Originally Posted by
Agile
I do not think it is the role of the OEM to police which airframe should be flying and which airframe should not. (especially when it is in their best intrest to "black list" as many serial number as possible to have the least airframe loose on the market)
The list is merely advisory by the OEM. They have no legal power to "blacklist" any aircraft. Does the OEM have liability, sure, and that was the reason Bell originally started listing aircraft thought to be destroyed or scrap as they were sued over an aircraft that was not original under its data plate.
why do we have an airworrthiness certificate system then? are we saying it cannot be trusted.
It's not the systems fault as it was not designed to cull out illegal aircraft. Since an AWC is usually issued only once to an aircraft, if one were to remove the AWC, registration, data plate, and logbooks from the original aircraft and use those documents/records with any other aircraft nobody would be the wiser. And given there are people who prefer money over conformity you as a buyer may end up with an aircraft or component with a fraudulent history. There was a previous thread on Pprune about this same issue.
if something can be repaired, or inspected according to established procedures, it should get an authorized release form, and if it does it should be authorized by the authority FAA - EASA - CASA - CAA ....
And it still can. I don't know about the other agencies but the FAA has guidance on determining destroyed/scrapped aircraft and the method(s) for which to rebuild that aircraft if one so chooses. Its not the people who want to follow thew rules that caused this, but those individuals who think its okay to break those rules for personal gain.