COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (Civil Aviation Regulations 1998), PART 39 - 105 CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY
SCHEDULE OF AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
McDonnell Douglas (Hughes) and Kawasaki 369 Series Helicopters
AD/HU 369/40 Tail Rotor Fork Hinge Nut - Replacement 8/79
Applicability: All model 369H, 369HS, 369HM and 369HE helicopters. Model 369D helicopters with S/Nos. 0003D to 0384D.
Document: As applicable: Hughes SIN HN-131, or SIN DN-33. Compliance: Within 100 hours time in service after 31 August 1979.
Background: To reduce the possibility of stress corrosion cracking, a corrosion resistant nut is introduced for the tail rotor fork hinge bolt.
Overview
The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, specifically PART 39 - 105, mandates Airworthiness Directives (AD) to ensure the continued airworthiness of aircraft. One such AD is AD/HU 369/40, which was introduced to address the risk of stress corrosion cracking in the tail rotor fork hinge nut of McDonnell Douglas (Hughes) and Kawasaki 369 Series Helicopters. This directive applies to all models of the 369 series, including 369H, 369HS, 369HM, and 369HE, as well as model 369D helicopters with specific serial numbers. The policy objective behind AD/HU 369/40 is to enhance safety by replacing the existing nut with a corrosion-resistant one, thereby mitigating the risk of stress corrosion cracking. This legislative instrument was enacted by the Commonwealth of Australia and is administered by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), with the goal of maintaining the highest safety standards in civil aviation. Compliance with this directive is mandatory within 100 hours of time in service after 31 August 1979.
Scope and Application
The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, specifically Part 39 - 105, outlines the scope and application of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority's airworthiness directives concerning the McDonnell Douglas (Hughes) and Kawasaki 369 Series Helicopters. This legislation applies to all model 369H, 369HS, 369HM, and 369HE helicopters, as well as model 369D helicopters with serial numbers ranging from 0003D to 0384D. The directive mandates the replacement of the tail rotor fork hinge nut to mitigate the risk of stress corrosion cracking. Compliance with this directive is required within 100 hours of time in service after 31 August 1979, and it applies to helicopters equipped with Hughes SIN HN-131 or SIN DN-33. This regulatory requirement is applicable nationally under the Commonwealth of Australia's jurisdiction and does not specify any exclusions, exemptions, or thresholds within the given text. The scope of the directive may be further extended or specified through subordinate instruments issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority.
Key Provisions
The main operative sections of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, Part 39, Subpart 105, which concerns the Schedule of Airworthiness Directives for McDonnell Douglas (Hughes) and Kawasaki 369 Series Helicopters, include AD/HU 369/40. This specific directive (section 39-105) mandates the replacement of the tail rotor fork hinge nut on all model 369H, 369HS, 369HM, and 369HE helicopters, as well as on model 369D helicopters with serial numbers ranging from 0003D to 0384D. This requirement is to mitigate the risk of stress corrosion cracking by using a corrosion-resistant nut. Compliance with this directive is expected within 100 hours of time in service after 31 August 1979, or as applicable Hughes Service Information Notice (SIN) HN-131 or DIN DN-33.
The Act imposes specific obligations and requirements on the operators of the specified helicopters. Operators must ensure that the tail rotor fork hinge nut is replaced as per the directive within the specified timeframe. This includes verifying the helicopter’s serial number to determine applicability and ensuring that the replacement is done using the correct, corrosion-resistant nut specified in the relevant service information notices. Operators must also maintain records of the compliance with this directive to demonstrate adherence to the regulatory requirements.
Failure to comply with the provisions of this directive can lead to significant consequences. While the specific civil or criminal penalties are not detailed within the legislative instrument, non-compliance with airworthiness directives generally can result in severe repercussions. These may include enforcement actions by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, which could range from fines to the suspension or revocation of the aircraft’s airworthiness certificate. Such actions could also potentially lead to criminal charges if the non-compliance results in safety incidents or violations of civil aviation safety regulations. The maximum penalties for these offences can be substantial, reflecting the critical importance of adhering to airworthiness directives to ensure the safety of air travel.