TailplateTailplate
Run a report

Airworthiness Directive 95-25029

recurring
AD 95-25029 · 1995-10-18 · airframe

Airworthiness Directives; Airbus Model A300 and A300-600 Series Airplanes

What this AD requires

This amendment supersedes an existing airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to all Airbus Model A300 series airplanes, that currently requires repetitive inspections for cracking of the No. 2 flap beams, and replacement of the flap beams, if necessary. That AD was prompted by reports of cracking of the No. 2 flap beams. This amendment provides optional modifications for extending certain inspection thresholds, and an optional terminating modification for certain inspections. This amendment also expands the applicability of the existing AD to include Model A300-600 series airplanes. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent asymmetry of the flaps due to cracking of the No. 2 flap beams.

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 95-25029 applies to

MakesAirbus
ModelsA300-600

certain

Whether AD 95-25029 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 compliance — The specific action taken (inspected, replaced, modified) and to what revision.
Date — When the work was done.
Aircraft time — Total time in service / tach at compliance — how recurring next-due is computed.
Signature & certificate — The A&P/IA who returned it to service, with certificate number.
Is AD 95-25029 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.