Search the Community

All G109 and G109B owners, The AMOC for the Noseplate Inspection has been approved. The basic points are a smaller hole, 16 mm, and an inspection camera may be substituted for the original 110 mm hole and mirror and a 90 day time extension is provided, moving the compliance date to April 9th, 2013. The “meat and tatties†part of the AMOC is below. Read it to see pertinent (but not all) details contained. ------------------------------------------------------------------ 2.All provisions of AD 20 12-10-1 1 that are not specifically referenced above remain fully applicable and must be complied with accordingly. As justification for allowing this alternative inspection method, you state that you accomplished an inspection of a model 0 109B using both a mirror as specified in the AD and a flexible, inspection camera. You conclude that the flexible, inspection camera provides a better examination than the mirror in this particular application due to limitations imposed by the geometry of the 110 mm opening relative to the position of the nose plate when using a mirror. In addition, for operators that do not currently have an access hole, you provide the costs associated with installing this opening including parts, labor, and transportation costs to get the sailplane to an approved shop where the work can be performed. As justification for extending the compliance due date by an additional three months, you state that no corrosion was found following the inspection on your glider, registration number N1O9BR, according to paragraph (f)(1)(i) of AD 2012-10-il. This inspection, which was accomplished prior to the original compliance deadline of October 09, 2012, was done to the top, front and rear sides of the vertical stabilizer nose plate, following Part A of the Accomplishment Instructions in Grob Aircraft S/B No. MSB8I7-58. The FAA has reviewed your Global AMOC request and the substantiation that you have provided. Since our office is responsible to coordinate such proposals with the state of design authority and the type certificate (TC) holder, we shared this request by e-mail with the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA), and with Grob Aircraft AG. The EASA Project Certification Manager for Grob Aircraft kindly provided a quick response due to the urgent nature of this request. Based on his discussions with Grob Aircraft, he stated that neither he nor Grob Aircraft had any objections to the use of the alternative inspection method you have proposed. He also stated that Grob Aircraft had tried a similar inspection method and found it acceptable for addressing the unsafe condition. After further consideration within the Small Airplane Directorate, the FAA agrees with your request to use an alternative inspection method, as defined in Attachment i, to accomplish the requirements of paragraphs (f)(l)(ii) and (0(1 )(iii) of AD 2012-10-1 i. After initial accomplishment, this alternative inspection method will need to be repeated at intervals not to exceed 12 months as specified in paragraph (f)(l)(iii). The FAA also agrees to extend the compliance due date to April 09, 2013 for paragraphs (f)(l)(ii) and (0(1 )(iii) of the AD, provided that the operator has previously completed the inspection from paragraph (f)(i)(i) with no adverse findings. Before using this AMOC, operators are to notify their appropriate principal inspector, or lacking a principal inspector, the manager of the local flight standards district office/certificate holding district office. This approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. The Small Airplane Directorate will revoke this AMOC, if we later determine that this AMOC does not provide an acceptable level of safety.

Noseplate and Elevator Push/Pull Tube Inspection AD’s Robert Mudd made up and sent me an epoxy kit that allowed me to add a 5/8†diameter (16 mm) inspection hole in the vertical stabilizer, precisely per Grob specifications, with absolutely minimal fuss. The kit included the specified resin, catalyst, and flocking, and… rubber gloves, a mixing spatula, and complete instructions. The epoxy resin and catalyst arrived pre-measured. It was only necessary to mix the resin and catalyst, add the cotton flocking to the designated consistency, and apply the mixture. No measuring! The Kit provided more than enough material without being excessive. Robert made up the custom repair kit for a total cost, including shipping, of $35. What a relief. For G109B owners, add another $15, and Robert will also send the rivet and “O†ring required to reassemble the Elevator Push/Pull tube. Removing the Push/Pull tube is easily accomplished. If you prefer, you can ship the removed rod to Robert and he will perform the inspection and, if indicated, repair/replace the push/pull tube. If you send him your unit, Robert will perform the required inspection and return a serviceable assembly to you. Robert will also provide the appropriate documentation with the returned unit. The FAA used Grob factory prices in their estimated costs: · $78 for the rivet, “O†ring, and LPS-3 (vs $15 rivet and “O†ring from Robert) or · $680 for a new, or rebuilt, assembly if there is corrosion present on the thin wall tube. (Robert does not know his replacement cost yet, if the tube is unserviceable, but is confident it will be better than Grob’s.) I want to publicly thank Robert for eliminating the major headaches we confronted on these two AD’s. Robert Mudd Composite Aircraft Repair P.O. Box 2010 Moriarty, NM 87035 robertmudd1u@aol.com 505-269-8234