"CFLav8r" wrote in
om:

I'm wondering what everyone else's definition of "Damage History" is.

As you surmise, there is not precise legal definition that I am aware
of. There are few aircraft in the fleet these days that haven't had a
piece of aluminum replaced SOMEWHERE due to a rock or hangar rash or
whatever.

Logs reflect no history of damage except:
11/2/95 Off airport landing; Wings, rudder & vertical fin replaced
with exchange units.
11/1/96 Hangar rash; R/H elevator re-skinned
5/16/97 Hit runway light on landing with tail; replaced rear tail cone
skin, rudder & stabilizer

Two issues here. First, note that he is not saying this is a "no damage
history" aircraft. He is saying the only damage is... and lists it.

Second issue, could this aircraft be called "no damage history"? In my
opinion, absolutely not. Both wings, rudder, and vertical? That's
pretty durn major IMHO. OTOH, those items are designed to come off. If
they were replaced with undamaged replacements, then one *could* argue
that there is no longer any damaged items on the plane. I've seen
brokers try to cover themselves this way... and in terms of practical
value of the aircraft, there may be something to their arguement. But
"no damage history"? No way.

-----------------------------------------------
James M. Knox
TriSoft ph 512-385-0316
1109-A Shady Lane fax 512-366-4331
Austin, Tx 78721
-----------------------------------------------