Originally Posted by
birmingham
After the second incident the manufacturer initially and publically concluded that MRG failure was not likely and suggested the investigation of the suspension bar assembly and a thorough review of maintenance records. Then debris was recovered which enabled the AIBN to conclude that the two incidents did indeed result from similar events in the epicyclic of the MRG. The investigators publically disagreed with the manufacturer and some of the regulators over allowing the type to return to service with increased inspections.
Conclusion came before they even find evident is what makes this investigation fishy from the beginning. Claiming MGB failure subsequently teared off the suspension bar which also proved to be false by simulation.