Robert Forsyth

Document ID: FAA-2009-0350-0002
Document Type: Public Submission
Agency: Federal Aviation Administration
Received Date: April 27 2009, at 03:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time
Date Posted: April 27 2009, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Start Date: April 16 2009, at 12:00 AM Eastern Standard Time
Comment Due Date: June 15 2009, at 11:59 PM Eastern Standard Time
Tracking Number: 8096c708
View Document:

This is comment on Rule

Airworthiness Directives; Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Limited Model 206A Series, 206B Series, 206L Series, 407, and 427 Helicopters

View Comment

The rationale for issuing an immediate AD 2009-07-51 two days before AD2009-07- 52 is unclear. It appears that the key difference between the two documents is the recognition in the second that the original Bell ASB on which this is founded only recommended inspection of lever assemblies that had undertaken less than 50 hours of flight time. In the meantime, any operators who wished to fly their aircraft were required to have the emergency AD 2009-07-51 carried out. This cost me personally $658 to meet the requirements of the AD, only for it to be superceded on March 19th by AD 2009-07-52. Does the FAA have any explanation for the rapid updating of the AD and if the first one was issued in error, will there be any form of compensation? The Bell ASB allowed operators to claim $300 from them, but only for aircraft that met their criteria.

Related Comments

Total: 1

Robert Forsyth
Public Submission Posted: 04/27/2009 ID: FAA-2009-0350-0002

Comment Period Closed
Jun 15,2009 11:59 PM ET