I'm not that well versed on this whole Part 29 issue, can you tell me which a/c are certified to this standard?
OK, now I see what the lawyer is getting at with statement #9 of his letter.
He is referring back to #7 where he contends that because there were 2 cases of complete loss of lubrication in about 100,000 hrs, the "extremely remote" (once in 1 million) is no longer valid.
So, although I agree that it was sloppy to group the 225 as a "Super Puma" I think his statement in #9 can be argued as factual.
Last edited by Outwest; 28th Feb 2011 at 10:19.