Glasflugel AD

On Sat, 5 Nov 2011 20:31:33 +0000 (UTC), Martin Gregorie
wrote:

.... text deleted
Glasfaser says it applies to all Kestrels, type 401.
The BGA doesn't say anything different. The copy of the AD 2011-0213,
http://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/easa_a...AD_2011-0213_1
referenced from the BGA website has additional notes about a few specific
gliders identified by s/n over the range 86-125.
.... text deleted

Looking at the EASA AD cited, this looks very similar to the problem
Schempp-Hirth experienced in the 1992-93 time frame with all of their
ships with elevators driven by a pushrod in the vertical tail; Ventus,
Nimbus, Janus, Discus, Mini-Nimbus.

See: TM Nr. 349-16.
http://www.schempp-hirth.com/fileadm...49-16-1592.pdf
http://www.schempp-hirth.com/fileadm...49-16-1590.pdf

In the SH case, the water apparently got into the vertical pushrod in
a similar manner, though a small inspection hole in the pushrod, in
this case through a leaking top sealing bellows.

My recollection from that time is that most everyone replaced the
vertical pushrod. I believe many SH ships of that era still bare the
small hole in the left side of the vertical tail required to access
the push rod securing nut, I know mine does.

Again, based on the EASA note and the Schempp-Hirth experience, this
should only effect ships with a top mounted elevator and a vertical
pushrod in the tail (T-tail designs).

Bob
Ventus C