John Robert Sierra, Jr.

Document ID: FAA-2013-0159-0011
Document Type: Public Submission
Agency: Federal Aviation Administration
Received Date: April 03 2013, at 12:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time
Date Posted: April 4 2013, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Start Date: February 25 2013, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Due Date: April 26 2013, at 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time
Tracking Number: 1jx-84kl-1584
View Document:

This is comment on Proposed Rule

Airworthiness Directives: Robinson Helicopter Company

View Comment

the FAA comments state that basically the problem with the blades is a design flaw. if this was a car, they would be recalled and replaced at the manufacturs expense. there has to be an incentive to force Robinson to design and make blades that are going to make it to 2200 hrs, safetly. Robinson should be requirred to pay for these blades. As it is proposed, Robinson actually sells a lot of blades (and i assume makes a profit) at the expense of their customers. At a minimun Robinson should be required to pay for a portion of the expense. Robinson's flip flop from stainless steel to alumunim and back and forth is laughable. Who's to say the replacement blades are going to be any better ? I'm a Robinson fan but to make all the customers pay for something like these blades is ridiculous.