COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (Civil Aviation Regulations 1998), PART 39 - 105 CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY
SCHEDULE OF AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
De Havilland DHC-1 (Chipmunk) Series Aeroplanes
AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE
For the reasons set out in the background section, the CASA delegate whose signature appears below revokes Airworthiness Directive (AD)DHC-1/22 Amdt 1 and issues the following AD under subregulation 39.1 (1) of CAR 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.
AD/DHC-1/22
Amdt 2
Tailplane Structure 7/2000
Applicability: All English production aircraft which have not been modified in accordance with a scheme approved by the Authority.
Requirement: Inspect the tailplane upper and lower spar flanges in accordance with British Aerospace TNS CT(C1) No. 157, Issue 3, Amendment dated 28 May 1986.
Compliance: Initially inspect no later than the next major inspection after 31 December 1985.
Repeat the inspections of paragraph 8 of the TNS at intervals not exceeding 6 years, unless the aircraft is operated on a Role Factor of 4 (see TNS CT(C1) No. 138), in which case the inspection interval shall not exceed 3 years.
This Amendment becomes effective on 13 July 2000.
Background: This directive requires repetitive radiographic inspection of the tailplane upper and lower spar flanges at the fuselage attachment brackets. Some aircraft have been modified to incorporate a locally developed reinforcement kit. This amendment excludes modified aircraft from the requirement. The opportunity has also been taken to update the TNS reference. No additional work is required as a result of this amendment.
The initial issue of this directive became effective on 29 October 1971. Amendment 1 became effective on 30 November 1985.
Bernard Malcolm Hole
Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority 31 May 2000
The above AD is notified in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette on 14 June 2000.
Overview
The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, specifically under Part 39 - 105, encompass the Civil Aviation Safety Authority's (CASA) Schedule of Airworthiness Directives, which address various safety concerns for different aircraft. One such directive pertains to De Havilland DHC-1 (Chipmunk) Series Aeroplanes, where the focus is on the structural integrity of the tailplane. This legislative instrument was enacted to address the problem of structural weaknesses in the tailplane of certain Chipmunk aircraft, aiming to ensure that these aircraft remain airworthy and safe to operate. The objective is to rectify the unsafe condition through required inspections of the tailplane upper and lower spar flanges, thereby mitigating potential risks associated with structural failure. This directive is issued under the authority of CASA, ensuring that all applicable aircraft are subject to these stringent safety measures.
Scope and Application
The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, specifically Part 39, addresses the safety standards and requirements for airworthiness directives, including the AD/DHC-1/22 Amdt 2 for De Havilland DHC-1 (Chipmunk) Series Aeroplanes. This directive applies to all English production aircraft of the specified series that have not undergone modifications approved by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). The directive mandates inspections of the tailplane upper and lower spar flanges in accordance with British Aerospace TNS CT(C1) No. 157, Issue 3, dated 28 May 1986. The initial inspection must occur no later than the next major inspection following 31 December 1985, with subsequent inspections at intervals not exceeding six years, or three years if the aircraft operates on a Role Factor of 4. This Airworthiness Directive is issued under subregulation 39.1 (1) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, and any modified aircraft are excluded from these inspection requirements. The amendment becomes effective on 13 July 2000, following its notification in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette on 14 June 2000.
Key Provisions
This legislative instrument sets out an Airworthiness Directive (AD) issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) under subregulation 39.1 (1) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1998 (CAR 1998) for the De Havilland DHC-1 (Chipmunk) Series Aeroplanes. Specifically, the AD revokes AD DHC-1/22 Amendment 1 and introduces Amendment 2, focusing on the tailplane structure. The directive applies to all English production aircraft that have not been modified according to an approved scheme by the Authority. The main requirement is to inspect the tailplane upper and lower spar flanges in accordance with British Aerospace Technical Note CT(C1) No. 157, Issue 3, Amendment dated 28 May 1986. The initial inspection must occur no later than the next major inspection following 31 December 1985, and subsequent inspections must be conducted at intervals not exceeding 6 years, or 3 years if the aircraft operates on a Role Factor of 4, as defined in TNS CT(C1) No. 138.
The AD imposes obligations on the operators and owners of the affected aircraft to ensure compliance with the inspection requirements. They must follow the instructions provided in the referenced technical note, which includes specific guidelines on the inspection procedure and acceptance criteria. Failure to adhere to these requirements can lead to the aircraft being considered unairworthy, which could result in grounding the aircraft and legal consequences. CASA delegates have the authority to enforce compliance and may take action against non-compliant aircraft.
Breach of the requirements stipulated in this AD could lead to significant consequences. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority has the authority to enforce compliance through various measures, including grounding the aircraft, denying maintenance approval, or imposing fines and other penalties. The maximum penalties for non-compliance can include substantial financial penalties and potential criminal charges, depending on the severity and impact of the breach. These provisions underscore the importance of adhering to the AD to ensure the continued airworthiness and safety of the aircraft in question.