wrote:
I spoke with Greg Davison at the FAA in OK City recently, and his take
was somewhat less encouraging. It seems that Centrair has been
contacted on a number of occasions in the last fourteen months by
owners and the FAA about the service life limit. Greg reports that they
are "very polite" and continually offer the response that "something"
will be done. As yet, nothing has resulted except these empty promises.

I inquired about other means to get around this issue, such as an
"Alternate Means Of Compliance (AMOC)," Experimental certificate, Time
Machine, etc. Greg informed me that the "Experimental" route is a
non-starter (Sorry Jacek, read the FAR's). Experimental category does
NOT exempt an aircraft from FAA issued AD's, especially ones that
concern airframe structure and life limits.

Likewise, the AMOC route is also pretty much a no-go. In order to
create an AMOC dealing with the structural limits of the airframe, all
the original test data must either be included or duplicated. This
means testing to failure and extensive fatigue tests. The Pegasus spar
was based on another Centrair spar (the Marianne), and the design was
accepted. Unfortunately, all these data are the property of the holder
of the Type Certificate (S.N. Centrair) and unless the data is
released, it has to be duplicated. Meaning, buy a glider and test it
like the factory did. And then break it. As much fun as this sounds, it
is likely to be prohibitively expensive.

Greg is disturbed at the situation. In his words, the FAA is NOT
particularly enamored of the potential to ground an entire fleet of
gliders when a simple solution exists- but only if the cure comes from
S.N. Centrair. What is needed is a Service or Technical Bulletin from
S.N. Centrair that supersedes the Bulletin removing reference to a
(non-existent) 3,000 hr. inspection protocol and emphasizing the 3,000
hr. structural life limit in the U.S.

As Greg put it, this situation became apparent after an owner inquired
about the contradictory references in the Pegase 101 Owners Manual. FAA
requested clarification from S.N. Centrair and they just sidestepped
the issue by stating that the 3,000 hr. limit is the accepted
reference. As a result, Greg and the FAA were forced to issue the AD.
It would have been better if the reference had been to the 3,000 hr.
inspection and such an inspection was offered.

At this time, the ball is in S.N. Centrair's court. The FAA is pretty
much unable to bring pressure on them, and can only work through EASA,
the Eurpoean equivalent of the FAA. Since EASA is a relatively new
organization, having superseded the JAA, it is busy dealing with more
pressing issues- like who gets the corner office, etc.

I suggested a 3,000 hr. service life limit on other French aircraft
(Like the Airbus 380, which may need it more than the Pegase, if what I
have read about their wing problems is true). Maybe if Airbus had to
deal with something like this, S.N. Centrair would be "encouraged" to
step up and provide a 3,000 hr. inspection. Needless to say, I'm not
holding my breath.

OK...how about this: there is 40 some Pegasus's in the US.....maybe we
all have to get together and write a letter to Centrair and basically
point out the solution to them....that was never done and I don't know
if that is going to bring any results but maybe would be worth
trying....