Wind turbine rotor blades are designed and certified according to the current IEC (2012) and DNV GL AS (2015) standards, which include the final full-scale experiment. The experiment is used to validate the assumptions made in the design models. In this work the drawbacks of traditional static and fatigue full-scale testing are elaborated, i. e. the replication of realistic loading and structural response. Sub-component testing is proposed as a potential method to mitigate some of the drawbacks. Compared to the actual loading that a rotor blade is subjected to under field conditions, the full-scale test loading is subjected to the following simplifications and constraints: First, the full-scale fatigue test is conducted as a cyclic test, where the load time series obtained from aero-servo-elastic simulations are simplified to a damage equivalent load range. Second, the load directions are typically applied solely in two directions, often pure lead-lag and flap-wise directions which are not necessarily the most critical load directions for a particular blade segment. Third, parts of the blade are overloaded by up to 20 % to achieve the target load along the whole span. Fourth, parts of the blade are not tested due to load introduction via load frames. Finally, another downside of a state-of-the-art, uni-axial, resonant, full-scale testing method is that dynamic testing at the eigenfrequencies of today's blades in respect of the first flap-wise mode between 0.4 Hz and 1.0 Hz results in long test times. Testing usually takes several months. In contrast, the sub-component fatigue testing time can be substantially faster than the full-scale blade test since (a) the load can be introduced with higher frequencies which are not constrained by the blade's eigenfrequency, and (b) the stress ratio between the minimum and the maximum stress exposure to which the structure is subjected can be increased to higher, more realistic values. Furthermore, sub-component testing could increase the structural reliability by focusing on the critical areas and replicating the design loads more accurately in the most critical directions. In this work, the comparison of the two testing methods is elaborated by way of example on a trailing edge bond line design.