Promulgation of Airworthiness Directives.

[Ozgrade3]

After the 737 incident last week, CFM issued a service bulletin, the FAA turnise it into an Emergency AD.

FAA sends the data to EASA who issue their own almost identical AD on the same day.

Yet the CASA website AD's link simply publishes a link to the EASA AD. No CASA issued AD. Is an EASA issued AD applicable, enforceable to VH registered aircraft here in Oz. I was under the impression that each jurisdiction published their own AD's.

[Lead Balloon]

It might be that it’s automatically an AD in Australia:39.001A Definitions

In these Regulations:

airworthiness directive means:

(a) an Australian airworthiness directive; or

(b) a foreign State of Design airworthiness directive issued on or after 1 October 2009; or

(c) for a model of aircraft that is first registered in Australia on or after 1 October 2009—a foreign State of Design airworthiness directive issued before 1 October 2009 for that model or for an aeronautical product that is part of, or used in, that model.

Australian airworthiness directive means a document, as in force from time to time, issued by CASA under subregulation 39.001(1).

foreign State of Design airworthiness directive, for a kind of aircraft or aeronautical product for which Australia is not the State of Design, means a document, as in force from time to time, that:

(a) is issued by the national aviation authority of the State of Design of the aircraft or aeronautical product; and

(b) is of the same nature as an Australian airworthiness directive.

[CitationJet]

On my reading the FAA AD would apply in Australia, not the EASA one, as only the FAA one is issued by the national aviation authority of the State of Design of the aircraft.

[Lead Balloon]

Either way...

[Bend alot]

Country of origin of the aircraft AD's are mandatory in Australia.

So you must comply with the FAA AD on an Australian registered Boeing 737.

The fun part is how to correctly sign off the AD when it is on the CAsA list of AD's (as the FAA number) but only a link to the FAA AD.

[Lead Balloon]

Shouldn’t be all that complicated. You’re not signing off on compliance with an FAA AD. You’re signing off an AD that happens to be binding in Australia as a consequence of another NAA’s AD’s coming within the definition of an AD that’s binding in Australia.

[Connedrod]

The AD is only complaint when it is listed on the Australian AD listing. If the list sets FAA or eusa list then it must be complied with. If it list both then both must be complied with.

how long before pa28 fleet will be grounded for centre spar inspections

[Lead Balloon]

Camel swimming pool concept Maralinga.

[Bend alot]

If you look up Australian AD's for a C210. Then pick out the due ones, what gets put in the Log Book?

AD/CESSNA 210/ 61 AMDT 2 and AD/CESSNA 210/ 2012-10-4 carried out nil defects evident.

or

AD/CESSNA 210/ 61 AMDT 2 and FAA AD 2012-10-4 carried out nil defects evident.

If a FAA AD is carried out prior to being linked to the Australian AD list would it correct to put in the Log Book:- FAA AD 2012-10-4 carried out nil defects evident. Will it need to be called up again when it does get put on the Australian AD list as AD/CESSNA 210/ 2012-10-4 carried out nil defects evident.

I ask this as I recall CAsA when stating the Country of Origin AD's must be carried out, there was also the comment that CAsA would do attempt to capture the relevant AD's but it was up to the registered operator to ensure all AD's required to be done are done (If we miss a few cant blame us).

I am of the opinion that 2012-10-4 is not an Australian AD, and should not be listed in the CAsA AD listing in the current way they are.

If they were Australian CAsA AD's they would need to follow the same format as AD/CESSNA 210/ 61 AMDT 2 and it clearly does not.

There is no document AD/CESSNA 210/ 2012-10-4!

Under Part 39, the Authority may issue ADs. The Director has delegated the power to

issue unique Australian ADs to the Head of Airworthiness Standards Branch and many of

the Section Heads of the Branch have the delegation to amend these ADs. However,

before issuing or amending a unique Australian AD, the Branch must consult with and

take into account the comments of CASA’s Chief Operations Officer. Each Section Head

within the Branch has the delegation to issue ADs based on foreign mandatory regulatory

requirements.

To issue the AD it needs a CAsA delegate signature and would look like this
http://services.casa.gov.au/airworth/airwd/ADfiles/under/cessna210/CESSNA210-004.pdf

No doubt 6 CAsA AWI's will have 7 different ways of what to write in the log book!

[Connedrod]

What i am saying is this
if the ad is not in the list for an aircraft it is not law and dose not have to be complied with. You do not have to look at the country of origin for the appliable ad.
when a country of origin issues an ad and when casa places that ad on the list then an only then it must be complied with.

just about every aircraft in australia is non complaint with ath the esea seat belt ad.

[Bend alot]

What i am saying is this
if the ad is not in the list for an aircraft it is not law and dose not have to be complied with. You do not have to look at the country of origin for the appliable ad.
when a country of origin issues an ad and when casa places that ad on the list then an only then it must be complied with.

just about every aircraft in australia is non complaint with ath the esea seat belt ad.

I disagree with you - All AD's of country of origin of the aircraft are mandatory on Australian registered aircraft, regardless of if they are on the CAsA website AD list for the aircraft.
In GA there are not many Aircraft manufactures outside USA so that seat belt AD may not be applicable ( I am not familiar with it).

With out checking I am pretty sure it is only Country of Manufacture of the aircraft not components or engines - but stand to be corrected. So the seat belt can be a product of France but if it is fitted to a New Cessna only an CAsA or FAA issued AD needs to be complied with not any French one.

[Bend alot]

From 1 October 2009, in accordance with Part 39:

 all aircraft on the Australian register are required to comply with applicable ADs issued by the National Airworthiness Authority (NAA) of the State of Design

 it is the responsibility of the registered operator (RO) to monitor all ADs (Australian and State of Design ADs) applicable to their aircraft and aeronautical products.



v4.1 – November 2015

AC 39-01 Airworthiness Directives

[Lead Balloon]

Conned’s many years of experience of the same year over and over again appear not to include any year after the point at which specified NAA’s ADs automatically became binding on Australian aircraft.

[Bend alot]

So Leady as I asked before - how is the AD signed off?

I don't believe the Australian listing of the # 2012-10-4 under the Australian 210 AD's exists as per my examples above as a actual AD.

So in my opinion it must be FAA 2012-10-4 carried out (be it on the Australian list or not).

But FWI's will not agree on a Monday (after 3pm) or a Thursday(before 11am) or as required.

[Connedrod]

I dont seam to understand what is so hard about this.
Any external AD from a foreign state is only law as an AD in Australia when it is placed on the Australian AD lisiting for a VH rego aircraft. Period.
Ads are law. A foriegn state may not make a law in australia. Only australia may make laws. Hence why they have to be placed on our casa listings.
you may monitor all you like.
remember IAW.
if what ypu are saying is correct then there would be zero ads listed as you would need to look at that aircrafts state ads.
a foriegn state AD may in fact have an illegal mod in australia.

and as for you leadie how many ads have you ever cerified for. Whislt you may have a crack at me i do this stuff on a daily basis, and if i would have had a problem im sure i would have been pulled up for it by now, which clearly i havent.

[Bend alot]

QUOTE ConnedrodI dont seam to understand what is so hard about this.

Any external AD from a foreign state is only law as an AD in Australia when it is placed on the Australian AD lisiting for a VH rego aircraft. Period.

** Mate I know an Advisory Circular is not law - but that previous post is very clear (also proves I was not correct in previous post/s

Ads are law. A foriegn state may not make a law in australia. Only australia may make laws. Hence why they have to be placed on our casa listings.
you may monitor all you like.

** The Australian CASA regulations decided it seems in 2009 your above statement is not actually correct - please link where they MUST be placed on the CASA listing ( the above AC clearly states I is the RO (Registered Operator) to check both Australian AD's and State of Design AD's to comply with.


remember IAW.

** Remember IAW ??? Please explain!

if what ypu are saying is correct then there would be zero ads listed as you would need to look at that aircrafts state ads.

** FFS Australia has its own AD's some modified from the manufacturer (these if indicated over rule the manufacturer) but yes the onus is on the RO to check the foreign state AD's - this is acceptable from the CASA AD page that has the Foreign National Aviation Authority AD website links ( it is on the Australian AD page - where CASA puts AD's). Found here. https://www.casa.gov.au/aircraft/standard-page/airworthiness-directives


a foriegn state AD may in fact have an illegal mod in australia.

** It is then up to the modifier to issue instructions as required for continued airworthiness - C441 TX airframe comes to mind as they still fly in Oz way after that hr limit.

[Connedrod]

An awb is not law . It can be consided law when in the absence of any other documents.

a foriegn ad is nothing. Its a nothing in Australia it holds no law qualifications at all .

an ad is law only when it passes though the correct paths via parliament.

hence it can only be an ad once it is posted on the list of Australian ads.

a forgien country cannot issue a ad for an aircraft in a foriegn country. Only the state of of which the aircraft is regested can issue an ad. In Australia via parliament
.
hence why there is no cao, ad etc that states you must carry out a foreign ad. T his is because they cannot due to a beach of the Australian law.

only casa can make you do an ad once its placed on the Australian ad listing.

once it is on this list then and only then it has to be complied with.

to to a forgien ad before its on the list then what are you doing it IAW. To say you are doing it iaw with a forgien ad is not correct because it is a nothing untill it on the list.

casa once again bully poeple into there way off thinking but they have no legal right to make you do it and when push and ask for a written procedre and regulations that show this they wont and back off.

now if you wish to do it go ahead i really dont care. But legally you cant and dont have too.

[Lead Balloon]

Get someone to read and explain the following laws to you:39.003 Australian aircraft covered by airworthiness directive not to be operated

(1) A person must not operate an Australian aircraft that is covered by an airworthiness directive (other than an aircraft to which subregulation (4) applies), or that is fitted with an aeronautical product covered by an airworthiness directive (other than an aircraft to which subregulation (5) applies):

(a) in breach of any requirement of the airworthiness directive that affects the operating limitations of the aircraft; or

(b) while any other requirement of the airworthiness directive has not been complied with.

Penalty: 50 penalty units.Here’s how the law defines “airworthiness directive” for the purposes of the above regulation:airworthiness directive means:

(a) an Australian airworthiness directive; or

(b) a foreign State of Design airworthiness directive issued on or after 1 October 2009; or

(c) for a model of aircraft that is first registered in Australia on or after 1 October 2009—a foreign State of Design airworthiness directive issued before 1 October 2009 for that model or for an aeronautical product that is part of, or used in, that model.Note paras (b) and (c), or get someone to explain them to you.

[Bend alot]

Under Part 39, the Authority may issue ADs. The Director has delegated the power to

issue unique Australian ADs to the Head of Airworthiness Standards Branch and many of

the Section Heads of the Branch have the delegation to amend these ADs. However,

before issuing or amending a unique Australian AD, the Branch must consult with and

take into account the comments of CASA’s Chief Operations Officer. Each Section Head

within the Branch has the delegation to issue ADs based on foreign mandatory regulatory

requirements.

For issuing Australian ADs, circulation for public comment will not be required for the

following:

* Where the Head of Airworthiness Standards certifies in writing that an unsafe condition

exists which warrants issue of an Immediate Safety of Flight AD before consultation

* For minor changes to foreign ADs to align with Australian conditions, and changes to

existing Australian unique ADs, providing the changes do not increase the difficulty of

compliance for Australian operators

* When the AD documents requirements that are made mandatory in another form by

the National Airworthiness Authority (NAA) issuing the Type Certificate—for example a

specific limitation included in the certifying country’s regulatory framework

* Where an AD revokes an existing AD or eliminates redundant requirements

* Where an Australian change revises compliance times, corrects typographical errors,

or provides comment or clarification notes.

[Eddie Dean]

Apologies should I be breaking into a private fight; I have noticed when working on private and airwork aircraft, the job documents only call out the Australian ADs and mandatory OEM service documents. Charter aircraft often have country of origin ADs.

[Lead Balloon]

Or...you could just read what the law says, Bend.

The foreign state of design ADs that fall within the scope of para (a) or (b) of the definition of “airworthiness directive” are, by definition, an AD covered by CASR 39.003. CASA doesn’t have to issue sh*t.

That said, I’m making the assumption that CASA isn’t doing the usual and regulating by exemption. That is - I admit - a very naive assumption.

[Connedrod]

The forgien ad Must be on the Australian listing before it can be done. Please show where it states agaist that. A forgien ad has nothing in law in australia till its on our listing.
so leadie when was the last time you had to do an ad list for an aircraft service and release that that aircraft after the service.
IAW. A forgien ad is not iaw.
It dose not say anything in what you have posted that it must be done before it is on our list.

at the end of the day you do what you wish ill do what i wish. And seaming i have already taken casa to task on this and won well ......
and leadie to use your words wtf would you know about maintenance your not even a bus driver. So humpty back to you.

[Bend alot]

Or...you could just read what the law says, Bend.

The foreign state of design ADs that fall within the scope of para (a) or (b) of the definition of “airworthiness directive” are, by definition, an AD covered by CASR 39.003. CASA doesn’t have to issue sh*t.

That said, I’m making the assumption that CASA isn’t doing the usual and regulating by exemption. That is - I admit - a very naive assumption.

Lead that is my point - read again.

I said with out checking that CAsA would only try capture the Country of Origin AD's but it was the owner/operator that must make sure country of manufacturer AD's are carried out.

Actually I did check and this is what I said!!

I ask this as I recall CAsA when stating the Country of Origin AD's must be carried out, there was also the comment that CAsA would do attempt to capture the relevant AD's but it was up to the registered operator to ensure all AD's required to be done are done (If we miss a few cant blame us).

So Lead can you explain your last post starting with this "Or...you could just read what the law says, Bend.

[Bend alot]

The forgien ad Must be on the Australian listing before it can be done. Please show where it states agaist that. A forgien ad has nothing in law in australia till its on our listing.
so leadie when was the last time you had to do an ad list for an aircraft service and release that that aircraft after the service.
IAW. A forgien ad is not iaw.
It dose not say anything in what you have posted that it must be done before it is on our list.

at the end of the day you do what you wish ill do what i wish. And seaming i have already taken casa to task on this and won well ......
and leadie to use your words wtf would you know about maintenance your not even a bus driver. So humpty back to you.

The Regulation was posted a few posts ago, also I posted the Advisory Circular - you have posted nothing of any CAsA documents to support your claim/s - NOTHING!!

We have and it all says your statements are not correct - so just post links to CAsA or other legal documents in relation to AD's - You are wrong on this.

[Bend alot]

Apologies should I be breaking into a private fight; I have noticed when working on private and airwork aircraft, the job documents only call out the Australian ADs and mandatory OEM service documents. Charter aircraft often have country of origin ADs.

Eddie the info posted by Lead apply to all Australian registered aircraft and they were the regulations.

The Regulations are top of the food chain, then AD's and then following are other CAsA documents and documents accepted by CAsA.

So unless the document you are reading from is part of the regulations, it is overruled by that posted reg.

[Connedrod]

The Regulation was posted a few posts ago, also I posted the Advisory Circular - you have posted nothing of any CAsA documents to support your claim/s - NOTHING!!

We have and it all says your statements are not correct - so just post links to CAsA or other legal documents in relation to AD's - You are wrong on this.


sorry im not wrong on this.
an ad must be passed from parliament. You will notice that a foreign ad there is a delay before it goes on the Aust listing. Why because it has to be made into law.
a foriegn state can not make a law in australia. An ad is law.

like i said you do what you wish. I really dont care.

[Lead Balloon]

Looks like two villages are short of idiots this evening.

Rod: Lake justice pimula armistice.

So Lead can you explain your last post starting with this "Or...you could just read what the law says, Bend.Yes, Bend. I’ll try it in words of one sill-ah-bull: Stop blab-ing ah-bout what CAR-SAH says and pub-lish-ez.

Just read what the law says

[Bend alot]

The law leady as I said all along is that all AD's from country of origin AND Australian AD's MUST be carried out.

I just did not quote it, only said that is what I recall.

What I recalled was fairly close to what is law.

Condrod does not agree and has some completely wrong statements - and not backed by anything than his comment/s.

So Leady the legend - how do we sign off such AD's in the Log Books?

That has been my question as a document AD/CESSNA 210/ 2012 - (what ever it was) does not exist? (but the AD regardless of being listed with the Australian AD's or not is required to be done).

[Lead Balloon]

I’d be signing off using a signature. Foreign NAA’s ADs include descriptions of stuff that has to be done. Just like in Australian ADs. Once that stuff has been done, you can lawfully certify that the stuff has been done. Write out the reference number of the foreign NAA’s AD and explain the stuff you did, and sign away. Job done!

You and Rod keep getting bent out of shape about what’s “listed”. Stop doing that. Forget lists. Start working out what ADs fall with the scope of the definition of “airworthiness directive”, in the law, that apply to the aircraft you’re working on. That’s your job. Some of those ADs may be issued by CASA and some may be issued by a foreign NAA. Deal with it.

[Eddie Dean]

Eddie the info posted by Lead apply to all Australian registered aircraft and they were the regulations.

The Regulations are top of the food chain, then AD's and then following are other CAsA documents and documents accepted by CAsA.

So unless the document you are reading from is part of the regulations, it is overruled by that posted reg.By document I mean the work pack handed to me to carry out and certify as appropriate.

[KRviator]

Apologies for a 2 year thread bump folks, but I'd like to see what the brains trust here thinks about this foreign AD compliance thing, and this was the most appropriate thread I found...

The background is I'm considering buying a Comanche to step up from the RV-9, and there are 20 'current' AD's listed by CAsA for the PA-24 in Australia, however a very well-known (but often not as carefully done) AD for the PA24 series in FAA-land is AD 77-13-21 Prevent Landing Gear Collapse issued 16/12/77, which details repetitive inspection of the landing gear components and 3-yearly replacing of the gear bungees, per a Piper SB, in order to avoid becoming a statistic. Australia has an AD detailing inspection of the landing gear side brace, but not the rest of the system, as detailed in the FAA AD.

The actual AD itself isn't particularly relevant, it's just the most well known repetitive one that would apply, so don't put too much thought into the specifics of it...but...

CAsA says that if the aircraft type was on their register prior to 01 October 2009, then the registered operator must comply with State of Design AD's issued from that date. But if the type was not on the CAsA register, then you have to go back and comply with all FAA AD's (CAsA AC 39-01 (https://www.casa.gov.au/files/ac3901v43airworthinessdirectivespdf) refers). Now, obviously the Comanche has been here for decades, and the FAA gear AD itself is over 40 years old, but still relevant, so my question is:

"What have I overlooked that means CAsA hasn't issued it as an Australian AD with which I must comply, or conversely, what have I overlooked about complying with older FAA AD's?"

[Lead Balloon]

Just read CASR Part 39 twice, and assume it means what it says.

Note that there’s a difference between an aircraft “type” and an aircraft “model”.

All of that said: Pick the brains of the Comanche Society. Their collective wisdom is what will help you keep a Comanche airworthy in fact.

The 260C is a nice aircraft....

[KRviator]

Just read CASR Part 39 twice, and assume it means what it says.

Note that there’s a difference between an aircraft “type” and an aircraft “model”.Thanks, LB, that's what's doing my head in. It is fairly clear in that FAA AD's issued prior to 2009 won't apply to the Comanche and I'm buggered if I can understand why. It is an unusually-clearly-written piece of the CASR's. Naturally both the PA24 (type) and PA24-260C (Model) have been here for yonks and so the "state of design" AD requirement won't apply earlier than 2009. I was sure I was missing something, somewhere, particularly for something as significant as the gear AD.

All of that said: Pick the brains of the Comanche Society. Their collective wisdom is what will help you keep a Comanche airworthy in fact.

The 260C is a nice aircraft....I've joined the Comanche FB groups and if I go through with the purchase will definitely sign up to the ICS & their Australian tribe too. I learnt the value of type clubs from the Vans Forums during the RV-9 build!

[Lead Balloon]

Re the 2009 'cut off', bear in mind that, for a very long time CASA, CAA, DCA, and whatever else the Australian civil aviation regulator happens to have been constituted and called over the years, considered itself competent to 'second guess' the decisions of other national airworthiness authorities that happened to be the issuers of the type certificates of many of the aircraft that were imported to Australia. Once the aircraft was registered in Australia, the entirety of the regulatory requirements for continuing airworthiness were decided by the Australian regulator.

Most of those requirements were, of course, 'automatically picked up' as a consequence of the definition of approved data, but AD requirements weren't. They arose only through ADs issued by the Australian regulator. Now, as you've seen, some ADs issued by foreign NAAs have 'automatic' effect in Australia as a consequence of the contemporary definition of AD. (That concept seems to have been mind-bogglingly confusing to some, as can be seen in the earlier discussion in this thread.)

Re the FAA AD 77-13-21 Prevent Landing Gear Collapse issued 16/12/77, it is perfectly possible that the Australian regulator took the view that Australian LAMEs were more competent and capable of detecting potential landing gear defects than their US counterparts. Bear in mind that the 'brains trust' in the Australian regulator would have comprised mainly Australian LAMEs...

(Another, out of many, interesting quirks of this situation is that in the US the regulator would never allow patch repairs of magnesium ruddervators on V-tailed Bonanzas, but I've seen a few patch repairs on them in Australia.)

It is of course open to you to ask a friendly LAME to perform the AD, as if it were mandatory, just like Service Bulletins and other things that are not mandated from a regulatory perspective. That's where the wisdom of the Comanche 'tribe' comes in.