On Oct 2, 6:07*am, JJ Sinclair wrote:
On Oct 2, 1:49*am, Nick Hill wrote:



ContestID67 wrote:
This AD came out in the last few days and sent me into a tizzy. *This
has to do with the elevator bearing stand breaking loose. *All
applicable ships must grind off and replace the difficult to get at
fiberglass and metal stand by Jan 19, 2010. *The part itself is 39
Euros (plus VAT and shipping, etc) and another 250 Euros (plus VAT)
for the "Release Certificate". *This was looking like a $1000 repair
and several months of downtime. *And this is because one (1!) DG-100
had this part fail out of 200+ built. *I know the elevator is the one
item you really DON'T want to fail but it seems like over doing it.

My understanding is that the German LBA mandated this not DG themselves..
This AD has been out for several months in europe.

The AD applies to "DG-100 and DG-100G: ser. no. 5, 21 up to 103". *My
DG-101G ELAN's SN is E102G72 so I figured I was caught. *But the early
DG serial numbers are notoriously difficult to decipher and DG
themselves intermix DG-100 and DG-101, with or without the G, rather
haphazardly.

*From your serial number E102G72 you have a type DG-100, the 102nd built
by Elan and the 72nd G type of the Elans.

Seehttp://www.dg-flugzeugbau.de/werknummer.rtfforan clear explanation
of serial numbers.

Remember various manufacturers use different model names to sell gliders
but the serial numbers refer to the type. All DG 100 and 101s including
G types are DG100s. All DG200 and DG202 are type DG200, all DG300 and
DG303 are type DG300 etc.

In the same way the ASG29 is not a different type but for all official
paperwork and type certificates etc it is officially an ASW27-18

Nick Hill

Are we required to accomplish an AD if the ship is licenced
Experimental (US)?
JJ

This ambiguity of this question has been discussed in threads on
r.a.s. before. In this case to remove any doubt the AD states "This AD
applies to Model DG-100 ... blah blah..., **certificated in any
category**." I think it would be a unwise to think this is not a
required AD on an experimental glider.

It would be sad if this was all a mindless drill because the previous
TN with inspection requirement for this bearing/bellcrank mount was
just performed improperly by one person. If I read things right the
person missed the inspection of whether a washer was in place inside
the bearing mount. It would be interesting to know how hard this was
to see with the inspection light method they described. i.e. if it is
really hard to see or if the inspector just goofed. But hey it is just
the elevator control circuit so lots of of paranoia is good (I always
wonder what the risk of introducing new problems are, in this case by
by dissembling and reassembling the control linkages, cutting off the
current mount and bonding on a new etc, is...)

If it was my glider I would really want to know more. And I'd have my
head down inside the fuselage looking at that mount and assembly
myself. And I'd want to know what changed with the Elan manufacturing
for them to be sure this is not an issue.

BTW looks like DG-100 openers all have another AD coming for their
aileron control rod end inspections.

Darryl