{"id":"F2006B03719","name":"AD/BEECH 200/66 Amdt 1 - Aircraft Flight Manual, Flight into Icing Conditions","slug":"ad-beech-200-66-amdt-1-aircraft-flight-manual-flight-into-icing-conditions","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":43309,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2006B03719-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-02","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE","sectionType":"part","heading":"AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE","content":"# AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE\n\n![](image.002.png)\n\n![](image.002.png)  \nFor the reasons set out in the background section, the CASA delegate whose signature appears below revokes Airworthiness Directive (AD) AD/BEECH 200/66 and issues the following AD under subregulation 39.1 (1) of CAR 1998. The AD requires that the action set out in the requirement section (being action that the delegate considers necessary to correct the unsafe condition) be taken in relation to the aircraft or aeronautical product mentioned in the applicability section: (a) in the circumstances mentioned in the requirement section; and (b) in accordance with the instructions set out in the requirement section; and (c) at the time mentioned in the compliance section.","sortOrder":0},{"sectionNumber":"AD/BEECH 200/66","sectionType":"part","heading":"AD/BEECH 200/66","content":"# AD/BEECH 200/66\n\nAmdt 1\n\n  \n\nAircraft Flight Manual, Flight into Icing Conditions\n\n  \n7/2000","sortOrder":1},{"sectionNumber":"\"WARNING\"","sectionType":"part","heading":"\"WARNING\"","content":"# \"WARNING\"\n\nSevere icing may result from environmental conditions outside of those for which the aircraft is certificated.\n\nFlight in freezing rain, freezing drizzle, or mixed icing conditions (super cooled liquid water and ice crystals) may result in:\n\n    ice build-up on protected surfaces and exceed the capability of the ice protection system, or\n    may result in ice forming aft of the protected surfaces.\n\nThis ice may not be shed using the ice protection systems, and may seriously degrade the performance and controllability of the aircraft.\n\nDuring flight, severe icing conditions that exceed those for which the aircraft is certificated shall be determined by the visual cues described below. If one or more of these visual cues exists, immediately request priority handling from Air Traffic Control to facilitate a route or an altitude change to exit the icing conditions. The cues are:\n\n    unusually extensive ice accumulation on the airframe and windscreen in areas not normally observed to collect ice, and/or\n\n    accumulation of ice on the upper surface of the wing aft of the protected area, and/or\n\n    accumulation of ice on the engine nacelles and propeller spinners farther aft than normally observed.","sortOrder":2},{"sectionNumber":"THE FOLLOWING WEATHER CONDITIONS MAY BE ","sectionType":"part","heading":"THE FOLLOWING WEATHER CONDITIONS MAY BE CONDUCIVE TO SEVERE IN-FLIGHT ICING:","content":"# THE FOLLOWING WEATHER CONDITIONS MAY BE CONDUCIVE TO SEVERE IN-FLIGHT ICING:\n\n    Visible rain at temperatures below 0 degrees Celsius ambient air temperature;\n    Droplets that splash or splatter on impact at temperatures below 0 degrees Celsius ambient air temperature.","sortOrder":3},{"sectionNumber":"PROCEDURES FOR EXITING A SEVERE ICING","sectionType":"part","heading":"PROCEDURES FOR EXITING A SEVERE ICING","content":"# PROCEDURES FOR EXITING A SEVERE ICING\n\nENVIRONMENT: (These procedures are applicable to all flight phases from take-off to landing.)\n\nMonitor the ambient air temperature.\n\nWhile severe icing may form at temperatures as cold as \\-18 degrees Celsius, increased vigilance is warranted at temperatures around freezing when visible moisture is present.","sortOrder":4}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"Compared with the original AD, this amendment clarifies and expands the AFM material by adding explicit visual cues, a short list of weather conditions conducive to severe icing, and standardised procedures for exiting severe icing that apply across all flight phases. That broadens the practical scope from simply notifying crews about icing risk to prescribing specific recognition cues and mandatory procedural responses; the change therefore expands the behavioural obligations on pilots and operational practices for affected operators."},"complexity_factors":["Short document with one clear action (AFM amendment)","Few cross-references (references CAR 1998 subregulation 39.1(1) and revokes prior AD)","No extensive defined terms list or multiple Parts","Prescriptive, plain-language operational text (warning, cues, weather, procedures) rather than conditional legal exceptions","Compliance obligation is documentary and operational rather than technical modification"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this instrument does (mechanically)**\n\n- Revokes the earlier Airworthiness Directive AD/BEECH 200/66 and issues an amended directive requiring an update to the Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) for the affected Beech 200-series aeroplanes.\n- Mandates that specific warning text and procedures about flight into severe icing conditions be included in the AFM and complied with by flight crews. The required material includes:\n  - A warning that severe icing can occur outside the aircraft’s certificated ice conditions and may exceed the capability of the ice protection system (the AFM text to be inserted is reproduced in the AD).\n  - Visual cues pilots must use in flight to determine when icing conditions exceed certificated limits (e.g. unusual ice accumulation on surfaces not normally affected; ice aft of protected wing areas; ice on nacelles and spinners farther aft than normal).\n  - A short list of weather conditions conducive to severe icing (visible rain or splashing droplets where ambient air temperature is below 0°C).\n  - Procedures for exiting severe icing that apply to all flight phases and advice to monitor ambient air temperature (with a note that severe icing may form as cold as −18°C but increased vigilance is needed near 0°C when visible moisture is present).\n- Requires operators to take the actions the CASA delegate considers necessary, in accordance with the AD’s instructions and within the compliance timing set out in the AD.\n\n**Who is affected**\n\n- Owners and operators of the specified Beech 200-series aircraft and their flight crews. The AD imposes a mandatory documentation change (update to the AFM) and an operational obligation on pilots to follow the AFM guidance when the visual cues or weather conditions described are present.\n- Maintenance organisations or authorised personnel who implement AFM changes and ensure the correct pages/text are in the flight manual.\n\n**Why it matters (stated purpose and operational effect)**\n\n- The stated purpose is to reduce the safety risk from severe in-flight icing that can exceed the capability of on-board ice protection systems by mandating that crews have clear, standardised warnings and procedures in the AFM.\n\n**Costs, incentives and trade-offs**\n\n- Direct compliance cost: primarily administrative — inserting required text into the AFM and distributing the revised AFM to crews. There may be a modest cost for maintenance/administration time.\n- Operational costs: the AD will incentivise crews to request priority handling from ATC and to change route or altitude to exit icing, which may increase flight time, fuel burn, delays or cancellations on affected flights.\n- Training/awareness cost: flight crews will need to be made aware of the new AFM material and trained or briefed on the visual cues and exit procedures; this is an implementation cost for operators.\n- Benefits and incentives: clearer AFM guidance reduces ambiguity in pilot decision-making in icing encounters, which can lower accident risk. Operators gain a clearer rule-of-thumb for when to divert, which concentrates benefits (safety) for occupants and the operator’s asset protection.\n- Trade-offs: stricter operational responses (more diversions/altitude changes) trade off punctuality and fuel/operational efficiency for increased safety margins.\n\n**Implementation risk and compliance burden**\n\n- Low technical implementation risk: the change is documentary (AFM text insertion) rather than an engineering modification.\n- Compliance risk centers on ensuring aircraft in service actually carry the revised AFM pages and that crews read and follow the guidance in operational conditions.\n- Enforcement mechanism: the AD is issued under CAR 1998 subregulation 39.1(1) and is mandatory; non‑compliance would expose operators to regulatory enforcement action.\n\n**Effect on private choice and markets**\n\n- The measure constrains pilot discretion in the sense it standardises the recognition cues and required action, but it does not create a price, tax or direct subsidy.\n- Competitive effects are minimal and diffuse: all affected operators must comply, so no operator-specific advantage is created by the AD itself. Operational costs (diversions, fuel) are borne by operators and may be passed to customers in the form of higher fares or schedule changes.\n\n**Concentrated benefits and potential unintended consequences**\n\n- Concentrated benefits accrue to aircraft occupants, operators (through reduced accident and damage risk), and insurers (reduced tail risk). Costs are diffuse across operators in the form of additional operational constraints.\n- A possible unintended effect is conservative flight planning or avoidance of certain weather that could increase cancellations or route inefficiencies; this is a behavioural substitution rather than a technical side-effect.\n\n**Who decides and who pays**\n\n- The CASA delegate (under CAR 1998 authority) decides the AD content and compliance requirements. Operators pay the direct administrative, training and any increased operational costs triggered by the guidance.\n\n**Source’s stated purpose vs practical implications**\n\n- The source claims the change corrects an unsafe condition by giving crews standardised warnings and exit procedures. Practically, that corrects an information and decision-making gap (low-cost intervention). The main practical costs are administrative and operational (training, diversions). Implementation depends on crews updating manuals and adopting the procedures in real time when visual cues or specified weather appear (sections: “WARNING”, the list of visual cues, the weather conditions list, and the “PROCEDURES FOR EXITING A SEVERE ICING ENVIRONMENT”)."},"flash_summary_failed":{"failed":true,"reason":"Unauthenticated. Configure AI_GATEWAY_API_KEY or use a provider module. Learn more: https://ai-sdk.dev/unauthenticated-ai-gateway","source":"analysis-cron"},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This is an amendment (Amdt 1) to an existing Airworthiness Directive. The scope remains tightly focused on the original purpose: addressing unsafe icing conditions for Beechcraft 200 aircraft. The amendment appears to update or replace the previous version of the same directive without expanding beyond flight manual procedures for severe icing recognition and escape."},"complexity_factors":["Very short document (approximately 400 words)","No defined terms section — all language is plain operational English","No cross-references to other legislation or regulations beyond a single citation to CAR 1998 subregulation 39.1(1) (the legal basis for issuing ADs)","Simple conditional structure: 'If you see X, do Y'","Single purpose document with no exceptions, exemptions, or nested conditions","Primarily instructional/warning content rather than regulatory prescription with legal contingencies"],"plain_english_summary":"This AD replaces the prior Beechcraft 200 order and warns pilots of signs of severe icing on King Air Model 200 aircraft—ice forming where it shouldn’t and weather cues like visible freezing rain or droplets at sub‑zero OAT. \n\nPilots must immediately request priority ATC help to change altitude/route and continuously monitor outside air temperature and visible moisture to escape conditions beyond the aircraft’s ice‑protection capability. Compliance is mandatory for owners, operators and flight crews."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/ad-beech-200-66-amdt-1-aircraft-flight-manual-flight-into-icing-conditions","history":"/api/acts/ad-beech-200-66-amdt-1-aircraft-flight-manual-flight-into-icing-conditions/history","analysis":"/api/acts/ad-beech-200-66-amdt-1-aircraft-flight-manual-flight-into-icing-conditions/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/ad-beech-200-66-amdt-1-aircraft-flight-manual-flight-into-icing-conditions/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/ad-beech-200-66-amdt-1-aircraft-flight-manual-flight-into-icing-conditions/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/ad-beech-200-66-amdt-1-aircraft-flight-manual-flight-into-icing-conditions/documents"}}