AD/MU-2/36 Amdt 1 - Pitot System

Overview

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, specifically Part 39 - 105, address the safety requirements for aircraft through the Civil Aviation Safety Authority's Schedule of Airworthiness Directives. The Mitsubishi MU-2 Series Aeroplanes AD/MU-2/36 Amendment 1, issued in 1986, was enacted to tackle issues with erroneous airspeed indications in certain Mitsubishi MU-2B models during flight, particularly in icing conditions. This problem arose due to ice accumulation in the pitot tube mast, which led to inaccurate readings. The amendment expanded the applicability of the directive to include more serial numbers of the affected aircraft models, ensuring a broader safety measure. The policy objective was to mitigate potential flight hazards by requiring compliance with the specified service recommendations to address and prevent the erroneous airspeed indications. The directive mandates that all models MU-2B, serial numbers 001 up to and including 753, must adhere to either Mitsubishi Aircraft International Ltd.'s Service Recommendation No 020/34-005 Rev B or Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd Service Recommendation No. 053A, with compliance required before 31 August 1986. This directive was issued under the authority of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority to ensure the continued airworthiness and safety of the specified aircraft models.

Scope and Application

The Mitsubishi MU-2 Series Aeroplanes Airworthiness Directive (AD) pertains specifically to all MU-2B models, encompassing serial numbers from 001 to 753, including those with the SA suffix. The regulation mandates compliance with either Mitsubishi Aircraft International Ltd. Service Recommendation No 020/34-005 Rev B or Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd Service Recommendation No. 053A, addressing issues identified with erroneous airspeed indications during flight under icing conditions due to ice accumulation in the pitot tube mast. This directive was initially issued prior to 31 August 1986, with subsequent amendments extending its applicability. The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, overseen by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, ensure these standards are met within Australia's jurisdictional reach, with no specific exclusions or thresholds mentioned in the provided text, though broader compliance may be dictated by subordinate instruments.

Key Provisions

The Mitsubishi MU-2 Series Aeroplanes AD/MU-2/36 Amendment 1 addresses specific airworthiness issues related to the pitot system, particularly in the context of icing conditions. Section 1 of the AD/MU-2/36 Amendment 1 details the applicability of the directive to all models of MU-2B with serial numbers ranging from 001 to 753, including those with the SA suffix. The directive references two documents for compliance purposes: Mitsubishi Aircraft International Ltd. Service Recommendation No 020/34-005 Rev B, and Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Ltd Service Recommendation No. 053A. It also notes that FAA AD 85-04-03 is related to this issue. The obligations imposed by this directive are centred on ensuring that the pitot system on affected Mitsubishi MU-2B aircraft is inspected and, if necessary, repaired to prevent erroneous airspeed indications. Specifically, the directive mandates that compliance must be achieved before 31 August 1986. The directive’s background section highlights the importance of this requirement, explaining that pilot reports have indicated that ice accumulation in the pitot tube mast can lead to erroneous airspeed indications, especially during flight in icing conditions. This risk necessitates that operators of the specified aircraft models take proactive measures to ensure that their pitot systems are maintained and checked according to the outlined service recommendations. Failing to comply with the AD/MU-2/36 Amendment 1 could lead to serious consequences, including potential safety hazards during flight. While the specific penalties or consequences for non-compliance are not detailed within the directive itself, non-compliance with airworthiness directives is generally subject to enforcement actions by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). These actions can include fines, suspension of airworthiness certificates, and other regulatory penalties. The severity of the consequences is dependent on the extent of non-compliance and the potential risk to flight safety posed by the non-compliance. It is important for aircraft operators to adhere strictly to these directives to avoid any legal repercussions and to ensure the continued airworthiness of their aircraft.