{"id":"F2006B03004","name":"AD/B747/103 - Cabin Overhead Stowage Compartment Doors","slug":"ad-b747-103-cabin-overhead-stowage-compartment-doors","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":42363,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2006B03004-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-01","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"AD/B747/103 - Cabin Overhead Stowage Compartment Doors","content":"COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (Civil Aviation Regulations 1998), PART 39 \\- 105 CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY\n\nSCHEDULE OF AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES\n\n![](image.001.png)  \nBoeing 747 Series Aeroplanes\n\nAD/B747/103 Cabin Overhead Stowage Compartment Doors 2/92\n\nApplicability: Model 747 series with line numbers 001 through 708, except 747-400 and freighters. Requirement: Action in accordance with the technical requirements of FAA AD 91-22-05 Amdt 39-\n\n8065.\n\nNote: Boeing SB 747-25-2734 refers.\n\nCompliance: As specified in the Requirement Document.\n\nBackground: The FAA has received reports of several injuries that resulted from overhead stowage compartment doors freefalling or swinging open faster than expected after unlatching because the doors were only partially restrained. This condition, if not corrected, could result in inadvertent or unrestrained opening of overhead stowage compartment doors, which could result in injury to passengers or flight attendants.","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This directive does not expand or alter the aircraft type’s certification in this text; it imposes a corrective maintenance requirement on a defined subset of Boeing 747 line numbers by mandating actions set out in an external FAA AD. The instrument’s scope is limited to imposing that safety action on the specified fleet (Applicability, Requirement, Compliance)."},"complexity_factors":["Cross-reference to an external FAA Airworthiness Directive (FAA AD 91-22-05 Amdt 39-8065) rather than containing self‑standing technical steps (Requirement)","Reference to a Boeing service bulletin (SB 747-25-2734) as related material, creating dependence on multiple documents (Note)","Narrow but specific applicability (line numbers 001–708, excluding 747-400 and freighters) requiring operators to check individual aircraft eligibility (Applicability)","Compliance specifics (timing, exact procedures) are delegated to the Requirement Document, so the AD text alone does not state deadlines or methods (Compliance)","Technical nature of the mandated work (mechanical restraint of overhead stowage doors) requires certified maintenance labour and potential aircraft downtime (Requirement, Compliance)"],"plain_english_summary":"What this instrument does (mechanically)\n\n- Requires operators of certain Boeing 747 aeroplanes to carry out the technical actions described in FAA Airworthiness Directive 91-22-05 (Amdt 39-8065). (Requirement)\n- Applies to Boeing 747 series aeroplanes with line numbers 001 through 708, excluding 747-400 models and freighter conversions. (Applicability)\n- Directs compliance with the steps and timing contained in the referenced Requirement Document rather than repeating the technical procedure in this notice. (Compliance)\n- Notes a Boeing service bulletin (SB 747-25-2734) as related material. (Note)\n\nWho is affected\n\n- Aircraft owners and operators of the specified Boeing 747 line numbers must ensure the required work is carried out. (Applicability, Requirement)\n- Maintenance organisations and licensed engineers who perform the work will carry out the physical inspections, modifications or repairs set out in the FAA AD and/or the Boeing service bulletin. (Requirement, Note)\n- Passengers and cabin crew are the potential beneficiaries of the safety remedy, because the action addresses a hazard that could cause injury. (Background)\n\nWhy it matters (stated purpose and operational effect)\n\n- The FAA reported incidents where overhead stowage compartment doors either fell freely or swung open faster than expected after unlatching because the doors were only partially restrained. If not corrected this could allow inadvertent or unrestrained opening and cause injury to passengers or flight attendants. The AD implements a mandated technical fix intended to remove that hazard. (Background, Requirement)\n\nWho pays, who decides, and what behaviour changes\n\n- Who pays: Aircraft owners/operators pay for the inspections, repairs or modifications required by the FAA AD and any associated downtime or parts/labour costs. (Requirement, Compliance)\n- Who decides: The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) issues this airworthiness directive; it requires operators to follow the FAA AD (so CASA enforces compliance while the FAA AD and Boeing SB specify the technical work). (Requirement, Note)\n- Behaviour changes: Operators must schedule and complete the mandated maintenance actions for affected aircraft in accordance with the Requirement Document. Maintenance providers must implement the technical steps prescribed. (Requirement, Compliance)\n\nImplementation mechanics, costs and trade-offs (practical testing of the stated rationale)\n\n- The directive accomplishes compliance by cross-referencing an external FAA AD rather than embedding technical steps, so operators must obtain and follow that external document (and the Boeing SB where relevant). This creates a dependency on external technical documents for exact scope, timing and methods. (Requirement, Note, Compliance)\n- The concrete cost to each operator depends on the work specified in the FAA AD/Boeing SB: parts, labour hours, and aircraft out-of-service time. Those costs are borne by the aircraft owner/operator. (Requirement, Compliance)\n- The safety benefit is targeted and concentrated (reduced risk of overhead door unrestrained opening for cabin occupants). The cost is more diffuse across operators and maintenance providers who must allocate resources to comply. (Background, Requirement)\n- Discretion is limited in substance because the AD requires following the FAA AD; operational discretion remains limited to how and when the operator schedules and performs the mandated work, subject to the compliance timing in the Requirement Document. (Requirement, Compliance)\n\nImplementation risks and administrative points\n\n- Because the AD refers to external technical documents, there is a risk of implementation delays or inconsistent interpretation if operators do not promptly obtain or correctly apply the FAA AD and related Boeing service bulletin. (Requirement, Note, Compliance)\n- The AD does not itself specify implementation timing in this text; timing and exact procedures are in the Requirement Document, so operators must consult that document to determine deadlines and acceptable corrective actions. (Compliance)\n\nSource citations: Applicability; Requirement; Note (Boeing SB); Compliance; Background."},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This is a standard, narrow airworthiness directive addressing a specific mechanical defect on specific aircraft. It has not expanded beyond its original safety purpose."},"complexity_factors":["Very short document (under 200 words)","Only 1 defined term implicitly referenced (line numbers)","No cross-references to other Australian legislation","Simple conditional logic: applies to specific model range, with two clear exclusions","Single requirement: comply with external FAA directive","No nested exceptions or complex procedural steps within the instrument itself"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this is:** This is an Airworthiness Directive (AD) — a mandatory safety order issued by Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) that requires specific repairs or inspections on certain aircraft.\n\n**What it does:** It orders airlines and aircraft operators to fix a safety problem with overhead luggage bin doors on specific Boeing 747 passenger jets. The doors were found to swing open too quickly or fall freely when unlatched, causing injuries to passengers and crew. The directive requires operators to follow a specific repair procedure developed by the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).\n\n**Who it affects:** \n- **Aircraft:** Boeing 747 models with production line numbers 001 through 708\n- **Exclusions:** Does NOT apply to 747-400 models or freighter (cargo-only) aircraft\n- **Operators:** Airlines and companies operating these specific aircraft in Australia\n\n**Why it matters:** Unrestrained overhead bin doors can fall open unexpectedly and hit people, causing head injuries. This directive prevents those injuries by ensuring proper door restraint mechanisms are installed.\n\n**What must be done:** Operators must follow the technical instructions in FAA AD 91-22-05 (a US safety order) and Boeing Service Bulletin 747-25-2734 (the manufacturer's repair guide). The exact deadline for compliance is set out in those documents."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/ad-b747-103-cabin-overhead-stowage-compartment-doors","history":"/api/acts/ad-b747-103-cabin-overhead-stowage-compartment-doors/history","analysis":"/api/acts/ad-b747-103-cabin-overhead-stowage-compartment-doors/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/ad-b747-103-cabin-overhead-stowage-compartment-doors/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/ad-b747-103-cabin-overhead-stowage-compartment-doors/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/ad-b747-103-cabin-overhead-stowage-compartment-doors/documents"}}