Twist & Shout
“I think it's pretty unemotional and factual, that at this time there is an unexplained catastrophic failure involving EC225. (Perhaps it would be irrational to be happy to fly an EC225 under the current circumstances, even for say, SAR.)”
T&S. Can I assume your meaning of “happy to fly an EC225” is an expression of your accceptance to fly the aircraft whilst not being comfortable with so doing ? Or vice versa ??
I believe there are three groups of EC225 pilots out there. Those who will fly it on SAR , those who will not fly it at all (or at least until a definitive cause is established) and those who are as yet undecided (or who are in a position where they do not have to decide right away).
I am personally in the latter group and am extremely conflicted about the issue.
Unfortunately the various AUTHORITIES/COMPANIES/MILITARY are in disagreement as to flying the aircraft. All have a different outlook.
As in :-
1. Nil commercial flights
2. Nil passenger flights but SAR is ok
3. Nil flights what so ever
A pilot normally assesses a myriad of factors before he accepts a flight. If he cannot come up with tics in all the boxes then it is a NO GO.
My question is , how can any pilot put tics in all the boxes when there is still an unknown as to whether it was a MAINTENANCE failure or an OEM failure irrespective of what category of flight it is. How can any AUTHORITY/COMPANY/MILITARY condone the release of the aircraft given the above unknown.
Category of flight is irrelevant. Empty ? SAR ? Makes no difference! At the very least there are still “two joes” sitting up front flying a machine with a potential “unexplained catastrophic” fault.