Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
Caruso, you are making a big deal about how having the camera inside is an integral part of the strength of the (rigid) housing, hence your conclusion that an empty (rigid) housing will/could/might implode. Can you give any evidence that this is a problem, or is it just speculation/argument?
Going back to the OP question, if you've been testing the empty housing and it works fine, it just proves what we've been saying - it is not a problem to test an empty housing - but it's giving you a false sense of security - anytime you open the housing you risk getting something on the o-rings.
I note you said you did a bucket test and that passed but the housing leaked at depth - was the bucket test with the camera inside?
The only concern is damage from transport.
Have you considered carrying it with you? Is there a particular reason you check it in? I travel with camera gear and the only thing I would ever consider checking are the clamps/arms/ball mounts/floats.
I'm already dealing with a travel backpack, a roller and a camera backpack. The roller is carry-on size, but always over the 7 kg limit.
My camera roller is 18kg I have always been let on with it even after weighing, once I explain what it is and that it’s fragile, and how much it’s worth. Maybe it’s worth a try for you.
My housing cost $100!
My roller has my main diving gear, so I either go bigger to include the housing, which would likely put me over the size limit, or I have another bag, which becomes too unmanageable.
What do you do for puddle jumper flights, where the overhead only fits small backpacks, the same size as what's available under seats?