{"id":"F2006B10221","name":"AD/GAF-N22/71 - Landing Gear","slug":"ad-gaf-n22-71-landing-gear","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":55879,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2006B10221-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-02","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"AD/GAF-N22/71 - Landing Gear","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)  GAF N22 and N24 Series Aeroplanes\n\n \n\nAD/GAF-N22/71 Landing Gear 4/95 DM\n\nApplicability: All Model N22 series and N24 series aircraft.\n\n \n\nRequirement: Action in accordance with the requirements of ASTA Service Bulletin ANMD-32-20. Compliance:               Unless previously accomplished prior to 1 March 1995.\n\nBackground: Operational limitations imposed by AD/GAF-N22/69 have the effect that the landing gear “UP” warning system will not provide adequate gear “UP” warning for the 10 degree landing flap configuration.\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":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The AD's scope is limited and aligned with its stated purpose in the source text: require operators of all Model N22 and N24 aircraft to implement the actions in ASTA Service Bulletin ANMD-32-20 to address inadequate landing‑gear “UP” warning in the 10° landing flap configuration (Applicability; Requirement; Background). The directive does not expand the population affected or add additional types of corrective measures beyond the referenced service bulletin, so there is no change in scope relative to that stated intent."},"complexity_factors":["Single, focused requirement: AD contains one mandatory action (Requirement).","Dependence on an external technical document (ASTA Service Bulletin ANMD-32-20) for detailed steps, increasing practical compliance complexity despite simple AD text (Requirement).","A fixed compliance reference date (must have been done before 1 March 1995 unless already accomplished) creates a clear deadline but no phased options (Compliance).","Applies to all N22 and N24 series aircraft, so the population affected is broad though the action is uniform (Applicability).","Interacts with a prior directive (AD/GAF-N22/69) whose operational limitations prompted this AD; the AD does not describe how the prior limitations change once this AD is complied with (Background).","No technical, cost, or procedural details are specified in the AD itself, leaving operational interpretation to operators and the service bulletin."],"plain_english_summary":"### What this instrument does, in practical terms\n\nThis airworthiness directive (AD/GAF-N22/71) tells owners and operators of GAF Model N22 and N24 series aeroplanes to carry out the modification or actions set out in ASTA Service Bulletin ANMD-32-20. The directive applies to all N22 and N24 aircraft (Applicability). It must be done unless it was already completed before 1 March 1995 (Compliance). The AD itself does not list technical steps — it requires compliance with the external ASTA service bulletin (Requirement).\n\n### Why it exists (stated purpose)\n\nThe directive says it is needed because operational limitations imposed by an earlier directive (AD/GAF-N22/69) had the effect that the landing gear “UP” warning system did not give an adequate warning when the aircraft was in the 10° landing flap configuration (Background). The AD therefore directs operators to implement the remedy in the ASTA service bulletin to address that inadequate warning.\n\n### Who pays and who decides\n\n- Who decides: The Civil Aviation Safety Authority issued this airworthiness directive under the Commonwealth aviation regime (document header). The AD makes compliance with the ASTA Service Bulletin mandatory for the listed aircraft.\n- Who pays: The owners/operators of the affected aircraft bear the cost of carrying out the work required by the ASTA Service Bulletin (Requirement). The AD does not specify funding, subsidies, or cost recovery.\n\n### What behaviour changes\n\nOperators of all Model N22 and N24 aircraft must arrange for the inspection/modification/repair actions described in ASTA Service Bulletin ANMD-32-20 and complete them by the compliance provision (unless already done before 1 March 1995). That will change maintenance scheduling and create a one-off maintenance action (or series of actions) on affected aircraft (Requirement; Compliance).\n\n### Implementation mechanics, trade-offs and risks\n\n- Mechanism: The AD mandates compliance with an externally issued technical bulletin rather than prescribing step‑by‑step technical details in the AD itself (Requirement). This delegates the technical specification to the ASTA document.\n- Compliance burden: Operators must obtain and follow the ASTA Service Bulletin, allocate maintenance time, and use suitably qualified personnel/facilities to carry out the work. The AD does not state the time, parts, or direct cost involved, so these practical burdens are left to operators to determine (Requirement).\n- Trade-offs and opportunity cost: Operators will incur maintenance time and expense instead of deploying those resources elsewhere; the AD does not quantify those costs or specify alternatives (Requirement; Compliance).\n- Substitution/incentives: Before this AD, operators were subject to operational limitations under AD/GAF-N22/69 to manage the warning-system deficiency. This AD requires the technical remedy in the service bulletin, which may allow lifting prior operational limitations if regulators approve — the AD does not itself state the effect on earlier limitations (Background).\n- Implementation risk and compliance clarity: Because the AD references an external service bulletin for the technical fix, the clarity of what must be done depends on that bulletin. The AD does not list acceptable alternative means of compliance or provide explicit enforcement mechanisms beyond requiring the service bulletin action (Requirement).\n\n### Concentrated benefits and diffuse costs (mechanism-based observation)\n\n- Concentrated benefits: Aircraft that receive the service-bulletin actions should, by the AD’s stated purpose, have improved landing-gear “UP” warning performance for the 10° landing flap configuration (Background).\n- Diffuse costs: The financial and time costs fall to individual aircraft owners/operators and are not specified in the AD; different operators will face different absolute and relative burdens depending on fleet size, maintenance capacity, and aircraft availability (Requirement; Compliance).\n\nSection citations: Applicability; Requirement; Compliance; Background."},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This is a targeted safety directive addressing a specific technical defect in a specific aircraft series. The scope remains precisely limited to the landing gear warning system issue described."},"complexity_factors":["Very short document (under 200 words)","Only 1 defined applicability (aircraft models)","Single compliance requirement referencing an external technical document","No nested conditions or exceptions","Straightforward temporal deadline","Minimal cross-referencing (only to predecessor AD/GAF-N22/69 and manufacturer service bulletin)"],"plain_english_summary":"This is an **Airworthiness Directive (AD)** — essentially a mandatory safety order issued by Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) for specific aircraft.\n\n**What it does:**\nOrders owners and operators of **GAF N22 and N24 series aircraft** (small Australian-made planes, often used for agricultural work and training) to carry out a specific safety fix on the landing gear warning system.\n\n**The problem:**\nA previous safety order (AD/GAF-N22/69) created a situation where the cockpit alarm that warns pilots if the landing gear is still up during landing wouldn't work properly when the plane is configured with 10 degrees of landing flaps (a common landing setting). This creates a crash risk — pilots might accidentally land with wheels up.\n\n**What must be done:**\nOperators must follow the instructions in **ASTA Service Bulletin ANMD-32-20** — a technical document from the aircraft manufacturer detailing the required inspection or modification.\n\n**Who it affects:**\nAnyone who owns, operates, or maintains GAF N22 or N24 aircraft in Australia.\n\n**Deadline:**\nThe work must be done by **1 March 1995** unless already completed.\n\n**Why it matters:**\nLanding gear-up accidents are often catastrophic. This directive closes a safety gap created by an earlier rule, ensuring pilots get proper warnings regardless of flap setting."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/ad-gaf-n22-71-landing-gear","history":"/api/acts/ad-gaf-n22-71-landing-gear/history","analysis":"/api/acts/ad-gaf-n22-71-landing-gear/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/ad-gaf-n22-71-landing-gear/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/ad-gaf-n22-71-landing-gear/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/ad-gaf-n22-71-landing-gear/documents"}}