So what? We have photos of D-BJET from 2003, and it still has the Fairchild-Dornier paintwork. DLR used it, and didn't find it necessary to change the paintwork. By your logic D-BJET couldn't have had that paintwork in 2003 because Fairchild-Dornier did not exist.Fairchild-Dornier did not exist in 2008 - having declared itself insolvent in 2002
Read back the thread. I myself pointed out the piece of tape on the tail that makes it certain it is actually D-BJET. But in the OP, this question was just glossed over. The OP did not provide actual evidence that the plane must be D-BJET and cannot be anything else. So this is a missing link in the OP's logic.But do you actually think that it's at all likely that the plane in the OP was misidentified? That there might have been another identical plane in 2008, with the exact same livery (now out of date) and icing test equipment as D-BJET had in 2003?
So what? We have photos of D-BJET from 2003, and it still has the Fairchild-Dornier paintwork. DLR used it, and didn't find it necessary to change the paintwork. By your logic D-BJET couldn't have had that paintwork in 2003 because Fairchild-Dornier did not exist.
https://www.aviationstrategy.aero/newsletter/articles/1206/showAfter running out of cash after March’s [2002] wages had been paid, Fairchild Dornier has been compelled under German law to put itself into the hands of the administrators. Its immediate future rests with HypoVereinsbank AG ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairchild_AircraftIn 2003, the assets of Fairchild were purchased by M7 Aerospace and the new company was relocated to San Antonio.
Thanks, I've added this to the OP.Read back the thread. I myself pointed out the piece of tape on the tail that makes it certain it is actually D-BJET. But in the OP, this question was just glossed over. The OP did not provide actual evidence that the plane must be D-BJET and cannot be anything else. So this is a missing link in the OP's logic.
Read back the thread. I myself pointed out the piece of tape on the tail that makes it certain it is actually D-BJET. But in the OP, this question was just glossed over. The OP did not provide actual evidence that the plane must be D-BJET and cannot be anything else. So this is a missing link in the OP's logic.