Whodesigns,When I say easily avoided, I mean that the knowledge and technology exists and has existed for a long time to non destructively inspect these type of parts, it is not new, I was doing it 25 years ago and it was well established then.
Yes this was directed at the industry, they should be putting out parts that have a greater level of quality control. The nature of composites is that it is process driven, in that each part is individually made and can have individual problems, however if the process is not robust the variables become greater. Inspection provides data to validate if the process is robust or not, this should not be up to the rider to find out the hard way. There have been recalls on many forks over the years, which shows that they do get it wrong. They need to learn from getting it wrong.
I don't think the cost is as much a barrier as people suggest, Canyon for example say they CT scan each fork and their bikes are by no means the most expensive in the market.
It comes down to understanding the issues, the bike industry has transitioned from metal bikes to carbon bikes very quickly and appears to have skipped some of the quality process' required. The quality control for a metal tubeset is done at the mill not on each individual frame as it is put together, it is a different mindset.
I am not saying that each rider needs to pay to get their bike inspected by someone with my skillset before they ride, they should not have to, however if you are unsure about things it is clearly prudent to get things checked, especially on a failure critical part like a fork.
No chance you were called to give expert opinion/evidence in the coroners inquest? Would have been interesring if the above opinion was presented to the coroner.