{"id":"F2006B04131","name":"AD/BEECH 65/34 Amdt 5 - Upper and Lower Outboard Wing Front Spar Caps","slug":"ad-beech-65-34-amdt-5-upper-and-lower-outboard-wing-front-spar-caps","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":43837,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2006B04131-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 65/34 Amdt 4 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 65/34","sectionType":"part","heading":"AD/BEECH 65/34","content":"# AD/BEECH 65/34\n\nAmdt 5\n\nApplicability: All models.","sortOrder":1},{"sectionNumber":"Upper and Lower Outboard Wing Front Spar","sectionType":"part","heading":"Upper and Lower Outboard Wing Front Spar Caps","content":"# Upper and Lower Outboard Wing Front Spar Caps\n\n  \n11/2000","sortOrder":2}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":5,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"This instrument expressly revokes AD/BEECH 65/34 Amdt 4 and issues AD/BEECH 65/34 Amdt 5, thereby replacing the prior amendment (see: \"revokes ... Amdt 4 and issues the following AD\"). The supplied text retains the applicability provision \"All models.\" The precise nature and magnitude of the change in required actions, timing, or technical scope cannot be determined from the excerpt because the requirement and compliance sections are not included; those sections would show how the actionable scope differs from the prior amendment."},"complexity_factors":["Revocation and replacement of a prior amendment (Amdt 4 revoked, Amdt 5 issued) creates cross-reference complexity.","Authority delegated to CASA delegate under subregulation 39.1(1) of CAR 1998 concentrates discretion and requires tracking of delegated decisions.","Key operative details (the requirement section and the compliance section) are not included in the supplied text, making practical assessment incomplete.","Applicability is broad (\"All models\"), which increases potential operational impact and variability of compliance actions across operators.","Potential technical specificity implied by the subject (wing front spar caps) suggests detailed maintenance/engineering requirements that add implementation complexity."],"plain_english_summary":"What this instrument does, in plain English\n\n- This document is an Airworthiness Directive (AD) identified as AD/BEECH 65/34 Amdt 5 dated 11/2000. It formally revokes the previous amendment (Amdt 4) and replaces it with this AD (see: \"revokes Airworthiness Directive (AD) AD/BEECH 65/34 Amdt 4 and issues the following AD under subregulation 39.1 (1) of CAR 1998\").\n\n- Applicability: the AD applies to \"All models.\" That is the scope statement provided in the instrument.\n\n- Legal effect and mechanism: the AD requires that the corrective action described in its requirement section be taken in relation to the aircraft or aeronautical product covered by the applicability statement. The directive instructs that the action must be taken (a) in the circumstances mentioned in the requirement section; (b) in accordance with the instructions set out in the requirement section; and (c) at the time mentioned in the compliance section (see: \"The AD requires that the action set out in the requirement section ... (a) in the circumstances ...; (b) in accordance with the instructions ...; and (c) at the time mentioned in the compliance section\"). The legal power for issuing the AD is subregulation 39.1(1) of CAR 1998 (see: opening paragraph).\n\nPurpose claimed and how it is implemented\n\n- The document explicitly frames the AD as corrective action for an \"unsafe condition\" (see: \"being action that the delegate considers necessary to correct the unsafe condition\"). That is the stated purpose.\n\n- Implementation is mechanical and direction-based: the CASA delegate issues the AD, the requirement section sets out the specific technical actions and instructions, and the compliance section sets the timing. The delegate’s signature (referenced in the preamble) gives the AD legal force.\n\nWho decides, who pays, and how behaviour changes\n\n- Who decides: the CASA delegate determines and issues the required corrective action and timings under the cited CAR subregulation.\n\n- Who pays: the instrument makes the operator/owner of the applicable aircraft responsible for carrying out the AD’s required action (the AD compels action \"in relation to the aircraft or aeronautical product mentioned in the applicability section\"). The text does not specify funding, compensation, or cost-sharing.\n\n- Behaviour changes: operators must carry out the inspections/repairs/replacements or other actions that the requirement section prescribes, and must comply within the time specified in the compliance section. This will change maintenance planning, scheduling and potentially require parts, labour and aircraft downtime.\n\nImplementation, compliance burden and uncertainty\n\n- The AD gives no technical details in the supplied text about what the required action is (the requirement section itself is not included here). Without the requirement and compliance text, it is not possible to quantify the cost, scope of work, parts required, or exact downtime.\n\n- Discretion and administrative control: the CASA delegate has discretion to set the corrective action and timing (the AD is issued under the delegate’s authority). That discretion concentrates decision-making with the regulator/its delegate rather than with individual operators.\n\nTrade-offs, incentives and risks (mechanical description)\n\n- Benefit side (claimed): the AD is intended to correct an \"unsafe condition,\" which, if the requirement is effective, should reduce the identified safety risk.\n\n- Cost side: costs are borne by operators/owners who must comply. Those costs will include labour, inspections, replacement parts, and aircraft downtime. The document does not quantify or allocate those costs.\n\n- Implementation risk and compliance burden: because the specific remedial steps and timing are in the requirement/compliance sections (not provided here), operators must obtain and follow those sections exactly. The lack of those details in this excerpt means an operator cannot assess the magnitude or operational impact from this text alone.\n\n- Substitution and market effects: any required repair or replacement of the \"Upper and Lower Outboard Wing Front Spar Caps\" (the AD subject heading) may create demand for particular parts or technician services; the instrument does not specify permitted sources for parts or whether alternative methods of compliance are allowed.\n\nWhere to look next\n\n- To understand the concrete obligations, costs and timing, consult the AD’s requirement section and compliance section (the preamble here describes their legal effect but does not quote them)."},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":4,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This appears to be a routine amendment (Amdt 5) to an existing Airworthiness Directive. The scope remains consistent with the original AD/BEECH 65/34 — addressing structural integrity of wing spar caps on Beech 65 aircraft. Amendment 5 likely incorporates new inspection data, extends compliance times, or refines technical requirements based on operational experience, but does not expand beyond the original safety purpose."},"complexity_factors":["Standard AD structure with defined sections (Applicability, Compliance, Requirements, Background) but limited cross-referencing","Technical aviation terminology requires specialised knowledge (spar caps, outboard wing structure)","Refers to previous amendment history (Amdt 4 being revoked) creating version dependency","Conditional logic based on aircraft model applicability and compliance timeframes","Relies on external technical documentation (likely Beechcraft service bulletins or instructions) not reproduced in the directive itself","Regulatory authority citation (CAR 1998 subreg 39.1(1)) embedded in preamble"],"plain_english_summary":"This is an **Airworthiness Directive (AD)** — essentially a mandatory safety order issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) for aircraft.\n\n**What it does:**\n- Revokes (cancels) the previous version of this directive (Amendment 4) and replaces it with Amendment 5\n- Requires specific safety actions on **Beech 65 series aircraft** (the \"65\" in the title refers to the Beechcraft Model 65 — a twin-engine aircraft family including the Queen Air and King Air)\n- Targets the **upper and lower outboard wing front spar caps** — these are critical structural components at the front of the wing that bear significant stress during flight\n\n**Who it affects:**\n- Owners and operators of all Beech 65 model aircraft\n- Maintenance organisations servicing these aircraft\n\n**Why it matters:**\nSpar caps are fundamental to wing structural integrity. Fatigue, corrosion, or cracking in these components can lead to catastrophic wing failure. This AD mandates inspection and/or repair actions to address an identified unsafe condition before it causes an accident.\n\n**Key sections:**\n- **Applicability:** All Beech 65 models\n- **Compliance:** Specifies when actions must be completed\n- **Requirements:** The specific technical actions required (inspections, repairs, replacements)\n\nThe directive is issued under **CAR 1998** (Civil Aviation Regulations 1998), specifically subregulation 39.1(1), which gives CASA the power to issue mandatory safety directives."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/ad-beech-65-34-amdt-5-upper-and-lower-outboard-wing-front-spar-caps","history":"/api/acts/ad-beech-65-34-amdt-5-upper-and-lower-outboard-wing-front-spar-caps/history","analysis":"/api/acts/ad-beech-65-34-amdt-5-upper-and-lower-outboard-wing-front-spar-caps/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/ad-beech-65-34-amdt-5-upper-and-lower-outboard-wing-front-spar-caps/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/ad-beech-65-34-amdt-5-upper-and-lower-outboard-wing-front-spar-caps/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/ad-beech-65-34-amdt-5-upper-and-lower-outboard-wing-front-spar-caps/documents"}}