Ok Hung lets have at it <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Quote
* In example #1, the girl's broken arm doesn't affect her appearance, so it's not a factor. Now, if she had fallen thru a glass window and her face is full of scars from stitches, I'd consider that "damage history".
Isn?t a replaced spar (major damage) analogous to a properly mended bone? You just made my point that the damage history is not a factor if it doesn?t affect from or function. Thanks

Quote
* In example #2, if the repair was "well done and there is no apparent evidence the car has damage" then it's OK. But if there's any mismatch in the paint or part alignment, then it's less desirable than one that wasn't involved in a fender-bender.
A condition of the example was that there was no apparent evidence of the damage or repair. I am not going to fall for you changing the conditions and then saying that the example is not well chosen. Your fiddling with the example completely changes the situation. Again the ?damage? has not affected form or function. . I think that you made my point again by having to change the conditions to find fault.

Quote
* In example #3, I wouldn't consider a stuck valve and a replaced cylinder "damage"; I'd call them "engine problem".
I just knew that someone would fall for this one. Of course a broken engine is damage. It had to be repaired else the airplane is not airworthy. The difference is that we expect for engines to wear out and things in them to brake and therefore we ignore broken engines as damage. If you wore out a part of the airframe that cause a secondary failure I?ll bet money, marbles and chalk that your would yell ?damage history?


Quote
I know the point you were trying to make, but I think the examples were not very well selected.

The whole point of the quote is that if damage is properly repaired and documented the effect that the damage has on the value of the airplane is purely EMOTIONAL. I think that the way that you took exception to each of the examples drives home the point that I was trying to make. Thanks a bunch.