AD/GENERAL/45 Amdt 2 - Mitchell Automatic Pilot Servo Bridle Cable Clamp - Replacement

Overview

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, enacted by the Australian Parliament, serve to ensure the safety and efficiency of civil aviation within Australia. This legislation encompasses various provisions and regulations, one of which is the Airworthiness Directive (AD) concerning the replacement of Mitchell automatic pilot servo bridle cable clamps. AD/GENERAL/45 Amendment 2 addresses the specific issue of replacing certain Mitchell automatic pilot servo bridle clamps on aircraft, with the objective of enhancing safety by mitigating the risk of cable clamp failure. This directive applies to aircraft equipped with the specified Mitchell parts, except for those that incorporate a safety sleeve as per Piper III Series automated Flight Control System bridle clamps. The AD aims to ensure compliance with international safety standards, referencing relevant service bulletins and directives from other jurisdictions such as the United States Federal Aviation Administration. The policy objective is to maintain a high standard of airworthiness, ensuring that aircraft operations are conducted safely and without undue risk to passengers and crew. The compliance period requires that the specified maintenance action be completed within 300 hours of time in service after certain dates, contingent on the aircraft model and configuration.

Scope and Application

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, specifically under Part 39 - 105 Civil Aviation Safety Authority Schedule of Airworthiness Directives, outlines the requirements for the replacement of Mitchell Automatic Pilot Servo Bridle Cable Clamp for certain aircraft. This legislation applies to all aircraft equipped with automatic pilot servo bridle clamps identified as Mitchell Part No. 42A173 or 42A184, excluding those that have bridle clamps installed by Piper and incorporate a safety sleeve as detailed in the Piper III Series automated Flight Control System. This amendment is particularly pertinent to the compliance requirements for maintaining the airworthiness of these aircraft within specific timeframes, ensuring safety and operational integrity in the aviation industry. The geographic reach of these regulations is national, as they are enforced by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) across Australia. The regulation is applicable regardless of state or territory boundaries, ensuring a uniform standard of airworthiness throughout the country. Furthermore, the regulations can be extended or restricted through subordinate instruments, providing flexibility in enforcement and compliance based on evolving safety standards or technological advancements.

Key Provisions

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, particularly Part 39 - 105, include the Civil Aviation Safety Authority's (CASA) Schedule of Airworthiness Directives (AD). Section AD/GENERAL/45 Amendment 2 addresses the Mitchell Automatic Pilot Servo Bridle Cable Clamp, specifying that it must be replaced (section 1). This directive applies to all aircraft equipped with automatic pilot servo bridle clamps identified as Mitchell Part No. 42A173 or 42A184, with the exception of those fitted with Piper III Series automated Flight Control System bridle clamps that incorporate a safety sleeve (section 2). Compliance with this directive is to be evidenced by reference to either the Edo-Aire Mitchell Service Bulletin MBI dated 1 June 1970 or FAA AD 70-15-18 (section 3). Aircraft owners and operators must ensure that the specified components are replaced within 300 hours of time in service following certain dates. For aircraft specified in FAA AD 70-15-18, compliance is required within 300 hours after 30 September 1970. For other affected aircraft, compliance is necessary within 300 hours after 31 January 1974 (section 4). These requirements are designed to ensure the continued airworthiness of the aircraft by addressing potential safety issues associated with the Mitchell Automatic Pilot Servo Bridle Cable Clamp. Failure to comply with these directives may result in serious safety implications. CASA enforces these requirements to maintain high standards of aviation safety. Violations of these regulations could lead to enforcement actions against aircraft operators, including potential grounding of the aircraft until compliance is achieved. The specific obligations include meticulous record-keeping to demonstrate compliance and ensuring that all affected aircraft are serviced and maintained in accordance with the outlined timeframes. The consequences of non-compliance can be severe. Under the Civil Aviation Act 1988, non-compliance with ADs can result in both civil and criminal penalties. Civil penalties can include substantial fines and the potential suspension or revocation of the aircraft's certificate of airworthiness. Additionally, criminal penalties may apply, particularly if non-compliance is found to have directly contributed to an aviation accident or incident. The maximum penalties can vary depending on the severity of the breach, but they can include significant fines and imprisonment for individuals responsible for the oversight or management of the aircraft.