Originally Posted by
HeliComparator
... ...
I am certainly not trying to suggest that the recent accident rate is acceptable nor that we shouldn't be striving hard to dramatically improve it. What I am saying is that to dump a well tried and tested aircraft which has had its issues dealt with, for new stuff with as yet completely unknown issues, is madness. One thing is for sure, there WILL be an accident with a 189/169/175, and probably more accidents than if the 225 remained in service doing the bulk of the work.
Somebody earlier mentioned the problem that strengthening a component might mean moving the problem elsewhere and I think there is an analogy here with change of type. UK parliamentarians pointed out in their 2014 report that the Super Puma family were 60% of the NS fleet so it was unsurprising that they were involved in most of the accidents. A very popular helicopter type in service for 12 years and hundreds of thousands of flying hours before any fatality seems like not a bad record especially when compared to previous generations of aircraft. I'd rather it were better but it's not bad.
Our friend Helicomparator has not mentioned the S-92 but we should think about the enormous pressure that will inevitably now be on the S-92 fleet and supply chain.