Airworthiness Directive 2013-12696

recurring
AD 2013-12696 · 2013-05-31 · turboshaft engine

Airworthiness Directives; Turbomeca S.A. Turboshaft Engines

What this AD requires

We are superseding an existing airworthiness directive (AD) for Turbomeca S.A. Arrius 2B, 2B1, and 2F turboshaft engines. That AD currently requires replacement of injector manifolds and borescope- inspection of the flame tube and the high-pressure (HP) turbine area for possible damage. This new AD requires, depending on the engine model, repetitive replacements of fuel injection manifolds and the privilege injector, or, repetitive replacements of the privilege injector. This AD was prompted by a report that the corrective actions of the existing AD were insufficient to eliminate the unsafe condition. We are issuing this AD to prevent an uncommanded in-flight shutdown of Arrius 2B1 and 2F turboshaft engines and damage to the helicopter.

Repetitive inspection. Re-inspect. The next-due date/hours depend on this aircraft’s time in service — a records report computes it from the logbooks.

Which aircraft AD 2013-12696 applies to

MakesTurbomeca
Models2B1, 2F, Arrius

Whether AD 2013-12696 actually applies to your aircraft (by serial and installed parts) and whether it’s already complied with comes from that aircraft’s records.

Supersession

Supersedes AD 2001-08-14.

How AD compliance is recorded

A valid compliance record (14 CFR 43.9) states:

Method of complianceThe specific action taken (inspected, replaced, modified) and to what revision.
DateWhen the work was done.
Aircraft timeTotal time in service / tach at compliance — how recurring next-due is computed.
Signature & certificateThe A&P/IA who returned it to service, with certificate number.
Is AD 2013-12696 complied with on your aircraft?

Tailplate reads a tail number’s logbooks and matches every applicable AD — including this one — to its compliance evidence, with recurring next-due dates computed.

Look up a tail number →Read the full directive (Federal Register)

Applicability is derived from the FAA directive corpus and is advisory, not a legal airworthiness determination. Compliance is established only from an aircraft’s actual records.