Just a few points.
I've been using Cream towers for about 5 months, i'm on my third. Compared to the 5 or 6 stock towers i used prior to that. In 3 months. My experience tells me that it's not a material issue. Its a clearance one. The change to CF just masks it, or at least, delays the failure.
A rear mounted shock is a hell of a lot of work compared to filling off the lug (which i think i'll try sometime soon) and modifying a spur cover. Also its not generally the big landings that cause the failure so much as the crash landings, roof down, which rear mounted shocks won't fix, as the tower will still be the highest point, and most snaggable. (tho i have had one fail after a rather awkward and large landing, wheels down, well, one wheel down first............)
The 410 has a similar, but less pronounced issue, the front and rear bulkheads give way in the event of a *big* smash (mainly the front). Going to CF towers (from aluminium) should make it less likely as the CF has some spring, but it doesn't happen often enough to make any sort of judgement. Its far less common in my experience. i.e. i only have one set of spares, the 210 i have "more" ;o)
As for engineering error, if the team drivers don't fail it, a design team as small as TD have are unlikely to spot something relating to extremes of deformation due to crash loads. There is only so much resource they have.
Other thing to try is a high wing mod, once RDRP (or others) launch the parts!
|