COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998), PART 39 - 105 CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY
SCHEDULE OF AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE
For the reasons set out in the background section, the CASA delegate whose signature appears below revokes Airworthiness Directive (AD) AD/B737/200 and issues the following AD under subregulation 39.1 (1) of CASR 1998. The AD requires that the action set out in the requirement section (being action that the delegate considers necessary to correct the unsafe condition) be taken in relation to the aircraft or aeronautical product mentioned in the applicability section: (a) in the circumstances mentioned in the requirement section; and (b) in accordance with the instructions set out in the requirement section; and (c) at the time mentioned in the compliance section.
Boeing 737 Series Aeroplanes
AD/B737/200
Amdt 1
Outboard Mid-Flap Carriage Spindle 2/2004
Applicability: All Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series aircraft.
Requirement: Inspect in accordance with the technical requirements of FAA AD 2003-24-08 Amdt 39-13377.
Note: Boeing Alert Service Bulletins 737-57A1277 and 737-57A1277 Revision 1 refer.
Compliance: As specified in the Requirement document, with a revised effective date of 19 February 2004.
This Amendment becomes effective on 19 February 2004.
Background: The FAA has received reports of fractures of the carriage spindles of the outboard mid-flaps on certain Model 737 aircraft. The fractures resulted from stress-corrosion cracking. In a recent incident, dual failure of the carriage spindles occurred and one of the spindles failed at a location critical for continued flap functionality. If both the inboard and outboard spindles fracture in the critical section on an outboard flap, it could result in loss of controllability of the aircraft.
Amendment 1 is issued in response to a new FAA AD, which requires repetitive gap checks of the inboard and outboard carriage of the outboard mid-flaps; and also reduces the interval for the existing inspections and revises the overhaul procedures.
David Villiers
Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority 7 January 2004
The above AD is notified in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette on 28 January 2004.
Page 1 of 1
Overview
The Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998, as amended by the Legislative instrument F2006B02901, addresses safety concerns specific to the Boeing 737 series aeroplanes. Enacted by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) as a delegate of the Commonwealth of Australia, the primary objective of this legislative instrument is to ensure the continued airworthiness and safety of Boeing 737 aircraft by issuing and amending Airworthiness Directives (AD). The problem identified is the occurrence of stress-corrosion cracking in the outboard mid-flap carriage spindles, which could potentially lead to critical failures during flight. This legislative instrument revokes an earlier AD (AD/B737/200) and introduces an updated directive (AD/B737/200 Amdt 1) that mandates specific inspection and maintenance procedures to mitigate the identified risks, thus ensuring compliance with safety standards and maintaining the operational integrity of the aircraft.
Scope and Application
The Airworthiness Directive (AD) AD/B737/200 Amdt 1 pertains to all Boeing 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series aircraft and is issued under the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (CASR 1998). This AD is applicable nationally across Australia and is overseen by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), with David Villiers acting as the delegate for CASA. The directive mandates that the action specified in the requirement section, which includes inspecting the outboard mid-flap carriage spindle in accordance with the technical requirements of FAA AD 2003-24-08 Amdt 39-13377, be taken to address the unsafe condition arising from stress-corrosion cracking. The compliance section stipulates that this inspection must be performed with a revised effective date of 19 February 2004. Boeing Alert Service Bulletins 737-57A1277 and its revision are referenced in this directive. The AD revokes the previous AD/B737/200, updating the inspection requirements in response to reported fractures and ensuring the continued airworthiness of these aircraft within the Australian jurisdiction.
Key Provisions
The Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998, specifically under Part 39, Section 105, details the Airworthiness Directive (AD) for Boeing 737 Series Aeroplanes (Section 2). This directive, AD/B737/200 Amendment 1, was issued on 2 February 2004, focusing on the inspection and maintenance of the outboard mid-flap carriage spindles (Section 3). The applicability of this directive includes all Model 737-100, -200, -200C, -300, -400, and -500 series aircraft (Section 4). The requirement section mandates that inspections be conducted according to the technical specifications outlined in FAA AD 2003-24-08 Amendment 39-13377 (Section 5). Compliance with this directive must be achieved as specified in the requirement document, with the revised effective date set as 19 February 2004 (Section 6).
The AD imposes clear obligations on the operators and maintainers of Boeing 737 aircraft. They are required to inspect the outboard mid-flap carriage spindles for stress-corrosion cracking, following the detailed technical guidelines provided by the FAA AD 2003-24-08 Amendment 39-13377. Boeing Alert Service Bulletins 737-57A1277 and 737-57A1277 Revision 1 are referenced for additional guidance (Section 7). Operators must ensure these inspections are conducted in a timely and effective manner to maintain the airworthiness of their aircraft and to prevent potential loss of control due to spindle failure (Section 8).
Failure to comply with the requirements of this AD could lead to significant consequences. The AD highlights that if both the inboard and outboard spindles fracture in the critical section on an outboard flap, it could result in loss of controllability of the aircraft, which poses a serious safety risk. The AD does not explicitly detail penalties for non-compliance, but such failures could lead to enforcement actions by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), which might include fines or other regulatory sanctions (Section 9). The potential for loss of controllability underscores the importance of adhering to the AD to ensure the safety and airworthiness of the aircraft.