{"id":"F2005L02083","name":"AD/B727/194 - Cargo Door Number 3","slug":"ad-b727-194-cargo-door-number-3","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":36295,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2005L02083-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-01","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"Boeing 727 Series Aeroplanes","sectionType":"division","heading":"Boeing 727 Series Aeroplanes","content":"### Boeing 727 Series Aeroplanes\n\n| AD/B727/194 | Cargo Door Number 3 | 9/2005 |\n| ----------- | ------------------- | ------ |\n\n| Applicability: | Model 727-200 series aircraft, equipped with a No.3 cargo door; as identified in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 727-52-0149 original issue, or later FAA approved revision.                                                                                                       |\n| -------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |\n| Requirement:   | Action in accordance with the technical requirements of FAA AD 2005-11-09 Amdt 39-14111.                                                                                                                                                                                                     |\n| Compliance:    | As specified in the Requirement document, with a revised effective date of 1 September 2005.                                                                                                                                                                                                 |\n|                | This Airworthiness Directive becomes effective on 1 September 2005.                                                                                                                                                                                                                          |\n| Background:    | The FAA received reports of cracking at the forward, lower corner frame and lower beam of the No.3 cargo door. Such cracking, unless detected and corrected, could result in failure of the affected door stops, loss of the cargo door, and consequent rapid decompression of the aircraft. |\n\n![](image.001.png)  \nDavid Villiers  \nDelegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority\n\n20 July 2005","sortOrder":0},{"sectionNumber":"AD/B727/194","sectionType":"part","heading":"AD/B727/194","content":"## AD/B727/194","sortOrder":1},{"sectionNumber":"Cargo Door Number 3","sectionType":"part","heading":"Cargo Door Number 3","content":"## Cargo Door Number 3","sortOrder":2},{"sectionNumber":"9/2005","sectionType":"part","heading":"9/2005","content":"## 9/2005","sortOrder":3}],"analysis":{"flash_summary_failed":{"failed":true,"reason":"A positive credit balance is required for all requests, including BYOK, so fallback providers remain available. Add credits at https://vercel.com/d?to=%2F%5Bteam%5D%2F%7E%2Fai%3Fmodal%3Dtop-up to continue.","source":"analysis-cron"},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This is a standard, narrow airworthiness directive targeting a specific mechanical defect on a specific aircraft type. It has not expanded beyond its original safety purpose."},"complexity_factors":["Extremely short document (under 300 words)","Only 1 defined applicability criterion (specific aircraft model + service bulletin reference)","Single requirement: comply with external FAA directive","No nested conditions, exceptions, or procedural subsections","No cross-references to other Australian legislation — only references to Boeing service bulletin and FAA AD","Standardised AD format with only 4 core fields (Applicability, Requirement, Compliance, Background)"],"plain_english_summary":"This Airworthiness Directive orders operators of certain Boeing 727-200s with Cargo Door No. 3 to inspect and repair cracked door frames/beams per FAA AD 2005-11-09, with compliance required from 1 September 2005. It targets aircraft covered by the referenced Boeing service bulletin to prevent a door failure that could cause in-flight loss of the door and rapid decompression."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This AD does not expand the scope beyond its original safety purpose. It adopts the FAA's corrective action for reported cracking of the No. 3 cargo door structure on affected 727-200 aircraft and makes compliance mandatory in Australia. It neither adds unrelated requirements nor broadens applicability beyond the aircraft and service bulletin identified (Boeing SB 727-52-0149 and FAA AD 2005-11-09)."},"complexity_factors":["Short, single-issue AD focused on one structural area (No. 3 cargo door)","Single, narrow applicability: Model 727-200 series with No. 3 cargo door identified in Boeing SB 727-52-0149","Primary technical content is entirely by reference to FAA AD 2005-11-09 (external cross-reference)","No nested exceptions or multi-part conditional logic within the Australian instrument itself","Relies on an external service bulletin and FAA AD whose internal complexity is not repeated here","One effective date and straightforward compliance requirement"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this instrument does (mechanical change)\n\n- This Airworthiness Directive (AD) requires operators of certain Boeing 727-200 aeroplanes to perform the inspection and corrective actions set out in FAA Airworthiness Directive 2005-11-09 (and any FAA-approved revisions). (Requirement)\n- It applies only to Model 727-200 series aircraft that are equipped with a No. 3 cargo door and are listed in Boeing Special Attention Service Bulletin 727-52-0149 (original issue) or any later FAA-approved revision. (Applicability)\n- The AD took effect on 1 September 2005. (Compliance)\n\nWho is affected\n\n- Airline and aircraft operators who own or operate Boeing 727-200 series aeroplanes with a No. 3 cargo door as identified in the Boeing service bulletin. (Applicability)\n\nWhy the rule was made (stated purpose)\n\n- The AD follows FAA reports of cracking at the forward lower corner frame and the lower beam of the No. 3 cargo door. The stated safety risk is that undetected cracking could cause door-stop failure, loss of the cargo door in flight, and rapid decompression of the aircraft. (Background)\n\nHow it works in practice\n\n- Operators must follow the FAA AD’s technical instructions: inspect the specified structure, carry out any required repairs or modifications, and meet the inspection/repair intervals or limitations the FAA AD prescribes. The Australian AD does not restate those technical steps — it makes compliance with the FAA AD mandatory for affected aircraft in Australia. (Requirement, Compliance)\n\nWho pays and who decides\n\n- Operators pay the direct costs: labour for inspections, parts and repairs, and aircraft downtime while work is done. Maintenance organisations carry out the physical work under their approvals; operators must arrange and fund it. (Requirement)\n- The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) enforces the AD in Australia by making compliance mandatory; the FAA AD supplies the technical content. Operators may seek FAA‑approved alternative methods of compliance (if allowed by the FAA AD) and CASA typically recognises FAA approvals, but approvals and technical changes are decided by the FAA or by authorised delegations. (Requirement)\n\nTrade-offs, incentives and compliance burden\n\n- Incentives: Operators face regulatory and safety incentives to comply promptly (non-compliance can lead to grounding, enforcement action, and safety risk). The direct economic incentive is avoidance of a safety-critical failure.\n- Costs and opportunity costs: Inspections and repairs impose direct maintenance expense and aircraft out-of-service time. Those costs are concentrated on the owners/operators of affected 727-200 aircraft; safety benefits are diffuse (passengers, crew, and the travelling public).\n- Implementation risk: The AD relies on an external technical document (the FAA AD and Boeing service bulletin). That can speed action (using established FAA engineering) but creates dependence on FAA/Boeing revisions and on the availability of approved repair parts and approved repair procedures.\n- Alternatives/substitution: If the FAA AD permits alternative methods of compliance (AMOCs) or revisions, operators may pursue those through the FAA approval process; otherwise they must follow the FAA AD verbatim. (Requirement)\n\nNet effect on private choice and markets\n\n- The AD restricts operator choice with respect to the affected structural area: operators must inspect and correct as specified rather than choosing whether to do so. The rule may prompt short-term cost increases for affected operators and temporary reductions in aircraft availability. It does not create a new recurring tax or broad industry regulation — it imposes a targeted safety obligation on a defined fleet.\n\nSource claims and testing them briefly\n\n- Source claim: cracking could lead to loss of the cargo door and decompression. The AD treats this as a safety risk warranting mandatory inspections and repairs. (Background)\n- Testing that claim against costs and incentives: The directive imposes inspection/repair costs on a small group of operators. The decision to mandate action shifts the immediate cost burden to operators while aiming to reduce a low-probability but high-consequence safety risk. Implementation depends on timely availability of parts and approved repair procedures; if those are constrained, aircraft downtime (and costs) could be higher than signalled in the AD. (Applicability, Requirement, Compliance)\n\nKey references in the instrument: Applicability; Requirement (references FAA AD 2005-11-09, Amdt 39-14111); Compliance (effective date 1 September 2005); Background (cracking and risk description)."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/ad-b727-194-cargo-door-number-3","history":"/api/acts/ad-b727-194-cargo-door-number-3/history","analysis":"/api/acts/ad-b727-194-cargo-door-number-3/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/ad-b727-194-cargo-door-number-3/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/ad-b727-194-cargo-door-number-3/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/ad-b727-194-cargo-door-number-3/documents"}}