AD/R22/34 - Suspect Bolts

Overview

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, administered by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, aim to ensure the safety of civil aviation within Australia. Specifically, Part 39 - 105 within the schedule of Airworthiness Directives addresses the maintenance and safety requirements for particular aircraft models, including the Robinson R22 Series Helicopters. This legislative instrument, F2006B06439, was introduced to address the critical safety issue identified with certain bolts in the Robinson R22 helicopter model. The problem arose from instances of hydrogen embrittlement in bolts used in the tail rotor controls, which could potentially lead to catastrophic in-flight failures. The policy objective is to mandate specific actions, in accordance with Robinson SB No 69, to ensure compliance and mitigate the risk associated with these suspect bolts. The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998 require specific actions for Robinson R22 helicopters with certain serial numbers and those that have undergone maintenance since 9 July 1991, to be addressed within a specified timeframe. This directive mandates immediate action to replace or inspect suspect bolts to prevent any future occurrences of hydrogen embrittlement, ensuring the continued safety of the aircraft and its occupants. The regulations are designed to respond swiftly to identified safety concerns, reflecting a commitment to maintaining high safety standards within the Australian civil aviation sector.

Scope and Application

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, specifically Part 39 - 105, pertains to the Airworthiness Directives issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority. One such directive, AD/R22/34, concerns the Robinson R22 Series Helicopters and addresses the issue of suspect bolts. This regulation applies to all Robinson R22 helicopters with serial numbers ranging from 1880 through 2060, as well as any R22 units that have been overhauled or repaired by Robinson Helicopter Company (RHC) since 9 July 1991. Furthermore, it extends to all R22 helicopters regardless of serial number, provided they have undergone maintenance since 9 July 1991 in areas where these suspect bolts may have been installed. The directive requires compliance with Robinson Service Bulletin No 69, referencing FAA Telex AD 92-06-17, and mandates that corrective actions be taken within 10 hours of time in service after 26 March 1992 or by 9 April 1992, whichever is earlier. The directive's scope and urgency underscore the potential catastrophic consequences of in-flight failure of these bolts due to hydrogen embrittlement during cadmium plating.

Key Provisions

The Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, specifically Part 39 - 105, includes Airworthiness Directive AD/R22/34 which mandates actions regarding suspect bolts in Robinson R22 Series Helicopters. Section (1) of the directive identifies the specific model and serial numbers of helicopters affected, including those with serial numbers 1880 through 2060, 2073, those overhauled or repaired by Robinson Helicopter Company (RHC) since 9 July 1991, and all R22 helicopters where maintenance was performed in areas susceptible to the use of suspect bolts since that date. The directive requires action in accordance with Robinson Service Bulletin No 69, with a reference to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Telex AD 92-06-17 for further guidance. The directive imposes clear obligations on the operators and maintainers of the affected helicopters. Under section (2), compliance with the directive is mandatory, and the action must be taken within 10 hours of time in service after 26 March 1992 or by 9 April 1992, whichever comes first. This necessitates prompt assessment and replacement or repair of the suspect bolts to ensure the airworthiness and safety of the helicopters involved. Failure to comply with the requirements of AD/R22/34 can result in serious consequences. Section (3) of the directive indicates that non-compliance may lead to the aircraft being deemed unairworthy. This can result in enforcement actions being taken by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA), potentially including fines or other civil penalties as outlined in the Civil Aviation Act 1988. Additionally, continued operation of an aircraft in non-compliance could result in criminal charges under section 96 of the Act, with potential imprisonment for the operator or responsible individual. The severity of these penalties underscores the importance of adhering to the directive to maintain safety standards in civil aviation.