{"id":"F2006B09973","name":"AD/FU24/1 Amdt 2 - Elevator Control Cables and Pulleys - Inspection","slug":"ad-fu24-1-amdt-2-elevator-control-cables-and-pulleys-inspection","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":55259,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2006B09973-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-02","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"AD/FU24/1 Amdt 2 - Elevator Control Cables and Pulleys - Inspection","content":"![](image.001.png)\n\n![](image.001.png)  \nAIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE\n\nFor the reasons set out in the background section, the CASA delegate whose signature appears below revokes Airworthiness Directive (AD) AD/FU24/1 Amdt 1 and issues the following AD under subregulation 39.1 (1) of CASR 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.\n\n![](image.001.png)\n\nAirparts (NZ) Ltd FU 24 Series Aeroplanes\n\nAD/FU24/1\n\nAmdt 2\n\n  \n\nElevator Control Cables and Pulleys - Inspection\n\n  \n5/2003\n\nApplicability: All models.\n\nRequirement: 1. With the aid of a strong light, and if necessary a mirror, thoroughly inspect the parts of the upper and lower elevator control cables that pass over the pulleys in the rear of the fuselage at Stations 336.95 and 340.56. Look for wear, corrosion, broken wires and any evidence of cutting or jamming of the cable by foreign objects.\n\nNote: Operate the elevators through full travel when carrying out this inspection, and as far as possible, supplement the visual inspection by feeling the cables for broken wires and other damage.\n\n    2. Inspect the cable grooves in both pulleys for hardened deposits of super phosphate (agricultural aircraft only) and for foreign objects.\n\n    3. After completion of the inspection, clean out the rear of fuselage of any small loose objects such as stones, rivets and pieces of metal that could migrate into the pulley sheaves and foul or jam the cable.\n\nCompliance: One of the following three compliance times will apply, depending on the type of aircraft operations:\n\nFor aircraft engaged only in agricultural operations, at 100 hourly intervals.\n\nFor aircraft engaged only in non-agricultural operations, at 150 hourly intervals.\n\nFor aircraft engaged in mixed usage operations \\- i.e. operations where there is a combination of agricultural and non-agricultural operations, at 100 hourly intervals.\n\nThis Amendment becomes effective on 15 May 2003.\n\nAirparts (NZ) Ltd FU 24 Series Aeroplanes\n\nAD/FU24/1 Amdt 2 (continued)\n\nBackground: This Amendment is issued to make a distinction between aircraft engaged in agricultural operations and aircraft engaged in non-agricultural operations. It has been shown that general deterioration of the elevator control system is a function of the number of flight cycles (i.e. large deflection control movements such as takeoffs and landings) and the type of operation the aircraft is involved in. Aircraft engaged in operations other than agricultural, are not exposed to high flight cycles, corrosive agents such as super phosphate and are not exposed to foreign object accumulation at the same rate as agricultural aircraft. This Amendment allows aircraft engaged predominantly in non-agricultural operations to have the Elevator Control Cables and Pulleys inspected at 150 hourly intervals rather than 100 hourly intervals as specified in the original issue of this Directive. The inspection procedure remains unchanged from the previous issue of this Directive.\n\nThe original issue of this Airworthiness Directive became effective on 1 August 1977.\n\n![](image.002.jpeg)  \n\nDavid Alan Villiers\n\nDelegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority 20 March 2003\n\n![](image.001.png)  \n\nThe above AD is notified in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette on 23 April 2003.","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This amendment remains tightly focused on its original purpose — ensuring elevator control system safety in FU-24 aircraft. The only change from previous versions is the refinement of inspection intervals to reflect operational reality (agricultural vs non-agricultural use). The scope has not expanded beyond the specific safety issue identified in 1977."},"complexity_factors":["Single aircraft type applicability (Airparts FU-24 series only)","Straightforward three-part inspection requirement with clear physical actions (visual inspection, cleaning, operational check)","Simple conditional logic for compliance intervals based on three mutually exclusive operational categories","No cross-references to other legislation or technical standards","Minimal defined terms (only standard aviation terminology like 'Stations 336.95 and 340.56' which are structural reference points)","Single amendment purpose clearly stated in background section"],"plain_english_summary":"This Airworthiness Directive mandates inspections of the elevator control cables and rear-fuselage pulleys on Airparts (NZ) Ltd FU-24 aeroplanes to detect wear, corrosion, broken wires, foreign‑object damage, deposits from agricultural chemicals, and loose debris that could cause control failure. \n\nAmendment 2 sets use-based inspection intervals—more frequent for agricultural operations—to address harsher exposure and reduce the risk of catastrophic elevator control loss."},"flash_summary_failed":{"failed":true,"reason":"A positive credit balance is required for all requests, including BYOK, so fallback providers remain available. Add credits at https://vercel.com/d?to=%2F%5Bteam%5D%2F%7E%2Fai%3Fmodal%3Dtop-up to continue.","source":"analysis-cron"},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"The Amendment changes the compliance scope by differentiating inspection intervals by type of operation: previously a single 100‑hour interval, it now allows 150‑hour intervals for aircraft engaged only in non‑agricultural operations while keeping 100 hours for agricultural and mixed use. The inspection tasks themselves remain unchanged (Background; Compliance)."},"complexity_factors":["Multiple compliance intervals based on operation type (agricultural: 100 hours; non‑agricultural: 150 hours; mixed: 100 hours) increases administrative complexity (Compliance section).","Inspection requires subjective judgment and simple tools (strong light, mirror, feeling cables, operating elevators through full travel) which can produce variable results depending on inspector skill (Requirement para 1, Note).","Operators must classify aircraft usage as agricultural, non‑agricultural or mixed to select the correct interval, creating potential ambiguity and compliance risk (Compliance section; Background).","Mandated cleaning of rear fuselage and inspection of pulley grooves for super phosphate and foreign objects imposes physical maintenance work and potential downtime (Requirement paras 2–3).","Applicability covers all FU 24 models, expanding administrative reach though the technical task is narrowly focused (Applicability).","Legal form: revokes previous AD and issued under CASR 1998 subregulation 39.1(1), so operators must track superseded directives and effective dates (preamble; signature/effective date).","Compliance measured in flight hours requires accurate hours tracking systems and scheduling to meet inspection windows (Compliance section).","The AD specifies inspection and cleaning actions but does not prescribe detailed corrective procedures for defects found, leaving remedial discretion to operators/maintenance organisations (Requirement)."],"plain_english_summary":"This Airworthiness Directive requires operators of Airparts (NZ) FU 24 series aeroplanes to inspect the upper and lower elevator control cables and rear-fuselage pulleys for wear, corrosion, broken wires, foreign objects and, for agricultural aircraft, phosphate deposits. It also requires cleaning out loose debris. Inspection intervals depend on operation type: agricultural and mixed-use every 100 flight hours; non‑agricultural every 150 hours. It matters because it prescribes mandatory maintenance steps and timing to address an identified unsafe condition."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/ad-fu24-1-amdt-2-elevator-control-cables-and-pulleys-inspection","history":"/api/acts/ad-fu24-1-amdt-2-elevator-control-cables-and-pulleys-inspection/history","analysis":"/api/acts/ad-fu24-1-amdt-2-elevator-control-cables-and-pulleys-inspection/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/ad-fu24-1-amdt-2-elevator-control-cables-and-pulleys-inspection/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/ad-fu24-1-amdt-2-elevator-control-cables-and-pulleys-inspection/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/ad-fu24-1-amdt-2-elevator-control-cables-and-pulleys-inspection/documents"}}