{"id":"F2006B08937","name":"AD/DH114/27 Amdt 1 - Flap Datum Hinge Assembly - Inspection","slug":"ad-dh114-27-amdt-1-flap-datum-hinge-assembly-inspection","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":52533,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2006B08937-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-02","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"AD/DH114/27 Amdt 1 - Flap Datum Hinge Assembly - Inspection","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)  DH114 (Heron) Series Aeroplanes\n\n \n\nAD/DH114/27\n\nAmdt 1\n\n\nFlap Datum Hinge Assembly - Inspection NK\n\n \n\nApplicability: All models.\n\n \n\nDocument: Hawker Siddeley TNS Heron (114) No. CF.14, Issue 1. Compliance:  For Para. 4.1 - Within 25 hours time in service after 17 July 1970.\n\nFor Paras. 4.2 & 4.3 - In accordance with the requirement document.\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\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n\n \n","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"The instrument is labelled as \"Amdt 1\" to AD/DH114/27, indicating it is an amendment to a prior directive. The supplied text does not include the original AD language, so the extract does not show which elements (if any) were altered by this amendment. The text as supplied establishes that the AD applies to \"All models\" and sets specific compliance timing and a referenced requirement document (\"Hawker Siddeley TNS Heron (114) No. CF.14, Issue 1\"). Without the original AD text or a clear statement of the amendment's changes, it is not possible from the supplied material to identify exactly how the scope has changed; only that an amendment exists."},"complexity_factors":["Short, narrowly targeted directive with few provisions (low overall volume)","References an external requirement document (Hawker Siddeley TNS Heron (114) No. CF.14, Issue 1) for procedural detail, which shifts substantive complexity outside the AD","Specific but limited timing requirement (Para. 4.1: \"Within 25 hours time in service after 17 July 1970\") reduces interpretive ambiguity for that action but creates operational scheduling complexity","Paras. 4.2 & 4.3 are not detailed in the supplied extract and require cross-reference, increasing compliance uncertainty","Regulatory authority and enforcement framework are indicated only at header level, requiring familiarity with Part 39 processes for full implementation"],"plain_english_summary":"What this instrument does mechanically\n\n- Requires inspection activity for the flap datum hinge assembly on DH114 (Heron) series aeroplanes. The instrument is labelled as an Amendment 1 to AD/DH114/27 and appears in the Civil Aviation Safety Authority schedule of airworthiness directives (header: \"COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (Civil Aviation Regulations 1998), PART 39 - 105 CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY SCHEDULE OF AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES\").\n- Applicability is stated as \"All models\" (section: \"Applicability: All models\").\n- The inspections must follow the procedures and timing set out either directly in the AD or in the referenced manufacturer document: the requirement document is \"Hawker Siddeley TNS Heron (114) No. CF.14, Issue 1\" (section: \"Document: Hawker Siddeley TNS Heron (114) No. CF.14, Issue 1\").\n- Stated timing: for paragraph 4.1 the action must be done \"Within 25 hours time in service after 17 July 1970\"; for paragraphs 4.2 and 4.3 actions are to be carried out \"In accordance with the requirement document\" (section: \"Compliance: For Para. 4.1 - Within 25 hours time in service after 17 July 1970. For Paras. 4.2 & 4.3 - In accordance with the requirement document.\").\n\nWho is affected and who decides\n\n- Aircraft owners and operators of DH114 (Heron) series aeroplanes must carry out the inspections because the AD attaches mandatory maintenance/compliance obligations to those aircraft (section: \"Applicability: All models\").\n- The Civil Aviation Safety Authority is the issuing authority for the schedule of airworthiness directives (header: \"...CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY SCHEDULE OF AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES\").\n- The specific inspection procedures and possibly further timing or remedial actions are in the referenced manufacturer document (\"Hawker Siddeley TNS Heron (114) No. CF.14, Issue 1\"), so the content of compliance is partially delegated to that external document (section: \"Document: ... No. CF.14, Issue 1\").\n\nWho pays, incentives and compliance burden\n\n- Costs fall to owners/operators: they must schedule aircraft downtime, perform the inspection(s), and carry out any corrective work required by the procedure document. This cost implication follows from the AD making the inspection mandatory for all models (sections: \"Applicability: All models\" and \"Compliance: ...\").\n- The AD imposes a short-term timing constraint for the action in paragraph 4.1 (\"Within 25 hours time in service after 17 July 1970\"), which creates an incentive for operators to prioritise and reallocate maintenance resources into that limited window. If inspections reveal work, operators incur additional maintenance costs and potential longer grounding of aircraft (section: \"Compliance: For Para. 4.1 ...\").\n- Because Paras. 4.2 and 4.3 refer to the requirement document for timing and method, operators must obtain and follow that external document; this creates administrative burdens (document access, interpretation, record-keeping) beyond a simple time deadline (section: \"For Paras. 4.2 & 4.3 - In accordance with the requirement document\").\n\nDiscretion, implementation risks and trade-offs\n\n- The AD delegates procedural detail to a manufacturer document (\"Hawker Siddeley ... No. CF.14, Issue 1\"), so enforcement and interpretation depend on that document's content and on the regulator's acceptance of compliance with it (section: \"Document: ... No. CF.14, Issue 1\"). This introduces implementation risk if the external document is ambiguous or inaccessible.\n- The AD sets a fixed short deadline for at least one action (Para. 4.1). Fixed deadlines can concentrate workload into a short period, possibly increasing short-term service costs or supply bottlenecks for maintenance resources.\n- The instrument does not, in the text supplied, state the specific remedial outcomes, benefits, or the regulator's explanatory rationale. The text therefore requires readers to consult the referenced requirement document for procedural detail and to infer the directive's intended operational effect (sections: whole AD; specifically \"Document: ...\" and \"Compliance: ...\").\n\nPractical effects on private choice and markets\n\n- Operators must choose between scheduling inspections within the prescribed short window or seeking any available statutory relief mechanisms (not included in the supplied text). That choice affects aircraft availability and operating schedules (section: \"Compliance: For Para. 4.1 ...\").\n- The AD creates a compliance market for qualified maintenance labour and parts (if inspection leads to repairs). The directive concentrates immediate demand for such services into the compliance period described in the AD (section: \"Compliance: ...\").\n\nNotes on statements of purpose\n\n- The AD's text does not include an explicit statement of safety rationale or expected benefit in the supplied extract. The instrument’s practical effect is an inspection requirement per the specified timing and procedures; any claimed benefits are not set out in the supplied text and would need to be confirmed by consulting the explanatory materials or the referenced requirement document (sections: whole AD; specifically \"Document: ...\" and \"Compliance: ...\")."},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This is Amendment 1 to an existing Airworthiness Directive. The scope remains tightly focused on the original safety issue (flap datum hinge assembly inspection) for the DH114 Heron aircraft. There is no evidence of scope creep; it appears to be a routine update or clarification to the original AD/DH114/27."},"complexity_factors":["Very short document (approximately 200 words)","Only 1 defined term implicitly referenced (the technical document CF.14)","Simple conditional structure: one deadline for initial inspection, one reference to ongoing requirements","No nested exceptions or complex cross-referencing within the text itself","Single applicability clause covering 'All models'","Note: Full complexity would require reviewing the referenced technical document (CF.14), which is not included in this legislative instrument"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this is:** This is an **Airworthiness Directive (AD)** — a mandatory safety instruction issued by Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) for aircraft.\n\n**What it does:** It requires owners and operators of **de Havilland DH114 Heron series aeroplanes** to inspect the **flap datum hinge assembly** — a critical component that helps control the aircraft's flaps (the moving surfaces on the wings that help with takeoff and landing).\n\n**Who it affects:** Anyone who owns, operates, or maintains a DH114 Heron aircraft (all models).\n\n**What must be done:**\n- **Initial inspection:** Within 25 hours of flying time after 17 July 1970, operators must complete the inspection described in paragraph 4.1 of the referenced technical document.\n- **Ongoing requirements:** Additional inspections or actions described in paragraphs 4.2 and 4.3 must be carried out according to the schedule in the technical document (Hawker Siddeley TNS Heron No. CF.14, Issue 1).\n\n**Why it matters:** This directive addresses a potential safety defect in the flap hinge mechanism. If this component fails, it could compromise the pilot's ability to control the aircraft during critical phases of flight (takeoff and landing), potentially leading to loss of control or accident.\n\n**Key point:** This is not optional. Compliance is legally mandatory under the Civil Aviation Regulations 1998, Part 39."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/ad-dh114-27-amdt-1-flap-datum-hinge-assembly-inspection","history":"/api/acts/ad-dh114-27-amdt-1-flap-datum-hinge-assembly-inspection/history","analysis":"/api/acts/ad-dh114-27-amdt-1-flap-datum-hinge-assembly-inspection/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/ad-dh114-27-amdt-1-flap-datum-hinge-assembly-inspection/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/ad-dh114-27-amdt-1-flap-datum-hinge-assembly-inspection/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/ad-dh114-27-amdt-1-flap-datum-hinge-assembly-inspection/documents"}}