Re: G550 SN 5173
arry, great to see you too yesterday. I've discussed with We=tfield mans ement and below is their positon. I spoke with Deryck Sa=oy, Sr. Operations Manager. He can be reached at for further discussion if you would like and is cc'd on this email=
• Seller pilots flew the aircraft, they may or may not have known =he temps were on the rise, certainly if they did know they likely would be=reluctant to point it out as they were seller pilots.
- The aircraft was flown from BAF on 5/4/17, a Saturday morning pr=sumably to keep costs down. The buying customer only requested an av=onics tech to be on board to go through the cabin/galley systems, he was not up in the jump se=t nor is he qualified to diagnose/identify mechanical system anomalies. A =echanical systems tech was available but not requested for the flight.
• Had GAC test pilot's been in command I can virtually gua=antee they would have pointed out those temps on the rise.
- x The buyer did not share the photos he took with any BAF personne= requesting opinions on what was depicted.
Gulfstream's quotes/hold harmless paperwork specifically=spells out our liability, although not popular we are not culpable or fina=cially responsible for this event.
Customer has proof he purchased the aircraft in that condition v=a photos, the seller's pilots were in command during the test flig=t, perhaps Chevron has some responsibility?
=er our discussion yesterday, I am still awaiting management response on th= Window Shade mod you referenced in your prior emails and will contact you=tomorrow to present options.
=e appreciate your business Larry, and trust you understand our position st=ted above. Give me a call if you have any questions.
Send to josh