Results
90-17-08: 90-17-08 BOEING: Amendment 39-6692. Docket No. 90-NM-30-AD. \n\n\tApplicability: Model 767 series airplanes as listed in Boeing Service Bulletin 767- 30A0011, Revision 2, dated September 28, 1989, certificated in any category. \n\n\tCompliance: Required as indicated, unless previously accomplished. \n\n\tTo ensure the integrity of the wing and engine anti-ice system, accomplish the following: \n\n\tA.\tWithin the next 300 hours time-in-service after July 21, 1988 (the effective date of Amendment 39-5970), and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 300 hours time-in-service, perform the wing and engine thermal anti-ice operational test described in Boeing Service Bulletin 767-30A0011, Revision 2, dated September 28, 1989. \n\n\tNOTE: This is the same as the operational test required by AD 88-04-04 R1.\n \n\tB.\tAny switch or circuit malfunction, identified by a negative verification during the functional test required by paragraph A., above, must be corrected prior to further flight, inaccordance with the Boeing Model 767 Maintenance Manual or Boeing Service Bulletin 767- 30A0011, Revision 2, dated September 28, 1989. \n\n\tC.\tWithin the next 6,000 hours time-in-service after the effective date of this AD, modify the thermal anti-ice system in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 767-30A0011, Revision 2, dated September 28, 1989. This constitutes terminating action for repetitive operational testing required by paragraph A., above. \n\n\tD.\tAn alternate means of compliance or adjustment of the compliance time, which provides an acceptable level of safety, may be used when approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. \n\n\tNOTE: The request should be submitted directly to the Manager, Seattle ACO, and a copy sent to the cognizant FAA Principal Inspector (PI). The PI will then forward comments or concurrence to the Seattle ACO. \n\n\tE.\tSpecial flight permits may be issued in accordance with FAR 21.197 and21.199 to operate airplanes to a base in order to comply with the requirements of this AD. \n\n\tAll persons affected by this directive who have not already received the appropriate service documents from the manufacturer may obtain copies upon request to Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124. These documents may be examined at the FAA, Northwest Mountain Region, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, S.W., Renton, Washington. \n\n\tThis AD supersedes AD 88-04-04 R1, Amendment 39-5970. \n\tThis amendment (39-6692, AD 90-17-08) becomes effective on September 17, 1990.
2011-21-10: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for Diamond Aircraft Industries GmbH Model (Diamond) DA 40 airplanes equipped with cabin air conditioning vapor cycle system (VCS) installed per STC SA03674AT held by Premier Aircraft Services (originally held by DER Services, Inc.) following DER Services Master Document List MDL-2006- 020-1, Revision C, dated February 3, 2009; Revision D, dated April 22, 2009; Revision E, dated May 12, 2010; or Revision F, dated July 6, 2010. This AD was prompted by reports of damage around the VCS compressor mounting areas found during maintenance inspections. This AD requires deactivation of the VCS, removal of the compressor and bracket, and revision to the airplane weight and balance. We are issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on these products.
97-02-10: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) that is applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-9, DC-9-80, and C-9 (military) series airplanes, Model MD- 88 airplanes, and Model MD-90 airplanes. This action requires a visual check to determine the part and serial numbers of the upper lock link assembly of the nose landing gear (NLG); repetitive inspections of certain upper lock link assemblies to detect fatigue cracking; and modification of the NLG. This action also provides for terminating action for the repetitive inspections. This amendment is prompted by a report indicating that, due to fatigue cracking, the upper lock link assembly on an airplane fractured, and consequently prevented the NLG from extending fully. The actions specified in this AD are intended to prevent this assembly from fracturing due to fatigue cracking, and the NLG consequently failing to extend fully; this condition could result in injury to passengers and flight crew, and damage to the airplane.
97-01-12: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to all Airtell International, Inc., Centaurus Model C3-100 GPWS equipment that is installed on any type of airplane, that requires replacement of this equipment with a similar type of equipment that meets specific performance requirements. This amendment is prompted by results of an investigation, which revealed that, under certain circumstances, the Centaurus GPWS equipment does not provide the flight crew with aural warnings to indicate that the airplane is descending. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent failure of the GPWS equipment to provide such aural warnings. If the flight crew relies on receiving such warnings and the GPWS equipment fails to provide those warnings, the ability of the flight crew to prevent the airplane from impacting the ground may be inhibited.
2009-13-06 R1: We are revising an existing airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Piper Aircraft, Inc. Models PA-23, PA-23-160, PA-23-235, PA-23- 250, PA-23-250 (Navy UO-1), PA-E23-250, PA-31, PA-31-300, PA-31-325, PA-31-350, PA-31P, PA-31P-350, PA-31T, PA-31T1, PA-31T2, PA-31T3, PA- 42, PA-42-720, and PA-42-1000 airplanes that are equipped with a baggage door in the fuselage nose section (a nose baggage door). That AD currently establishes life limits and replacement requirements for safety-critical nose baggage door components and repetitive inspections and lubrication of the nose baggage door latching mechanism and lock assembly. This new AD removes the requirement for the nose baggage door compartment interior light inspection and retains the other requirements from AD 2009-13-06, Amendment 39-15944. This AD was prompted by further investigation and a request for an alternative method of compliance (AMOC). We are issuing this AD to correct the unsafe condition on these products.
85-16-01: 85-16-01 BOEING: Amendment 39-5114. Applies to Boeing Model 767 series airplanes certificated in any category. Compliance is required as indicated, unless already accomplished. \n\n\tTo preclude failure of the Pneumatic System Pressure Regulating and Shutoff Valve (PRSOV), and to assure its integrity when commanded closed by a crew procedure, accomplish either paragraph A. or B., below, (1) within the next 200 hours time-in-service on the PRSOV, or prior to the accumulation of 1500 hours time-in-service on the PRSOV, whichever occurs later, on airplanes equipped with General Electric CF6-80 series engines, or (2) within the next 500 hours time-in-service on the PRSOV, or prior to accumulation of 3000 hours time-in-service on the PRSOV, whichever occurs later, on airplanes equipped with Pratt & Whitney JT9D series engines: \n\n\tA.\tReplace the PRSOV, Hamilton Standard P/N 773288, with a serviceable valve. Repeat this procedure for replacement valves not modified in accordance with paragraph B. below, (1) prior to the accumulation of 1500 hours time-in-service on the valve, on airplanes equipped with General Electric CF6-80 series engines, or (2) prior to the accumulation of 3000 hours time-in-service on the valve, on airplanes equipped with Pratt & Whitney JT9D series engines. \n\n\tB.\tAccomplish PRSOV modification in accordance with Hamilton Standard Service Bulletin 36-2030, dated March 8, 1985, or later FAA-approved revisions. Valves modified in accordance with this bulletin are not subject to a repetitive replacement, and constitute terminating action for this AD. \n\n\tNOTE: In the event an operator is unable to establish the accumulated hours time-in- service on a given PRSOV installed on an airplane, the total hours accumulated on the airplane must be used in the determination of replacement or modification times for the PRSOV. \n\n\tC.\tAlternate means of compliance which provide an acceptable level of safety may be used when approved by the Manager, SeattleAircraft Certification Office, FAA, Northwest Mountain Region. \n\n\tD.\tSpecial flight permits may be issued in accordance with FAR 21.197 and 21.199 to operate airplanes to a base for the accomplishment of inspections and/or modifications required by this AD. \n\n\tAll persons affected by this directive who have not already received these documents from the manufacturer may obtain copies upon request to the Boeing Commercial Airplane Company, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124, or to Hamilton Standard, Bradley Field Road, Windsor Locks, Connecticut 06096. These documents also may be examined at FAA, Northwest Mountain Region, 17900 Pacific Highway South, Seattle, Washington, or 9010 East Marginal Way South, Seattle, Washington. \n\n\tThis amendment becomes effective August 19, 1985.
90-25-01: 90-25-01 BOEING: Amendment 39-6789. Docket No. 89-NM-270-AD. \n\n\tApplicability: All Model 737 series airplanes, certificated in any category. \n\n\tCompliance: Required as indicated, unless previously accomplished. \n\n\tNOTE: This AD references Boeing Document Number D6-38528, "Aging Airplane Corrosion Prevention and Control Program, Model 737," Revision A, dated July 28, 1989, for inspection procedures, compliance times, and reporting requirements. In addition, this AD specifies inspection and reporting requirements beyond those included in the Document. Where there are differences between the AD and the Document, the AD prevails. \n\n\tTo control corrosion, accomplish the following: \n\n\tA.\tWithin one year after the effective date of this AD, revise the FAA-approved maintenance program to include the corrosion control program specified in Boeing Document Number D6-38528, "Aging Airplane Corrosion Prevention and Control Program, Model 737," Revision A, dated July 28, 1989, (hereinafter referred to as "the Document"). \n\n\tNOTE: All structure found corroded or cracked as a result of an inspection conducted in accordance with this paragraph must be addressed in accordance with FAR Part 43. \n\n\tNOTE: Where non-destructive inspection (NDI) methods are employed, in accordance with Section 4.1 of the Document, the standards and procedures used must be acceptable to the Administrator in accordance with FAR 43.13. \n\n\tNOTE: Procedures identified in the Document as "optional" are not required to be accomplished by this AD. \n\n\tB.\t1.\tIf, as a result of any inspection conducted in accordance with the program required by paragraph A., above, Level 3 corrosion is determined to exist in any area, accomplish one of the following within 7 days after such determination: \n\n\t\t\ta.\tSubmit a report of any findings of Level 3 corrosion to the Manager of the Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) and inspect the affected area on all Model 737 aircraft in the operator's fleet; or \n\n\t\t\tb.\tSubmit for approval to the Manager of the Seattle ACO one of the following: \n\n\t\t\t\t(1)\tProposed adjustments to the schedule for performing the tasks in that area on remaining airplanes in the operator's fleet, which are adequate to ensure that any other Level 3 corrosion is detected in a timely manner, along with substantiating data for those adjustments; or \n\n\t\t\t\t(2)\tData substantiating that the Level 3 corrosion found is an isolated occurrence and that no such adjustments are necessary. \n\n\tNOTE: Notwithstanding the provision of Section 1.1. of the Document that would permit corrosion that otherwise meets the definition of Level 3 corrosion (i.e., which is determined to be a potentially urgent airworthiness concern requiring expeditious action) to be treated as Level 1 if the operator finds that it "can be attributed to an event not typical of the operator's usage of other airplanes in the same fleet," this paragraph requires that data substantiating anysuch finding be submitted to the FAA for approval. \n\n\tNOTE: As used throughout this AD, where documents are to be submitted to the Manager of the Seattle ACO, the document should be submitted directly to the Manager, Seattle ACO, and a copy sent to the cognizant FAA Principal Inspector (PI). The PI will then forward comments or concurrence to the Seattle ACO. The Seattle ACO will not respond to the operator without the PI's comments or concurrence. \n\n\t\t2.\tThe FAA may impose adjustments other than those proposed, upon a finding that such adjustments are necessary to ensure that any other Level 3 corrosion is detected in a timely manner. \n\n\t\t3.\tPrior to the compliance time specified for the first task required in the adjusted schedule approved under paragraph B.1. or B.2. of this AD, revise the FAA-approved maintenance program to include those adjustments. \n\n\tNOTE: The reporting requirements of this paragraph and of paragraph D., below, do not relieve operators from reportingcorrosion as required by FAR Section 121.703. \n\n\tC.\tTo accommodate unanticipated scheduling requirements, it is acceptable for a repeat inspection interval to be increased by up to 10 percent but not to exceed 6 months. The cognizant FAA Principal Inspector (PI) must be informed, in writing, of any extension.\n \n\tNOTE: Except as provided in this paragraph, notwithstanding Section 3.1., paragraph 4, of the Document, all extensions to any compliance time must be approved by the Manager of the Seattle ACO. \n\n\tD.\tReport forms for Level 2 corrosion and a follow-up report for Level 3 corrosion must be submitted at least quarterly in accordance with Section 5.0 of the Document. \n\n\tE.\tIf the repeat inspection or task intervals of an operator's existing corrosion inspection program are shorter than the corresponding intervals in Section 4.3 of the Document, they may not be increased without specific approval of the Manager of the Seattle ACO. \n\n\tF.\tBefore any airplane that is subject to this AD can be added to an air carrier's operations specifications, a program for the accomplishment of tasks required by this AD must be established in accordance with the following: \n\n\t\t1.\tFor airplanes that have previously been operated under an FAA-approved maintenance program, the initial task on each area to be accomplished by the new operator must be accomplished in accordance with the previous operator's schedule or with the new operator's schedule, whichever would result in the earlier accomplishment date for that task. After each task has been performed once, each subsequent task must be performed in accordance with the new operator's schedule. \n\n\t\t2.\tFor airplanes that have not previously been operated under an FAA-approved maintenance program, each initial task required by this AD must be accomplished either prior to the airplane's being added to the air carrier's operations specifications, or in accordance with a schedule approved by the Manager, Seattle ACO.G.\tIf corrosion is found to exceed Level 1 on any inspection after the initial inspection, the corrosion control program for the affected area must be reviewed and means implemented to reduce corrosion to Level 1 or better. \n\n\t\t1.\tWithin 60 days after such a finding, if corrective action is necessary to reduce future findings of corrosion to Level 1 or better, such proposed corrective action must be submitted for approval to the Manager, Seattle ACO. \n\n\t\t2.\tWithin 30 days after the corrective action is approved, revise the FAA-approved maintenance program to include the approved corrective action. \n\n\tH.\tAn alternate means of compliance or adjustment of the compliance time, which provides an acceptable level of safety, may be used when approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. \n\n\tNOTE: The request should be submitted directly to the Manager, Seattle ACO, and a copy sent to the cognizant FAA Principal Inspector (PI). The PI will then forward comments or concurrence to the Seattle ACO. \n\n\tI.\tSpecial flight permits may be issued in accordance with FAR 21.197 and 21.199 to operate airplanes to a base in order to comply with the requirements of this AD. \n\n\tThe requirements shall be done in accordance with Boeing Document Number D6-38528, "Aging Airplane Corrosion Prevention and Control Program, Model 737," Revision A, dated July 28, 1989. This incorporation by reference was approved by approved by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR Part 51. Copies may be obtained from Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, Northwest Mountain Region, 1601 Lind Avenue S.W., 5th Floor, Renton, Washington; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 1100 L Street N.W., Room 8301, Washington, D.C. \n\n\tThis amendment (39-6789, AD 90-25-01) becomes effective on December 31, 1990.
48-11-01: 48-11-01 DOUGLAS: Applies to DC-6 Aircraft. \n\n\tTo be accomplished prior to return to service in class B operation-with cabin heating and thermal deicing, including windshield, operative, but with cabin supercharging inoperative. \n\n\tRework must be accomplished in accordance with the following Douglas Co. data: \n\n\t1.\tAccomplish all rework covered by data listed in Note 48-10-01 for class A operation with the exception of the rework outlined in Service Bulletins No. 258, No. 225 and No. 230. Also accomplish paragraphs 1 and 2 but do not accomplish 3 of Note 48-10-01. \n\n\t2.\tRework in accordance with the following must also be accomplished: \n\n\tService Bulletin DC-6 No. 223, Stainless Steel Heater Discharge Ducts and Windshield Anti-Icing Ducts, as revised February 24, 1948. \n\n\tService Bulletin DC-6 No. 38, Heater Fire Warning Switch-Installation of, dated October 6, 1947. \n\n\tService Bulletin DC-6 No. 250, Cabin Heater Shut-Off Control, dated February 19, 1948. \n\n\tService Bulletin DC-6 No. 211, Main Cabin Heater Exhaust-Revision of, as revised February 23, 1948. \n\n\tService Bulletin DC-6 No. 227, Cabin Heater Scoop Segregation, as revised February 24, 1948. \n\n\tService Bulletin DC-6 No. 243, Revise Cabin Heater Ignition Conduit in Boiler Room and Hell-Hole Area, as revised January 26, 1948. \n\n\tService Bulletin DC-6 No. 245, Heater and Buffet Power Cable Conduit, as revised February 24, 1948. \n\n\tThe rework outlined in the data listed above is based upon an airplane which incorporates certain production changes. Therefore, in order to satisfactorily complete the rework required, some aircraft* must also be revised in accordance with the following: \n\n\tService Bulletin DC-6 No. 40, Heater Exhaust Fire Detector-Replacement of, dated September 3, 1947. (Accomplish partially*). \n\n\tService Bulletin DC-6 No. 71, Installation-Oil Trap and Drain, Cabin Heater Combustion Air Duct, dated September 3, 1947. (Accomplish Electrical Phase of Service Bulletin only.) \n\n\tService Bulletin DC-6 No. 96, Windshield De-icing Air Discharge Revision, dated December 22, 1947. \n\n\tService Bulletin DC-6 No. 141, Improvements in DC-6 Cabin Pressure and Cabin Air Conditioning Systems, dated February 19, 1948. \n\n\tService Bulletin DC-6 No. 150, Revision-Cockpit and Windshield Heat Control System and Windshield Air Exhaust, dated December 11, 1947. \n\n\tService Bulletin DC-6 No. 160, Cabin Air Mixing Valve Actuator, dated February 2, 1948. \n\n\tService Bulletin DC-6 No. 179, Ground Blower Electrical Wiring Revision, dated December 29, 1947. \n\n\tService Bulletin DC-6 No. 28, Installation of Ammeter and Selector Switch for Functional Check of Pitot and Air Scoop Anti-Icing Heaters, dated August 20, 1947. (Must be accomplished completely except that P/N 3320167-516 nameplate, 1 required, shall be deleted.) \n\n\tIn addition to the above, the following must also be accomplished in all aircraft: \n\n\t(a)\tDisconnect the superchargers and drain and flushsupercharger oil system. \n\n\t*Serial numbers of airplanes affected by this rework are listed on the pertinent Service Bulletin(s). Also, additional information may be obtained from the "Supplement" to "Cross Reference List-Service Changes and Modification Items" which has been prepared and revised by the Douglas Co. as of February 11, 1948.
96-26-04: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) that is applicable to certain Boeing Model 747 series airplanes. This action requires a one-time inspection to detect fatigue cracking of the vertical beam webs and chords of the nose wheel well (NWW) at body station (BS) 300 and BS 320, and repair, if necessary. This action also requires inspections to detect fatigue cracking of the inner chord and web of the fuselage frames at BS 300 and BS 320, and repair, if necessary. This amendment is prompted by a report indicating that the fuselage frames at BS 300 and BS 320 severed approximately 10 inches outboard of the NWW side panel and resulted in accelerated fatigue cracking and subsequent failure of the adjacent NWW vertical beams. The actions specified in this AD are intended to detect and correct such fatigue cracking, which could result in collapse of the NWW pressure bulkhead and subsequent rapid decompression of the airplane.
96-25-17: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain Boeing Model 737-300, -400, and -500 series airplanes, that requires inspections to detect bent or damaged tie links and washers of the elevator feel and centering unit, and replacement of the centering unit with a new or serviceable unit, if necessary. This amendment also provides an optional replacement of the centering unit, which, if accomplished with the installation of supports and a stop bolt, constitutes terminating action for the repetitive inspections. This amendment is prompted by a report of high control column forces that occurred during takeoff and landing. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent such high forces, which could result in restriction of elevator control during takeoff, climbout, and landing.