ACTION:

Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

SUMMARY:

The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 75-23-03, which applies to all Alexander Schleicher GmbH & Co. Segelflugzeugbau (Alexander Schleicher) Model Ka2B, Ka 6, Ka 6 B, Ka 6 BR, Ka 6 C, Ka 6 CR, K 7, K 8, and AS-K 13 gliders. AD 75-23-03 requires visually inspecting the glue joint between the elevator nose rib number 1 and the nose plywood skin and replacing the glue joint if insufficient glue adhesion is found. Since the FAA issued AD 75-23-03, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) superseded prior EASA ADs for the unsafe condition on these products. This proposed AD would add the Model K 8 B gliders to the applicability and would require repetitively inspecting the glue joint at elevator rib number 1 and repairing any damage found. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:

The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 12, 2022.

The NPRM is available here:
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/03/28/2022-06390/airworthiness-directives-alexander-schleicher-gmbh-and-co-segelflugzeugbau-gliders

On Saturday, March 26, 2022 at 1:32:40 PM UTC-6, soa...@yahoo.com wrote:
> ACTION:
>
> Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
>
> SUMMARY:
>
> The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 75-23-03, which applies to all Alexander Schleicher GmbH & Co. Segelflugzeugbau (Alexander Schleicher) Model Ka2B, Ka 6, Ka 6 B, Ka 6 BR, Ka 6 C, Ka 6 CR, K 7, K 8, and AS-K 13 gliders. AD 75-23-03 requires visually inspecting the glue joint between the elevator nose rib number 1 and the nose plywood skin and replacing the glue joint if insufficient glue adhesion is found. Since the FAA issued AD 75-23-03, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) superseded prior EASA ADs for the unsafe condition on these products. This proposed AD would add the Model K 8 B gliders to the applicability and would require repetitively inspecting the glue joint at elevator rib number 1 and repairing any damage found. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
>
> DATES:
>
> The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 12, 2022.
>
> The NPRM is available here:
> https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/03/28/2022-06390/airworthiness-directives-alexander-schleicher-gmbh-and-co-segelflugzeugbau-gliders

Would they, or do they specify what glue to use to repair this? I know glue in these older gliders has been an issue, particularly when restoring them.

On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 4:16:06 PM UTC-7, johngf...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, March 26, 2022 at 1:32:40 PM UTC-6, soa...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > ACTION:
> >
> > Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
> >
> > SUMMARY:
> >
> > The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 75-23-03, which applies to all Alexander Schleicher GmbH & Co. Segelflugzeugbau (Alexander Schleicher) Model Ka2B, Ka 6, Ka 6 B, Ka 6 BR, Ka 6 C, Ka 6 CR, K 7, K 8, and AS-K 13 gliders. AD 75-23-03 requires visually inspecting the glue joint between the elevator nose rib number 1 and the nose plywood skin and replacing the glue joint if insufficient glue adhesion is found. Since the FAA issued AD 75-23-03, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) superseded prior EASA ADs for the unsafe condition on these products. This proposed AD would add the Model K 8 B gliders to the applicability and would require repetitively inspecting the glue joint at elevator rib number 1 and repairing any damage found. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
> >
> > DATES:
> >
> > The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 12, 2022.
> >
> > The NPRM is available here:
> > https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/03/28/2022-06390/airworthiness-directives-alexander-schleicher-gmbh-and-co-segelflugzeugbau-gliders
> Would they, or do they specify what glue to use to repair this? I know glue in these older gliders has been an issue, particularly when restoring them.

Many years ago I mailed photos of rather large cracks in both root ribs of an ASW-15 to Schleicher. It took a couple of months for them to reply with instructions to fill the cracks with a mixture of epoxy and cotton flox. They also indicated that they didn’t consider the cracks to be an un-airworthy condition?? Looks like they no longer believe that!

I have also obtained FAA permission to use epoxy glue rather than factory glue used in the K-6 which was clearly not holding a proper bond after 30 years in service. I believe it was Resorsinal glue? They also allowed me to use 1/4” plywood ribs, ala BG-12 / Duster rather than stick & gusset used by the factory. Believe that was on a field approval, good luck getting one today!
JJ

On Tuesday, March 29, 2022 at 10:55:59 AM UTC-4, johnsin...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 4:16:06 PM UTC-7, johngf...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Saturday, March 26, 2022 at 1:32:40 PM UTC-6, soa...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > ACTION:
> > >
> > > Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
> > >
> > > SUMMARY:
> > >
> > > The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 75-23-03, which applies to all Alexander Schleicher GmbH & Co. Segelflugzeugbau (Alexander Schleicher) Model Ka2B, Ka 6, Ka 6 B, Ka 6 BR, Ka 6 C, Ka 6 CR, K 7, K 8, and AS-K 13 gliders. AD 75-23-03 requires visually inspecting the glue joint between the elevator nose rib number 1 and the nose plywood skin and replacing the glue joint if insufficient glue adhesion is found. Since the FAA issued AD 75-23-03, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) superseded prior EASA ADs for the unsafe condition on these products. This proposed AD would add the Model K 8 B gliders to the applicability and would require repetitively inspecting the glue joint at elevator rib number 1 and repairing any damage found. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
> > >
> > > DATES:
> > >
> > > The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 12, 2022.
> > >
> > > The NPRM is available here:
> > > https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/03/28/2022-06390/airworthiness-directives-alexander-schleicher-gmbh-and-co-segelflugzeugbau-gliders
> > Would they, or do they specify what glue to use to repair this? I know glue in these older gliders has been an issue, particularly when restoring them.
> Many years ago I mailed photos of rather large cracks in both root ribs of an ASW-15 to Schleicher. It took a couple of months for them to reply with instructions to fill the cracks with a mixture of epoxy and cotton flox. They also indicated that they didn’t consider the cracks to be an un-airworthy condition?? Looks like they no longer believe that!
>
> I have also obtained FAA permission to use epoxy glue rather than factory glue used in the K-6 which was clearly not holding a proper bond after 30 years in service. I believe it was Resorsinal glue? They also allowed me to use 1/4” plywood ribs, ala BG-12 / Duster rather than stick & gusset used by the factory. Believe that was on a field approval, good luck getting one today!
> JJ
Any chance you remember the N# or s/n? A previous field approval can be the basis of a new one...

..On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 4:11:29 AM UTC-7, sgs...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 29, 2022 at 10:55:59 AM UTC-4, johnsin...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 4:16:06 PM UTC-7, johngf...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Saturday, March 26, 2022 at 1:32:40 PM UTC-6, soa...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > ACTION:
> > > >
> > > > Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
> > > >
> > > > SUMMARY:
> > > >
> > > > The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 75-23-03, which applies to all Alexander Schleicher GmbH & Co. Segelflugzeugbau (Alexander Schleicher) Model Ka2B, Ka 6, Ka 6 B, Ka 6 BR, Ka 6 C, Ka 6 CR, K 7, K 8, and AS-K 13 gliders. AD 75-23-03 requires visually inspecting the glue joint between the elevator nose rib number 1 and the nose plywood skin and replacing the glue joint if insufficient glue adhesion is found. Since the FAA issued AD 75-23-03, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) superseded prior EASA ADs for the unsafe condition on these products. This proposed AD would add the Model K 8 B gliders to the applicability and would require repetitively inspecting the glue joint at elevator rib number 1 and repairing any damage found. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
> > > >
> > > > DATES:
> > > >
> > > > The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 12, 2022.
> > > >
> > > > The NPRM is available here:
> > > > https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/03/28/2022-06390/airworthiness-directives-alexander-schleicher-gmbh-and-co-segelflugzeugbau-gliders
> > > Would they, or do they specify what glue to use to repair this? I know glue in these older gliders has been an issue, particularly when restoring them.
> > Many years ago I mailed photos of rather large cracks in both root ribs of an ASW-15 to Schleicher. It took a couple of months for them to reply with instructions to fill the cracks with a mixture of epoxy and cotton flox.. They also indicated that they didn’t consider the cracks to be an un-airworthy condition?? Looks like they no longer believe that!
> >
> > I have also obtained FAA permission to use epoxy glue rather than factory glue used in the K-6 which was clearly not holding a proper bond after 30 years in service. I believe it was Resorsinal glue? They also allowed me to use 1/4” plywood ribs, ala BG-12 / Duster rather than stick & gusset used by the factory. Believe that was on a field approval, good luck getting one today!
> > JJ
> Any chance you remember the N# or s/n? A previous field approval can be the basis of a new one...

KA-6E. N3075, s/n 4024……….the 337 shows, “Repairs were made in accordance with AC 43.13-1a, chapter 1, para 23b and figure 1.16. Patcher were made of birch plywood and secured with FLP-16a Epoxy glue. Dated 8/10/84.
Later on, I remember the Feds wouldn’t accept AC 13.13a as being acceptable repair instructions, even though they wrote the damned thing! No mention of “field approval” on the 337, believe it was oral in nature that didn’t involve a Federaly’s signature.
Hope this helps,
JJ

On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 11:59:35 AM UTC-4, johnsin...@yahoo.com wrote:
> .On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 4:11:29 AM UTC-7, sgs...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 29, 2022 at 10:55:59 AM UTC-4, johnsin...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 4:16:06 PM UTC-7, johngf...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Saturday, March 26, 2022 at 1:32:40 PM UTC-6, soa...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > > ACTION:
> > > > >
> > > > > Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
> > > > >
> > > > > SUMMARY:
> > > > >
> > > > > The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 75-23-03, which applies to all Alexander Schleicher GmbH & Co. Segelflugzeugbau (Alexander Schleicher) Model Ka2B, Ka 6, Ka 6 B, Ka 6 BR, Ka 6 C, Ka 6 CR, K 7, K 8, and AS-K 13 gliders. AD 75-23-03 requires visually inspecting the glue joint between the elevator nose rib number 1 and the nose plywood skin and replacing the glue joint if insufficient glue adhesion is found. Since the FAA issued AD 75-23-03, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) superseded prior EASA ADs for the unsafe condition on these products. This proposed AD would add the Model K 8 B gliders to the applicability and would require repetitively inspecting the glue joint at elevator rib number 1 and repairing any damage found. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
> > > > >
> > > > > DATES:
> > > > >
> > > > > The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 12, 2022..
> > > > >
> > > > > The NPRM is available here:
> > > > > https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/03/28/2022-06390/airworthiness-directives-alexander-schleicher-gmbh-and-co-segelflugzeugbau-gliders
> > > > Would they, or do they specify what glue to use to repair this? I know glue in these older gliders has been an issue, particularly when restoring them.
> > > Many years ago I mailed photos of rather large cracks in both root ribs of an ASW-15 to Schleicher. It took a couple of months for them to reply with instructions to fill the cracks with a mixture of epoxy and cotton flox. They also indicated that they didn’t consider the cracks to be an un-airworthy condition?? Looks like they no longer believe that!
> > >
> > > I have also obtained FAA permission to use epoxy glue rather than factory glue used in the K-6 which was clearly not holding a proper bond after 30 years in service. I believe it was Resorsinal glue? They also allowed me to use 1/4” plywood ribs, ala BG-12 / Duster rather than stick & gusset used by the factory. Believe that was on a field approval, good luck getting one today!
> > > JJ
> > Any chance you remember the N# or s/n? A previous field approval can be the basis of a new one...
> KA-6E. N3075, s/n 4024……….the 337 shows, “Repairs were made in accordance with AC 43.13-1a, chapter 1, para 23b and figure 1.16. Patcher were made of birch plywood and secured with FLP-16a Epoxy glue. Dated 8/10/84.
> Later on, I remember the Feds wouldn’t accept AC 13.13a as being acceptable repair instructions, even though they wrote the damned thing! No mention of “field approval” on the 337, believe it was oral in nature that didn’t involve a Federaly’s signature.
> Hope this helps,
> JJ
The 43.13 - 1b is the current version - is absolutely approved data with"....the AC chapter, page, and paragraph listed in block 8 of FAA form 337 when: a. the user has determined that it is appropriate to the product being repaired; b. it is directly applicable to the repair being made; and c. 2. it is not contrary to manufacturer’s data." , but you are taking the hard way if you want the FAA to sign it off. That's what your IAs are for. Get the IA on board ahead of time if they're not going to be doing the repair.

> The 43.13 - 1b is the current version - is absolutely approved data with"....the AC chapter, page, and paragraph listed in block 8 of FAA form 337 when: a. the user has determined that it is appropriate to the product being repaired; b. it is directly applicable to the repair being made; and c. 2. it is not contrary to manufacturer’s data." , but you are taking the hard way if you want the FAA to sign it off. That's what your IAs are for.. Get the IA on board ahead of time if they're not going to be doing the repair.

Guess it depends on which FSDO your trying to deal with, I did a fish-mouth split sleeve repair to the steel tube inner structure on a Standard Cirrus that came right out of 43-13, signed by me as A&P and signed by my AI. The 337 was returned saying that 43-13 was not “Approved Data” for the ship???
I also filed a properly signed and inspected 337 on an H-301 Libelle after repairing a broken fuselage. The ship was licensed as Experimental, but the owner thought he might re-license it in Standard category at some in the future…………….the 337 was returned, stating that 337’s were not required on Experimental aircraft???
But wait, it gets better………..they even told me that AD’s did not apply to Experimental aircraft??? At that point, I decided the Federallies really didn’t give a shit about SAFETY any more!
JJ

One of our club members who retired from the FAA often said, "There are about 90 FSDOs in the US. Each one independently owned and operated."

On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 3:26:07 PM UTC-4, sgs...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 11:59:35 AM UTC-4, johnsin...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > .On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 4:11:29 AM UTC-7, sgs...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > On Tuesday, March 29, 2022 at 10:55:59 AM UTC-4, johnsin...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 4:16:06 PM UTC-7, johngf...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Saturday, March 26, 2022 at 1:32:40 PM UTC-6, soa...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > > > ACTION:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > SUMMARY:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 75-23-03, which applies to all Alexander Schleicher GmbH & Co. Segelflugzeugbau (Alexander Schleicher) Model Ka2B, Ka 6, Ka 6 B, Ka 6 BR, Ka 6 C, Ka 6 CR, K 7, K 8, and AS-K 13 gliders. AD 75-23-03 requires visually inspecting the glue joint between the elevator nose rib number 1 and the nose plywood skin and replacing the glue joint if insufficient glue adhesion is found. Since the FAA issued AD 75-23-03, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) superseded prior EASA ADs for the unsafe condition on these products. This proposed AD would add the Model K 8 B gliders to the applicability and would require repetitively inspecting the glue joint at elevator rib number 1 and repairing any damage found. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > DATES:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 12, 2022.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The NPRM is available here:
> > > > > > https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/03/28/2022-06390/airworthiness-directives-alexander-schleicher-gmbh-and-co-segelflugzeugbau-gliders
> > > > > Would they, or do they specify what glue to use to repair this? I know glue in these older gliders has been an issue, particularly when restoring them.
> > > > Many years ago I mailed photos of rather large cracks in both root ribs of an ASW-15 to Schleicher. It took a couple of months for them to reply with instructions to fill the cracks with a mixture of epoxy and cotton flox. They also indicated that they didn’t consider the cracks to be an un-airworthy condition?? Looks like they no longer believe that!
> > > >
> > > > I have also obtained FAA permission to use epoxy glue rather than factory glue used in the K-6 which was clearly not holding a proper bond after 30 years in service. I believe it was Resorsinal glue? They also allowed me to use 1/4” plywood ribs, ala BG-12 / Duster rather than stick & gusset used by the factory. Believe that was on a field approval, good luck getting one today!
> > > > JJ
> > > Any chance you remember the N# or s/n? A previous field approval can be the basis of a new one...
> > KA-6E. N3075, s/n 4024……….the 337 shows, “Repairs were made in accordance with AC 43.13-1a, chapter 1, para 23b and figure 1.16. Patcher were made of birch plywood and secured with FLP-16a Epoxy glue. Dated 8/10/84.
> > Later on, I remember the Feds wouldn’t accept AC 13.13a as being acceptable repair instructions, even though they wrote the damned thing! No mention of “field approval” on the 337, believe it was oral in nature that didn’t involve a Federaly’s signature.
> > Hope this helps,
> > JJ
> The 43.13 - 1b is the current version - is absolutely approved data with"....the AC chapter, page, and paragraph listed in block 8 of FAA form 337 when: a. the user has determined that it is appropriate to the product being repaired; b. it is directly applicable to the repair being made; and c. 2. it is not contrary to manufacturer’s data." , but you are taking the hard way if you want the FAA to sign it off. That's what your IAs are for.. Get the IA on board ahead of time if they're not going to be doing the repair.

Note that 43-13.9-1g reflects that submission is to OK City for filing in the aircraft file. The requirement to send to FSDO for approval is gone. No FSDO employee wants to approve anything that could affect his or her retirement. That does not relieve the person signing and submitting the 337 from conforming to the regulations but does get rid of 90 different opinions about conformity. Having an experienced IA is a big help in wading through this muck.
UH

On Thursday, April 7, 2022 at 9:20:52 AM UTC-7, Hank Nixon wrote:
> On Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 3:26:07 PM UTC-4, sgs...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 11:59:35 AM UTC-4, johnsin...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > .On Tuesday, April 5, 2022 at 4:11:29 AM UTC-7, sgs...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > On Tuesday, March 29, 2022 at 10:55:59 AM UTC-4, johnsin...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > > On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 4:16:06 PM UTC-7, johngf...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > On Saturday, March 26, 2022 at 1:32:40 PM UTC-6, soa...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > > > > > > ACTION:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > SUMMARY:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 75-23-03, which applies to all Alexander Schleicher GmbH & Co. Segelflugzeugbau (Alexander Schleicher) Model Ka2B, Ka 6, Ka 6 B, Ka 6 BR, Ka 6 C, Ka 6 CR, K 7, K 8, and AS-K 13 gliders. AD 75-23-03 requires visually inspecting the glue joint between the elevator nose rib number 1 and the nose plywood skin and replacing the glue joint if insufficient glue adhesion is found. Since the FAA issued AD 75-23-03, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) superseded prior EASA ADs for the unsafe condition on these products.. This proposed AD would add the Model K 8 B gliders to the applicability and would require repetitively inspecting the glue joint at elevator rib number 1 and repairing any damage found. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > DATES:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The FAA must receive comments on this proposed AD by May 12, 2022.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > The NPRM is available here:
> > > > > > > https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/03/28/2022-06390/airworthiness-directives-alexander-schleicher-gmbh-and-co-segelflugzeugbau-gliders
> > > > > > Would they, or do they specify what glue to use to repair this? I know glue in these older gliders has been an issue, particularly when restoring them.
> > > > > Many years ago I mailed photos of rather large cracks in both root ribs of an ASW-15 to Schleicher. It took a couple of months for them to reply with instructions to fill the cracks with a mixture of epoxy and cotton flox. They also indicated that they didn’t consider the cracks to be an un-airworthy condition?? Looks like they no longer believe that!
> > > > >
> > > > > I have also obtained FAA permission to use epoxy glue rather than factory glue used in the K-6 which was clearly not holding a proper bond after 30 years in service. I believe it was Resorsinal glue? They also allowed me to use 1/4” plywood ribs, ala BG-12 / Duster rather than stick & gusset used by the factory. Believe that was on a field approval, good luck getting one today!
> > > > > JJ
> > > > Any chance you remember the N# or s/n? A previous field approval can be the basis of a new one...
> > > KA-6E. N3075, s/n 4024……….the 337 shows, “Repairs were made in accordance with AC 43.13-1a, chapter 1, para 23b and figure 1.16. Patcher were made of birch plywood and secured with FLP-16a Epoxy glue. Dated 8/10/84.
> > > Later on, I remember the Feds wouldn’t accept AC 13.13a as being acceptable repair instructions, even though they wrote the damned thing! No mention of “field approval” on the 337, believe it was oral in nature that didn’t involve a Federaly’s signature.
> > > Hope this helps,
> > > JJ
> > The 43.13 - 1b is the current version - is absolutely approved data with"...the AC chapter, page, and paragraph listed in block 8 of FAA form 337 when: a. the user has determined that it is appropriate to the product being repaired; b. it is directly applicable to the repair being made; and c. 2.. it is not contrary to manufacturer’s data." , but you are taking the hard way if you want the FAA to sign it off. That's what your IAs are for. Get the IA on board ahead of time if they're not going to be doing the repair.
> Note that 43-13.9-1g reflects that submission is to OK City for filing in the aircraft file. The requirement to send to FSDO for approval is gone. No FSDO employee wants to approve anything that could affect his or her retirement. That does not relieve the person signing and submitting the 337 from conforming to the regulations but does get rid of 90 different opinions about conformity. Having an experienced IA is a big help in wading through this muck.
> UH

Thanks guys, I filed my last 337 some 20 years ago. Good to hear the Feds finally got their act together on what an Approved Repairs is and how to get the information into the aircraft file.
Cheers,
JJ

ACTION:

Final rule.

SUMMARY:

The FAA is superseding Airworthiness Directive (AD) 75-23-03 for all Alexander Schleicher GmbH & Co. Segelflugzeugbau (Alexander Schleicher) Model Ka2B, Ka 6, Ka 6 B, Ka 6 BR, Ka 6 C, Ka 6 CR, K 7, K 8, and AS-K 13 gliders. AD 75-23-03 required visually inspecting the glue joint between the elevator nose rib number 1 and the nose plywood skin and replacing the glue joint if insufficient glue adhesion was found. Since the FAA issued AD 75-23-03, the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) superseded prior EASA ADs for the unsafe condition on these products. This AD adds the Model K 8 B gliders to the applicability and requires repetitively inspecting the glue joint at elevator rib number 1 and repairing any damage found. The FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.

DATES:

This AD is effective July 21, 2022.

Additional information is available here:
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2022/06/16/2022-12869/airworthiness-directives-alexander-schleicher-gmbh-and-co-segelflugzeugbau-gliders