COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (Civil Aviation Regulations 1998), PART 39 - 105 CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY
SCHEDULE OF AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE
For the reasons set out in the background section, the CASA delegate whose signature appears below revokes Airworthiness Directive (AD) AD/MU-2/61 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.
Mitsubishi MU-2 Series Aeroplanes
AD/MU-2/61
Amdt 1
Trim In Motion and Automatic Pilot Disconnect System
7/2001
Applicability: Mitsubishi Model MU-2B, MU-2B-10, -15, -20 and -25 aircraft having serial numbers 008 through 279 inclusive; and MU-2B-30, -35 and -36 airplanes having
serial numbers 502 through 651 inclusive, and 653.
Requirement: Unless previously accomplished in accordance with Mitsubishi MU-2 Service Bulletin (SB) No.231 dated 2 July 1997, install a trim-in-motion alert system and an automatic autopilot disconnect system in accordance with. Mitsubishi MU-2 SB No.231A dated 20 December 2000.
Note 1: There is a flight manual revision associated with this installation. Note 2: Japanese Civil Aviation Bureau AD TCD-4625A-2001 refers.
Compliance: Before 1 December 2001.
This Amendment becomes effective on 12 July 2001.
Background: The original issue of this Directive was issued to minimise the risk of undetected airspeed decreasing during flight with autopilot engaged in icing conditions, which could result in the aircraft stalling. Reports had been received by the manufacturer that pilots have inadvertently allowed their aircraft to slow while climbing or in cruise with the autopilot engaged in an attitude or altitude hold mode.
This amendment introduces an additional aeroplane model and an alternative method of compliance.
The original issue of this Directive became effective on 4 December 1997.
Eugene Paul Holzapfel
Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority 30 May 2001
The above AD is notified in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette on 13 June 2001.
Overview
The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, specifically within Part 39, addresses various safety directives to ensure the airworthiness of aircraft within Australian airspace. This legislation, enacted by the Australian Government, was introduced to mitigate risks associated with aviation safety, particularly focusing on the prevention of in-flight hazards. The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), as the delegate of the Australian Government, issues these directives to correct unsafe conditions that may compromise the safety of aircraft operations. The underlying policy objective of these regulations is to ensure that all aircraft meet stringent safety standards, thereby protecting the public and maintaining the integrity of the aviation industry. This particular Airworthiness Directive concerning the Mitsubishi MU-2 Series Aeroplanes was issued to address the risk of undetected airspeed decreases during flight, particularly when the autopilot is engaged in icing conditions, which could potentially lead to aircraft stalling.
Scope and Application
This Airworthiness Directive applies specifically to Mitsubishi Model MU-2B, MU-2B-10, -10, -20, and -25 aircraft with serial numbers ranging from 008 to 279, inclusive, and to MU-2B-30, -35, and -36 airplanes with serial numbers 502 to 651 inclusive, and 653. It mandates the installation of a trim-in-motion alert system and an automatic autopilot disconnect system to mitigate the risk of airspeed decreasing during flight with the autopilot engaged in icing conditions, a condition that could lead to the aircraft stalling. The directive requires compliance with Mitsubishi MU-2 Service Bulletin No.231A dated 20 December 2000, and stipulates that this action must be completed before 1 December 2001. This directive is issued under the authority of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and applies nationally within the Commonwealth of Australia, extending to all relevant aircraft operating within its jurisdiction. There are no stated exclusions, exemptions, or thresholds in this particular directive, and it does not extend or restrict application through subordinate instruments.
Key Provisions
The Airworthiness Directive (AD) AD/MU-2/61 Amendment 1 pertains specifically to Mitsubishi MU-2 Series aeroplanes, as detailed in the applicability section (Part 39-105.02). The directive applies to Mitsubishi Model MU-2B, MU-2B-10, -15, -20 and -25 aircraft with serial numbers 008 through 279 inclusive, and MU-2B-30, -35 and -36 aircraft with serial numbers 502 through 651 inclusive, and 653. The directive mandates the installation of a trim-in-motion alert system and an automatic autopilot disconnect system in accordance with Mitsubishi MU-2 Service Bulletin (SB) No.231A dated 20 December 2000, unless this has already been carried out in accordance with Mitsubishi MU-2 SB No.231 dated 2 July 1997. The requirement section outlines the actions that must be taken to address the identified safety concern. The compliance section specifies that these actions must be completed before 1 December 2001, with the amendment becoming effective on 12 July 2001.
The AD imposes obligations on the owners and operators of the specified Mitsubishi MU-2 Series aeroplanes to ensure that the mandated systems are installed correctly and in accordance with the outlined Service Bulletins. It is essential that the flight manual is revised to reflect these changes. Failure to comply with these requirements could lead to serious safety issues, including the potential for airspeed to decrease during flight with the autopilot engaged, particularly in icing conditions, which could result in the aircraft stalling. Additionally, the AD references a similar directive from the Japanese Civil Aviation Bureau, AD TCD-4625A-2001, indicating a broader recognition of the safety issue across jurisdictions.
The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998 (CAR 1998) under which this AD is issued, may impose various civil and criminal consequences for non-compliance. The specific penalties are not detailed in the AD but generally, under CAR 1998, non-compliance with ADs can lead to substantial fines and potential criminal charges. The severity of the penalty can depend on the nature of the breach and the impact on aviation safety. In the case of serious breaches, individuals or entities may face criminal charges, with maximum penalties including fines and imprisonment, reflecting the high stakes involved in ensuring the safety of aviation operations.