Airworthiness Directive 2014-05-03

recurring
Official AD 2014-05-03 · FR doc 2014-04547 · 2014-03-05 · airframe

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Airplanes

What this AD requires

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain The Boeing Company Model 777 airplanes. This AD was prompted by a report of cracking in the fuselage skin underneath the satellite communication (SATCOM) antenna adapter. This AD requires repetitive inspections of the visible fuselage skin and doubler if installed, for cracking, corrosion, and any indication of contact of a certain fastener to a bonding jumper, and repair if necessary. We are issuing this AD to detect and correct cracking and corrosion in the fuselage skin, which could lead to rapid decompression and loss of structural integrity of the airplane.

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 2014-05-03 applies to

MakesBoeing
Models777-200, 777-200LR, 777-300, 777-300ER, 777F, 777

As identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 777-53A0068, dated June 12, 2013.

Whether AD 2014-05-03 actually applies to your aircraft (by serial and installed parts) and whether it’s already complied with comes from that aircraft’s records.

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 2014-05-03 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.