{"id":"F2006B02953","name":"AD/B737/53 - Flight Attendant Seats","slug":"ad-b737-53-flight-attendant-seats","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":42295,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2006B02953-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-01","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"AD/B737/53 - Flight Attendant Seats","content":"---\nmeta-content-style-type: text/css\nmeta-content-type: application/xhtml+xml; charset=utf-8\nmeta-generator: Aspose.Words for .NET 22.10.0\n---\n\n?xml version=\"1.0\" encoding=\"utf-8\" standalone=\"no\"?>\n\nCOMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (Civil Aviation Regulations 1998), PART 39 - 105 CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY\n\nSCHEDULE OF AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES\n\n \n\n![](image.001.png)  Boeing 737 Series Aeroplanes\n\n \n\nAD/B737/53 Flight Attendant Seats 3/91\n\nApplicability: Model 737-300, 737-400 and 737-500 series; equipped with Transaero p/n 91466 series double flight attendant seats.\n\n \n\nRequirement: Action in accordance with the technical requirements of FAA AD 90-26-05 Amdt 39- 6832.\n\n \n\nNote: Transaero SB 176 refers.\n\n \n\nCompliance: As specified in the Requirement Document with revised effective date of 21 March 1991.\n\n \n\nBackground: There have been reported instances of bent, fractured, broken, cracked or otherwise damaged seat bottoms of certain double flight attendant seats manufactured by Transaero. These conditions were apparently caused by the incorrect manufacture o these seats.\n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This is a discrete, targeted safety directive addressing a specific manufacturing defect in a specific aircraft part. It has not expanded beyond its original purpose of mandating repairs to faulty flight attendant seats on specific Boeing 737 variants."},"complexity_factors":["Very short document (approximately 200 words)","Only 1 defined term implicitly referenced (the FAA AD number)","Single, clear applicability clause identifying specific aircraft models and part numbers","No nested exceptions or conditional logic — straightforward command to comply with external document","Simple linear structure: applicability → requirement → compliance date → background","Cross-references only 2 external documents (FAA AD and manufacturer service bulletin)"],"plain_english_summary":"This is an **Airworthiness Directive (AD)** — essentially a mandatory safety order issued by Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). It applies to specific Boeing 737 aircraft (the -300, -400, and -500 models) that have a particular type of double flight attendant seat made by a company called Transaero.\n\n**What it does:**\n- **Orders airlines to inspect and fix** these flight attendant seats because they were manufactured incorrectly\n- **The problem:** The seat bottoms have been bending, breaking, cracking, or otherwise failing — which is dangerous for crew safety during turbulence or emergency landings\n- **What airlines must do:** Follow the technical instructions in an American safety order (FAA AD 90-26-05) and a manufacturer's service bulletin (Transaero SB 176)\n- **Deadline:** The fixes must be done by 21 March 1991\n\n**Who it affects:** Airlines operating these specific Boeing 737 models with Transaero double flight attendant seats (part number 91466 series).\n\n**Why it matters:** Flight attendant seats need to withstand significant forces during emergencies. Faulty seats could injure crew members or prevent them from performing safety duties when passengers need them most."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The document does not indicate any change to the substantive scope of the safety issue or to the range of affected equipment; it prescribes compliance with FAA AD 90-26-05 for the same set of seats and aircraft models identified as affected (Applicability, Requirement). The only procedural change recorded is a revised effective date for the Requirement Document (\"Compliance\"), not a change in whom or what is covered."},"complexity_factors":["Single-issue directive limited to a narrow fleet subset (B737-300/400/500 with Transaero p/n 91466 seats) (Applicability).","Delegation of technical specification to an external FAA AD (FAA AD 90-26-05) increases reliance on another document (Requirement).","Reference to a manufacturer service bulletin (Transaero SB 176) for technical detail (Note).","Compliance timing adjustment (revised effective date 21 March 1991) is noted but no detailed scheduling or exceptions are included (Compliance).","No cost allocation, exemptions, or alternative compliance pathways are specified in the text, leaving operational detail to the referenced documents (Requirement, Compliance)."],"plain_english_summary":"What this instrument does (mechanically)\n\n- This is an airworthiness directive issued under the Commonwealth's civil aviation framework that requires specific corrective action for certain Boeing 737 aeroplanes. It makes compliance with an external FAA airworthiness directive mandatory for Australian-registered operations (see header and \"Requirement\").\n\nWho is affected\n\n- The directive applies only to Boeing 737-300, 737-400 and 737-500 series aircraft that are fitted with Transaero part number 91466 series double flight attendant seats (\"Applicability\").\n\nWhat operators must do\n\n- Operators of affected aircraft must carry out the technical actions set out in FAA AD 90-26-05 Amendment 39-6832. The AD text points Australian operators to that FAA requirement as the mandatory course of action (\"Requirement\"). The Compliance paragraph makes those actions compulsory as specified in the referenced Requirement Document, with a revised effective date of 21 March 1991 (\"Compliance\").\n\nTechnical reference\n\n- The directive also notes Transaero Service Bulletin 176 as a related document (\"Note\").\n\nWhy the directive was issued (official rationale)\n\n- The document states there have been reported instances of bent, fractured, broken, cracked or otherwise damaged seat bottoms in certain Transaero double flight attendant seats and says those conditions were apparently caused by incorrect manufacture of the seats (\"Background\"). The Requirement therefore directs remedial action in accordance with the FAA AD.\n\nPractical effects, who pays, and decision points\n\n- Who pays: The directive does not specify funding or cost allocation. Because the instrument makes the FAA-prescribed actions mandatory for affected aircraft, the immediate compliance cost (inspections, repairs or replacements described in the Requirement Document) will fall on the operators of the affected aeroplanes unless another party (for example, a manufacturer or lessor) is contractually responsible. This follows from the Requirement and Compliance paragraphs.\n\n- Who decides: The Civil Aviation Safety Authority has published the directive under the Commonwealth civil aviation framework (header). The technical details to be followed are those in FAA AD 90-26-05 (\"Requirement\") and the related Transaero service bulletin (\"Note\").\n\n- Behaviour changes required: Operators must identify affected aeroplanes (per \"Applicability\") and perform the inspections or corrective actions specified in the FAA AD and referenced documents by the stated compliance date (\"Compliance\").\n\nCompliance burden and administrative discretion\n\n- Compliance burden: The text obliges operators to perform the externally specified technical actions; it does not quantify time, parts or labour required. The size of that burden depends on the procedures and intervals set out in FAA AD 90-26-05 and Transaero SB 176 (\"Requirement\", \"Note\").\n\n- Agency discretion: The directive itself delegates the technical specification to the FAA AD and to the Transaero service bulletin. The published text does not record discretionary exemptions, alternate methods of compliance, or cost-sharing arrangements; any such matters would need to be found in the referenced Requirement Document or in separate CASA administration.\n\nTrade-offs, risks and implementation notes\n\n- The instrument’s stated purpose is to address damaged seat bottoms that are attributed to manufacturing error (\"Background\"). The concrete trade-off is that operators must expend resources to carry out the required actions (inspections/repairs) in order to meet the mandatory safety requirement (\"Requirement\", \"Compliance\").\n\n- The document does not specify supply, scheduling or technical-support arrangements for completing the mandated work. It also does not specify who, if anyone, will bear replacement-part costs or downtime; those are matters for operators, contractual arrangements, or the detailed Requirement Document (\"Requirement\", \"Compliance\").\n\n- The only scheduling detail in this text is a revised effective date of 21 March 1991 for the Requirement Document (\"Compliance\").\n\nSource references: header, Applicability, Requirement, Note, Compliance, Background."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/ad-b737-53-flight-attendant-seats","history":"/api/acts/ad-b737-53-flight-attendant-seats/history","analysis":"/api/acts/ad-b737-53-flight-attendant-seats/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/ad-b737-53-flight-attendant-seats/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/ad-b737-53-flight-attendant-seats/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/ad-b737-53-flight-attendant-seats/documents"}}