Greg Morrison

Having been a Canadian AME on Robinson products for 20 years, a "re-think" by the FAA is in order regarding the AD's against the R22 and R44. AD 88-26-01R2 on the R22 should be CANCELLED, in my 20 years I have never heard of a or come across an R22 with a cracked spindle bearing, I maintian a flight school with 5 R22s flying 500+ hrs each year, we have never found a cracked bearing, EVER. The R44 and R66 have the same design of blade spindle yet they don't have an AD, just because someone torqued the bolt improperly, why make the rest of us suffer? As for AD 2011-26-04, agian if blades are not being found to have de-bonded, then REVISE the AD. A little common sense has to creep into government thought patterns once and awhile and these AD's need to be looked at again. As for the unfortunate owners of "manual control" R44 Astro's, the FAA is way out of line saying that the cost to owners is no big deal. Go search ebay, they are giving them away because of the cost to convert them. Come on policy makers, open your eyes and quit hiding behind the safety word and the reg's.