AD/PA-22/32 Amdt 2 - Fuselage Door Frame Tube Corrosion

Overview

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, enacted by the Australian Government, form part of a legislative framework designed to ensure the safety and regulation of civil aviation within Australia. Specifically, Part 39 - 105 of these regulations outlines the Civil Aviation Safety Authority's (CASA) Schedule of Airworthiness Directives, addressing various safety concerns and requirements for different aircraft models. One such directive is AD/PA-22/32, which pertains to the Piper PA-22 (Tri-Pacer and Colt) series aeroplanes, focusing on the issue of fuselage door frame tube corrosion. The primary objective of this directive, as articulated in the text, is to address the problem of excessive corrosion reported between the steel tubing and preformed steel sections in the door frames, windshield, and baggage areas of the fuselage. The directive aims to ensure these issues are identified and rectified to maintain the airworthiness of the affected aircraft.

Scope and Application

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, under the authority of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, apply to all Piper PA-22 series aircraft, specifically those with serial numbers 22-01 through 22-9848. This regulation mandates that corrective action be taken to address corrosion issues in the fuselage door frames of these aircraft. The primary requirement is for the aircraft owners or operators to either follow the corrective action outlined in Piper Service Bulletin 819 or conduct a radiographic inspection of the specified areas as per a scheme approved by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority. Notably, the radiographic technique No ANTDS.86.4 by Gippsland Aeronautics is an acceptable method for compliance. The initial compliance date for these directives was set before 30 November 1986, with subsequent inspections mandated every five years from that date. The amendment to this directive, effective from 6 January 1994, extended the inspection interval but did not alter the compliance requirements. This regulation is part of a national legislative framework, ensuring the safety and airworthiness of aircraft operating within Australia's jurisdiction.

Key Provisions

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, particularly in Part 39 - 105, specify the requirements for airworthiness directives related to specific aircraft models, such as the Piper PA-22 (Tri-Pacer and Colt) series aeroplanes. For this model, Airworthiness Directive AD/PA-22/32 Amendment 2 addresses corrosion issues in the fuselage door frame tubes. Section 1 of this directive mandates that either action must be taken in accordance with Piper Service Bulletin 819 or a radiographic inspection of the specified areas must be carried out according to a scheme approved by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). The inspection must follow a specific technique, such as the one provided by Gippsland Aeronautics, which is noted to be acceptable for compliance. This requirement applies to all PA-22 aircraft with serial numbers ranging from 22-01 to 22-9848. Under the Civil Aviation Regulations, the directive imposes specific obligations on the parties involved. For instance, owners or operators of affected PA-22 aircraft must ensure that either the corrective action outlined in Piper Service Bulletin 819 is implemented or that a radiographic inspection is conducted in compliance with the approved scheme. This inspection must be completed by 30 November 1986 if it has not already been done. Furthermore, these inspections must be repeated at intervals not exceeding five years. The directive's compliance is contingent on these actions being undertaken to address the identified corrosion issues. In the event of non-compliance with the provisions of this directive, there may be serious repercussions. While the specific penalties are not detailed within the text of the directive, the Civil Aviation Regulations generally provide for both civil and criminal penalties for breaches of airworthiness directives. Civil penalties can include fines and other financial penalties, while criminal penalties might encompass imprisonment, depending on the severity and circumstances of the breach. The potential penalties serve to enforce adherence to safety standards and ensure that aircraft remain airworthy, thereby protecting both the operators and the general public.