AD 2009-10-09 R2: Cessna and Reims Rudder-Stop Research

AD 2009-10-09 R2 concerns rudder-stop and rudder-horn modification research for specified Cessna and Reims aircraft. Applicability depends on its model and serial table, including special entries and conditional Reims configurations. An Aerobat label, a kit receipt or a family-wide AD list cannot by itself establish compliance for an aircraft.

Use the corrected revision

The EASA FAA AD index identifies a correction to R2 and distinguishes the correction record's issue date from the directive's effective date of 12 September 2011. That distinction matters when comparing a later web listing with an earlier maintenance entry. A newer listing date does not automatically create a new aircraft compliance deadline.

Special serials are part of applicability

In the corrected AD text, Table 1 includes 15064970 under A150M and A1500433 and 681 under A152. Certain FA150L/FRA150L and FA150M/FRA150M entries retain explicit FKA150 kit conditions. These examples demonstrate why the full table must be used; they are not an abbreviated list of every affected aircraft.

The Cessna 150 serial guide and Cessna 152 serial guide help organize the identity inquiry. Keep the original label visible when comparing a special entry with an aircraft record. The authority's use of an exceptional identifier does not justify inventing a manufacture date or automatically changing another reference field.

Kit evidence needs its recorded conditions

The AD distinguishes bulkhead and kit cases and gives conditions for credit for earlier work. A part number alone is therefore an incomplete summary of the evidence. Locate the work description and the supporting inspection or verification entries before deciding what question remains for the aircraft's maintenance reviewer.

Do not use this article as a kit installation procedure or a maneuver authorization. Its purpose is to connect the publication version, exact aircraft scope and evidence trail. The original compliance instructions and applicable service information remain the place to resolve the required actions.

Ask a question that can be answered from records

Instead of asking only whether the rudder AD was "done," ask which revision was evaluated, which applicability entry was used and which records support the claimed method. If documents refer to a previous kit or revision, preserve those references for review rather than replacing them with a current shorthand description.

The tail-attachment guide covers different structural concerns, while the AD research hub explains how a component or configuration can change the search. Keeping those subjects distinct makes a prebuy discussion more precise without claiming that the website has inspected the aircraft.

Later advisory information concerns modified-part condition

The rudder-stop corrosion guide explains later FAA advisory information about earlier kits. It does not replace this directive’s corrected applicability table or its credit provisions. Keep the installed configuration, claimed AD method and later condition review as separately traceable records.

That distinction helps when a file contains an early kit invoice and a much later inspection receipt. The documents may answer related questions, but their presence alone does not establish that the later work examined every component relevant to the advisory. Locate the work description and findings before making that connection.