Arjan Meijer

Comments on NPRM 2009-NM-076-AD The new proposed actions by par (o) of this AD require removal of the carriage spindle (as given in the work instructions of Boeing SB737-57A-1218 Rev. 5) for a detailed inspection for corrosion, pitting, cracking and measurement of some minimal allowable spindle diameters. The times specified for this action are the same as for the initial GAP check and NDT for NEW (never been overhauled) carriage spindles and interval change for the overhaul carriage spindles. If removal of the carriage spindle is required at 12.000 cycles, is the initial or repetitive gap check and NDT at the same time still useful? KLM deems it not very useful to do a gap check or NDT to determine if a removal for the carriage spindle is required, if at the same time the carriage spindle must be removed from the aircraft. If the spindle is removed for a detailed inspection at 12.000 cycles and found in serviceable condition, is the repetitive gap check and NDT still required at same interval as given in table 1 and 2 of Boeing SB 737-57A1277 Rev.1? KLM is of the opinion that carriage spindles which received a thorough detailed inspection and found in serviceable condition does not require a gap check or a NDT at the times specified in the 12.000 to 20.000 flight cycles range of table 1 and 2 of Boeing SB 737-57A1277 Rev.1 KLM does belief the gap checks and NDT’s are still required, although at a different time interval after completing the requirements of Par (0) of the proposed AD. Best regards, KLM