AD/WILGA/5 - Fuselage Front Posts

The directive uses a narrow set of operational concepts and references to create prescriptive obligations. These main concepts are:

• Applicability by model and serial number: The instrument expressly states the covered models , "PZL-104 Wilga 35, 35A and 80 aircraft, all serial numbers" , so the obligation is model-specific and not limited by serial number (Applicability).

• Age trigger measured from "the last overhaul at the effective date": The directive conditions Requirement 1 on an aircraft having "accumulated 12 years or more from the last overhaul at the effective date of this Directive." That is a retrospective age trigger tied to the "effective date" rather than a prospective accumulation after the AD takes effect (Requirement 1 heading). The choice of measuring from the last overhaul, rather than from date of manufacture or entry into service, is a specific risk-targeting mechanism.

• Use of manufacturer Mandatory Bulletins as normative procedures: The inspection criteria, repair thresholds and padding-replacement steps are not fully set out in the AD text. Instead the AD incorporates, by reference, EADS PZL Mandatory Bulletins: MB No. 1109185 for Wilga 35/35A and MB No. 10409036 for Wilga 80, "initial issue, or later EASA approved revision." The AD further points to particular numbered paragraphs within those MBs (paragraph 6.A, paragraph 6.A.c and paragraph 6.C) as the operative technical standards (Requirement 1).

• Repair standard: If corrosion meets the MB criteria, "repair in accordance with an approved repair scheme or replace with a serviceable part" is required and must be completed "before further flight." The AD therefore establishes a pass/fail criterion that, if triggered, requires either repair under an "approved" scheme or part replacement (Requirement 1.a).

• Maintenance programme amendment: For all aircraft, operators must "Amend the approved operator's aircraft maintenance programme to incorporate the applicable tasks as described in the relevant PZL-104 Wilga ... Maintenance Manuals titled 'Maintenance Instructions and Scheduled Inspections'." This directs operators to fold specific manufacturer scheduled tasks into their already approved programmes (Requirement 2).

• Compliance timing and legal effect: The AD "becomes effective on 27 August 2009" and requires compliance with Requirements 1 and 2 "Within 6 months after 27 August 2009." The AD also references EASA AD 2009-0072R1 (Note).

These concepts combine a model-specific focus, an age-based trigger, manufacturer-supplied technical standards incorporated by reference, an explicit immediate grounding mechanism where serious corrosion is present, and a universal amendment obligation to operators' maintenance programmes.

The directive names the affected classes of persons and entities directly in the text and by necessary implication from its requirements.

• Aircraft operators and owners of PZL-104 Wilga 35, 35A and 80 airframes: The Applicability table states the models covered and "all serial numbers." Therefore any person or organisation operating, owning, or responsible for the airworthiness of those models is directly affected. The obligation to "Amend the approved operator's aircraft maintenance programme" (Requirement 2) presumes an operator with an approved programme.

• Operators of aircraft that have "accumulated 12 years or more from the last overhaul at the effective date": For these specific aircraft, Requirement 1 imposes additional immediate obligations: to inspect the fuselage front posts for corrosion per the cited MBs, to perform repairs or replacements if corrosion meets criteria in MB paragraph 6.A.c, and to replace the padding of the rear glass per MB paragraph 6.C. Operators of those older aircraft therefore face inspection cost, possible repair or replacement costs and operational downtime.

• Maintenance organisations and certificated personnel: The AD requires inspections and repairs "in accordance with" MB procedures and "in accordance with an approved repair scheme" where repair is necessary. Maintenance organisations and licensed maintenance personnel will be the parties to carry out the inspections, replacements and repairs and must do so consistent with the MBs and any approval regime that governs repair schemes.

• Aircraft maintenance programme approvers and regulators: Because Requirement 2 is to "Amend the approved operator's aircraft maintenance programme to incorporate ... applicable tasks", entities that approve maintenance programmes (for example the approving authority or CASA delegated approvers implied by the "approved operator" phrase) will be engaged in processing and approving programme amendments, although the AD text does not describe the approval process.

• Manufacturers and documentation holders: The AD explicitly references EADS PZL Mandatory Bulletins (MB No. 1109185 and MB No. 10409036, initial issues or later EASA approved revisions) and the PZL-104 Wilga Maintenance Manuals titled "Maintenance Instructions and Scheduled Inspections." Holders of this documentation will be the source of the technical criteria the AD mandates. The AD also references EASA AD 2009-0072R1 for cross-reference.

• No other person-specific exemptions are stated: the AD contains no carve-outs for private, commercial, museum or heritage operations; it applies to "all serial numbers" of the models and requires the maintenance-programme amendment for "all aircraft."

Who pays: the text does not state funding or cost recovery mechanisms; by plain reading, the operators of the affected aircraft will incur inspection, repair, replacement and administrative costs, and maintenance organisations will bear execution responsibility. The AD does not allocate cost-sharing or provide funding.

Who decides: the AD sets mandatory requirements; the text names a CASA delegate as issuer but does not specify appeal or waiver mechanisms within the instrument itself.

The instrument sets out limited but concrete duties and some implied operational rights. The duties are prescriptive and tied to manufacturer and maintenance documentation.

Primary duties

• Inspection duty for older aircraft: For aircraft that "have accumulated 12 years or more from the last overhaul at the effective date of this Directive" there is a duty to inspect "the fuselage front posts for corrosion" in accordance with paragraph 6.A of the applicable MB (Requirement 1.a). The duty is triggered by the specified age condition measured from last overhaul at the effective date.

• Repair or replace before further flight if criteria met: If "serious corrosion damage is detected that meets the criteria defined in paragraph 6.A.c of the applicable Requirement document," the operator must, "before further flight, repair in accordance with an approved repair scheme or replace with a serviceable part, as necessary" (Requirement 1.a). This imposes an immediate remediation duty that prevents continued flight if the damage threshold is reached.

• Replace padding of the rear glass for older aircraft: The operator must "Replace the padding of the rear glass in accordance with paragraph 6.C" of the relevant MB (Requirement 1.b). This is a specific component-replacement duty applicable to aircraft meeting the 12-year-from-last-overhaul trigger.

• Maintenance-programme amendment duty for all aircraft: All operators must "Amend the approved operator's aircraft maintenance programme to incorporate the applicable tasks as described in the relevant PZL-104 Wilga ... Maintenance Manuals titled 'Maintenance Instructions and Scheduled Inspections'." This is a systems duty , it requires altering the operator's approved maintenance regime so that the scheduled tasks from the Manual are part of routine compliance (Requirement 2).

Standards and reference documents

• The MBs and Maintenance Manuals are normative for how the inspection, repair, replacement and scheduled tasks are to be performed. The AD requires use of MB No. 1109185 (Wilga 35/35A) and MB No. 10409036 (Wilga 80), initial issues or later EASA approved revisions (Requirement 1).

Timing duty

• The AD prescribes a compliance window: both Requirement 1 and Requirement 2 are to be done "Within 6 months after 27 August 2009." The AD "becomes effective on 27 August 2009."

Rights and implied operational flexibilities

• Use of "approved repair scheme": The AD allows two remediation routes for serious corrosion: repair according to an "approved repair scheme" or replacement with a serviceable part. The presence of two authorised technical routes provides operators with some choice, subject to the approval requirement for the repair scheme.

• Use of later EASA approved revisions: The AD allows MB initial issues or "later EASA approved revision[s]" to be used. This gives operators the right to rely on updates to the MBs provided those revisions have EASA approval, rather than being locked to the initial issue.

• No explicit waiver, relief or penalty language in the AD text: The AD does not itself set out an appeals or waiver mechanism, nor does it list penalties. Any regulatory discretion, approvals or enforcement mechanisms would rest outside the text of this AD or be provided by the general aviation regulatory framework; this AD does not specify them.

Recordkeeping and proof of compliance are implied duties: While not expressly stated, the obligations to amend "approved" maintenance programmes and to comply with MB procedures reasonably imply operators will need to document compliance for review by the approving authority, but the AD does not set recordkeeping specifics.

The text of AD/WILGA/5 does not include explicit penalty provisions, sanctions, or a standalone enforcement section. It records the directive's effective date and compliance timelines, but does not stipulate civil or criminal penalties, infringement fines, suspension or revocation provisions, or enforcement procedures within the instrument itself.

What the AD does state relevant to enforcement

• Mandatory character and effective date: The AD "becomes effective on 27 August 2009" and sets a compliance deadline of "Within 6 months after 27 August 2009" for both Requirement 1 and Requirement 2. The framing and language of the AD are prescriptive and time-bound.

• Immediate grounding where criteria met: The AD requires that when "serious corrosion damage" meeting the MB-defined criteria is detected, the aircraft must be "repaired in accordance with an approved repair scheme or replace with a serviceable part" "before further flight." This creates an immediate operational prohibition on flying an aircraft with corrosion meeting the MB threshold until the remediation is complete. That is a functional enforcement mechanism: non-completion of corrective work prevents lawful flight operations.

What the AD does not state

• No penalties or sanctioning clauses: The AD contains no sections that set out penalties, fines, or specific enforcement processes. It does not identify enforcement officers, notice procedures, scheduled follow-ups, or audit processes. It does not describe the consequences of failing to amend an approved maintenance programme.

• No appeal or variation procedure in the text: The AD does not articulate a path for seeking an extension, alternative means of compliance, or administrative review. The text does not name the approving body for the "approved repair scheme."

Implications

• Enforcement must be inferred from the regulatory context outside this AD: Because the AD itself is silent on penalties and enforcement procedures, any sanctioning or enforcement action would be taken pursuant to CASA's broader regulatory powers and enforcement processes rather than by express provision in this instrument. The AD’s prescriptive operational requirement , "before further flight" , is the clearest operational enforcement mechanism directly present in the text.

• Practical enforcement levers for regulators and inspectors: In practice, an inspector or regulator might verify compliance through maintenance-programme approvals, maintenance records and physical inspection of airframes, and could ground non-compliant aircraft. The AD’s requirement that maintenance programmes be amended and MB procedures followed provides traceable documentary evidence that inspectors could check, but the AD does not prescribe the inspection regime nor the consequences of a finding of non-compliance.

Summary

The AD imposes mandatory technical and administrative obligations with a firm effective date and compliance window, and it contains an operationally immediate grounding requirement where MB-defined corrosion thresholds are met. The instrument does not itself set out penalties or detailed enforcement procedures; enforcement actions and any sanctions will depend on the wider aviation regulatory framework beyond the text of this AD.

The directive is short on cross-references but does incorporate and refer to other aviation regulatory and technical instruments. The interaction points appear in three main areas:

1. Manufacturer Mandatory Bulletins and Maintenance Manuals as normative technical sources

• The AD makes EADS PZL Mandatory Bulletins (MB No. 1109185 for PZL-104 Wilga 35/35A and MB No. 10409036 for PZL-104 Wilga 80) and the PZL-104 Wilga Maintenance Manuals ("Maintenance Instructions and Scheduled Inspections") the operative technical standards for inspection, repair thresholds and scheduled tasks (Requirement 1 and Requirement 2). Those documents are external to the AD and have their own status and approval history. The AD permits the use of the initial MB issues "or later EASA approved revision[s]," so it expressly interacts with the EASA approval process for technical documentation.

• Because the AD requires work "in accordance with" the MBs and Manuals, operators will need to reconcile those documents with any domestic regulatory maintenance standards and ensure the MB-approved procedures are integrated into their "approved operator's aircraft maintenance programme." That creates a legal and operational link between manufacturer technical material and the operator's regulatory approvals.

2. Reference to EASA airworthiness action

• The AD includes a note: "EASA AD 2009-0072R1 refers." That indicates a coordination point with European aviation safety authorities and suggests that the technical concern underlying this AD has been the subject of an EASA airworthiness directive. The AD does not reproduce EASA's content but points operators to an external regulator's action, which may elaborate on the technical criteria, compliance options or broader harmonised safety measures.

3. Interaction with an operator's approval framework

• Requirement 2 explicitly demands amendment of the "approved operator's aircraft maintenance programme." The AD thereby engages with the institutional process through which an operator secures and maintains approval for a maintenance programme. While the AD does not specify the approval mechanics, it necessarily interacts with the administrative and regulatory framework that governs approvals, including submission and acceptance of programme amendments by the approving authority.

Missing or unspecified intersections

• The AD does not reference any specific domestic statutes, regulations, or penalty provisions; nor does it specify which body must approve a repair scheme described as "approved." Those omissions mean that the AD interacts with broader aviation law and enforcement structures by implication rather than by express cross-reference. Operators must therefore be aware that compliance with this AD will need to be demonstrated in the context of other aviation safety obligations and may require engagement with the certifying authority responsible for approving maintenance programme changes and repair schemes.

Practical consequence

• Operators must integrate manufacturer technical documents, EASA material where appropriate, and their domestic approval processes to meet the AD. The AD functions as a nexus between manufacturer technical guidance, international airworthiness actions and the operator’s administrative maintenance obligations. The AD itself is not a comprehensive code of procedure; it relies on those external documents and approval mechanisms to deliver the detailed compliance pathway.

The AD text supplies a concise record of issuance and effective timing and refers to external documents that have their own revision histories. The available amendment-history elements in the instrument are:

• AD identification and date: The instrument is designated AD/WILGA/5 and dated 9/2009 in the header. The table shows repeated labels "AD/WILGA/5" and "9/2009." The issuer signature block records the date of signature as "15 July 2009" by David Villiers, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (signing date). The AD "becomes effective on 27 August 2009," which indicates a gap between the signing date and the effective date.

• Compliance deadline expressed relative to the AD effective date: The AD requires both Requirement 1 and Requirement 2 to be completed "Within 6 months after 27 August 2009." The AD therefore establishes the effective date and a six-month compliance window from that effective date. There is no subsequent amendment or revision to the AD contained within the text provided.

• Use of initial MB issues "or later EASA approved revision[s]": The AD allows the cited EADS PZL Mandatory Bulletins (MB No. 1109185 and MB No. 10409036) to be used in their initial issue or in "later EASA approved revision[s]." That phrase acknowledges and accommodates future amendments to those MBs, provided the future versions have EASA approval. The AD therefore anticipates future amendment to the MBs and permits reliance on them when EASA approval has been granted.

• External AD cross-reference: The AD includes a Note that "EASA AD 2009-0072R1 refers." That suggests the underlying technical issue has been the subject of an EASA AD which may itself have a revision history (R1 in the reference indicates a revision), but the AD text does not reproduce that history. The inclusion of the EASA reference provides a path to any amendments or revisions in the European instrument.

• No internal amendment log or subsequent revisions within this instrument: The provided AD text contains no record of later revisions, corrections, or superseding ADs. There is no explicit "Amendment" or "Repeal" section, nor is there an indication in the text that this AD has been superseded or amended domestically.

Practical consequence for operators and maintainers

• Operators should treat the MBs and the EASA AD as live documents that may be updated; the AD expressly permits the use of EASA-approved revisions of the MBs. Operationally, that means operators will need to check for later EASA-approved MB revisions and consider those current for compliance purposes.

• The AD itself, as provided, appears to be a single-issue instrument with a clear effective date and compliance timeline and no domestic amendment history recorded within the text.

The text of AD/WILGA/5 does not record any litigation history, judicial review, or administrative appeals connected to the directive. There are no references to court proceedings, case names, enforcement actions recorded as arising from this AD, nor is there any mention of challenges, stay orders, or injunctions.

What the AD does provide in respect of provenance

• Administrative provenance: The AD was issued by a named CASA delegate, "David Villiers", with a date of 15 July 2009, and it "becomes effective on 27 August 2009." That administrative provenance is the only procedural history documented in the text.

• Cross-reference to EASA AD 2009-0072R1: The AD notes that EASA AD 2009-0072R1 "refers." That indicates coordination with or reference to an EASA instrument, which itself may have an administrative and enforcement history elsewhere. However, the provided AD does not summarise any disputes or litigation associated with that EASA AD.

Absence of documented litigation in the AD

• No recorded court or tribunal proceedings: Because the instrument contains no litigation references, readers should not infer any particular litigation posture from this AD alone. The absence of litigation references means that any enforcement, compliance dispute or appeal that has occurred post-issue is not recorded in this text.

Recommendation for practitioners seeking litigation context

• Check external records and regulator files: To establish whether any litigation, appeals, or enforcement actions have occurred in relation to AD/WILGA/5, practitioners would need to consult CASA records, public enforcement registries, tribunal or court databases, and possibly the EASA docket for AD 2009-0072R1. The AD itself contains no litigation or challenge history.

This short AD contains a number of potential traps and sources of ambiguity for operators and maintainers. The following are concrete "gotchas" grounded in the text.

1. Age trigger measured from "last overhaul at the effective date"

• The trigger for Requirement 1 is "have accumulated 12 years or more from the last overhaul at the effective date of this Directive." That phrasing fixes the measurement point to the AD's effective date (27 August 2009). Operators must assess the time elapsed since the aircraft's last overhaul as at that effective date. Misinterpreting the trigger as 12 years from the date of the AD signature, from manufacture, or as forward-looking could lead to incorrect compliance treatment.

2. Applicability of replacement tasks is tied to the same age trigger

• Both the inspection/repair duty (1.a) and the rear glass padding replacement (1.b) sit under the same "For aircraft which have accumulated 12 years or more ..." heading. Some readers might mistakenly treat the padding replacement as applying to all aircraft; the AD text confines Requirement 1.b to the older-aircraft cohort.

3. Reliance on external MB paragraphs for pass/fail criteria

• The AD does not reproduce the technical thresholds. Instead it refers to "paragraph 6.A" and "paragraph 6.A.c" for corrosion criteria, and "paragraph 6.C" for rear glass padding replacement in the relevant MBs. That means compliance requires access to those MB paragraphs. Operators without ready access to MB No. 1109185 or MB No. 10409036, or inability to determine whether a later EASA-approved revision applies, may struggle to apply the AD correctly.

4. "Approved repair scheme" is unspecified in the AD

• Where corrosion meets the MB-defined "serious" threshold, the AD requires repair "in accordance with an approved repair scheme." The AD does not identify which authority must approve the repair scheme, the approval standard, or the approval process. That procedural gap creates risk: is approval required from CASA, from the manufacturer, or from another certifying authority? The text simply uses the term "approved" without further elaboration.

5. Immediate operational consequence wording "before further flight"

• The AD requires remediation "before further flight" when corrosion meets the MB criteria. This creates an operational imperative to ground an affected aircraft until the repair or replacement is completed. Operators must plan for potentially immediate grounding and the attendant logistical and commercial consequences.

6. Maintenance-programme amendment for all aircraft

• Requirement 2 forces all operators to "Amend the approved operator's aircraft maintenance programme" to include tasks from the Maintenance Manuals. Even if an operator's fleet includes aircraft that are younger than the 12-year trigger, the operator still must amend the approved programme across the board. Failure to treat this administrative step as an urgent approval action could leave operators non-compliant despite having performed inspections on older aircraft.

7. Compliance window tied to the effective date

• The compliance window is "Within 6 months after 27 August 2009." The AD does not provide for staggered deadlines or phased implementation. Operators must ensure all inspections and programme amendments for the tasks required are completed within that single six-month window.

8. Possible confusion about which MB applies to which model

• The AD cites MB No. 1109185 for "PZL-104 Wilga 35 and 35A aircraft; and MB No. 10409036 ... for PZL-104 Wilga 80 aircraft." Careless cross-referencing could lead an operator to use the incorrect MB for a given model.

9. EASA-approved MB revisions permitted, but approval status matters

• The AD permits "initial issue, or later EASA approved revision." That means only MB revisions that have EASA approval qualify; internal manufacturer revisions without EASA approval are not acceptable under the AD text. Operators must confirm EASA approval status when selecting MB revisions.

10. The AD contains minimal procedural detail about maintenance-programme amendment

• The AD requires amendment of an "approved operator's aircraft maintenance programme" but does not state the procedural steps, the form of submission, the evidence required, nor whether a temporary in-service reprieve is available while amendments are processed.

These gotchas indicate that compliance is not purely a technical exercise: it requires careful reading of the MBs, confirmation of approval statuses, administrative action to amend approvals, and planning for potential immediate grounding where serious corrosion is detected.

The AD sets a concise compliance pathway. The following step-by-step approach organises the obligations as stated and highlights decision points grounded in the AD text.

Immediate preparatory steps (within days):

1. Identify affected aircraft in your fleet

   • Confirm which airframes are PZL-104 Wilga 35, 35A or 80 and record serial numbers (Applicability).

2. Determine which airframes meet the age trigger

   • For each Wilga airframe, calculate the time elapsed "from the last overhaul at the effective date of this Directive." The AD makes that effective date 27 August 2009; if an aircraft has "accumulated 12 years or more" since its last overhaul at that date, it falls within Requirement 1.

3. Obtain the referenced documents

   • Secure EADS PZL "Warszawa-Okecie" Mandatory Bulletins: MB No. 1109185 (initial issue) for Wilga 35/35A and MB No. 10409036 (initial issue) for Wilga 80. Also obtain the PZL-104 Wilga 35 or 80 Maintenance Manuals, specifically the sections titled "Maintenance Instructions and Scheduled Inspections." Confirm whether there are later EASA-approved revisions of the MBs and, if so, obtain the EASA-approved revision(s) as permitted by the AD.

Inspection and corrective-action steps (for aircraft meeting the 12-year trigger):

4. Inspect fuselage front posts for corrosion as per MB paragraph 6.A

   • For aircraft that meet the age trigger, perform the inspection "in accordance with paragraph 6.A" of the applicable MB (Requirement 1.a). Ensure maintenance personnel follow the MB procedural steps exactly.

5. Assess corrosion against MB paragraph 6.A.c

   • If the inspection reveals corrosion, evaluate whether it reaches the threshold of "serious corrosion damage" as defined in MB paragraph 6.A.c. The AD conditions corrective action on meeting that criterion.

6. If MB paragraph 6.A.c threshold met, perform remedial work before further flight

   • Where the MB-defined serious corrosion threshold is reached, do not fly the aircraft until corrective action is completed. The AD requires repair "in accordance with an approved repair scheme" or replacement "with a serviceable part" as necessary, "before further flight" (Requirement 1.a). Determine and secure the required "approved repair scheme" , see note on approval below , or obtain a serviceable replacement part.

7. Replace padding of rear glass per MB paragraph 6.C

   • For aircraft subject to Requirement 1, carry out the rear glass padding replacement in accordance with paragraph 6.C of the applicable MB (Requirement 1.b).

Administrative programme amendment (for all aircraft):

8. Amend the approved operator's maintenance programme

   • For every operator of PZL-104 Wilga aircraft (the AD says "For all aircraft"), incorporate the "applicable tasks as described in the relevant PZL-104 Wilga ... Maintenance Manuals titled 'Maintenance Instructions and Scheduled Inspections'" into the operator's approved maintenance programme (Requirement 2). Prepare the amendment documentation showing which tasks are being added and how they integrate into the operator's maintenance intervals and procedures.

9. Seek approval or lodge amendments as required by your approval framework

   • The AD uses the phrase "approved operator's aircraft maintenance programme," which implies that the programme amendment must be processed through whatever approval mechanism applies to that operator (the AD does not specify the approval process). Promptly submit the amendment to the approving authority and retain evidence of submission and approval.

Timing and recordkeeping:

10. Meet the compliance deadline

    • Complete Requirements 1 and 2 "Within 6 months after 27 August 2009." The AD is explicit that both the inspection/repair/replacement steps for aged aircraft and the maintenance-programme amendment for all aircraft must be done within this single six-month window.

11. Maintain documentary evidence of compliance

    • Keep records of inspections (referencing MB paragraph 6.A), repair approvals or replacement parts, completion certificates for padding replacement (MB paragraph 6.C), and the maintenance-programme amendment and its approval. While the AD does not specify recordkeeping, such documentation will be needed to demonstrate compliance if asked by the approving authority.

Technical and approval points to resolve before execution:

12. Confirm which body must approve a repair scheme

    • The AD requires repair "in accordance with an approved repair scheme" but does not say who approves it. Operators should determine, via their regulatory contacts or approval procedures, the appropriate approver (for example the national authority, a delegated approval, or the manufacturer) and secure approval prior to performing the repair as a compliant remedy when the MB threshold is met.

13. Verify EASA approval for MB revisions if relying on later versions

    • If using a later revision of an MB, ensure it is "EASA approved" as the AD permits only "initial issue, or later EASA approved revision[s]."

14. Plan for operational downtime and spare parts provisioning

    • Because the AD mandates immediate remedial action where MB thresholds are met, have a plan for potential temporary grounding, parts sourcing, and maintenance slots to avoid extended aircraft unavailability.

15. Consult EASA AD 2009-0072R1 for further technical context

    • The AD notes that "EASA AD 2009-0072R1 refers." Operators may find additional technical explanation or harmonised measures by consulting that EASA AD, which could assist with interpretation of MB criteria and remediation options.

Practical checklist summary

• Identify affected airframes and determine which meet the 12-year-from-last-overhaul trigger as at 27 August 2009.
• Obtain the relevant MBs and Maintenance Manuals, confirming EASA approval status for any revisions relied upon.
• Inspect fuselage front posts in accordance with MB paragraph 6.A for applicable aircraft.
• If MB paragraph 6.A.c criteria are met, secure an "approved repair scheme" or a serviceable replacement and complete remediation "before further flight."
• Replace the rear glass padding per MB paragraph 6.C for aircraft meeting the age trigger.
• Amend and obtain approval for the operator's maintenance programme to incorporate applicable tasks from the Maintenance Manuals.
• Complete all actions within the six-month compliance period and retain documentary evidence of compliance.

Following these steps will align operational practice with the requirements and timelines set out in AD/WILGA/5.