<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
          <<  Lancair Builders' Mail List  >>
          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>
OK. Fine.  FAR 43 was used by the JUDGE.

My point is NOT to let a court interpret the FARS.  In my region, if Mr.
Davenport had written to the FAA, their reply would not have taken the same
position as the court did.  The insurance company could not have used the
"failure to re-certify" argument to void the insurance coverage if the FAA was
"notified", regardless of the FAA's categorization as minor, significant or
major.  I would rather depend on an FAA expert's (inspector or DAR) written
reply than some judge.

Does anyone know a judge who is building a Lancair?


Scott Krueger
N92EX