chance it
I think if there was significant evidence that this was a carbon copy of G-REDL (or the two bevel gear incidents) AH would not have made the statement that the 225 is safe to fly.
I also think it likely that the AIBN would have alluded to such evidence by now to justify the continuing ban.
They would also have shared that evidence with other regulators who would likely have introduced bans of their own.
So the cause remains undetermined for now. The latest from the AIBN is "most of the wreckage is recovered" - hopefully including the missing lift/suspension bar and associated components. That is encouraging as it suggests they will ultimately be able to point to the primary cause with more authority than if components were at the bottom of the sea.
Like you, I believe that this latest incident can be analysed and measures be brought to bear to resume flying these aircraft which, viewed over their lifetime, have a very good safety record by the standards of medium weight helicopters.
I also agree that switching to the S92 or some newer types not yet in service will not in any way guarantee a safer ride and an accident free future is a completely unrealistic expectation.
However, the short-term problem is that the Puma's safety record in the NS in the last seven years is nothing short of appalling. Whether they will continue to be part of the solution in the NS E&P business only time will tell.
I first flew in a Puma in 1974 and like you would willingly do so again, but it is not you and I that AH need to convince.
Last edited by birmingham; 24th May 2016 at 14:25.