AD/DAUPHIN/68 Amdt 2 - Main Gearbox Base Plate

The Directive is structured around a small set of interlocking concepts: applicability keyed to aircraft model and modification status; reference to a manufacturer ASB for the technical method; event-based and calendar/event-linked compliance triggers; and an explicit connection to a preceding EASA AD and prior amendments.

Applicability: The scope is model-specific and conditional on the main gearbox base plate modification state. The relevant text reads: "All SA 365 N, N1, and AS 365 N2, N3 helicopters, all serial numbers, equipped with a main gearbox base plate before embodiment of MOD 0763C45." This makes the presence or absence of MOD 0763C45 the decisive mechanical attribute for whether the Directive applies.

Reference-based compliance: The Directive does not lay out inspection techniques, acceptance criteria, or repair steps. Instead it mandates that operators "Action in accordance with paragraph 2.B. of Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) 05.00.45 R1 or latter approved revision." The ASB paragraph 2.B. therefore contains the operative inspection method and any corrective actions; the Directive effectively converts that ASB content into a required action for the affected fleet.

Triggering events and recurrent intervals: Two distinct types of triggers are used. For certain gearboxes the trigger is a flight-cycle count (9,900 cycles for SA 365 N/N1; 7,300 for AS 365 N2/N3), particularly where the MGB has "never been overhauled or repaired." For other categories the trigger is the next ALF-check after a historic date (after 18 February 2004). Once the initial inspection is performed, recurrent inspections are required at intervals not exceeding 55 flight hours. The Directive repeats this compliance formulation across the model variants and gearbox histories (Compliance).

Treatment of overhauled or repaired gearboxes: The Directive explicitly addresses newly overhauled or newly repaired main gearboxes. Those gearboxes are not exempted; the Requirement column lists "Equipped with a newly overhauled or newly repaired MGB: Action in accordance with paragraph 2.B. of ASB 05.00.45 R1 or latter approved revision" (Requirement). Thus overhaul or repair does not remove the inspection obligation.

Relationship with prior ADs and service documents: The Background states that Amendment 1 replaced AOT Requirement documents with ASB Requirement documents and extended repeat inspection intervals, while Amendment 2 introduces the current EASA AD and clarifies helicopter applicability without changing technical requirements (Background). The Directive also notes EASA AD 2006-0101 as a point of reference.

Risk premise: The Directive’s technical rationale is recorded in the Background: a crack was discovered on an AS 365 N2 main gearbox base plate, located close to the attachment of a laminated pad and running to the inside of the MGB base plate and then to the MGB casing. The background says "Undetected crack growth could lead to the loss of rotor torque-to-structure transfer function." That stated hazard is the operational risk that the inspections are intended to mitigate (Background).

Effective date and administrative detail: The Directive indicates the original issue became effective on 18 February 2004, and this Amendment 2 becomes effective on 5 June 2008. It is signed by the CASA delegate on 15 April 2008 (Compliance; Background; signature block).

Operators and owners: The Directive affects owners and operators of the specific Eurocopter models listed: SA 365 N, SA 365 N1, AS 365 N2, and AS 365 N3 helicopters, of all serial numbers, but only when those helicopters are "equipped with a main gearbox base plate before embodiment of MOD 0763C45" (Applicability). Therefore the primary economic and operational burden falls on those parties who operate or maintain helicopters that meet the model and modification criteria.

Maintenance organisations and contracted engineers: Because the Directive requires inspections "in accordance with paragraph 2.B. of ASB 05.00.45 R1", maintenance organisations, licensed engineers and any contracted maintenance provider who carries out that ASB work will be directly engaged. They will need access to the ASB document, competence to perform the specified inspection technique, and authority to take any corrective actions invoked by the ASB.

Airframes with MOD 0763C45 embodied: The applicability clause creates a class of helicopters that are outside the scope: those with the main gearbox base plate after embodiment of MOD 0763C45. Owners who have embodied the MOD are not listed in the Applicability and therefore are not the target of this AD. That creates an owner decision variable: investing in embodiment of the MOD is a way to change the aircraft’s status under this directive, according to the text.

Manufacturers and parts suppliers: While the Directive points to the possibility of corrective action if cracks are found, it does not itself specify the parts or modifications to be provided. Nonetheless, Eurocopter/part suppliers will be implicated when corrective work or new base plates are required as a result of ASB-directed findings.

Fleet managers and schedulers: The compliance regime uses both flight-cycle and flight-hour-linked intervals (initial thresholds at flight-cycle counts and recurrent intervals "not to exceed 55 flight hours"). Fleet managers must track flight cycles and flight hours for the main gearbox and schedule ALF-checks and other maintenance events accordingly. The text specifically instructs that certain initial inspections must be performed at "the next ALF-check (after the last flight of the day) after 18 February 2004" for several categories, tying the Directive into daily maintenance cycles (Compliance).

Regulators and certifying authorities: The document was issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority delegate and references EASA AD 2006-0101. Regulators responsible for continuing airworthiness record-keeping and oversight will see this AD as a rule to be enforced in their domain, because the AD itself is issued by CASA. The Directive, however, contains no explicit penalty clause within the text provided (see Penalties and enforcement below).

Insurance underwriters and lessees: The Directive will affect risk assessments for insurers and may impact lease agreements where airworthiness directives are a covenant. Those stakeholders will be interested in compliance status because the background highlights a failure mode with potential severe consequences for flight safety (Background).

Summary: Practically every party involved in operation, maintenance and oversight of the subject Dauphin series helicopters is affected if the helicopter is within the stated applicability. The dividing line in ownership and operational impact is the presence or absence of MOD 0763C45 on the main gearbox base plate, the logged flight cycles on the MGB, and whether the MGB has been overhauled or repaired (Applicability; Requirement; Compliance).

Key duties imposed by the Directive flow from the Requirement and Compliance sections and the cross-reference to Eurocopter ASB 05.00.45 R1. They are discrete and operational:

• Duty to identify applicability: Operators must establish whether each helicopter is one of the models listed and whether it is fitted with a main gearbox base plate prior to embodiment of MOD 0763C45 (Applicability). The Directive’s applicability language makes ownership and maintenance records central to compliance.

• Duty to perform actions in the ASB: For applicable helicopters, operators must perform the actions prescribed in paragraph 2.B. of Eurocopter ASB 05.00.45 R1 or a later approved revision. The Duty is phrased as "Action in accordance with paragraph 2.B. of…ASB 05.00.45 R1 or latter approved revision" across the Requirement column for each category of helicopter and gearbox status (Requirement).

• Duty to observe initial triggers and recurrent intervals: The Compliance column sets precise triggers for initial inspections. For example, for SA 365 N and N1 helicopters with an MGB that has "logged less than 9,900 flight cycles and has never been overhauled or repaired" the compliance entry is "Upon accumulating 9,900 flight cycles. Thereafter at intervals not to exceed 55 flight hours." For some categories the initial action is "At the next ALF-check (after the last flight of the day) after 18 February 2004. Thereafter at intervals not to exceed 55 flight hours." The Directive thus imposes a duty to track flight cycles and to schedule ALF-check compliance events (Compliance).

• Duty affecting newly overhauled or newly repaired MGBs: The Directive expressly says that newly overhauled or newly repaired main gearboxes are subject to the same ASB action (Requirement). Therefore, the duty to inspect is not removed by overhaul or repair.

• Duty to rely on the latest approved ASB revision: The text permits compliance to a "latter approved revision" of ASB 05.00.45 R1. That creates a duty to ensure the ASB revision used is approved and current at the time of action.

Rights and procedural aspects the Directive implies or leaves open in its text:

• Right to comply by following the ASB: The Directive prescribes a method of compliance, namely following paragraph 2.B. of the ASB. In practice, this means operators can discharge the requirement by performing the ASB actions as issued or by performing any alternative method only if such an alternative is approved, although the Directive itself does not specify an alternative approval route. The phrasing "or latter approved revision" indicates that later ASB revisions can be used if approved; the text does not detail the approval mechanism.

• Right to modify applicability by embodiment of MOD 0763C45: The Applicability clause excludes helicopters equipped with a main gearbox base plate after embodiment of MOD 0763C45. This implies that embodying that MOD alters applicability. The Directive does not mandate embodiment of the MOD; it only sets it as a conditional boundary for applicability.

• Duty to record compliance events: Although the Directive does not state record-keeping obligations explicitly, compliance depends on counting flight cycles and flight hours and scheduling inspections at ALF-checks. Therefore accurate logging is necessary in practice to demonstrate compliance with the timing laid out in Compliance.

• No explicit corrective-action details in the AD text: The AD does not itself state the remedial actions or acceptance criteria for detected cracks; those are contained in the referenced ASB paragraph 2.B. Operators must therefore obtain the ASB to understand remedial rights and obligations following detection.

• Duty to follow the effective dates and amendment history: The Directive notes that the original issue became effective on 18 February 2004, and that this specific Amendment 2 becomes effective on 5 June 2008. Operators must align compliance timelines against these effective dates where the Compliance section requires action "after 18 February 2004" for certain categories (Compliance; Background).

In short, the Directive translates a manufacturer ASB into a required duty for certain helicopters and links that duty to flight-cycle and ALF-check triggers. The AD creates no within-text exemption mechanism other than the MOD embodiment criterion and reliance on later approved ASB revisions.

The Directive text provided does not specify penalties, fines, or a sanctions regime within its body. It records administrative facts: the AD is issued as AD/DAUPHIN/68 Amdt 2, signed 15 April 2008 by David Villiers, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, and it becomes effective on 5 June 2008 (signature block; Compliance). The document therefore provides no explicit enforcement clause, monetary penalty, or criminal sanction language.

From the document itself, enforcement-relevant elements that practitioners must bear in mind are procedural and practical rather than statutory within the AD text:

• Effective date: The AD becomes effective on 5 June 2008. This effective date is the point from which the AD’s status as an issued directive takes administrative effect (Compliance). Operators must align their maintenance and inspection schedules with the Compliance entries.

• Cross-references to other instruments: The Directive references Eurocopter ASB 05.00.45 R1 and EASA AD 2006-0101. While the AD text does not state enforcement mechanisms, the fact that it converts specified ASB actions into a directive creates an obligation to perform the ASB actions as required by the AD. The Directive does not set out who enforces it or how non-compliance will be handled; that is not present in the text.

• Implicit operational risk in Background: The Background describes an operational failure mode , a crack that could lead to "the loss of rotor torque-to-structure transfer function." While not an enforcement mechanism, that hazard is the risk the AD aims to control. Failure to comply leaves the aircraft in the state that the Background warns against, which in operational environments would be relevant to safety oversight and insurance assessment, although those consequences are not specified in the AD text.

• No formal variance or alternative method approval text included: The AD does not describe an approved alternative method for compliance within its text. It does permit compliance with "latter approved revision" of the ASB, but provides no mechanism for seeking an alternative means of compliance (AMOC) or approval within the AD itself.

• Administrative history that may affect enforcement: The AD states that Amendment 1 replaced earlier AOT requirement documents with ASB requirement documents and extended repeat inspection intervals, and that Amendment 2 introduces the current EASA AD clarification without changing technical requirements (Background). The absence of a penalty clause in the AD text does not mean regulators will not take enforcement action under other legal frameworks, but the AD as printed contains no enforcement or penalty provisions.

Practitioners requiring clarity on enforcement mechanisms, penalties, or the route for alternative compliance should consult the issuing authority’s formal procedures outside this Directive text. The AD itself provides the operative technical duties and compliance timelines but not the enforcement machinery or sanctioning language.

The Directive explicitly references other technical and regulatory instruments and thereby defines its interaction with those instruments in a limited but concrete way.

Reference to Eurocopter ASB 05.00.45 R1: The Requirement repeatedly mandates "Action in accordance with paragraph 2.B. of Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin (ASB) 05.00.45 R1 or latter approved revision." That places the ASB’s inspection and corrective-action content at the centre of compliance. Mechanically, the AD transforms the ASB paragraph into a required action for the affected helicopters. Interaction therefore occurs by incorporation: the ASB supplies the technical method and repair criteria, and the AD supplies the legal requirement to carry those actions out for applicable helicopters.

Reference to EASA AD 2006-0101: The AD contains a note stating "EASA AD 2006-0101 refers." The Background states that Amendment 2 is issued "to introduce the current EASA AD related to this Directive, which clarifies helicopter applicability; with no change to technical requirements." Thus the AD interacts with the EASA AD as a clarifying instrument: the EASA AD’s content informs or aligns applicability language but, according to the AD text, does not change the technical inspection or repair requirements.

Interaction with modification status (MOD 0763C45): The Applicability is explicitly conditional on embodiment of a modification, MOD 0763C45. Helicopters "equipped with a main gearbox base plate before embodiment of MOD 0763C45" are within scope; those with the post-MOD base plate are not. That creates an interaction between continuing airworthiness certification, configuration control and the AD: a physical modification embodied on the aircraft has a direct effect on whether the AD applies, according to the AD language.

Interaction with maintenance routines (ALF-checks): The Compliance section ties initial inspection events to routine maintenance procedures, namely ALF-checks (after the last flight of the day). The AD integrates with operators’ existing maintenance checkpoint structure by specifying that for some categories the inspection must be performed "At the next ALF-check (after the last flight of the day) after 18 February 2004." This is an operational interaction between the AD and daily maintenance schedules.

Amendment relationship and prior AOT documents: The Background notes that Amendment 1 replaced previous AOT (Airworthiness Operations/TM?) Requirement documents with ASB Requirement documents, "with no change to technical content; and extended the repeat inspection intervals." This indicates a procedural change in how the technical content was presented or mandated, which affects how the AD interacts with prior documents. The AD sits in a sequence of amendments; practitioners need to account for earlier versions and their supersedure in maintenance records and compliance history.

No explicit conflict resolution or alternative compliance pathway stated: The AD does not specify how it interacts with other statutory instruments beyond the references to the ASB and the EASA AD. The text does not specify an alternative method of compliance process, a waiver route, or how to reconcile divergent requirements if they exist. The phrase "or latter approved revision" allows later ASB revisions that are approved to be used for compliance, but there is no on-text description of the approval process.

Record-keeping and continuing airworthiness regimes: Although the AD does not itself state record-keeping rules, its requirements for flight-cycle counting and timing relative to ALF-checks imply an interaction with the operator’s continuing airworthiness records and logbooks. That practical interaction is necessary to demonstrate when triggers are met and that inspections were performed within the 55 flight-hour repeat interval.

In sum, the Directive interacts with technical manufacturer guidance (ASB), a European regulatory AD (EASA AD 2006-0101), aircraft configuration control (MOD 0763C45), and operators’ maintenance processes (ALF-checks). It does not specify interaction with enforcement statutes or provide a formal alternative compliance route within the text provided.

The AD text itself provides a concise amendment history and dates that stakeholders must note when reconciling compliance records.

Original issue: The background records that "The original issue of this Airworthiness Directive became effective on 18 February 2004." That provides the baseline for earlier compliance obligations and any inspections or interventions performed under prior issues of the AD (Background).

Amendment 1: The Background states that "Amendment 1 replaced the previous AOT Requirement documents with ASB Requirement documents, with no change to technical content; and extended the repeat inspection intervals." From the wording it is clear that Amendment 1 was procedural in nature in terms of the mandated document format (shifting from AOT to ASB referenced requirements) and also altered the repeat inspection intervals by extension. The AD text does not give the date of Amendment 1 or the exact prior intervals; it only communicates that the repeat interval was extended when Amendment 1 was issued (Background).

Amendment 2 (this instrument): The current text is Amendment 2. The Background states: "Amendment 2 is issued to introduce the current EASA AD related to this Directive, which clarifies helicopter applicability; with no change to technical requirements." The current AD includes an explicit "Note: EASA AD 2006-0101 refers." Amendment 2 therefore appears primarily to align or incorporate applicational clarifications from the EASA AD, without altering the substantive technical inspection or repair content that operators must implement (Background). The AD identifies the effective date of Amendment 2 as 5 June 2008 (Compliance), and the document bears the signature and date 15 April 2008.

Other recorded changes: The table header lists "AD/DAUPHIN/68 Amdt 2 | Main Gearbox Base Plate | 6/2008" indicating the calendar month and year annotation for the amendment (6/2008). The top lines and repeated headings reflect the AD number and amendment number. The AD also notes that the "compliance times remain unchanged by this issue of the Directive," meaning Amendment 2 did not alter the compliance deadlines previously set (Compliance).

Implication for records: For maintenance compliance and regulatory reporting, practitioners must be careful to track which amendment of the AD applied when inspections were completed. Where Amendment 1 extended repeat intervals, and Amendment 2 clarified applicability, operators who changed the configuration (embodiment of MOD 0763C45) or performed overhauls during different amendment phases must ensure their records show the AD amendment in force at the time of each inspection.

Summary: The AD contains three temporal markers,original issue (effective 18 February 2004), Amendment 1 (content change described but undated in the text), and Amendment 2 (this document, signed 15 April 2008, effective 5 June 2008),and the text clarifies that Amendment 2 aligns applicability with EASA AD 2006-0101 without changing technical requirements. For practical compliance, the amendment history affects which inspection intervals and applicability criteria operators must follow for particular maintenance events.

The AD text provides no litigation history. There are no case names, court decisions, or regulatory enforcement actions referenced in the document. The only legal-administrative material present is the AD itself, its amendments and the cross-references to Eurocopter ASB 05.00.45 R1 and EASA AD 2006-0101.

As a result, the Directive contains no recorded judicial challenges, appeals, or adjudications in the text supplied. There is no mention of disputes over applicability, technical content, or enforcement, and no description of any legal proceedings concerning the AD or its amendments.

For practitioners seeking to understand whether this AD has been the subject of litigation or formal dispute resolution, the document itself does not supply that information and directs attention instead to the ASB for technical steps and to EASA AD 2006-0101 for contextual reference. Any litigation history would therefore need to be sourced from outside the AD text.

The absence of litigation history in the AD does not indicate the absence of enforcement interest or the possibility of contestation in practice; it simply means that no such instances are recorded within this document. Users relying on this AD for compliance or risk assessment should not infer from the AD text that there have been no regulatory interactions or disputes beyond what is stated; the AD itself records only administrative, technical and effective-date information.

The AD contains several points that can cause practical compliance or interpretation traps if not read carefully.

Applicability hinge on MOD 0763C45: The Applicability clause is precise: it applies to helicopters "equipped with a main gearbox base plate before embodiment of MOD 0763C45." Operators who assume the AD applies to all helicopters of the listed models without verifying the embodiment status of MOD 0763C45 will either over-comply or under-comply. Accurate configuration status documentation is therefore critical.

Precision of flight-cycle thresholds and their conditional phrases: The Requirement distinguishes gearboxes that have "logged less than 9,900 flight cycles and has never been overhauled or repaired" from those that have "logged 9,900 or more flight cycles, and has never been overhauled or repaired." Similar thresholds appear for AS 365 N2/N3 with a 7,300-cycle threshold. The text repeats the ASB citation for all these categories. The conditional language "has never been overhauled or repaired" means operators must have clear maintenance history showing whether a particular MGB was ever overhauled or repaired; otherwise it will be ambiguous which trigger applies.

Newly overhauled/repaired MGBs are not exempt: Some operators may assume that a newly overhauled or newly repaired main gearbox resets the inspection requirement or exempts the aircraft. The AD explicitly includes "Equipped with a newly overhauled or newly repaired MGB: Action in accordance with paragraph 2.B. of ASB 05.00.45 R1 or latter approved revision." Therefore overhaul or repair does not avoid the obligation.

Reliance on an external technical document for the operative method: The AD mandates actions "in accordance with paragraph 2.B. of Eurocopter ASB 05.00.45 R1". The AD itself does not set out the inspection technique, acceptance criteria, or corrective procedures. Practitioners must obtain the ASB to know what to do. Failure to consult the ASB could result in performing inadequate or incorrect work despite claiming to have complied with the AD.

ALF-check timing oddity: The Compliance entries use the phrase "At the next ALF-check (after the last flight of the day) after 18 February 2004. Thereafter at intervals not to exceed 55 flight hours." That means that, for some categories, if the operator did not perform the inspection at the first ALF-check after 18 February 2004, the initial required inspection timing could be ambiguous if adequate records are not available. Operators must reconcile historical ALF-check records to demonstrate when the initial inspection was performed.

"Compliance times remain unchanged" wording: The AD states "The compliance times remain unchanged by this issue of the Directive." That can create confusion where Amendment 1 had extended repeat intervals but Amendment 2 claims no change to compliance times relative to the immediately preceding issue. Practitioners need to be careful which prior instrument they compare against when interpreting "unchanged."

EASA AD cross-reference: The AD includes a "Note: EASA AD 2006-0101 refers." That suggests the EASA AD contains related or clarifying material, particularly regarding applicability. Operators must check EASA AD 2006-0101 to understand any clarifications of applicability, because the AD says Amendment 2 "introduces the current EASA AD related to this Directive, which clarifies helicopter applicability" (Background). Relying only on the local AD without consulting the EASA AD could miss an important nuance.

Intervals given in flight hours versus flight cycles: The triggers and repeat intervals use a mix of flight-cycle counts and flight-hour intervals. Proper compliance needs accurate and consistent logging of both flight cycles and flight hours for the main gearbox. Misalignment in record-keeping between flight cycles and hours can cause missed inspections.

No penalty or AMOC language in the AD: The AD contains no text on penalties, nor does it describe an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) process. Operators who wish to seek alternative procedures must therefore look to other regulatory texts or contact the certifying authority; that process is not described in the AD text.

Summary: The main operational "gotchas" are the MOD-embodiment-based applicability distinction, the conditional flight-cycle thresholds tied to overhaul history, the obligation applying to newly overhauled/repaired MGBs, the AD’s reliance on an external ASB for operative methods, and the ALF-check timing language anchored to 18 February 2004. Each of these points is stated in the AD text and can produce compliance pitfalls if records, access to the ASB, or understanding of the Amendment sequence are incomplete.

Below is a practical, source-grounded checklist of steps an operator or maintainer should take to comply with AD/DAUPHIN/68 Amdt 2, strictly following the Directive’s text.

1. Confirm applicability for each airframe:

   • Identify whether the helicopter is an SA 365 N, N1, AS 365 N2, or AS 365 N3 (Applicability).
   • Confirm the embodiment status of MOD 0763C45 on the main gearbox base plate. The Directive applies only to helicopters "equipped with a main gearbox base plate before embodiment of MOD 0763C45" (Applicability). If the MOD has been embodied, the AD does not list the helicopter as affected.

2. Establish MGB history:

   • Determine for each main gearbox whether it has "never been overhauled or repaired" or whether it is "newly overhauled or newly repaired" as those categories dictate which initial trigger is used (Requirement).
   • Record the flight cycles logged on the MGB to establish whether the thresholds of 9,900 cycles (SA 365 N/N1) or 7,300 cycles (AS 365 N2/N3) have been reached (Requirement; Compliance).

3. Obtain the encoded ASB:

   • Acquire Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin 05.00.45 R1 (paragraph 2.B.) or any "latter approved revision." The AD requires action "in accordance with paragraph 2.B. of Eurocopter ASB 05.00.45 R1 or latter approved revision" (Requirement). This ASB paragraph contains the technical inspection method and any corrective actions.

4. Perform the initial inspection at the correct trigger:

   • For applicable SA 365 N, N1 helicopters with MGBs that have logged less than 9,900 cycles and never overhauled or repaired, the initial action is "Upon accumulating 9,900 flight cycles. Thereafter at intervals not to exceed 55 flight hours" (Compliance).
   • For SA 365 N/N1 gearboxes that already had 9,900 or more cycles or that are newly overhauled or repaired, the initial action is "At the next ALF-check (after the last flight of the day) after 18 February 2004. Thereafter at intervals not to exceed 55 flight hours" (Compliance).
   • For AS 365 N2/N3 analogous initial triggers are 7,300 flight cycles for un-overhauled/repaired gearboxes, or at the next ALF-check after 18 February 2004 for the other categories, followed in all cases by repeat inspections at intervals not to exceed 55 flight hours (Requirement; Compliance).

5. Implement recurrent inspections and scheduling:

   • After the initial inspection, schedule and perform repeat inspections at intervals not to exceed 55 flight hours, as the AD prescribes for all listed categories (Compliance). Integrate these inspections into routine ALF-check scheduling or other maintenance planning.

6. Follow ASB-prescribed corrective actions:

   • If the inspection per ASB paragraph 2.B. identifies cracking or other defects, carry out the repairs and any corrective actions specified by the ASB or ensure parts replacement or overhaul per the ASB instructions. The AD itself does not specify defects criteria or repair methods; they are in the ASB (Requirement).

7. Record and document compliance:

   • Document the inspection dates, references to ASB paragraph 2.B. (including revision used), flight cycles/hours at the time of inspection, and any corrective actions taken. Accurate records are necessary to demonstrate the timing triggers set out in the Compliance section and the ALF-check timing anchored to 18 February 2004.

8. Monitor ASB revisions and EASA AD references:

   • Use the latest "approved revision" of ASB 05.00.45 R1 when performing inspections if a later approved revision is available, as the AD permits compliance through "latter approved revision" (Requirement).
   • Note the AD refers to EASA AD 2006-0101 for related clarifications. Consult that EASA AD if there is any uncertainty about applicability or interpretation, because the AD states Amendment 2 introduced the current EASA AD clarifying applicability (Background).

9. Consider MOD embodiment as a configuration management decision:

   • If an operator wishes to change the aircraft’s applicability status under this AD, embodying MOD 0763C45 on the main gearbox base plate is the relevant modification according to the Applicability clause. The AD does not mandate embodiment but makes embodiment status a decisive factor for whether the AD applies.

10. Liaise with the Certifying Authority or delegate where clarification is needed:

• The AD does not provide penalty or AMOC procedures within its text. If an operator believes an alternative inspection method is justified, or needs clarification on the meaning of a compliance trigger (for example, as to record-standing for an initial ALF-check after 18 February 2004), they should consult the relevant regulatory office or delegate for official guidance. The AD provides the issuing authority’s delegate name and date (David Villiers, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, 15 April 2008), but does not contain procedural text for alternatives.

Practical notes derived from the AD text: ensure flight-cycle and flight-hour logs for the main gearbox are accurate; ensure ALF-check records are retrievable going back to 18 February 2004 for initial-inspection evidence where required; retain the specific ASB revision used to perform each inspection as part of the aircraft’s continuing airworthiness records; and treat newly overhauled or newly repaired MGBs as subject to the same ASB actions, per the Requirement.

Following these steps, derived directly from the AD’s Applicability, Requirement and Compliance text, will effect compliance with AD/DAUPHIN/68 Amdt 2 as drafted.