Results
2006-24-02: The FAA is superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD), which applies to certain Boeing Model 747 series airplanes. That AD currently requires repetitive inspections to detect cracks at certain stringer fastener locations; and repair, if necessary. For certain airplanes, that AD requires a modification in certain areas where reports indicate that cracking was prevalent. This modification terminates the repetitive inspections only for those areas, and is also an option for other airplanes affected by the existing AD. This new AD requires an additional inspection of areas that may have Alodine-coated rivets installed, and repair if necessary. This AD results from a report of cracking discovered in a skin lap joint that was previously inspected using the eddy current method. We are issuing this AD to prevent rapid decompression of the airplane due to disbonding and subsequent cracking of the skin panels.
2006-24-03: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain Airbus Model A330-200, A330-300, A340-200, and A340-300 series airplanes. This AD requires repetitive inspections for discrepancies of the grease and gear teeth of the radial variable differential transducer of the nose wheel steering gearbox; or repetitive inspections for damage of the chrome on the bearing surface of the nose landing gear (NLG) main fitting barrel; as applicable. And, for airplanes with any discrepancy or damage, this AD requires an additional inspection or corrective actions. This AD also adds a terminating action. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent incorrect operation or jamming of the nose wheel steering, which could cause reduced controllability of the airplane on the ground. This action is intended to address the identified unsafe condition.
2019-11-03: The FAA is adopting an airworthiness directive (AD) for certain The Boeing Company Model 737-700C, -800, and -900ER series airplanes. This AD requires a maintenance records check to determine if any main slat track assembly has been removed, an inspection of the main slat track assemblies for a suspect lot number or a lot number that cannot be determined, and applicable on-condition actions. This AD was prompted by a report that certain main slat track assemblies were manufactured incorrectly and are affected by hydrogen embrittlement. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
2019-11-05: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2015-22-02 for certain Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited (Bell) Model 429 helicopters. AD 2015-22-02 required inspecting the tail rotor (TR) pitch link assemblies. This AD retains the inspections of AD 2015-22-02 and requires replacing certain pitch link bearings. This AD was prompted by a new design bearing introduced by Bell. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
98-18-24: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain Airbus Model A320 series airplanes, that requires repetitive inspections to detect cracking in the inner flange of door frame 66, and corrective actions, if necessary. This amendment also provides for an optional terminating action for the repetitive inspections. This amendment is prompted by issuance of mandatory continuing airworthiness information by a foreign civil airworthiness authority. The actions specified by this AD are intended to correct fatigue cracking in the inner flange of door frame 66, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the airplane.
98-19-14: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) that applies to all S.N. Centrair (Centrair) 101 series sailplanes. This AD requires replacing the airbrake control system with one of improved design. This AD is the result of mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by the airworthiness authority for France. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent loss of the airbrake control system caused by cracks in the original design airbrake control system, which could result in an inadvertent forced landing with consequent sailplane damage and/or passenger injury.
87-10-02: 87-10-02 BOEING: Amendment 39-5620. Applies to Model 767 series airplanes, as listed in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-27A0074, dated March 20, 1987, certificated in any category. Compliance required as indicated, unless previously accomplished. \n\n\tTo prevent lateral control system restriction or jamming resulting from improper installation of a trailing edge flap drive vapor seal, accomplish the following: \n\n\tA.\tWithin the next 100 landings or 30 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, inspect the trailing edge flap drive vapor seals for correct installation in accordance with Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 767-27A0074, dated March 20, 1987, or later FAA-approved revision. Vapor seals found to be installed incorrectly must be reworked to correct the installation before further flight in accordance with the instructions contained in the aforementioned alert service bulletin. \n\n\tNOTE: At the time of issuance of this AD, the Boeing 767 IllustratedParts Catalog, the Boeing 767 Maintenance Manual, and the Boeing 767 Maintenance Planning Data document all contained illustrations depicting a trailing edge flap drive vapor seal installed incorrectly, with the vapor seal flanges aligned vertically. The FAA-approved airplane maintenance program should be revised to take account of these errors. \n\n\tB.\tAn alternate means of compliance which provides an acceptable level of safety, may be used when approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Northwest Mountain Region. \n\n\tC.\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\tAll persons affected by this directive who have not already received the appropriate service information from the manufacturer may obtain copies upon request to the Boeing Commercial Airplane Company, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124. This information may be examinedat FAA, Northwest Mountain Region, 17900 Pacific Highway South, Seattle, Washington, or Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, FAA, Northwest Mountain Region, 9010 East Marginal Way South, Seattle, Washington. \n\n\tThis amendment 39-5620 becomes effective May 22, 1987.
2019-11-04: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Airbus Helicopters Deutschland GmbH (Airbus Helicopters) Model MBB-BK 117 D-2 helicopters. This AD requires replacing the rescue hoist cable cut pushbutton flip guard (flip guard). This AD was prompted by reports of unintended lifting of several flip guards. [[Page 26557]] We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
98-16-17: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) that is applicable to all Cessna Model 750 Citation X series airplanes. This action requires repetitive in-flight functional tests to verify proper operation of the secondary horizontal stabilizer pitch trim system, and repair, if necessary. This amendment is prompted by reports of simultaneous failures of the primary and secondary horizontal stabilizer pitch trim system during flight, due to internal water contamination and corrosion damage in the system actuator. The actions specified in this AD are intended to detect and correct such contamination and damage, which could result in simultaneous failure of both primary and secondary pitch trim systems, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.
2006-23-12: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all BAE Systems (Operations) Limited Model BAe 146 and Avro 146-RJ airplanes equipped with certain hydraulic accumulators. This AD requires inspecting the hydraulic accumulators to identify certain serial numbers, and replacing any affected accumulator with a new or serviceable accumulator. Operators may delay doing the replacement by doing repetitive inspections of the affected hydraulic accumulators for signs of failure (leaking or cracking), and replacing any failed accumulator with a new or serviceable unit. This AD results from a report that one hydraulic accumulator failed in service, which caused the loss of the yellow hydraulic system when the airplane was configured for landing. We are issuing this AD to prevent damage to the pressure skin, failure of certain hydraulic systems, contamination of the cabin with hydraulic mist, increased workload for the flightcrew associated with the loss of one or more hydraulic circuits, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.
2006-22-13: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for Pratt & Whitney PW4074, PW4074D, PW4077, PW4077D, PW4084D, PW4090, PW4090-3, and PW4098 turbofan engines, with certain front turbine hub part numbers installed. This AD requires a onetime visual inspection of the anti-rotation slots in the front turbine hub, for a machining nonconformance, and its replacement if the inspection failed. This AD results from a report of a crack found in an anti-rotation slot of a front turbine hub, during overhaul shop inspection. The anti-rotation slot geometry was not machined in conformance with the design drawing during manufacture. We are issuing this AD to prevent uncontained engine failure, damage to the airplane, and injury to passengers.
2000-24-04: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) that applies to certain Raytheon Aircraft Corporation (Raytheon) Beech Models A36, B36TC, and 58 airplanes. This AD requires you to inspect for misrouted rudder control cables; replace any worn or damaged guard pins; replace any pulley brackets that are damaged or worn; and replace any misrouted rudder control cables. Three reports of misrouted cables prompted this action. The actions specified by this AD are intended to correct the misrouted rudder control cable and consequent guard pin wear or fraying of the cables with loss of rudder control.
2019-08-11: We are superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2008-24-14, which applied to all Bombardier, Inc., Model CL-600-2B19 (Regional Jet Series 100 & 440) airplanes. AD 2008-24-14 required revising the instructions for continued airworthiness to incorporate certain airworthiness limitations for the main landing gear (MLG) trunnion fitting assembly. This AD requires revising the maintenance or inspection program, as applicable, to incorporate certain airworthiness limitations (AWLs). This AD also requires reworking the trunnion fitting in order to meet new structural safe-life limits. This AD was prompted by reports of cracks on the MLG trunnion fitting during fatigue testing; the introduction of new AWL tasks with revised inspection, modification, and safe-life requirements; and a determination that the trunnion fitting lower flange and both forward and aft bore holes are also subject to fatigue cracking. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
78-09-07 R3: 78-09-07 R3 BENDIX: Amendment 39-3205 as amended by Amendments 39-3252 and 39-3963 is further amended by Amendment 39-4538. Applies to Bendix S-20 series, S-1200 series, D-2000 series, and D-3000 series magnetos incorporating impulse couplings. Compliance required as indicated unless previously accomplished. To preclude magneto or engine failure resulting from magneto impulse coupling failure, accomplish the following: a. On magnetos having less than 475 hours time in service since new or overhaul, accomplish the provisions of paragraphs "c" and "d" of this AD prior to 500 hours time in service and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500 hours time in service from the last inspection. b. On magnetos having 475 or more hours in service since new or overhaul, accomplish the provisions of paragraphs "c" and "d" of this AD within the next 25 hours time in service and thereafter at intervals not to exceed 500 hours time in service from the last inspection. c. Inspect and replace, if necessary, impulse coupling components in accordance with the paragraph titled "Detailed Instructions" contained in Bendix Engine Products Division Service Bulletin Number 599B or an FAA approved equivalent. d. After accomplishing paragraph "c" of this AD, make a logbook entry showing the compliance time. Include the magneto make, model, and serial number. (Note: Except for new or zero time overhauled magnetos, any magneto not accompanied by a record of operating time must be in compliance with paragraph "c" upon installation on an approved engine.) e. Equivalent inspections and procedures must be approved by the Manager, New York Aircraft Certification Office, Room 202, 181 South Franklin Avenue, Valley Stream, New York 11581. f. As permitted by Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) 21.197 and 21.199, aircraft may be flown to a base where maintenance required by this AD can be accomplished. Amendment 39-3205 was effective May 9, 1978. Amendment 39-3252 amended Amendment 39-3205 effective July 3, 1978. Amendment 39-3963 amended Amendments 39-3205 and 39-3252 effective November 3, 1980. This Amendment 39-4538 is effective on January 17, 1983.
97-24-08: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD) that applies to Burkhart Grob, Luft-und Raumfahrt, GmbH. (Grob) Model G102 Astir CS sailplanes. This action requires replacing the elevator control lever with an improved elevator control lever. The discovery of cracks in the elevator control lever during a routine inspection of a Grob Model G102 Astir CS sailplane prompted this action. This AD is the result of mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by the airworthiness authority for Germany. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent failure of the elevator control lever, which could result in loss of control of the sailplane.
94-03-08: This amendment supersedes an existing airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10 series airplanes and Model KC-10A (military) airplanes, that currently requires certain structural modifications and inspections. This amendment requires additional structural modifications and inspections. This amendment is prompted by an evaluation by the Model DC-10 Task Group, which identified additional modifications for mandatory action. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent degradation in the structural capabilities of the affected airplanes. This action also reflects the FAA's decision that long-term continued operational safety should be assured by actual modification of the airframe, where feasible, rather than only repetitive inspections for known service problems.
2019-10-04: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain BRP-Rotax GmbH & Co KG (Rotax) 912 and 914 model engines. This AD was prompted by power loss and engine revolutions per minute (RPM) drop on certain Rotax 912 and 914 model engines due to a quality control deficiency in the manufacturing process of certain valve push-rod assemblies resulting in partial wear on the rocker arm ball socket and possible malfunction of the valve. This AD requires one-time inspection and, depending on the findings, replacement of the affected parts with parts eligible for installation. We are issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
98-16-06: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to all Airbus Model A310 series airplanes, that requires inspections of the lower door surrounding structure to detect cracks and corrosion, and repair, if necessary. This amendment also requires inspections to detect cracking of the holes of the corner doublers, the fail-safe ring, and the door frames of the door structures; and repair, if necessary. In addition, this amendment provides for optional terminating action for certain inspections. This amendment is prompted by reports indicating that corrosion was found between the scuff plates at exit and cargo doors, and fatigue cracks originated from certain fastener holes located in adjacent structure. The actions specified by this AD are intended to detect and correct such corrosion and fatigue cracking, which could result in reduced structural integrity of the door surroundings.
98-14-14: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-3 and DC-3C series airplanes, that requires revising the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) to modify the limitation that prohibits positioning the power levers below the flight idle stop during flight, and to provide a statement of the consequences of positioning the power levers below the flight idle stop during flight. This amendment is prompted by incidents and accidents involving airplanes equipped with turboprop engines in which the ground propeller beta range was used improperly during flight. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent loss of airplane controllability, or engine overspeed and consequent loss of engine power caused by the power levers being positioned below the flight idle stop while the airplane is in flight.
2006-22-14: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Airbus Model A330 airplanes and Model A340-200 and -300 series airplanes. This AD requires repetitive detailed inspections for cracking in the aft web of support rib 6 between certain bottom skin stringers on both wings; high frequency eddy current inspections for cracking of the attachment holes of the fuel pipes, and repair if necessary. This AD also provides for an optional modification, which extends a certain inspection threshold, and mandates, for certain airplanes, a new modification of support rib 6 on both wings, which ends the repetitive inspection requirement. This AD results from a report of significant cracking found in the aft web of support rib 6 on both wings. We are issuing this AD to prevent cracking in the aft web of support rib 6, which could result in overloading of adjacent ribs and the surrounding wing structure and consequent reduced structural integrity of the wing.
2019-10-05: The FAA is adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for all Viking Air Limited (Viking) Models DHC-6-1, DHC-6-100, DHC-6-200, DHC- 6-300, and DHC-6-400 airplanes. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by the aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as occurrences of excessive wear of elevator cables at pulley location station (STA) 270.3. The FAA is issuing this AD to require actions to address the unsafe condition on these products.
96-13-11: This amendment supersedes an existing airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to all Airbus Model A300 B2, B4-100, and B4-200 series airplanes, that currently requires supplemental structural inspections to detect fatigue cracking, and repair of cracked structure. This amendment requires revising the supplemental structural inspection (SSID) program by changing some of the inspection techniques, changing some of the thresholds and intervals for inspections, expanding the area to be inspected for some of the inspections, and revising the Fleet Leader Program. This amendment is prompted by a review of recent service history and reports received from the current SSID program required by the existing AD. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent reduced structural integrity of these airplanes due to fatigue cracking.
97-22-06: 97-22-06 AIRBUS INDUSTRIE: Amendment 39-10177. Docket 96-NM-155-AD. Applicability: All Model Airbus Model A300, A310, and A300-600 series airplanes, certificated in any category. NOTE 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified, altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (c) of this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to address it. Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished previously.To detect and correct corrosion of the ram air turbine (RAT) uplock pin/shaft and needle that could result in failure of the RAT to deploy and subsequent loss of emergency hydraulic power to the flight controls in the event that power is lost in both engines, accomplish the following: (a) Prior to the accumulation of 30 months since the date of manufacture, or within 3 months after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later: Accomplish the requirements of paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2) of this AD in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-29-0108, dated April 1, 1996 (for Model A300 series airplanes); A310-29-2076, dated April 1, 1996 (for Model A310 series airplanes); or A300-29-6037, dated April 1, 1996 (for Model A300-600 series airplanes); as applicable. Thereafter, repeat these actions at intervals not to exceed 30 months. (1) Perform a RAT extension test on the ground, in accordance with the procedures specified in the Maintenance Manual. (2) Disassemble and remove the uplock mechanism of the RAT and perform a visual inspection of the uplock mechanism to detect corrosion, in accordance with the applicable service bulletin. NOTE 2: For the purposes of this AD, the RAT uplock mechanism includes both the lever assembly and uplock unit. (i) If no corrosion is detected: Prior to further flight, clean and lubricate the uplock mechanism and its associated parts, reinstall the assembly, and perform a retraction/extension/retraction of the RAT, in accordance with the applicable service bulletin. (ii) If any corrosion is detected in any part of the uplock mechanism, prior to further flight, accomplish either paragraph (a)(2)(ii)(A) or (a)(2)(ii)(B) of this AD in accordance with the applicable service bulletin. (A) Replace the uplock mechanism with a new part and perform a retraction/extension/retraction of the RAT, in accordance with the applicable service bulletin. Or (B) Clean and lubricate the uplock mechanism and its associated parts. Within 30 days following accomplishment of this cleaning and lubrication, replace the uplock mechanism with a new part and perform a retraction/extension/retraction of the RAT. (b) Initial accomplishment of the actions required by paragraph (a) of this AD that have been performed in accordance with Airbus All Operator Telex (AOT) 29-16, Revision 01, dated January 10, 1996, is considered acceptable for compliance with the initial RAT extension test and an initial visual inspection as required by paragraph (a) of this AD. However, the first repetitive inspection, as required by paragraph (a) of this AD, must be performed within 30 months after that RAT extension test and visual inspection were conducted, and repeated thereafter at intervals not to exceed 30 months. (c) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used if approved by the Manager, Standardization Branch, ANM-113, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators shall submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the Manager, Standardization Branch, ANM-113. NOTE 3: Information concerning the existence of approved alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be obtained from the Standardization Branch, ANM-113. (d) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where the requirements of this AD can be accomplished. (e) The actions shall be done in accordance with Airbus Service Bulletin A300-29- 0108, dated April 1, 1996; Airbus Service Bulletin A310-29-2076, dated April 1, 1996; or Airbus Service Bulletin A300-29-6037, dated April 1, 1996; as applicable. This incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the FederalRegister in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies may be obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France. Copies may be inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC. NOTE 4: The subject of this AD is addressed in French airworthiness directive 95-163-182 (B) R2, dated June 5, 1996. (f) This amendment becomes effective on December 2, 1997.
2000-15-06: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain McDonnell Douglas Model DC-10 series airplanes, that requires a general visual inspection of electrical power feeder cables, airplane structure, and insulation blankets at a certain fuselage station to detect chafing and arcing damage, and corrective actions, if necessary; and installation of a standoff and clamp. This amendment is prompted by an incident in which the power feeder cables in the cabin electrical system were found to be chafed and arced against a fuselage frame due to insufficient clearance between the cables and airplane structure. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent such chafing and arcing, which could cause smoke and fire in the overhead of the main cabin.
95-18-06 PL: 95-18-06 Hamilton Standard: Priority Letter issued on August 28, 1995. Docket No. 95-ANE-50. Supersedes Telegraphic AD T95-18-51 and AD 95-05-03, Amendment 39-9170. Applicability: Hamilton Standard Models 14RF-9, 14RF-19, 14RF-21, and 14SF-5, 14SF-7, 14SF-11, 14SFL11, 14SF-15, 14SF-17, 14SF-19, and 14SF-23; and Hamilton Standard/British Aerospace 6/5500/F propellers installed on but not limited to Embraer EMB-120 and EMB 120-RT; SAAB-SCANIA SF 340B; Aerospatiale ATR42-100, ATR42-300, ATR42-320, ATR72; DeHavilland DHC-8-100 series, DHC-8-300 Series; Construcciones Aeronauticas SA (CASA) CN-235 series and CN-235-100; Canadair CL-215T and CL-415; and British Aerospace ATP airplanes. NOTE: This AD applies to each propeller identified in the preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the requirements of this AD. For propellers that have been modified, altered, or repaired so that the performance ofthe requirements of this AD is affected, the owner/operator must use the authority provided in paragraph (h) to request approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). This approval may address either no action, if the current configuration eliminates the unsafe condition, or different actions necessary to address the unsafe condition described in this AD. Such a request should include an assessment of the effect of the changed configuration on the unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no case does the presence of any modification, alteration, or repair remove any propeller from the applicability of this AD. Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished previously. To prevent separation of a propeller blade due to cracks initiating in the blade taper bore, that can result in aircraft damage, and possible loss of aircraft control, accomplish the following: (a) For Hamilton Standard Model 14RF-9 propeller blades, installed on Embraer EMB-120 series aircraft, within the next 10 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, remove from service propeller blades that have been ultrasonically shear wave inspected in accordance with AD 94-09-06 or AD 95-05-03, removed from service due to crack indications, and subsequently reworked and returned to service. These propeller blades include, but are not limited to, the following serial numbers: 847598 855196 851646 855859 852085 857375 852561 858696 853151 859824 854530 860589 854535 867590 854838 876707 855014 880245 855042 (b) For Hamilton Standard Models 14RF-19, 14RF-21, and 14SF-5, 14SF-7, 14SF-11, 14SFL11, 14SF-15, 14SF-17, 14SF-19, and 14SF-23; and Hamilton Standard/British Aerospace 6/5500/F propeller blades, installed on aircraft other than Embraer EMB-120 series aircraft, within the next 10 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, unless inspected previously in accordance with Telegraphic AD T95-18-51, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks in the blade taper bore of propeller blades that have been ultrasonically inspected in accordance with AD 94-09-06 or AD 95-05-03, removed from service due to crack indications, and subsequently reworked and returned to service. Thereafter, at intervals not to exceed 1,250 flight cycles since last inspection, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks in the blade taper bore of propeller blades. Perform the ultrasonic shear wave inspection in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of the following Hamilton Standard Alert Service Bulletins (ASB's), as applicable: No. 14RF-21-61-A68, No. 14SF-61-A88, No. 14RF-19-61-A49, No. 6/5500/F-61-A36; all dated August 25, 1995. Remove cracked propeller blades from service and replace with serviceable parts. (c) For Hamilton Standard Model 14RF-9 propeller blades, installed on Embraer EMB-120 series aircraft, not affected by paragraph (a) of this AD, perform ultrasonic shear wave inspections in accordance with theAccomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB No. 14RF-9-61- A85, dated August 28, 1995. Remove cracked propeller blades from service and replace with serviceable parts: (1) For propeller blades with 1,250 or more flight cycles since last ultrasonic shear wave inspection on the effective date of this AD, or that have not been ultrasonically shear wave inspected, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks within the next 50 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. (2) For propeller blades with less than 1,250 flight cycles since last ultrasonic shear wave inspection on the effective date of this AD, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks within the next 50 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, or prior to accumulating 1,250 flight cycles, whichever occurs later. (3) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic shear wave inspections at intervals not to exceed 1,250 flight cycles since last inspection. (d) For Hamilton Standard Models 14RF-19, 14RF-21, and 14SF-5, 14SF-7, 14SF-11, 14SFL11, 14SF-15, 14SF-17, 14SF-19, and 14SF-23; and Hamilton Standard/British Aerospace 6/5500/F propeller blades; identified by serial number in the ASB's listed in this paragraph, installed on aircraft other than Embraer EMB-120 aircraft, and not affected by paragraph (b) of this AD, perform ultrasonic shear wave inspections in accordance with the Accomplishment Instructions of Hamilton Standard ASB's, as applicable: No. 14RF-21-61-A69, No. 14SF-61-A89, No. 14RF-19- 61-A50, No. 6/5500/F-61-A37; all dated August 28, 1995. Remove cracked propeller blades from service and replace with serviceable parts: (1) For propeller blades with 1,250 or more flight cycles on the effective date of this AD, or that have not been ultrasonically shear wave inspected, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks within the next 150 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD. (2) For propeller bladeswith less than 1,250 flight cycles on the effective date of this AD, perform an ultrasonic shear wave inspection for cracks within the next 150 flight cycles after the effective date of this AD, or prior to accumulating 1,250 flight cycles, whichever occurs later. (3) Thereafter, perform repetitive ultrasonic shear wave inspections at intervals not to exceed 1,250 flight cycles since last inspection. (e) No ultrasonic shear wave inspections are required for Hamilton Standard Models 14RF- 19, 14RF-21, and 14SF-5, 14SF-7, 14SF-11, 14SFL11, 14SF-15, 14SF-17, 14SF-19, and 14SF-23; and Hamilton Standard/British Aerospace 6/5500/F propeller blades, that have been shotpeened in the taper bore during manufacture, and not identified by serial numbers in the ASB's listed in paragraph (b) of this AD. (f) Propeller blades removed from service in accordance with this AD may not be returned to service. (g) For the purpose of this AD, a flight cycle is defined as one takeoff andthe next landing of an aircraft. (h) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be used if approved by the Manager, Boston Aircraft Certification Office. The request should be forwarded through an appropriate FAA Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the Manager, Boston Aircraft Certification Office. NOTE: Information concerning the existence of approved alternative methods of compliance with this airworthiness directive, if any, may be obtained from the Boston Aircraft Certification Office. (i) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the aircraft to a location where the requirements of this AD can be accomplished. (j) Copies of the applicable service information may be obtained from Hamilton Standard, One Hamilton Road, Windsor Locks, CT 06096-1010; telephone (203) 654-6876. This information may be examined at the FAA, New England Region, Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel, 12 New England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. (k) Priority Letter AD 95-18-06, issued August 28, 1995, becomes effective upon receipt. (l) Priority Letter AD 95-18-06 supersedes Telegraphic AD T95-18-51 and AD 95-05-03, Amendment 39-8854.