{"id":"F2006B05418","name":"AD/PA-22/14 Amdt 1 - Tail Brace Streamline Tie Rods - Inspection","slug":"ad-pa-22-14-amdt-1-tail-brace-streamline-tie-rods-inspection","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":46088,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2006B05418-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-02","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"AD/PA-22/14 Amdt 1 - Tail Brace Streamline Tie Rods - 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)  Piper PA-22 (Tri-Pacer and Colt) Series Aeroplanes\n\n \n\nAD/PA-22/14\n\nAmdt 1\n\n\nTail Brace Streamline Tie Rods - Inspection 11/67\n\n \n\nApplicability: All models.\n\n \n\nDocument: 1. Piper SB No. 183; or\n\n \n\n2. FAA AD 60-1-7.\n\n \n\nCompliance: At intervals not exceeding 100 hours time in service.\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":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"The instrument is labelled as Amendment 1 (AD/PA-22/14 Amdt 1), indicating it amends an earlier AD. The text provided sets applicability to all PA-22 models and mandates inspections at intervals not exceeding 100 hours, with procedural reference to Piper SB No. 183 or FAA AD 60-1-7. The supplied text does not state what the earlier AD required or how the amendment alters the earlier wording, so the presence of \"Amdt 1\" shows a change was made but the content differences from the original AD are not specified in the document excerpt provided."},"complexity_factors":["Very short text with a single clear mandatory action (inspection).","Applies uniformly to all models of PA-22 (broad applicability but simple scope).","Relies on external documents (Piper SB No.183 or FAA AD 60-1-7) for procedural detail — adds a layer of dependency for implementation.","Specifies a recurring interval (<=100 hours), creating an ongoing compliance schedule rather than a one-off task.","Omits enforcement details and precise inspection steps within the AD text itself, requiring cross-referencing."],"plain_english_summary":"What this instrument requires (mechanics)\n\n- It is an Airworthiness Directive (AD) that applies to Piper PA-22 (Tri‑Pacer and Colt) series aeroplanes (\"All models\"). (Applicability: All models.)\n- The AD requires inspection of the tail brace streamline tie rods. The inspections must be carried out in accordance with either Piper Service Bulletin No. 183 or FAA AD 60-1-7. (Document: 1. Piper SB No. 183; or 2. FAA AD 60-1-7.)\n- The inspections must be repeated at intervals not exceeding 100 hours time in service. (Compliance: At intervals not exceeding 100 hours time in service.)\n\nWho pays, who decides, and what changes in behaviour\n\n- Aircraft owners/operators of PA-22 series aeroplanes must ensure the inspections occur (Applicability: All models; Compliance: ...100 hours). They therefore bear the direct costs: labour, parts if defects are found, and aircraft downtime while the inspection (and any remedial work) is done.\n- Organisations or individuals who perform maintenance work will carry out the inspections under whatever business arrangements exist between them and the owners/operators; the AD references external technical documents for the inspection procedure (Document: Piper SB No. 183; or FAA AD 60-1-7).\n- The AD changes behaviour by turning these inspections into a mandatory, recurring regulatory obligation rather than a voluntary maintenance choice (Compliance: ...100 hours).\n\nStated purpose and how that maps to costs, incentives and trade-offs\n\n- The AD itself prescribes inspections; it does not include a narrative of purpose in the text provided. The mechanical effect of the AD—compulsory recurring inspection of a structural control component—signals an objective to detect and address defects in the tail brace streamline tie rods before they cause failure. (Document and Compliance citations above.)\n- Who benefits and who pays: Any safety benefit (detection/correction of defects) would be enjoyed by aircraft occupants, operators and third parties; the immediate, concentrated cost is on the aircraft owner/operator who must fund inspections and any corrective work. Maintenance providers gain the corresponding revenue from performing inspections/repairs.\n- Trade-offs and opportunity costs: time spent complying with the 100‑hour inspection cycle is time the aircraft is unavailable for other productive uses; funds spent on inspections/repairs are not available for other investments. If defects are rare, the recurring inspection cost is a recurring operating expense with limited direct commercial return other than risk reduction.\n\nImplementation, compliance burden and administrative dependencies\n\n- The AD text is brief and delegates the inspection method and technical detail to external documents (Piper SB No. 183 or FAA AD 60-1-7). That means implementers must obtain and follow those documents to know exactly what the inspection requires (Document: ...). This creates a dependency: the regulatory obligation is clear, but the procedural instructions sit in referenced documents.\n- The compliance burden is a predictable, recurring task: inspections at intervals not exceeding 100 hours time in service. The AD does not itself set penalties or enforcement mechanisms in the text provided; enforcement will rely on the broader regulatory framework under which ADs operate (the AD prescribes the mandatory action and interval). (Compliance: ...100 hours.)\n\nEffects on private enterprises, competition and contracting\n\n- The AD does not specify who must perform the inspection (licensed maintenance organisation, owner, etc.) in the text provided; it simply mandates the inspection interval and points to the technical documents. That leaves scope for existing maintenance-market arrangements to determine who actually performs the work.\n- Maintenance providers stand to receive recurring work from compliance activity; aircraft owners/operators bear the recurring cost and scheduling constraints. The AD does not prescribe price, provider qualifications or exclusive suppliers; it simply requires adherence to the referenced technical documents.\n\nUncertainties, unintended consequences and risks\n\n- The AD is concise and omits procedural detail within the text itself, so implementers must consult the referenced documents to know exactly what to inspect and what corrective actions are required (Document: ...). If those documents are unavailable or ambiguous, there is implementation risk and potential for inconsistent compliance.\n- The AD imposes a uniform 100‑hour interval on \"All models.\" If some individual aircraft have different usage patterns or condition-based needs, the one‑size‑fits‑all interval may create either excess inspections (higher cost) or, if interpreted differently, uneven compliance.\n\nSource citations\n\n- Applicability: All models. (Applicability: All models.)\n- Technical references: Piper SB No. 183; or FAA AD 60-1-7. (Document: 1. Piper SB No. 183; or 2. FAA AD 60-1-7.)\n- Required interval: At intervals not exceeding 100 hours time in service. (Compliance: At intervals not exceeding 100 hours time in service.)"},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This is a straightforward maintenance directive that has not expanded beyond its original purpose. It remains focused solely on the specific safety issue identified in the 1960s (the referenced FAA AD 60-1-7 dates from 1960) regarding tail brace tie rods on a single aircraft type."},"complexity_factors":["Extremely short document — only 8 substantive lines of regulatory text","No defined terms section — all language is plain technical aviation terminology","No cross-references to other legislation beyond two external technical documents (Piper SB and FAA AD)","Single, unambiguous compliance requirement (100-hour interval)","No conditional logic, exceptions, or nested provisions","Simple applicability statement ('All models') with no exclusions"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this is:** This is an **Airworthiness Directive (AD)** — a mandatory safety order issued by Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). Think of it as a compulsory recall notice, but for aircraft rather than cars.\n\n**What it does:** It requires owners and operators of **Piper PA-22 Tri-Pacer and Colt aeroplanes** to regularly inspect the **tail brace streamline tie rods** — these are the metal rods that help stabilise the aircraft's tail section. The inspection must happen **every 100 hours of flight time** (\"time in service\").\n\n**Who it affects:** Anyone who owns, operates, or maintains a Piper PA-22 series aircraft in Australia.\n\n**Why it matters:** The tail section is critical for controlling the aircraft in flight. If these tie rods fail due to fatigue, corrosion, or damage, the pilot could lose control of the aircraft. This AD exists because the manufacturer (Piper) and the US aviation regulator (FAA) identified a safety risk that requires ongoing monitoring.\n\n**Key details:**\n- **Applies to:** All models of the PA-22 series\n- **Follows:** Piper Service Bulletin No. 183 and/or FAA AD 60-1-7 (these are the technical instructions for how to do the inspection)\n- **How often:** Every 100 hours the aircraft is flown\n- **Legal force:** Non-compliance means the aircraft is not legally airworthy and cannot be flown"}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/ad-pa-22-14-amdt-1-tail-brace-streamline-tie-rods-inspection","history":"/api/acts/ad-pa-22-14-amdt-1-tail-brace-streamline-tie-rods-inspection/history","analysis":"/api/acts/ad-pa-22-14-amdt-1-tail-brace-streamline-tie-rods-inspection/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/ad-pa-22-14-amdt-1-tail-brace-streamline-tie-rods-inspection/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/ad-pa-22-14-amdt-1-tail-brace-streamline-tie-rods-inspection/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/ad-pa-22-14-amdt-1-tail-brace-streamline-tie-rods-inspection/documents"}}