Airworthiness Directives: GA 8 Airvan (Pty) Ltd Airplanes

Airworthiness Directives; GA 8 Airvan (Pty) Ltd Airplanes

Supplementary Information

Background

The FAA issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to supersede AD 2010-18-06, Amendment 39-16419 (75 FR 52253, August 25, 2010) (AD 2010-18-06). AD 2010-18-06 applied to all GA8 Airvan (Pty) Ltd Model GA8 and GA8-TC320 airplanes. AD 2010-18-06 was prompted by MCAI originated by CASA, which is the aviation authority for Australia. CASA Australia issued CASA Australia AD AD/GA8/3 Amdt 2, dated August 11, 2010 (CASA Australia AD/GA8/3 Amdt 2) to correct an unsafe condition identified as excessive wear in the forward cargo door slide, which could result in an in-flight separation of the cargo door, with possible loss of control of the airplane. CASA Australia AD AD/GA8/3 Amdt 2 was issued to require the actions in service information updated by the manufacturer to remove any ambiguities in the previous revision and provide an improved inspection method and a minor design change to the forward slide of the cargo door (inclusion of a slide backing plate, castellated nut, and split pin).

AD 2010-18-06 required doing all of Action 1 (measuring the groove width of the forward cargo door slide and if it exceeds 0.145 inch at any point along the slide, or is cracked, installing a new slider assembly) and Action 2 (inspecting wear of the forward slide of the cargo door and doing applicable corrective action steps specified in Action 1) of GippsAero Pty. Ltd. Mandatory Service Bulletin SB-GA8-2005-23, Issue 3, dated August 5, 2010. The FAA issued AD 2010-18-06 to address excessive wear in the forward cargo door slide.

The NPRM published in the Federal Register on January 23, 2024 (89 FR 4211). The NPRM was prompted by CASA Australia AD AD/GA8/3 amdt 3, dated August 18, 2023 (also referred to as the MCAI). The MCAI states that inspections revealed cases of excessive wear in the forward slide of the cargo door. Excessive wear in the forward slide of the cargo door may result in the cargo door separating from the airplane in flight with potentially catastrophic results. The MCAI requires accomplishing the actions specified in GippsAero Service Bulletin SB-GA8-2005-23, Issue 7, dated May 30, 2023 (GippsAero Service Bulletin SB-GA8-2005-23, Issue 7). This service bulletin includes procedures for revised inspections of the door mechanism, installing a stop on the forward slide of the cargo door and reworking the door slide to suit (accommodate) the track stop installation. Depending on the findings of the inspections, additional actions might be necessary including reworking the door mechanism pivot, upgrading the door operating rod, or fitting a door handle with an integral stop.

The FAA is issuing this AD to address excessive wear in the forward slide of the cargo door. The unsafe condition, if not addressed, could result in the cargo door separating from the airplane during flight, with potential loss of control of the airplane.

You may examine the MCAI in the AD docket at regulations.gov under Docket No. FAA-2024-0035.

Discussion of Final Airworthiness Directive

Comments

The FAA received no comments on the NPRM or on the determination of the costs.

Conclusion

These products have been approved by the aviation authority of another country and are approved for operation in the United States. Pursuant to the FAA's bilateral agreement with this State of Design Authority, it has notified the FAA of the unsafe condition described in the MCAI referenced above. The FAA reviewed the relevant data and determined that air safety requires adopting this AD as proposed. Accordingly, the FAA is issuing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products. This AD is adopted as proposed in the NPRM.

Related Service Information Under 1 CFR Part 51

The FAA reviewed GippsAero Service Bulletin SB-GA8-2005-23, Issue 8, dated October 11, 2023 (GippsAero SB-GA8-2005-23, Issue 8). This service information specifies procedures for installing a backing plate on the forward slide of the cargo door; inspecting the forward slide of the cargo door for excessive wear; inspecting the cargo door latching mechanism for contact between the operating rod and door handle pivot post, inspecting the threaded studs and rod ends at both ends of the operating rod for bending, and checking the cargo door handle engagement with the catch; reworking the cargo door handle pivot post; reworking the door operating rod; inspecting the door handle to determine if an integrated stop is installed and checking for excessive play; and inspecting the center rail of the cargo door to determine if an aft stop is installed, installing an aft stop, and reworking the center rail of the cargo door to accommodate the track stop.

This service information is reasonably available because the interested parties have access to it through their normal course of business or by the means identified in ADDRESSES .

Differences Between This AD and the MCAI[

The MCAI applicability is Gippsland Aeronautics Model GA8 Series airplanes, all serial numbers. The applicability in this AD is GA8 Airvan (Pty) Ltd Model GA8 and GA8-TC320 airplanes because the FAA type certificate specifies GA8 Airvan (Pty) Ltd instead of Gippsland Aeronautics and specifies Model GA8 and GA8-TC320 airplanes instead of Model GA8 Series airplanes.

The MCAI requires doing the actions in Gippsland Aeronautics mandatory service bulletin SB-GA8-2005-23 Issue 7, dated May 30, 2023. This AD requires doing the actions in GippsAero SB-GA8-2005-23, Issue 8. After the MCAI was published, the manufacturer issued GippsAero SB-GA8-2005-23, Issue 8, which was revised to provide clarification regarding the actions and compliance schedule. The title page of GippsAero SB-GA8-2005-23, Issue 8, specifies GippsAero instead of Gippsland Aeronautics.

Costs of Compliance

The FAA estimates that this AD affects 61 airplanes of U.S. registry.

The FAA estimates the following costs to comply with this AD. The corresponding letter and number in parenthesis refer to the specific paragraph in GippsAero SB-GA8-2005-23, Issue 8.

The FAA estimates the following costs to do any necessary actions that would be required based on the results of the inspections. The agency has no way of determining the number of airplanes that might need these actions. The corresponding letter and number in parenthesis refer to the specific paragraph in GippsAero SB-GA8-2005-23, Issue 8.

The FAA has included all known costs in its cost estimate. According to the manufacturer, however, some of the costs of this AD may be covered under warranty, thereby reducing the cost impact on affected operators.

Authority for This Rulemaking

Title 49 of the United States Code specifies the FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, section 106, describes the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: Aviation Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the Agency's authority.

The FAA is issuing this rulemaking under the authority described in Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: General requirements. Under that section, Congress charges the FAA with promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing regulations for practices, methods, and procedures the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority because it addresses an unsafe condition that is likely to exist or develop on products identified in this rulemaking action.

Regulatory Findings

The FAA has determined that this AD will not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132. This AD will not have a substantial direct effect on the States, on the relationship between the national government and the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this AD:

(1) Is not a "significant regulatory action" under Executive Order 12866,

(2) Will not affect intrastate aviation in Alaska, and

(3) Will not have a significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

The Amendment

Accordingly, under the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the FAA amends 14 CFR part 39 as follows:

Part 39 Airworthiness Directives