COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998), PART 39 - 107 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 issues the following Airworthiness Directive (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.
Propellers - Variable Pitch - Hartzell
AD/PHZL/70 Hard Alloy Blades - Removal 4/2003
Applicability: Hartzell Propeller Inc. model HC-B3TN-5( ) propellers, with part numbers (P/N’s) T10176H(B)-5, T10176H(K)-5, T10176H-5, T10178H-11, T10178H-11R,
T10178H(B)-11, and T10178H(B)-11R blades that are installed on Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd MU-2 series aeroplanes.
Requirement: Remove and replace propeller blades in accordance with paragraphs 3.A. through 3.C.(3) of the accomplishment instructions of Hartzell Propeller Inc. Service Bulletin HC-SB-61-250, Revision 1.
Note: FAA AD 2003-04-23 Amendment 39-13072 refers.
Compliance: Within 200 flight hours or 12 months from the effective date of this directive, whichever occurs first.
This Airworthiness Directive becomes effective on 17 April 2003.
Background: Certain hard alloy blades installed on Mitsubishi MU-2 aircraft have a history of blade failure. Replacement of the blades listed in this directive will reduce the likelihood of blade failure by replacement with a blade with greater resistance to intergranular corrosion. Failure of the blade can lead to severe damage to the aeroplane and subsequent loss of control of the aeroplane.
James Coyne
Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority 5 March 2003
The above AD is notified in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette on 26 March 2003.
Overview
The Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 were enacted to establish and maintain safety standards in the aviation industry in Australia. This legislation was introduced to address the need for comprehensive and enforceable safety regulations governing aircraft and aeronautical products, ensuring the safety of passengers, crew, and the general public. The Regulations were enacted by the Australian Parliament and serve to implement the Civil Aviation Act 1988, which aims to ensure the safety and efficiency of civil aviation. The policy objective of these regulations is to maintain the highest possible safety standards in civil aviation by setting mandatory requirements for the design, manufacture, maintenance, and operation of aircraft and aeronautical products.
One specific aspect of these regulations is the issuance of Airworthiness Directives (ADs) to address safety issues as they arise. An example of this is AD/PHZL/70, which was issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) to address the issue of blade failure in certain Hartzell propellers installed on Mitsubishi MU-2 series aeroplanes. The directive requires the removal and replacement of specific hard alloy blades to mitigate the risk of blade failure, which can lead to severe damage and loss of control of the aircraft. This directive was issued to ensure the continued safety of aircraft operating under Australian jurisdiction and is an example of the proactive measures taken by CASA to address safety concerns in the aviation industry.
Scope and Application
The Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998, specifically Part 39, pertains to the issuance of Airworthiness Directives (ADs) by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). These regulations apply to specific aircraft and aeronautical products, ensuring they meet certain safety standards. The AD in focus mandates the removal and replacement of specific propeller blades on Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd MU-2 series aeroplanes. This directive applies to Hartzell Propeller Inc. model HC-B3TN-5 propellers with specified part numbers. The requirement for compliance involves the removal and replacement of these blades as per the instructions detailed in Hartzell Propeller Inc. Service Bulletin HC-SB-61-250, Revision 1. The compliance period stipulates that this action must be completed within 200 flight hours or 12 months from the effective date of the directive, whichever comes first. This AD underscores the importance of addressing safety issues to prevent blade failure, which can lead to severe damage and loss of control of the aircraft. The directive extends its jurisdictional reach to all entities operating within the Commonwealth of Australia, thereby enforcing stringent safety measures across the aviation industry.
Key Provisions
The Airworthiness Directive (AD) AD/PHZL/70 issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) pertains to specific Hartzell propeller blades installed on Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd MU-2 series aeroplanes. The directive applies to Hartzell Propeller Inc. model HC-B3TN-5( ) propellers with particular part numbers, specifically T10176H(B)-5, T10176H(K)-5, T10176H-5, T10178H-11, T10178H-11R, T10178H(B)-11, and T10178H(B)-11R blades (section 1). The directive mandates that these blades be removed and replaced in accordance with paragraphs 3.A through 3.C of Hartzell Propeller Inc. Service Bulletin HC-SB-61-250, Revision 1 (section 2). The compliance timeframe is either within 200 flight hours or 12 months from the effective date of the directive, whichever comes first (section 3).
The AD imposes specific obligations on the parties governed by it, primarily focusing on ensuring the safety of the aircraft. Owners and operators of the affected MU-2 series aeroplanes must follow the detailed instructions provided in Hartzell’s Service Bulletin to replace the specified propeller blades. This involves the precise removal and replacement process to mitigate the risk of blade failure due to intergranular corrosion. The directive is clear in its requirement for compliance within the stipulated timeframe to maintain airworthiness standards and prevent potential catastrophic failures.
Failure to comply with the Airworthiness Directive AD/PHZL/70 can lead to significant legal and safety repercussions. The directive does not explicitly mention specific offences, penalties, or consequences within the text provided, but non-compliance with CASA directives generally can result in severe penalties under the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998. Potential consequences may include fines, suspension of airworthiness certificates, or other regulatory actions that could affect the operation of the aircraft. Such non-compliance not only risks the safety of the aircraft and its occupants but also potentially results in civil or criminal liability for the operator.