{"id":"F2006B10216","name":"AD/GAF-N22/67 - Flap Components - Retirement Lives","slug":"ad-gaf-n22-67-flap-components-retirement-lives","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":55874,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2006B10216-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-02","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"AD/GAF-N22/67 - Flap Components - Retirement Lives","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)  \nGAF N22 and N24 Series Aeroplanes\n\nAD/GAF-N22/67 Flap Components \\- Retirement Lives 5/94 DM\n\nApplicability: All Nomad N22 and N24 aircraft.\n\nRequirement: Replace the flap control rods (PN 1/N-45-1139/1140) and flap control bellcranks (PN 1/N-45-1017/1018 and \\-1019/1020) in accordance with ASTA Alert Service Bulletin ANMD-27-44.\n\nCompliance: 1.a. For flap control rods which have less than 11800 landings as at 11 March 1994, replace with new control rods before exceeding 12000 landings; and\n\n1.b. For flap control rods which have 11800 or more landings as at 11 March 1994, replace with new control rods within 10 landings from 11 March 1994, or before exceeding 12000 landings, whichever occurs later. Replacement of these flap control rods may be deferred for up to 200 landings by satisfactory completion of an inspection in accordance with paragraph 2.B of ASTA Alert Service Bulletin ANMD-27-44.\n\n    2.a. For flap control bellcranks which have less than 9800 landings as at\n\n11 March 1994, replace with new bellcranks before exceeding 10000 landings; and\n\n    2.b. For flap control bellcranks which have 9800 or more landings as at 11 March 1994, replace with new bellcranks before exceeding 10000 landings, or within 10 landings from 11 March 1994, whichever occurs later. Replacement of these flap control bellcranks may be deferred for up to 200 landings by satisfactory completion of an inspection in accordance with paragraph 2.B of ASTA Alert Service Bulletin ANMD-27-44.\n\nBackground: Although the number of landings is the important factor for determining the accumulation of fatigue damage on the flap control components, for convenience, the aircraft manufacturer originally stated their retirement lives in terms of hours (based upon an assumption of one landing per hour of flight). Since some aircraft are consistently flying short flights, with more than one landing per hour of flight, the retirement lives have been re-stated in terms of landings. As a result of this change, some aircraft may now be fitted with components which have exceeded their retirement lives. This AD is issued to ensure that these components are replaced and to make all operators aware of the revised basis for the retirement lives.","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"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":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This Airworthiness Directive maintains its original narrow scope: mandating replacement of specific fatigue-limited flap components on GAF Nomad aircraft. The background explains a technical refinement (changing measurement from hours to landings) but this does not expand the directive's scope beyond its original safety purpose."},"complexity_factors":["Multiple conditional compliance paths based on landing counts relative to a fixed date (11 March 1994)","Cross-reference to external technical document (ASTA Alert Service Bulletin ANMD-27-44) for inspection procedures","Nested 'whichever occurs later' logic in sub-paragraphs 1.b and 2.b","Two separate component categories (rods vs bellcranks) with different landing thresholds (12,000 vs 10,000)","Deferred compliance option adding another conditional layer (200-landing extension)","Part number references (PN 1/N-45-1139/1140 etc.) requiring technical lookup"],"plain_english_summary":"This Airworthiness Directive requires operators of GAF Nomad N22/N24 aircraft to track landings and replace specific flap-control rods and bellcranks based on landing counts (rods before 12,000 landings, bellcranks before 10,000) rather than flight hours. \n\nIt responds to fatigue from frequent short flights that accelerate wear, preventing flap-control failures during landing and reducing the risk of catastrophic accidents."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"The AD changes the operational metric for component retirement from flight hours (the original manufacturer basis) to landings, and enforces replacement thresholds measured in landings. Mechanically this broadened immediate applicability: some components that were within the hour-based limits are now treated as beyond their landing-based retirement lives and must be replaced (or inspected and deferred). The AD therefore increases short-term replacement obligations for operators who conduct many short flights, while preserving the original safety objective of limiting fatigue-related failures."},"complexity_factors":["Short document with a single, specific technical mandate","Two component classes with parallel but different landing thresholds (rods: 12,000; bellcranks: 10,000)","Reference date (11 March 1994) creates bifurcated rules (below/at-or-above specified pre-date landing counts)","Optional deferral up to 200 landings contingent on completing a specified inspection (external ASTA Alert Service Bulletin ANMD-27-44, paragraph 2.B)","External dependence on a manufacturer service bulletin for inspection procedures (cross-reference adds operational dependency but not legal complexity)","Few conditional branches and no multi-layered exceptions"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this instrument does (mechanically)**\n\n- Applies to all GAF Nomad N22 and N24 aeroplanes (Applicability).\n- Orders mandatory replacement of specific flap components: the flap control rods (part numbers 1/N-45-1139 and 1/N-45-1140) and the flap control bellcranks (part numbers 1/N-45-1017/1018 and 1/N-45-1019/1020) in accordance with a manufacturer service document (ASTA Alert Service Bulletin ANMD-27-44) (Requirement).\n- Sets replacement triggers measured in landings, with two component classes and two threshold rules depending on how many landings the component had recorded as at 11 March 1994:\n  - Flap control rods: replace before they exceed 12,000 landings. If they already had 11,800 or more landings on 11 March 1994, they must be replaced within 10 further landings or before exceeding 12,000 landings, whichever is later. (Compliance 1.a–1.b)\n  - Flap control bellcranks: replace before they exceed 10,000 landings. If they already had 9,800 or more landings on 11 March 1994, they must be replaced within 10 further landings or before exceeding 10,000 landings, whichever is later. (Compliance 2.a–2.b)\n- In both cases, replacement may be deferred for up to 200 landings if an inspection is performed and found satisfactory per paragraph 2.B of the ASTA Alert Service Bulletin (Compliance; ASTA reference).\n\n**Why the rule was issued (official rationale)**\n\n- The manufacturer originally stated component retirement lives in hours (assuming one landing per flight hour). Operators that fly many short flights can accumulate more landings than hours, so retirement lives were re-expressed in landings. As a result, some aircraft may already have components that exceed the retirement life measured in landings; the AD requires those components be replaced and alerts operators to the revised basis. (Background)\n\n**Who it affects and who pays**\n\n- Affects operators/owners of all Nomad N22 and N24 aircraft and their maintenance organisations (Applicability; Requirement).\n- Direct costs fall on those operators: buying replacement rods/bellcranks, labour for removal/installation and inspections, plus aircraft downtime while maintenance is carried out. Indirectly, maintenance providers will perform and charge for the work.\n\n**How compliance changes operator behaviour**\n\n- Operators must track and rely on landing counts rather than flight hours for these parts (Background).\n- Operators will schedule replacements or inspections to avoid exceeding the landing thresholds (Compliance 1–2). They may use the 200-landing inspection deferral option only if they complete the specific inspection in the ASTA bulletin.\n\n**Trade-offs, costs, and implementation issues**\n\n- Cost and timing: Parts replacement and inspections create near-term cost and aircraft downtime. This is concentrated on the subset of operators using Nomad N22/N24 aircraft, especially those conducting many short sectors (who are likelier to have parts beyond the landing threshold).\n- Availability and logistics: If many aircraft require parts at once, availability of the specific part numbers and qualified maintenance slots could be constrained, increasing downtime or prices.\n- Compliance burden: Operators must (a) determine accurate landing counts as at the reference date (11 March 1994), (b) schedule and perform inspections when electing the deferral, and (c) maintain records to show compliance with the AD and the ASTA bulletin.\n- Safety benefit vs cost: The stated safety mechanism is fatigue-life control keyed to the physical stressor (landings). That shifts the monitoring metric to a variable that better matches the fatigue accumulation mechanism (Background). The AD enforces that metric, which may increase immediate replacements but aligns retirement policy to the relevant load factor.\n- Incentives: Maintenance providers gain business from mandated replacements and inspections. Operators gain reduced risk of component fatigue failure but bear replacement cost. There is an incentive for operators to keep meticulous landing logs and to use the permitted inspection deferral when appropriate.\n\n**Degree of administrative discretion and external references**\n\n- The AD delegates the detailed inspection method and criteria to the ASTA Alert Service Bulletin ANMD-27-44 (Requirement). That makes compliance dependent on an external manufacturer document, which operators must obtain and follow.\n\n**Concrete references to the instrument**\n\n- Applicability: All Nomad N22 and N24 aircraft.\n- Requirement: Replace flap control rods and bellcranks per ASTA Alert Service Bulletin ANMD-27-44.\n- Compliance timing: Rods — thresholds at 11,800/12,000 landings with up-to-200-landing deferral via inspection (Compliance 1.a–1.b). Bellcranks — thresholds at 9,800/10,000 landings with same 200-landing deferral via inspection (Compliance 2.a–2.b). Background explains change from hours to landings.\n\n**Bottom line**\n\n- The AD requires Nomad N22/N24 operators to replace two specific flap components at fixed landing-count limits (or to carry out and pass an inspection to defer replacement up to 200 landings). It shifts the retirement metric from hours to landings, which increases immediate replacement obligations for aircraft that do many short flights. The costs fall on aircraft operators (parts, labour, downtime); maintenance providers receive work. The AD ties compliance to a manufacturer-specified inspection procedure, so operators must obtain and follow that external document to rely on the inspection deferral."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/ad-gaf-n22-67-flap-components-retirement-lives","history":"/api/acts/ad-gaf-n22-67-flap-components-retirement-lives/history","analysis":"/api/acts/ad-gaf-n22-67-flap-components-retirement-lives/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/ad-gaf-n22-67-flap-components-retirement-lives/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/ad-gaf-n22-67-flap-components-retirement-lives/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/ad-gaf-n22-67-flap-components-retirement-lives/documents"}}