This is EXACTLY the argument that I make. When I first decided to go after a TSO-authorization I obtained a copy of FAR Part 37 (the governing document in effect in the 70's); I later acquired a copy of FAR Part 21 when that became the governing document.
In my reading of Part 37 I could not find any FAA REQUIREMENT for any additional testing after successfully completing the testing as called for by the TSO (and its referenced document/test standard).
I inquired to the FAA folks at the SACO and they confirmed what I understood.
In reading the two responses, I do NOT find any conflict with my original posting.
I have said for many years that I will bet $5 to a stale doughnut that no additional testing is REQUIRED by the FAA.
Of course, most mfrs have QC programs with internal inspections/testing; but this is NOT a FAA req'ment. Only having an FAA-approved QC program is required and those are unique to each TSO-authorization holder.
Please note that I also stated that you would be foolish not to continue testing. My argument was and is that no additional testing is an FAA REQUIREMENT.
I simply have never found any FAA document that REQUIRES additional testing.
And, as you state regarding ones brand new reserve canopy, do people actually believe that the very item that they have in their container has been drop-tested. I hope that they do not.
This is the very gist of my argument and I stand by it as it would apply to ripcords. If any company tests 100% of their ripcords, good for them. However, not all do.
