Originally Posted by
Mitchaa
Letmein,
Do you work for Airbus or are you reliant on the H225 keeping you in a job? Is your judgement being clouded by hope? Hope to save the H225?
That's exactly what Airbus's recent statement sounds like to me.
I wonder if Airbus can recreate their theory in a test bed environment and prove that a forward suspension bar attachment foot failure would cause an instantaneous failure of the head?
Who was at fault when G-CHCN ditched in the North Sea 5 months after G-REDW did for the exact same reason? This was followed by a 9 month suspension of EC225 flight. Eurocopter at that time did not protect its fleet (otherwise the 2nd failure would never have happened)
Questions how they handled the G-REDL incident.
I too would rubbish anything that the manufacturer claims at this point. What were they hoping to achieve with their statement? 225's to resume flying Monday and all to be forgotten about?
Let's wait on an independent AIBN report to conclude their findings.
Folks,
It always makes me smile when people say we should wait for the final report. Why? it is perfectly reasonable to discuss what happened. What we should do is avoid wild speculation and recognise that the various parties are subject to constraints we are not. Please also remember that the people at AH, CHC, AAIB etc. are professionals and while they have slightly different agendas in my opinion and experience are certainly not dishonest.
I think the reason AH have started to push what they see as the probable cause is that the 225 programme won't survive another 9 month suspension. This is nothing to do with the cause of the accident (although they clearly believe that is associated with the failure of the transmission shaft suspension). It is to do with the fact that NS is in decline, the oil price is low, the helicopter business is surviving on military orders, the operators are in financial distress and machines are being returned to lessors at an unprecedented rate. Lessors may see this as an oppopportunity to restructure their civil heicopter portfolios while their fixed wing business is boyant.
Thus the Pumas may end up effectively withdrawn well before the AIBN issues its final report and whatever that concludes.