Overview

The Airworthiness Directive AD/HOSE/8 issued in 2004 by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) under the Civil Aviation Act 1988, targets an identified safety issue concerning Titeflex Corporation hoses on various Boeing aircraft models, including the Boeing 737 series, 747-400, 757-200, 757-300, and 767 series. This directive was introduced to address the unsafe condition caused by improperly heat-treated aluminium B-nuts in certain hose assemblies, which posed a risk of fire extinguishing system and fuel system hose failure. The policy objective of this directive is to mandate specific inspections and corrective actions to ensure the airworthiness of affected aircraft by requiring the replacement or inspection of certain hoses based on their manufacture date and other specified conditions. This directive became effective on 8 July 2004, requiring compliance within specified timeframes to mitigate the identified safety risks.

Scope and Application

The Airworthiness Directive AD/HOSE/8 applies specifically to hose assemblies used in various Boeing aeroplane models, including the 737-300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -700C, -800, -900, 747-400, 757-200, -300, 767-200, -300, and -300F. The directive mandates that inspections and corrective actions be taken on Titeflex Corporation hoses to address issues with improperly heat-treated B-nuts that could lead to unsafe conditions. The directive outlines specific requirements for inspecting the manufacture date code of the hoses and performing actions such as replacement or testing based on the manufacture date and the presence of a white dot on the ID band. The directive applies nationally across the Commonwealth of Australia, with the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) issuing the directive under its regulatory authority. This AD becomes effective on 8 July 2004, and compliance is required within specific timeframes depending on the requirement. The directive is applicable to aircraft operators and maintenance personnel responsible for the maintenance and operation of the specified aircraft models within Australia.

Key Provisions

The Airworthiness Directive (AD) issued under subregulation 39.1(1) of CASR 1998 applies to specific Titeflex Corporation hoses installed on various Boeing aeroplane models, including the Boeing 737-300, -400, -500, -600, -700, -700C, -800, -900, 747-400, 757-200, -300, 767-200, -300, and -300F (section 1). The directive mandates specific actions to address unsafe conditions identified with certain hoses manufactured between November 1999 and January 2001. Firstly, operators must inspect the manufacture date code on all listed hoses (Requirement 1). If the manufacture date falls within the specified range and there is a permanent white dot on the ID band, no further action is required for that hose (Requirement 2). However, if the manufacture date is within the specified range but lacks a permanent white dot, the hose must either be replaced with a serviceable one or undergo an indirect conductive inspection/test for proper heat treatment (Requirement 3). Additionally, any hose with improperly heat-treated B-nuts must be replaced (Requirement 4). The AD imposes several obligations on the parties it governs. Operators must ensure that all inspections and required actions are performed in accordance with the instructions set out in the applicable Boeing alert service bulletins (ASB) listed in Table 1 of this AD (section 2). Specifically, for Requirements 1, 2, and 3, inspections and actions must be completed within 24 months from the effective date of the directive, unless previously inspected in line with specific ASBs (section 4). For Requirement 4, the replacement of improperly heat-treated hoses must occur before further flight following the inspections detailed in Requirement 3. Failure to comply with these obligations could result in the unsafe condition not being rectified, potentially leading to system failures and increased safety risks. Failure to comply with the requirements of this AD can lead to significant consequences. Non-compliance with the AD could result in the unsafe condition not being addressed, which might lead to potential fire extinguishing system and fuel system hose failures. Although the specific penalties for non-compliance are not detailed in the AD, under CASR 1998, violations of airworthiness directives can result in enforcement actions, including fines, suspension or revocation of aircraft certificates, and other regulatory actions deemed necessary by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). The severity of these penalties depends on the nature and extent of the non-compliance, and could potentially involve both civil and criminal liabilities.