As the third wheel in this particular menage-a-trois (no-one else seems to care at this point), I have to side with Msa1701. Whilst WP:V may apply in situations such as "Band X has sold 30m albums", "but that only includes their first 2 albums, not their third which has been out for 2 months", "but there are no figures for that album"; this debate, to me, appears to fall more under the auspices of WP:UCS. All of the cited references stem from the same common source - the brochure specs. If a helicopter engineer and a pilot both posit that those numbers are at best "optimistic" suggests to me that the figures aren't robust enough to guarantee their inclusion in an encyclopedia. I don't think that this constitutes WP:OR, just that it renders sufficient doubt on the given citations to preclude their inclusion as inarguable, verifiable fact. On that basis, I propose reverting to Msa1701's last revision. I'll give it 24 hours and I'm also shifting this discussion to the article's talk page as that seems the more sensible place.