AD/AMD 10/18 - Wing-to-Fuselage Junction - Inspection

Overview

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, enacted by the Parliament of Australia, were established to regulate various aspects of civil aviation, ensuring safety and consistency across the industry. Within this extensive piece of legislation, Part 39 focuses on airworthiness directives, aiming to address specific issues related to aircraft safety and operational standards. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) has the authority to issue these directives under the Act, with the overarching policy objective being the protection of public safety by maintaining high standards of airworthiness for all aircraft operating in Australian airspace. This legislative instrument specifically targets the Falcon 10 Series aeroplanes, addressing the issue of corrosion at the wing-to-fuselage junction, which has been identified as a potential safety hazard due to the deterioration of the original recess filling and sealing compound. The AMD Falcon 10 Series Aeroplanes directive, identified as AD/AMD 10/18, mandates an inspection of the wing-to-fuselage junction for all applicable models, specifically those with serial numbers 1 to 70, 73, 74, and 75. This directive was introduced in response to reported instances of corrosion in this critical area, necessitating timely and thorough inspections to prevent structural failure. The requirement outlined in this directive, AMD S.B. F10-0205, mandates compliance by 31 March 1985, with reference to Consigne De Navigabilite No. 84-41-19(B). The directive underscores the importance of adhering to stringent safety standards to mitigate risks associated with the identified corrosion issues, thereby enhancing the overall safety of civil aviation operations in Australia.

Scope and Application

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, specifically PART 39 - 105, applies to all model Falcon 10 aircraft with serial numbers 1 to 70, 73, 74, and 75, mandating an inspection of the wing-to-fuselage junction to address corrosion concerns. This regulation was introduced following reports of corrosion at the wing recesses and wing-to-fuselage attachments due to the deterioration of the original recess filling and sealing compound. The requirement for compliance with this directive is set out in AMD S.B. F10-0205, with an explicit compliance deadline of 31 March 1985. This directive is a critical safety measure aimed at preventing structural integrity issues that could compromise flight safety. The regulation extends to all relevant aircraft within the specified serial number range, ensuring that these aircraft meet the necessary safety standards set by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

Key Provisions

The primary operative section of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, specifically AD/AMD 10/18, mandates a crucial inspection requirement for all Falcon 10 series aeroplanes with serial numbers ranging from 1 to 70, 73, 74, and 75. This directive, referred to as AMD S.B. F10-0205, necessitates that these aircraft undergo an inspection of the wing-to-fuselage junction to address reported issues of corrosion at these junctions and their attachments. This requirement must be met before 31 March 1985, as stated in Consigne De Navigabilite No. 84-41-19(B). The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998 impose several obligations on the parties or entities governed by this legislation. Owners and operators of the specified Falcon 10 series aircraft must ensure that the inspection of the wing-to-fuselage junction is conducted by qualified personnel in accordance with the prescribed standards. This includes identifying and rectifying any corrosion issues found in the wing recesses and attachments, ensuring that the aircraft meet the necessary safety standards before resuming operations. Failure to comply with the inspection requirements outlined in AD/AMD 10/18 may result in significant legal consequences. Under the Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, non-compliance can lead to enforcement actions, which may include fines and potential grounding of the aircraft. The seriousness of the issue, given the reported corrosion, underscores the importance of adhering to the stipulated compliance date of 31 March 1985. The specific penalties for non-compliance are not detailed in the provided text, but they are likely to be severe given the safety implications of the mandated inspection.