Yes mate he did, but I am still working my way through the convoluted details. He is quoting some amendment 7 not inclusive of the amendment 10 which is curently in fashion. Also he is orientating in time and space with turbine vs piston aircraft and PVT and AWK vs paying pax. He branches out into test bed cells for overhauled engines which are not the subject of the AD.
I can't talk with the man or the organisation, all who see any one that opposes or questions their ideas as hostile and open to ridicule and attack. I must admit I give some stick as well, so perhaps you can broker a deal to at least simplify or civilise the matter at hand.
I can see where he is coming from but can't see an alternative if they manage to have the AD "repealed". The way I see it things go back to how they were before. ie. the prescriptive 2000 hrs or whatever or 12 years which ever comes first. Mention is made of a $20,000 overhaul. Struth, when did he last get an engine overhaul.
My late legal advice is that the previous status is no longer there because of the AD, BUT this doesn't necessarily mean things automatically revert to the US "recommendations".
Other advice from within the fortress Canberra mention things like "over my dead body" etc. I think this gives an indication of the chances of success. Give Office of Legal Counsel a buzz, they are always helpful with honest and simple advice.
At this stage one should consider the oft used phrase "if it ain't fkuced, don't fix it".
I don't understand what motivates CASA "spokesmen" to manufacture statements like the 3000 grounded aircraft. I am beginning to believe they are trying to kill GA in this Country.
Remember, just because your paranoid doesn't mean they are not out to get you.