Airworthiness Directives: Pratt and Whitney Division Engines

Pratt & Whitney (RTX Corporation) supports the proposed Airworthiness Directive but requests specific technical clarifications. They recommend including all -3 (Phase III) engine models in the applicability list to ensure alignment with existing service bulletins and to eliminate operator ambiguity.

The Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) supports the proposed Airworthiness Directive requiring the replacement of pressure burner sensors on various Pratt & Whitney Division engines. The union argues that this action is necessary to address safety issues such as tailpipe fires and loss of thrust control.

Delta Air Lines, Inc. submitted comments on the proposed airworthiness directive for Pratt & Whitney Division engines. The company requests specific modifications to the applicability, definitions, and required actions to better align the rule with existing service bulletins and operational tracking methods.

The commenter requests that the "Years In Service" counter for Electronic Engine Controllers (EECs) be differentiated based on whether the units are stored in a controlled environment or are in active operation. They argue that epoxy deterioration is technically different for stored units compared to those installed and operated on aircraft.

UPS Airlines requests specific modifications to the compliance methods for the Airworthiness Directives regarding Pratt and Whitney Division Engines. They propose allowing a 15-year calendar-time compliance interval for low-utilization operators and seeking a method to determine replacement timeframes for sensors with unknown history.

United Airlines supports the Airworthiness Directive but requests the inclusion of specific Accomplishment Instructions from a Pratt & Whitney Service Bulletin. They argue that because EEC timers can be unreliable, the AD should allow for calculating operational hours based on years in service or average annual utilization.

The Boeing Company expresses its concurrence with the proposed rule regarding Pratt and Whitney Division Engines. They state that they have no additional comments on the matter.