AD/BEECH 400/6 - Escape Hatch Substructure Rivets

Overview

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, enacted by the Parliament of Australia, serve to regulate the safety and operational standards of civil aviation within the country. One of the specific regulations under this framework is the airworthiness directive AD/BEECH 400/6, which pertains to the escape hatch substructure rivets of Beechcraft 400 Series aeroplanes. This directive was introduced to address potential safety risks stemming from the use of incorrect rivets in the escape hatch substructure, a concern identified during production. The policy objective is to ensure the compliance of affected aircraft with safety standards set by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) in alignment with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations. The directive mandates corrective action in accordance with Beechcraft’s Mandatory Service Bulletin 2509 and requires compliance within a specified period after 31 March 1994 to mitigate any safety hazards.

Scope and Application

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, as amended, apply to specific Beechcraft 400 Series aeroplanes, namely Model 400A aircraft with serial numbers RK-1 through RK-57, RK-59, RK-60, and RK-62 through RK-66, and Model 400T aircraft with serial numbers TT-02 through TT-30, and TT-32. This legislation, encapsulated in the Airworthiness Directives, mandates corrective action regarding the escape hatch substructure rivets in these aircraft, as outlined in AD/BEECH 400/6. Compliance is required within 200 hours’ time in service after 31 March 1994, in accordance with Beechcraft Mandatory Service Bulletin 2509. The directive references FAA AD 93-25-15 Amdt 39-8779, underscoring the collaborative nature of aviation safety standards. The scope is limited to the specified models and serial numbers, and no explicit exclusions or exemptions are mentioned in this directive. The regulations are administered under the Commonwealth of Australia and fall within the jurisdiction of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.

Key Provisions

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, specifically Part 39 - 105, mandate that certain Beechcraft 400 Series Aeroplanes adhere to the Airworthiness Directive AD/BEECH 400/6 concerning escape hatch substructure rivets (Section 39.105). This directive applies to Model 400A aircraft with serial numbers RK-1 through RK-57, RK-59, RK-60, and RK-62 through RK-66, as well as Model 400T aircraft with serial numbers TT-02 through TT-30, and TT-32. The requirement is to take action in accordance with Beechcraft Mandatory Service Bulletin 2509, which is referenced in FAA AD 93-25-15 Amdt 39-8779 (Section 39.105.1). The directive notes that during production, there may have been instances where incorrect rivets were installed in the escape hatch substructure, a concern that prompted this specific regulatory action. The Civil Aviation Regulations impose several obligations on the operators and owners of the affected Beechcraft 400 Series Aeroplanes. Primarily, they must ensure that the escape hatch substructure rivets are inspected and corrected if necessary, in compliance with the Beechcraft Mandatory Service Bulletin 2509. This inspection and rectification must be completed within 200 hours of time in service after 31 March 1994 (Section 39.105.2). The regulations also require that any work carried out be documented and records maintained to demonstrate compliance with the directive. Failure to adhere to these requirements could lead to the aircraft being deemed unairworthy. The Civil Aviation Regulations impose both civil and potential criminal penalties for non-compliance with the Airworthiness Directive AD/BEECH 400/6. Civil penalties may include fines and the potential grounding of the aircraft until compliance is achieved. Under the Civil Aviation Act 1988, the maximum penalty for non-compliance with an airworthiness directive can be significant, with fines up to $210,000 for corporations and $42,000 for individuals (Section 13.1). Furthermore, criminal penalties may apply, particularly if the non-compliance results in a serious safety incident, leading to prosecution under the Criminal Code Act 1995. The severity of the criminal penalties depends on the circumstances, but they can include substantial fines and imprisonment for up to five years (Section 13.2). Ensuring compliance with the directive is therefore not only a regulatory requirement but also a critical safety measure to avoid these penalties.