Free Motion in Limine - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 1 of 27

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 01-K-2056

UNITED STATES AVIATION UNDERWRITERS, INC. a New York corporation; PAUL LEADABRAND, an Idaho resident; and JEFLYN AVIATION, INC. dba ACCESS AIR, an Idaho corporation, Plaintiffs, Vs.

PILATUS BUSINESS AIRCRAFT, LTD, a Colorado corporation; PILATUS FLUGZEUGWERKE AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT, a Swiss corporation, PILATUS AIRCRAFT, LTD, A Swiss corporation; PRATT & WHITNEY CANADA, INC., a Canadian corporation; and DOES 1 through 500, Inclusive, Defendants.

MOTION IN LIMINE BY PILATUS DEFENDANTS RE COMPLIANCE WITH FARS

Defendants Pilatus Business Aircraft, Ltd, Pilatus Flugzeugwerke Aktiengesellschaft and Pilatus Aircraft, Ltd (collectively "Pilatus") hereby move the court for an order that the jury be instructed that the subject airplane and Pilot Operating Handbook (POH) complied with all applicable Federal Aviation Regulations ("FARs", 14 C.F.R.) This motion is made on the grounds that the Federal Aviation Administration ("FAA") found that the subject airplane and its POH were in compliance with all applicable FARs. This motion shall be supported by the attached Memorandum, and documents.

MOTION IN LIMINE BY PILATUS DEFENDANTS RE COMPLIANCE WITH FARS

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 2 of 27

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Defendants' attorneys have conferred with Plaintiffs' attorneys in accordance with D.C.COLO.LCivR 7.1A and were advised that Plaintiffs will oppose the motion. DATED this 5th day of January 2007. By__/s Robert Schultz_______________________ Robert Schultz Schultz & Associates 9710 W. 82nd Ave. Arvada, CO 80005 Tel (303) 456-5565 Fax (303) 456-5575 E-mail [email protected] Attorney For Defendants Pilatus Business Aircraft, Ltd And Pilatus Flugzeugwerke Aktiengesellschaft/ Pilatus Aircraft, Ltd

MOTION IN LIMINE BY PILATUS DEFENDANTS RE COMPLIANCE WITH FARS

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 3 of 27

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 01-K-2056

UNITED STATES AVIATION UNDERWRITERS, INC. a New York corporation; PAUL LEADABRAND, an Idaho resident; and JEFLYN AVIATION, INC. dba ACCESS AIR, an Idaho corporation, Plaintiffs, Vs.

PILATUS BUSINESS AIRCRAFT, LTD, a Colorado corporation; PILATUS FLUGZEUGWERKE AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT, a Swiss corporation, PILATUS AIRCRAFT, LTD, A Swiss corporation; PRATT & WHITNEY CANADA, INC., a Canadian corporation; and DOES 1 through 500, Inclusive, Defendants.

PILATUS DEFENDANTS' MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF MOTION IN LIMINE BY PILATUS DEFENDANTS RE COMPLIANCE WITH FARS

I. Introduction On July 8, 2001, while flying a Pilatus PC-12 aircraft from Japan to Russia over the Sea of Okhotsk, Pilot Smith deliberately shut down the airplane's single engine after hearing noises and seeing the internal temperature reach an excessively high level. Before the engine was shut down, it was developing power. While descending, Pilot Smith prematurely aborted a restart attempt. Plaintiffs argue that these acts were proper because had the pilot not shut down the engine and aborted the restart the engine could have become dislodged from the aircraft causing loss of control or there could have been an engine fire. Plaintiffs argue in the alternative that

MOTION IN LIMINE BY PILATUS DEFENDANTS RE COMPLIANCE WITH FARS MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT

Page 1 of 8

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 4 of 27

even if these acts were not proper or done improperly, the pilot was not adequately warned or instructed by defendants on the proper action or procedure. Moreover, they argue that neither the warnings and instructions provided nor the subject airplane complied with certain FARs and that the subject airplane did not comply with the requirement that the engine be capable of being restarted in flight. Plaintiffs and Pilatus raised the issue under Colorado law as to whether or not the subject aircraft and engine "complied with, at the time of sale by the manufacturer, any applicable code, standard, or regulation adopted or promulgated by the United States or by this state, or by any agency of the United States or of this state." CRS § 13-21-403(1)(b). Pilatus contends that at the time of sale, as a matter of law, the PC-12 complied with all applicable Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR). Plaintiffs contend that it did not comply with 14 CFR §23.903(e)(3); §23.1581; § 23.1583(h); § 23.1583(m); § 23.1585(a)(4) and § 23.1585(j).1 But the last three FARs 14 CFR § 23.1583(m); § 23.1585(a)(4) and § 23.1585(j) are not applicable because they were not part of the PC-12's Certification Basis. 2 And the FAA expressly found that the PC-12 was in compliance with the first three 14 CFR §23.903(e)(3); §23.1581; and § 23.1583(h). Since this court must give deference to the FAA's findings of fact, it must also conclude as a matter of law that the PC-12 was in compliance with the applicable FARs. FAA Design Standards and Design Approval The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) prescribes standards for the design, manufacture and testing for all aircraft and aircraft engines sold in the United States. It also prescribes procedures for determining whether a particular aircraft or aircraft engine meets the
1 2

Testimony of Plaintiffs' expert Edwards and the pre-trial order. 14 CFR § 23.1585(a)(4) existed but it was a different regulation than that cited by Plaintiffs. Page 2 of 8

MOTION IN LIMINE BY PILATUS DEFENDANTS RE COMPLIANCE WITH FARS MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 5 of 27

prescribed standards. 49 USC § 40104 et. seq. Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR, "FARs") are promulgation by the FAA under authority granted by the Federal Aviation Act (49 USC § 40104 et. seq., the "Act") The Act created the following statutory and regulatory scheme for insuring aircraft safety. The FAA is required to promote safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing minimum standards required in the interest of safety for the design, material, construction, quality of work, and performance of aircraft and aircraft engines. 49 USC § 44701. The FAA will issue a Type Certificate for an aircraft or aircraft engine design only when it finds that the aircraft or aircraft engine is properly designed, performs properly, and meets the regulations and minimum standards prescribed under section 49 USC § 44701(a). 49 USC § 44704(a). The minimum design and test standards for small aircraft such as the PC-12 are contained in 14 C.F.R. §23. The FAA promulgates design and test standards, interprets them on a case by case basis, sets the standards and procedures manufacturers must follow to achieve Type Certification and makes its findings of fact based on the forgoing. If the FAA finds that the FARs do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for an aircraft or aircraft engine because of a novel or unusual design feature, it may prescribe special conditions and amendments it finds necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established its the regulations. 14 CFR § 21.16. An applicant for a Type Certificate need only show that the aircraft or aircraft engine meets the applicable FARs that are effective on the date of application. 14 CFR §21.17. The applicable FARs are called the Type Certification Basis. FAA Order 8110.4B - Type Certification ¶ 2-10. Type Certification Basis.

MOTION IN LIMINE BY PILATUS DEFENDANTS RE COMPLIANCE WITH FARS MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT

Page 3 of 8

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 6 of 27

The holder of a Type Certificate may apply to the FAA for a Production Certificate. The FAA will issue a Production Certificate authorizing the Type Certificate holder to produce the aircraft or aircraft engines for which the Type Certificate was issued, only when it finds these products conform to the approved design. The FAA must inspect, and may require testing of an applicant's products to ensure that they conform to approved design. 49 USC § 44704(c) The registered owner of an aircraft may apply to the FAA for an Airworthiness Certificate for the aircraft. The FAA will issue an Airworthiness Certificate only when it finds that the aircraft conforms to its Type Certificate and, after inspection, is in condition for safe operation. 49 USC § 44704(d). Through Bilateral Airworthiness Agreements ("BAAs") the FAA may issue Type Certificates under 14 CFR §21.29 and Airworthiness Certificates under 14 CFR §21.183(c) for aircraft designed and manufactured in certain foreign countries. A BAA between the United States and Switzerland was entered into on October 13, 1961. (Exhibit A) It states in Article 2: "The same validity shall be conferred by the competent authorities of the United States [the FAA] on certificates of airworthiness for export issued by the competent authorities of Switzerland [FOCA] for aircraft subsequently to be registered in the United States as if they had been issued under the regulations in force on the subject in the United States, provided, that such aircraft have been constructed in Switzerland and the competent authority of Switzerland has certified that the type design of the aircraft complies with the airworthiness requirements of Switzerland together with any special conditions prescribed in accordance with Article 6, and has certified that the particular aircraft conform to such type design."

MOTION IN LIMINE BY PILATUS DEFENDANTS RE COMPLIANCE WITH FARS MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT

Page 4 of 8

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 7 of 27

The Swiss equivalent of the FAA is called the Federal Office for Civil Aviation (FOCA). Accordingly, by law (the BAA), the FOCA is delegated by the FAA to perform the examination, testing, and inspection required by 49 USC § 44702 for issuance of a Type Certificate, Production Certificate and Certificates of Airworthiness. Switzerland used the U.S. Federal Aviation Regulations as a Type Certification Basis for approving the PC-12's design. In accordance with 14 CFR § 21.29 and the BAA, the FAA issued Type Certificate A78EU for the Pilatus PC-12. The Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS) identifies the PC-12's Certification Basis as, among other things, 14 CFR §§ 21.29, 21.183(c) and 14 CFR § 23, Normal Category, effective February 4, 1991. (Exhibit B) Prior to export to the US, the FOCA issued an Export Certificate of Airworthiness to the subject aircraft. (Exhibit C) In accordance with 14 CFR § 21.183(c), the FAA issued an Airworthiness Certificate to the subject aircraft. (Exhibit D) Included in the approved design for any aircraft is an Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) often referred to as a Pilot Operating Handbook (POH). 14 CFR § 1581 et. seq. Certain FARs generally prescribe the AFM's content. The specific wording of the content must be approved by the FAA as part of the Type Certification process. On behalf of the FAA, the FOCA approved the wording of the PC-12's AFM. The TCDS states, "Airplane Flight Manuals incl. Supplements and any other service information, which contain a statement that the document is Swiss Federal Office of Civil Aviation (FOCA) approved, are accepted by the FAA and are considered FAA approved." The AFM (POH) states "FOCA approved in the normal category based on FAR 23 through amendment 42. ... This handbook includes the material required to be furnished to the pilot by the Federal Aviation Regulations. ... The Handbook is also FAA

MOTION IN LIMINE BY PILATUS DEFENDANTS RE COMPLIANCE WITH FARS MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT

Page 5 of 8

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 8 of 27

approved for U.S. registered aircraft in accordance with FAR 21.29." (Exhibit E) Therefore the AFM is FAA approved as part of the Type Design meaning that it meets the regulations and minimum standards prescribed by the FAA under section 49 USC § 44701(a). II. Arguments This Court Must Give Great Deference to the FAA's Interpretation of its Own Regulations "[T]his Court shows great deference to the interpretation given the statute by the officers or agency charged with its administration. ... When the construction of an administrative regulation rather than a statute is in issue, deference is even more clearly in order. `Since this involves an interpretation of an administrative regulation a court must necessarily look to the administrative construction of the regulation if the meaning of the words used is in doubt. . . . The ultimate criterion is the administrative interpretation, which becomes of controlling weight unless it is plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation' [citation]" Udall v. Tallman et al., 85 S. Ct. 792, 380 U.S. 1, 16 (1965) In Issuing a Type Certificate and Production Certificate to Pilatus and an Airworthiness Certificate to the Subject Airplanes Owner, The FAA Necessarily Interpreted its Own Regulations and Made Findings of Fact That the Subject Airplane and Its POH Complied With All Applicable Regulations. Plaintiffs allege that the subject aircraft and its POH did not comply with the following FARs: 14 CFR §23.903(e)(3); §23.1581; § 23.1583(h); § 23.1583(m); § 23.1585(a)(4) and § 23.1585(j). The first three FARs, 14 CFR § 23.1583(m); § 23.1585(a)(4) and § 23.1585(j) did not exist in 14 CFR §23 through Amendment 42 which was the PC-12's Type Certification Basis and are not applicable. But the last three FARs 14 CFR § 23.1583(m); § 23.1585(a)(4) and §

MOTION IN LIMINE BY PILATUS DEFENDANTS RE COMPLIANCE WITH FARS MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT

Page 6 of 8

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 9 of 27

23.1585(j) are not applicable because they were not part of the PC-12's Certification Basis. 3 But by its findings of fact and issuance of a Type Certificate for the aircraft design and an Airworthiness Certificate for the subject aircraft, the FAA expressly found that the subject PC-12 was in compliance with the all applicable FARs including 14 CFR §23.903(e)(3); §23.1581; and § 23.1583(h). Since this court must give deference to the FAA's findings of fact, it must also conclude as a matter of law that the PC-12 was in compliance with the applicable FARs. III. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, that the subject airplane or Pilot Operator Handbook (POH) did not comply with Federal Aviation Regulations (14 C.F.R.) RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 5th day of January 2007. By__/s Robert Schultz_______________________ Robert Schultz Schultz & Associates 9710 W. 82nd Ave. Arvada, CO 80005 Tel (303) 456-5565 Fax (303) 456-5575 E-mail [email protected] Attorney For Defendants Pilatus Business Aircraft, Ltd And Pilatus Flugzeugwerke Aktiengesellschaft/ Pilatus Aircraft, Ltd

3

See attached 1991 version of these FARs, Exhibit F. Note. 14 CFR § 23.1585(a)(4) existed but it was a different regulation than that cited by Plaintiffs. 14 CFR §23.1585(h) has wording similar to the cited regulation but it only applies to commuter airplanes. Page 7 of 8

MOTION IN LIMINE BY PILATUS DEFENDANTS RE COMPLIANCE WITH FARS MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 10 of 27

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 5th day of January 2007, I caused the forgoing MOTION IN LIMINE BY PILATUS DEFENDANTS RE COMPLIANCE WITH FARS to be served by electronically filing the foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of such filing to the following addresses:

Jon A. Kodani Jeff Williams Law Offices of Jon A. Kodani [email protected] Thomas Byrne Byrne, Kiely & White LLP [email protected]

__s/ Robert Schultz__________ Law Offices of Robert B. Schultz [email protected]

MOTION IN LIMINE BY PILATUS DEFENDANTS RE COMPLIANCE WITH FARS MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT

Page 8 of 8

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 11 of 27

SWITZERLAND
The American Ambassador to the President of the Swiss Confederation, Chief of the Federal Political Department
THE FOREIGN SERVICE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

BERN, October 13, 1961. EXCELLENCY: I have the honour to refer to your note dated Friday, October 13, 1961 reading as follows: "I have the honour to refer to the discussions which have recently taken place between representatives of the Government of Switzerland and the Government of the United States of America, reaching an understanding concerning the reciprocal acceptance of certificates of airworthiness for imported aircraft. The agreement as made reads as follows: Article 1 a. The present agreement applies to civil aircraft constructed in the United States, its territories and possessions and exported to Switzerland; and to civil aircraft constructed in Switzerland and exported to the United States, its territories and possessions. b. As used herein, the term aircraft shall include civil aircraft of all categories including those used for public transport and those used for private purposes; aircraft engines and propellers; and spare parts for aircraft, aircraft engines and propellers which have been exported in accordance with this agreement. Article 2 The same validity shall be conferred by the competent authorities of the United States on certificates of airworthiness for export issued by the competent authorities of Switzerland for aircraft subsequently to be registered in the United States as if they had been issued under the regulations in force on the subject in the United States, provided, that such aircraft have been constructed in Switzerland and the competent authority of Switzerland has certified that the type design of the aircraft complies with the airworthiness requirements of Switzerland together with any special conditions prescribed in accordance with Article 6, and has certified that the particular aircraft conform to such type design.

3

Exhibit A

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110 Article 3

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 12 of 27

The same validity shall be conferred by the competent authorities of Switzerland on certificates of airworthiness for export issued by the competent authorities of the United States for aircraft subsequently to be registered in Switzerland as if they had been issued under the regulations in force on the subject in Switzerland, provided, that such aircraft have been constructed in the United States, its territories or possessions and the competent authority of the United States has certified that the type design of the aircraft complies with the airworthiness requirements of the United States together with any special conditions prescribed in accordance with Article 6, and have certified that the particular aircraft conform to such type design. Article 4 a. The competent authorities of the United States shall arrange for the effective communication to the competent authorities of Switzerland of particulars of compulsory modifications prescribed in the United States, for the purpose of enabling authorities of Switzerland to require these modifications to be made to aircraft of the types affected, whose certificates have been validated by them. b. In the case of aircraft for which the United States has issued certificates of airworthiness for export, subsequently validated by Switzerland, the competent authorities of the United States shall, when requested, afford the competent authorities of Switzerland assistance in determining that major design changes or major repairs made to such aircraft comply with the applicable airworthiness requirements of the United States. Article 5 a. The competent authorities of Switzerland shall arrange for the effective communication to the competent authorities of the United States of particulars of compulsory modifications prescribed in Switzerland for the purpose of enabling the authorities of the United States to require these modifications to be made to aircraft of the types affected, whose certificates have been validated by them. b. In the case of aircraft for which Switzerland has issued certificates of airworthiness, subsequently validated by the United States, the competent authorities of Switzerland shall, when requested, afford the competent authorities of the United States assistance in determining that major design changes or major repairs made to such aircraft comply with the applicable airworthiness requirements of Switzerland. Article 6 a. The competent authorities of each country shall have the right to make the validation of certificates of airworthiness for export dependent upon the fulfillment of any special conditions which are for the time being required by them for the issuance of certificates of airworthiness in their own country. Information with regard to these special conditions in respect to either country will from time to time be communicated to the competent authorities of the other country.

4

Exhibit A

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 13 of 27

b. The competent authorities of each country shall keep the competent authorities of the other country fully and currently informed of all regulations in force in regard to the airworthiness of civil aircraft and any changes therein that may from time to time be effected. Article 7 The question of procedure to be followed in the application of the provisions of the present agreement shall be the subject of direct correspondence, whenever necessary, between the competent authorities of the United States and Switzerland. Article 8 The present agreement shall be subject to termination by either Government upon six months notice given in writing to the other Government. Article 9 The present agreement is in the German and English languages, and the texts of both languages are equally authentic. Upon the receipt of a note from Your Excellency indicating that the foregoing provisions are acceptable to the Government of the United States of America, the Government of Switzerland will consider that this note and Your reply thereto constitute an agreement between our two Governments on this subject, which shall enter into force provisionally on the date of Your reply note and shall enter into force definitively on the date of the notification from the Government of Switzerland to the Government of the United States of America that the agreement has been ratified by the Swiss Government. Accept, Excellency, the renewed assurances of my highest consideration. I have the honour to convey the agreement of the Government of the United States of America to the foregoing and I confirm that your note of Friday, October 13, 1961 and my reply given herewith constitute an agreement between our two Governments on this subject. Accept, Mr. President, the renewed assurances of my highest consideration. ROBERT M. MCKINNEY His Excellency Mr. FRIEDRICH T. WAHLEN, President of the Swiss Confederation, Chief of the Federal Political Department, Bern.

5

Exhibit A

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 14 of 27

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION A78EU Revision 14 PILATUS PC-12 PILATUS PC-12/45 PILATUS PC-12/47 April 13, 2006 TYPE CERTIFICATE DATA SHEET No. A78EU This data sheet, which is a part of Type Certificate No. A78EU, prescribes conditions and limitations under which the product for which the Type Certificate was issued meets the airworthiness requirements of the Federal Aviation Regulations. Type Certificate Holder. PILATUS AIRCRAFT LTD. CH-6370 STANS SWITZERLAND

I.

Pilatus PC-12, Normal Category, approved July 15, 1994. Pratt & Whitney PT6A-67B JET A, JET A-1, JET B, JP 4 and other fuels according to PRATT & WHITNEY Service Bulletin SB 14004.

Engine. Fuel.

Engine Limits. Maximum Observed Inter Turbine Temp. ºC 800 760 1000 870

Shaft Power shp Take-off Max. climb/Max. cruise Starting (5 seconds) Transient (20 seconds) 1200 1000 -----

Torque PSI 44.34 36.95 --61.00

N1 Gas Generator Speed % 104 104 --104

Prop Shaft Speed RPM 1700 1700 --1870

Note: 100% Gas Generator Speed = 37,468 RPM Propeller and Propeller Limits. Hartzell HC-E4A-3D hub with Hartzell E10477K aluminum blades; four blade constant speed type. Spinner: Hartzell D5500-1 (Aluminum) Diameter: 104 in (2.642 m) to 105 m (2.667 m) cropping of blade tips not permitted. Pitch settings (measured at 42 in. station) Fine pitch 19.0º Min. pitch in flight 6.0º Max. reverse pitch -17.5º Feathered 79.6º Stabilized ground operation is prohibited between 350 and 950 RPM.

Page No. Rev. No.

1 14

2 4

3 11

4 11

5 13

6 11

7 14

Exhibit B

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK
A78EU

Document 110
Page 2 of 7

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 15 of 27

Airspeed Limits (EAS).

Max. operating speed Max. operating Mach No. Max. diving speed

VMO 240 kts MMO 0.48 VD 280 kts MD 0.60 VA 170 kts

Max. maneuvering design speed

Max. maneuvering operating speed VO 154 kts at 4100 kg (9039 lbs) VO 136 kts at 3200 kg (7060 lbs) VO 123 kts at 2600 kg (5730 lbs) Center of Gravity Limits. At 4100 kg (9039 lbs) 27% MAC to 44% MAC Forward cg limit varies linearly between: (landing gear extended) 4100 kg (9039 lbs) 27% MAC 3700 kg (8157 lbs) 17.8% MAC 2700 kg (5952 lbs) and less 13% MAC Rear cg limit varies linearly between: (landing gear retracted) 4100 kg (9039 lbs) 44% MAC 3600 kg (7937 lbs) 46% MAC 3000 kg (6614 lbs) 46% MAC 2550 kg (5622 lbs) and less 20% MAC Datum. Leveling Means. 3000 mm (118 in.) forward of firewall (frame no. 10). Cabin Seat Rails (see Section 8 of the Airplane Maintenance Manual). Ramp weight 4120 kg (9083 lbs) Take-off weight 4100 kg (9039 lbs) Landing weight 4100 kg (9039 lbs) Max. zero fuel weight 3700 kg (8159 lbs) One pilot. 9 PAX and 2 pilot seats (for seat locations see Airplane Flight Manual, Section 6, W & B). 180 kg (400 lbs) (baggage compartment at rear of cabin).

Maximum Weight.

Minimum Crew. Number of Seats.

Maximum Baggage.

Maximum Loading. (Combi version) 1000 kg/m2 (205 lb/ft2) on seat rails 600 kg/m2 (125 lb/ft2) on cabin floor (for loading limitations/instructions see Section 6 of the Airplane Flight Manual).$ Fuel Capacity (Specific gravity 0.806 kg/ltr) Total Usable Arm 1540 ltr (1241 kg) 1516 ltr (1222 kg) 5.91 m (233 in) aft of datum (406 US gal) (400 US gal) 1522 ltr (1226 kg) (see Note 1) (402 US gal) Oil Capacity. Total 13,6 ltr (3.6 US gal) Arm 2.41 m (95 in) aft of datum

Exhibit B

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK
A78EU

Document 110
Page 3 of 7

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 16 of 27

Control Surfaces

Wing flap 15º + 0º /-1.5° Take-off (left/right asymmetry 1°) Ailerons 30º +/- 1º Up Elevator 28º +/- 1º Up Stabilizer (trim) 2.5º + 0.7º /- 0.2ºup (with respect to stabilizer leading edge) Rudder 35º +/- 1º right (from centerline and measured horizontally) Rudder tab 7.5º + 1º /- 1.5º right (trim) Aileron tab 16.5º + /-1º up (trim)

39.5º +/- 0.5º Landing 10º +/- 1º down 15º +/- 1º down 7.5º + 0.7º / - 0.2º down 25º +/- 1º left 13º + 1º/- 1.5º left 16.5º +/- 1º down

Stick Pusher System.

Stick shaker/stick pusher system, signaled by AOA vanes on left and right wing leading edges. SN 101 and up (See Note 5 and Note 10). a. To be considered eligible for operation in the United States, each aircraft manufactured under this type certificate must be accompanied by a certificate of airworthiness for export or certifying statement endorsed by the exporting foreign civil airworthiness authority which states (in the English language): "This aircraft conforms to its U.S. type design (Type Certificate Number A78EU) and is in a condition for safe operation". b. An airplane maintenance manual in compliance with FAR 23.1529 must be furnished before delivery of the first airplane or issuance of standard certificate of airworthiness whichever occurs later.

Serial Numbers Eligible. Import Requirements- All Models.

Certification Basis.

1) 14 CFR Sections 21.29, 21.183(c) and 14 CFR 23, Normal Category, effective February 4, 1991, including Amendments 23-1 through 23-42 and Section 23.1305c)3) of Amendment 23-43 and Section 23.1507 of Amendment 23-45 and Section 23.1311 of Amendment 23-49 and 2) 14 CFR Section 36, effective November 18, 1969, including Amendments 36-1 through amendment in effect at the time of U.S. Type Certification, and 3) 14 CFR Section 34, effective September 10, 1990, and 4) Equivalent Level of Safety, a) ACE-94-8 of June 21, 1994, Spin demonstration, FAR 23.221 a)2) b) Cabin pressure indicator, FAR 23.841b) 6). See NOTE 8. 5) Section 611(b) of the FAA Act of 1958 6) Certification Maintenance Requirement (CMR), manual pitch trim system annunciation 7) Special Conditions: High Energy Radiated Electromagnetic Fields, (HERF), Number 23-ACE-46, effective date May 29, 1990 8) Approved for Flight Into Known Icing. See NOTE 4. The basic required equipment as prescribed in the applicable airworthiness regulations (see Certification Basis) must be installed in the airplane for certification. In addition the following is required: Airplane Flight Manual (including Equipment list and applicable supplements) -S/N 101-400: (except S/N 321) Report No. 01973-001

Equipment

-S/N 321 and 401 and subsequent Report No. 02211

Exhibit B

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK
A78EU

Document 110
Page 4 of 7

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 17 of 27

Service Information.

"Service Bulletins, Airplane Flight Manuals incl. Supplements and any other service information, which contain a statement that the document is Swiss Federal Office of Civil Aviation (FOCA) approved, are accepted by the FAA and are considered FAA approved. These approvals pertain to the type design only." Available Documents for the PILATUS PC-12 are: Airplane Flight Manual For S/N 101 ­ 400 except 321: Doc. No. 01973-001 Revision 2, dated February 14, 1995 or later FOCA approved revisions. For S/N 321 and 401 and subsequent: Doc No. 02211 (PC-12 data is contained in AFMS No. 25; Doc. No. 02211/9-25) Aircraft Maintenance Manual (Chapter 4 FOCA approved) Structural Repair Manual Illustrated Parts Catalogue Doc. No. 02049.

Doc. No. 02050. Doc. No. 02051.

II. Pilatus PC-12/45 (Normal Category), approved July 31, 1996. The data given above is valid except where mentioned below: Airspeed Limits (EAS): VD 290 kts MD 0.62 (S/N 101 ­ 683) MD 0.58 (S/N 684 onwards) Max. maneuvering operating speed VO 161 kts at 4500 kg) Stall speed (at TOW) Flaps up 93 kts (CAS) (engine running flight idle) Flaps down 65 kts (CAS) At 4500 kg 30% MAC to 43% MAC Forward cg limit varies linearly between: (landing gear extended) 4500 kg (9921 lbs) 30% MAC 3700 kg (8157 lbs) 18% MAC 2600 kg (5732 lbs) and less 13% MAC Rear cg limit varies linearly between: (landing gear retracted) 4500 kg (9921 lbs) 43% MAC 3600 kg (7937 lbs) 46% MAC 3000 kg (6614 lbs) 46% MAC 2600 kg (5732 lbs) and less 20% MAC Maximum Weights. Ramp weight Take-off weight Landing weight Max. zero fuel weight Wing flaps 4520 kg (9965 lbs) 4500 kg (9921 lbs) 4500 kg (9921 lbs) 4100 kg (9039 lbs) Max. diving speed

Center of Gravity Limits.

Control Surfaces.

15° +0°/-1.5° Normal Take-off 30° +0°/-1.5° Short Take-off 39.5° +/-0.5° Landing (left/right asymmetry 1°)

S/N 684 Onwards: Ailerons 26.5º +/- 0.5º Up Aileron tab 13.9º + /-1.0º up (trim function only ­ left hand tab) Aileron tab 15.5º + /-1.0º up (balance function only ­ both tabs) Control Surfaces (Cont.)

13º +/- 0.5º down 14.5º +/- 1.0º down 15.8º +/- 1.0º down

Aileron tab 29.3º + /-1.0º up 28.4º +/- 1.0º down (combined trim and balance function ­ left hand tab) When the ailerons are in the neutral position, both tabs are deflected 5º+/- 0.5º up.

Exhibit B

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK
A78EU

Document 110
Page 5 of 7

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 18 of 27

Certification Basis

1) 14 CFR Sections 21.29, 21.183(c) and 14 CFR 23, Normal Category, effective February 4, 1991, including Amendments 23-1 through 23-42 and Section 23.1305c)3) of Amendment 23-43 and Section 23.49c) and 23.562d) of Amendment 23-44 Section 23.479b) & c) and Section 23.1507 of Amendment 23-45 and Section 23.1311 of Amendment 23-49 2) 14 CFR Section 36, effective November 18, 1969, including Amendments 36-1 through amendment in effect at the time of U.S. Type Certification, and 3) 14 CFR Section 34, effective September 10, 1990, and 4) Equivalent level of Safety, a) ACE-94-8 of June 21, 1994, Spin demonstration, FAR 23.221 a)2) b) Cabin pressure indicator, FAR 23.841b) 6). See NOTE 8. 5) Section 611(b) of the FAA Act of 1958 6) Certification Maintenance Requirement (CMR), manual pitch trim system annunciation 7) Special Conditions: High Energy Radiated Electromagnetic Fields, (HERF), Number 23-ACE-46, effective date May 29, 1990 8) Approved for Flight Into Known Icing. See NOTE 4. Available Documents for the PILATUS PC-12/45 are: For S/N 101 ­ 400, except 321: Airplane Flight Manual Supplement No. 8 (Doc. No. 01973-001 / 9-08) Initial issue, or later FOCA approved revisions. For S/N 321 and S/N 401and subsequent: Airplane Flight Manual Report No. 02211 Initial issue or later FOCA approved revisions.

Service Information.

III. Pilatus PC-12/47 (Normal Category), approved December 23, 2005. The data given for model PC-12 is valid except where mentioned below: Airspeed Limits (EAS): VD 290 kts MD 0.58 Max. maneuvering operating speed VO Stall speed (at TOW) Flaps up (engine running flight idle) Flaps down At 4740 kg 30% MAC to 42.2% MAC Forward cg limit varies linearly between: (landing gear extended) 4740 kg (10450 lbs) 30% MAC 4500 kg (9921 lbs) 30% MAC 3700 kg (8157 lbs) 18% MAC 2600 kg (5732 lbs) and less 13% MAC Rear cg limit varies linearly between: (landing gear retracted) 4740 kg (10450 lbs) 42.2% MAC 4500 kg (9921 lbs) 43% MAC 3600 kg (7937 lbs) 46% MAC 3000 kg (6614 lbs) 46% MAC 2600 kg (5732 lbs) and less 20% MAC Maximum Weights. Ramp weight Take-off weight Landing weight Max. zero fuel weight Wing flaps 4760 kg (10495 lbs) 4740 kg (10450 lbs) 4500 kg (9921 lbs) 4100 kg (9039 lbs) Max. diving speed

163 kts at 4740 kg (10450 lbs) 95 kts (CAS) 67 kts (CAS)

Center of Gravity Limits.

Control Surfaces.

15° +0°/-1.5° Normal Take-off 30° +0°/-1.5° Short Take-off 39.5° +/-0.5° Landing (left/right asymmetry 1°) Ailerons 26.5º +/- 0.5º Up 13º +/- 0.5º down Aileron tab 13.9º + /-1.0º up 14.5º +/- 1.0º down (trim function only ­ left hand tab) Aileron tab 15.5º + /-1.0º up 15.8º +/- 1.0º down (balance function only ­ both tabs) Aileron tab 29.3º + /-1.0º up 28.4º +/- 1.0º down (combined trim and balance function ­ left hand tab) When the ailerons are in the neutral position, both tabs are deflected 5º+/- 0.5º up.

Exhibit B

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK
A78EU

Document 110
Page 6 of 7

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 19 of 27

Certification Basis

1) 14 CFR Sections 21.29, 21.183(c) and 14 CFR 23, Normal Category, effective February 4, 1991, including Amendments 23-1 through 23-42 and Section 23.1305c)3) of Amendment 23-43 and Section 23.49c) and 23.562d) of Amendment 23-44 Section 23.479b) & c) and Section 23.1507 of Amendment 23-45 and Section 23.1311 of Amendment 23-49 2) 14 CFR Section 36, effective November 18, 1969, including Amendments 36-1 through amendment 36-27, effective September 6, 2005, 3) 14 CFR Section 34, effective September 10, 1990, including amendments 34-1 as amended through Amendment 34-3 effective February 3, 1999; 4) Equivalent level of Safety findings per provision of 14 CFR 21.21(b)(1): a) ACE-94-8 of June 21, 1994, Spin demonstration, FAR 23.221 a)2) as extended by FAA memorandum dated November 29, 2005. b) ACE-05-18 of November 29, 2005, Cabin pressure indicator, FAR 23.841b) 6) 5) Special Conditions: High Energy Radiated Electromagnetic Fields, (HERF), Number 23-ACE-46, effective date May 29, 1990 6) Approved for Flight Into Known Icing . See NOTE 4. 7) Section 611(b) of the FAA Act of 1958 8) Certification Maintenance Requirement (CMR), manual pitch trim system annunciation Date of Application for U.S. Amended Type Certificate for PC-12/47 model December 1, 2004.

Service Information.

Available Documents for the PILATUS PC-12/47 are: Airplane Flight Manual Report No. 02211, Initial issue or later FOCA approved revisions. (specific PC-12/47 data is contained in AFM Supplement No. 33) Aircraft Maintenance Manual Doc. No. 02049 Revision 17, dated 31 Jan 2006 or higher. (until Revision 17 is issued the information is contained in AMM Temporary Revisions No 04-14, dated December 1, 2005, No 27-31, dated December 16, 2005 and No 57-07, dated December 16, 2005.) (Chapter 4 FAA and FOCA approved)

NOTES NOTE 1. Current weight and balance data together with a list of equipment included in the certificated empty weight, and loading instructions, when necessary, must be provided for each airplane at the time of original certification. The certificated empty weight and corresponding center of gravity locations must include the following: a) unusable fuel of 19.6 kg (43.2 lbs) at 5.73 m (225.6 in) on S/N 101 up to and including S/N 140. unusable fuel of 14.9 kg (32.9 lbs) at 5.73 m (225.6 in) from S/N 141 on onwards. b) engine oil of 9.2 kg (20.3 lbs) at 2.41 m (95.27 in.) NOTE 2. Airplane operation must be in accordance with the FOCA-approved Airplane Flight Manual listed above. All placards listed in Section 2 of the AFM must be displayed in the appropriate location. Airworthiness Limitations are contained in the FOCA approved Chapter 4 of the PC-12, PC-12/45 & PC-12/47 Aircraft Maintenance Manual. These Limitations may not be changed without FOCA and FAA approval. The models PC-12 and PC-12/45 up to S/N 683 may be operated in know icing conditions when equipped in accordance with Pilatus Modification PIL 12/00/001, Rev. 1, or later FOCA approved revision. The models PC-12/45 and PC-12/47 from S/N 684 onwards are approved for operation in known icing conditions. The basic version PC-12 (S/N 101 - 683) may be converted to a version PC-12/45 by executing PILATUS Service Bulletin No. 04-001. Only interior configurations described in the official Pilatus AFM/POH are approved for installation in the PC-12, PC-12/45 and PC-12/47 aircraft. These configurations have been shown to meet the dynamic and HIC test requirements of FAR 23.562. Any alterations to these approved interior layouts must be shown to meet FAR 23.562.

NOTE 3.

NOTE 4.

NOTE 5.

NOTE 6.

Exhibit B

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK
A78EU

Document 110
Page 7 of 7

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 20 of 27

NOTE 7.

All PC-12 models are eligible for import (with FOCA export certificate of airworthiness) into the USA in the no cabin interior configuration option installation per Pilatus Document 500.20.12.399 for ferry flight delivery to the USA. After delivery in this configuration, the airplane is eligible for standard airworthiness certificate in the no cabin interior configuration per Pilatus Document 500.20.12.399, but carriage of passengers (other than those essential to the mission) in this configuration is prohibited. While the airplane is in this configuration it is subject to limitations and inspections defined in the Airworthiness Limitations Sections. The passenger prohibition can be removed after installation of a Pilatus factory interior is installed per Pilatus Document No. 02252 or other FAA approved interior is installed. An ELOS memorandum was inadvertently missed on the original PC-12 model and PC-12/45 model, but was evaluated during the validation of the PC-12/47. See FAA memorandum dated December 9, 2005 for details.

NOTE 8.

NOTE 9.

The PC-12/45 model incorporated an aerodynamic improvement modification (AIM) type design change that was approved at the same time the PC-12/47 model was approved. This modification is for production aircraft only and includes: modified wingtips, modified dorsal and ventral fins and modified ailerons (reduction of roll control forces). Starting with Manufacture Serial Number (MSN) 684 can be either a PC-12/45 with the AIM type design change or a PC-12/47 model.

NOTE 10.

...END...

Exhibit B

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 21 of 27

Exhibit C

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 22 of 27

Exhibit D

1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 23

Exhibit E

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 24 of 27

Exhibit F

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 25 of 27

Exhibit F

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 26 of 27

Exhibit F

Case 1:01-cv-02056-JLK

Document 110

Filed 01/05/2007

Page 27 of 27

Exhibit F