Originally Posted by
etudiant
Why would the regulators accept that handling damage argument if the evidence is not there?
If there is fatigue caused spalling, surely it should be possible to replicate the failure. We've had more than enough time to run a 10,000 hour test if needed.
Yet replication has not been achieved, which indicates that some aspect of the failure mechanism is still being overlooked.
AH are just using a scatter gun approach
They don’t claim both gearbox that failed fell off a truck.
Just trying to throw enough conjecture around that the fact that they do not know what caused the failure is overlooked.
It’s the modern world: do
something, to make everyone feel better, even if it wouldn’t have fixed the problem that caused the reaction in the first place.
After scum hijacked several airliners in flight, we were all forced to chain our helicopters up. (Fines issued for unlocked machines)
After a madman in Vegas shoots people from 450m away with an arsenal of modified automatic rifles, lever action shotguns are banned in QLD (with the Vegas atrocitie cited as the justification by the Premier)
The rotor detaches from two similar AH machines. OH times are reduced even though there is no evidence this was the issue.
At least they did
something 