It’s not the strength they were worried about, it was the temperature at which it weakend, which shouldn’t have been a problem according the the information provided to the pilot.

I don’t know the material data sheet was wrong or the person selling it to him was wrong or lying. We don’t and won’t know, because they didn’t try to identify it.

This was part “only” meant to funnel air into the engine, so I could see why he wouldn’t think it would be a problem. And I think it’s more like the carbon fiber impregnated abs, than coated. I paraphrased the report, so that’s on me.

I read through the report. The pilot believed it to be carbon fiber reinforced abs, which should have had a higher weakening temp than the stock fiberglass part. Apparently it didn’t though. They don’t identify the actual material in the report.