--- title: "Metallurgical Engineering Expert’s Testimony on Engine Failure Admitted" meta: "og:description": "The metallurgical engineering expert was permitted to testify despite failing to test his contamination theory" "og:title": "Metallurgical Engineering Expert’s Testimony on Engine Failure Admitted" author: "Expert Witness Profiler" description: "The metallurgical engineering expert was permitted to testify despite failing to test his contamination theory" --- # Metallurgical Engineering Expert’s Testimony on Engine Failure Admitted Posted on December 30, 2025 by Expert Witness Profiler This case arises from an accident involving a Robinson R44 II helicopter, registration N442VB (“Helicopter”), that occurred on the evening of December 30, 2021, in Levy County, Florida. The Helicopter was being flown at night by the owner-pilot, Ronald Hicks (“Pilot Hicks”), from a local friend’s residence to his private property. At the time of the accident, Pilot Hicks had less than ten hours of night flight experience in helicopters and was not certified under Instrument Flight Rules (“IFR”). Mr. Hicks, Shelly Kate Hicks, and their two children sustained fatal injuries. Defendants filed a _[Daubert](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/daubert_standard)_ motion to limit the opinion of Plaintiffs’ metallurgical expert [Mark B. Hood](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/expert-witness/Mark-Hood/1533893). ## **Metallurgical Engineering** **Expert Witness** [Mark Bruce Hood](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/expert-witness/Mark-Hood/1533893) is a professional engineer in the field of metallurgical engineering. Over his career, Hood has analyzed hundreds of failures, including metallic failures. [Get the full story on challenges to Mark Hood’s expert opinions and testimony with an in-depth Challenge Study](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/order/add?eId=1533893&pId=3). ## **Discussion by the Court** Defendant’s motion did not dispute Hood’s qualification to “render opinions on materials issues more generally.” It instead took issue with the reliability of one of Hood’s opinions—that the “collapse” of an “unidentified organic contaminant” caused a “critical loss of clamp-up force” and, ultimately, the helicopter engine’s failure. Specifically, Defendant argued that Hood failed to test this theory or provide peer reviewed literature supporting it.  Hood explained why this is the case here. He opined that that any debris that was between the gear and the crankshaft was “most likely lost during the original disassembly.” And he testified that, due in part to the lack of available evidence, certain testing was not possible, and certain testing techniques might not detect contaminants.  Though Hood’s failure to test his contamination theory is not determinative, this Court is not absolved of its gatekeeping function. While a close call, this Court found that Hood met the _Daubert_standard. Hood’s report explained why, based on a variety of evidence, he concluded that the helicopter’s engine was not under power when the helicopter crashed. He explained that one possible cause of a loss of torque in service is the failure to remove debris and foreign substances from the crankshaft.  Therefore, the Court is satisfied that Hood has demonstrated that his opinion is reliable.  ## **Held** The Court denied Defendant’s _Daubert_ motion to limit the opinion of Plaintiffs’ metallurgical expert Mark Hood. ## **Key Takeaway** To the extent an expert relies “solely or primarily on experience, then the witness must explain how that experience leads to the conclusion reached, why that experience is a sufficient basis for the opinion, and how that experience is reliably applied to the facts.” In other words, “proposed expert testimony must be supported by appropriate validation—i.e., good grounds, based on what is known.” The Court cannot simply “take the expert’s word for it.”  Please refer to the blogs previously published about this case: [Metallurgy Expert Allowed to Opine on Foreign Object Debris](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/metallurgy-expert-allowed-to-opine-on-foreign-object-debris) [Accident Reconstruction Expert’s Meteorological Opinions Excluded](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/accident-reconstruction-experts-meteorological-opinions-excluded) [Avionics Expert Allowed to Opine on Engine Failure](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/avionics-expert-allowed-to-opine-on-engine-failure) [Piloting Expert Was Allowed to Opine on Spatial Disorientation](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/piloting-expert-was-allowed-to-opine-on-spatial-disorientation) ## **Case Details:** --- ## **You Might Also Like** ![Corrections Expert's Standard of Care Testimony Admitted](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/blog-pic-640X480-2026-04-23T161938.085.jpg) [**Corrections Expert’s Standard of Care Testimony Admitted**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/metallurgical-engineering-experts-testimony-on-engine-failure-admitted/corrections-experts-standard-of-care-testimony-admitted)![Human Resources Expert Allowed to Opine on Termination](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/blog-pic-640X480-2026-04-22T200052.311.jpg) [**Human Resources Expert Allowed to Opine on Termination**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/metallurgical-engineering-experts-testimony-on-engine-failure-admitted/human-resources-expert-allowed-to-opine-on-termination)![Neuropsychology Expert Not Allowed to Opine on Cognitive Decline](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/blog-pic-640X480-2026-04-22T144728.528.jpg) [**Neuropsychology Expert Not Allowed to Opine on Cognitive Decline **](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/metallurgical-engineering-experts-testimony-on-engine-failure-admitted/neuropsychology-expert-not-allowed-to-opine-on-cognitive-decline)![Human Factors Expert Not Allowed to Opine on the Tile](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/blog-pic-640X480-2026-04-21T191749.960.jpg) [**Human Factors Expert Not Allowed to Opine on the Tile**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/metallurgical-engineering-experts-testimony-on-engine-failure-admitted/human-factors-expert-not-allowed-to-opine-on-the-tile)![Insurance Expert Not Allowed to Opine on Legal Duties](https://ewp-blog.expertwitnessprofiler.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/blog-pic-640X480-2026-04-21T155751.487.jpg) [**Insurance Expert Not Allowed to Opine on Legal Duties**](https://expertwitnessprofiler.com/metallurgical-engineering-experts-testimony-on-engine-failure-admitted/insurance-expert-not-allowed-to-opine-on-legal-duties)