Nicolas Finazzo: Well, because we’re at the stage that we’re at, we’ve already demonstrated the system performs the way the FAA has prescribed for an enhanced flight vision system. I don’t see there being a risk that the system is not certifiable. The risk would be if we continue to have issues that come up, where the FAA or whatever, maybe they don’t understand how something is displaying a particular way. We see some other anomaly. We see a failure in the system that the FA says, okay, well, hey, you guys were supposed to prove this thing would operate reliably for a week, and we had a problem. Go back, figure out what the root cause analysis of the problem is or was, and we want to see it and we’ll continue flying after we understand why did you have this problem, we don’t expect it, but it is possible.
In that case, what I would expect is what we’ve incurred thus far, which is issues come up. FAA says, hey, explain this to me. We explain it, we show it to them and then we keep flying. I think what it would do is, it would stop, it could potentially, depending on the nature of the issue, it could stop flying at that point, and we have to go back to the drawing board and fix the issue that was identified to the FAA’s satisfaction and then continue from that point forward. I don’t know what could happen at this point for the FAA to say the system is you cannot prove the reliability of the system unless we just cannot fly the airplane for a week and not have a problem. I mean if we just continue to fly the airplane with a problem after a problem, after a problem, after a problem, that could set us back quite a bit.
Now, we haven’t had that issue and we’ve put over 300 hours on the airplane. So, we have assurance. we have confidence based on the amount of time we’ve put on the airplane that we’re not likely to have repetitive recurring problems in a short period of time. The issues that have been discovered have been discovered over a prolonged series of — extensive series of flight testing and some of which was never noticed after hundreds of hours of flight testing. the issues were so minor. And again, it’s like the better you make the system, the more perfect it is, the easier it is to identify anything that isn’t as good as something else. And I think that’s where we’re at. I mean, we keep finding little things that even are within limits, but they’re not as good as you would think they could be.
And we find that there’s a way to fix them, make them even better. And that’s what we’ve been doing.
Bert Subin: So maybe, on the flip side of that question, if we were to assume the fifth or final flight tests were to take place the week of August 21st, I guess assuming that process seems to be pretty straightforward, where you’re just flying, simulating the typical pilot experience. And so after that, assuming you were to get through that final test, you would assume or your expectation is that the FAA will convene and rule on an STC. Is that fair? So, if everything were to go well through that period, you could have an STC by October 1st?
Nicolas Finazzo: I think that’s what we’ve been told, that no more than 30 days after we successfully complete our final flight testing, they will be in a position to issue us our STC. Could it take longer? Sure, it could take longer. Should it take longer? No.
Bert Subin: Got it. Okay. Maybe, just shifting over to the 757. Can you just give us an update on how we should think about timing? Correct me if I’m wrong. You said three sales are expected this year and then three will be put onto, I guess, short-term leases. And the remaining five, I guess, your expectation is the first half of ’24. Can you just give us an update on timing for the 757s or your expectation for timing.
