DG AD NOTE

[pbc76049]

Heres your Valentines day card from the FAA.

DG AD Note.


http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=ee033863-d2c7-4c29-be3f-fde8ab90326c&

[Marc Ramsey]

pbc76049 wrote:
> Heres your Valentines day card from the FAA.
>
> DG AD Note.
>
>
> http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=ee033863-d2c7-4c29-be3f-fde8ab90326c&
>

DG owners, the corresponding technical note has been out for well over a
year, applying to all DG-100, 200, 300, 400, 600, and early production
500 models. Look for a TN with subject "Lower mounting of rudder" for
your model...

Marc

[HL Falbaum]

Please help with my education. Is a German TN the same as a German AD or is
it not the same thing. Are they equivalent?

--
Hartley Falbaum
"Marc Ramsey" > wrote in message
...
> pbc76049 wrote:
>> Heres your Valentines day card from the FAA.
>>
>> DG AD Note.
>>
>>
>> http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=ee033863-d2c7-4c29-be3f-fde8ab90326c&
>>
>
> DG owners, the corresponding technical note has been out for well over a
> year, applying to all DG-100, 200, 300, 400, 600, and early production 500
> models. Look for a TN with subject "Lower mounting of rudder" for your
> model...
>
> Marc

[Marc Ramsey]

HL Falbaum wrote:
> Please help with my education. Is a German TN the same as a German AD or is
> it not the same thing. Are they equivalent?
>

Well, a Technical Note of this sort is approved by the LBA (and/or EASA,
these days) and becomes a part of the aircraft type certificate. So
yes, I guess it is sort of a German AD. For those of us who have
Special Airworthiness Certificates in the US, the operating limitations
almost always state that the aircraft must be maintained in compliance
with all technical notes and service bulletins, so effectively they are
equivalent to an AD for US experimental aircraft. The German technical
notes that apply to certified aircraft wend their way through the
various bureaucracies, and become a real US AD within a year or so. In
any case, if I had a certified DG, and a technical note like this came
out, I wouldn't wait for the US AD...

I know the guy who had the rudder fall off. It was during the landing
roll out, so it wasn't a big problem, but still rather disturbing to
consider what would have happened if it had fallen off a few moments
earlier...

Marc

[John Galloway]

My understanding is that and AD is issued by the airworthiness
authority (e.g. the LBA) and the corresponding TN by
the manufacturer to formally describe what needs to
be done and why. Then there might be an appendix issued
by the manufacturer with the real gen about how to
do it.

A typical example that affected myself was the Duo
spar problem. See Technical Note No. 890-3 and AD
No. 2003-245-2 at:

http://www.schempp-hirth.com/en/service/techn_mitteilungen/index.h
tml

But to confuse things the German LBA for AD seems to
be LTA and for TN read TM:-)

And there are also many manufacturer TNs without an
LBA AD (LTA) having been issued - sometimes for optional
modifications.




At 21:12 14 February 2006, Marc Ramsey wrote:
>HL Falbaum wrote:
>> Please help with my education. Is a German TN the
>>same as a German AD or is
>> it not the same thing. Are they equivalent?
>>
>
>Well, a Technical Note of this sort is approved by
>the LBA (and/or EASA,
> these days) and becomes a part of the aircraft type
>certificate. So
>yes, I guess it is sort of a German AD. For those
>of us who have
>Special Airworthiness Certificates in the US, the operating
>limitations
>almost always state that the aircraft must be maintained
>in compliance
>with all technical notes and service bulletins, so
>effectively they are
>equivalent to an AD for US experimental aircraft.
>The German technical
>notes that apply to certified aircraft wend their way
>through the
>various bureaucracies, and become a real US AD within
>a year or so. In
>any case, if I had a certified DG, and a technical
>note like this came
>out, I wouldn't wait for the US AD...
>
>I know the guy who had the rudder fall off. It was
>during the landing
>roll out, so it wasn't a big problem, but still rather
>disturbing to
>consider what would have happened if it had fallen
>off a few moments
>earlier...
>
>Marc
>

[[email protected]]

Yes this should be old news to DG owners. I received the FAA notice
months ago and thought it pretty amusing since I'd been aware of this
since late 2004 (the glider I brought already had the fix installed).
It is not hard to look on the DG web site. I see having to do this as
pretty much a reasonable expectation for an owner.

The other TN that amused me from the lack of awarness of it amongst
owners was the DG-300 undercarriage handle mod
(ftp://dgflugzeugbau.de/tn/dg-300/dg-300elan/359-22/). This is a spring
that helps hold the undercarriage handle in it's locked down detent.
When I was buying my DG-303 I asked people who were selling there
glider and other DG-303 owners if they had installed this mod. About
half the time I got a yes and about half the time I got blank look. The
best discussion went "what mod..." ... "oh that exactly happened to me
and my undercarrige collapsed".

Ditto for the DG-300/303 Roeger hook installation
(ftp://dgflugzeugbau.de/tn/dg-300/dg-300elan/359-19) , I'm not sure all
the gliders who could do with this mod have it installed. Like it only
took a pilot getting killed to create this mod, how many older gliders
are flying around without a Roeger hook on the canopy?


Darryl

Marc Ramsey wrote:
> pbc76049 wrote:
> > Heres your Valentines day card from the FAA.
> >

> > DG AD Note.
> >
> >
> > http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=ee033863-d2c7-4c29-be3f-fde8ab90326c&
> >
>
> DG owners, the corresponding technical note has been out for well over a
> year, applying to all DG-100, 200, 300, 400, 600, and early production
> 500 models. Look for a TN with subject "Lower mounting of rudder" for
> your model...
>
> Marc

[Gadget Guy]

Heres your Valentines day card from the FAA.

DG AD Note.


http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?ContentBlockID=ee033863-d2c7-4c29-be3f-fde8ab90326c&

Just noticed that the FAA does not mention anything about the DG-300. It is on the DG website. It has been there for a while.

John
DG-300 "XLT"

[Marc Ramsey]

Gadget Guy wrote:
> pbc76049 Wrote:
>> Heres your Valentines day card from the FAA.
>>
>> DG AD Note.
>>
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/7qnn8
>
> Just noticed that the FAA does not mention anything about the DG-300.
> It is on the DG website. It has been there for a while.

The only models that will be mentioned in an AD are those that have a
standard type certificate in the US. The DG-300 doesn't have one...

Marc

[pbc76049]

"HL Falbaum" > wrote in message
...
> Please help with my education. Is a German TN the same as a German AD or
> is it not the same thing. Are they equivalent?
>
> --
> Hartley Falbaum

A TN is roughly equivalent to a service bulletin. A manufacturer
recommended action.
An AD note is a required action.

[Ramy]

I find it amazing and amusing how far apart common sense and
bureaucracy are, even and especially in life threatening situation.
Common sense is to immediately notify all owners and make it required
to fix anything that failed and killed or could kill someone (such as
the rudder AD). FAA bureaucracy however, find it much more important to
deal with certificates, paperworks, regulations and fine prints (such
as the latest Pegasus AD - let's ground all pegasus due to
documentation clarity...).

Ramy

[Ramy]

ok, maybe not automatic, but it shouldn't take couple of years to
approve a fix to prevent a rudder from falling off, and then only
notify owners of certified gliders, as if identical glider which was
not certified but is legal to fly can continue fly safely without the
fix...

Ramy

[Marc Ramsey]

Ramy wrote:
> ok, maybe not automatic, but it shouldn't take couple of years to
> approve a fix to prevent a rudder from falling off, and then only
> notify owners of certified gliders, as if identical glider which was
> not certified but is legal to fly can continue fly safely without the
> fix...

Actually, the AD came out rather quickly (only a year!), given the time
frames the FAA normally operates with. In this case, there are 1000+
aircraft covered by the TN, ranging in age up to 30 years, but likely
only one or two actual instances of failure, none of which apparently
happened in flight. I think they got the trade-offs right.

With a potentially serious safety problem, the FAA will simply ground
all of the aircraft immediately (as they did with the Duos), then sort
out the paperwork and repair issues with the manufacturer at a
(slightly) accelerated pace. I wouldn't consider that a desirable
approach for this rudder mounting problem.

If one owns a glider with a special airworthiness certificate, one
assumes responsibility to check with the manufacturer for relevant
technical notes and service bulletins, as is clearly spelled out in the
operating limitations. If one wants the FAA to monitor these things,
one should buy a type certificated glider...

Marc

[John C]

As a 300 owner, I received a written notification from the FAA about a
year ago called a "Special Information Bulletin" that directed me to
the DG TN. So, although they did not issue an AD for 300's, they do
have a system in place to notify registered non type certificated
owners. I'm happy not to have the FAA any more involved in the
operation of my glider. Especially in the case of DG, it is very easy
to go online to check the current TN list for any model.

John

>
> If one owns a glider with a special airworthiness certificate, one
> assumes responsibility to check with the manufacturer for relevant
> technical notes and service bulletins, as is clearly spelled out in the
> operating limitations. If one wants the FAA to monitor these things,
> one should buy a type certificated glider...
>
> Marc