Originally Posted by
jimf671
That was simply a reference to there being one fatal accident in its entire service.
Your statement is of course correct but any inference that the 2009 epicyclic incident has no relationship to this year's crash because of a minor difference in designation would be disingenuous. It was considered a close enough relative to be grounded for the same reason. The two ditchings were as a direct result of trying to mitigate the 2009 incident and the failure mode of the 2016 incident was remarkably similar to the 2009 one. Epicyclics failed twice resulting in multiple fatalities and there have been four hull losses related to gearbox issues. There is no way that confidence can be restored if we just re-quote statistics to suit our own purposes.
As has been said many times here perceptions alone will ground this aircraft
Does anyone want to flame me for saying that AH have made a very difficult situation worse to the point it may be irreparable? Anyone want to defend their management of this problem?