G: I would have to agree with your statement regarding certifying philosophy. I also concur with your sentiments regarding acceptable failure rates.
Where the operating environments factors are known (i.e in fatigue life extensions or engine life extensions) and a statistical base has been established one could be confident in the statistical probability of failure, and hence have the ability to build a margin on safety into it. However, no one could suggest any accurate information is kept on FOD to tires, tire wear, manufacturing defects, or stress levels as they are seen as consumable items and rudimentary maintenance that could be performed by a pilot, without a sound statistical base, acceptable failure rates would be impossible calculate.
As accidents and service history are usually the impetus for change of the regulations regarding certification of new aircraft, has the CAA, DGAC, or FAA made any changes to the certification regs to make manufactures demonstrate or test that this will not happen again?
The proposed fixes .... are they going to be in the form of a STC, AD, or are we going to see a new type with a new TC ?
Does anyone know how many pax will have to be left behind to compensate for the additional load of the proposed fixes?
Has anyone thought of cooling the tires so they have a higher margin of safety during the time when they are under maximum loads (long taxi at high weights before takeoff)?
Z