Rob Wolf says: "FAR Part 23 guarantees a certain level of reliability and safety."
Then why does FAR Part 23 certification not protect a manufacturer from liability? If an aircraft's manufacturer jumps through the bureaucratic hoops (not to mention shelling out the massive dinero) required to meet such exacting "reliability" and "safety" standards, why does our government not then declare such an aircraft "safe" and "reliable" enough to prohibit tort litigation based on safety and reliability?
The reason is simple: because FAR Part 23 cerification guarantees nothing except that a certificated aircraft meets the bureaucratic standards contained within the FAR.
Here's another way to look at it. Do you think a certificate from the FAA guarantees a certain level of reliability and safety from a pilot?
Regards,
Mark