{"id":"F2006B06609","name":"AD/ROBIN/12 Amdt 1 - Safety Harness Link","slug":"ad-robin-12-amdt-1-safety-harness-link","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":48453,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2006B06609-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-02","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"AD/ROBIN/12 Amdt 1 - Safety Harness Link","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)  \nRobin Aviation Series Aeroplanes\n\nAD/ROBIN/12\n\nAmdt 1\n\n  \nSafety Harness Link 6/92\n\nApplicability: Models as listed in the Requirement Document.\n\nRequirement: Action in accordance with Avions Pierre Robin SB 114 Rev.1.\n\nNote: DGAC AD 89-074(A)R1 Refers.\n\nCompliance: Within 50 hours time in service after 21 May 1992. The compliance of the previous issue of this Directive was:\n\nPrior to exceeding 25 hours time in service after 2 August 1989, and thereafter at intervals not exceeding 50 hours time in service.\n\nBackground: Country of Origin AD. Manufacturer reports possibility of defective quick-disconnect link on safety belt.\n\nAmendment 1 is raised in response to a revision of the related DGAC AD which requires a modification to the link. This requirement constitutes terminating action in lieu of repetitive inspections.","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"Yes. The earlier requirement mandated repetitive inspections prior to exceeding 25 hours time in service after 2 August 1989 and thereafter at intervals not exceeding 50 hours. (Compliance — previous regime). Amendment 1 changes the scope of required action by requiring the modification set out in Avions Pierre Robin SB 114 Rev.1 to be carried out within 50 hours time in service after 21 May 1992, and states that the modification constitutes terminating action in place of the prior repetitive inspections. (Compliance; Amendment 1)"},"complexity_factors":["Relies on an external technical document (Avions Pierre Robin SB 114 Rev.1) for the substantive action, so legal text defers to technical detail not contained in the directive (Requirement).","Timetable is simple but date-dependent (compliance required within 50 hours time in service after 21 May 1992), which creates a short compliance window tied to aircraft usage (Compliance).","Applicability is indirect: models are listed in a separate Requirement Document rather than named in the text, requiring cross-reference to determine who is covered (Applicability).","Amendment changes regulatory approach from ongoing inspections to a one-off modification (terminating action), creating substitution effects operators must evaluate (Background; Amendment 1).","Cross-reference to foreign authority (DGAC AD) introduces inter-jurisdictional alignment but no additional domestic procedural detail (Note)."],"plain_english_summary":"What this instrument does (mechanics)\n\n- Requires operators of the listed Robin Aviation series aeroplanes to carry out the actions set out in Avions Pierre Robin Service Bulletin 114 Rev.1 (\"the SB\"). (Requirement)\n- Sets the deadline for compliance as within 50 hours time in service after 21 May 1992. (Compliance)\n- Replaces the previous regime of repeated inspections with a modification to the quick-disconnect link on the safety belt; once the modification is done it stops the need for the earlier repetitive inspections. (Amendment 1)\n\nWho this affects\n\n- Owners, operators and maintenance organisations responsible for the Robin models identified in the Requirement Document. (Applicability; Requirement)\n\nWhy it matters (purpose claimed and practical effects)\n\n- The manufacturer reported a possible defect in the safety-belt quick-disconnect link, creating a safety concern that prompted this directive. (Background)\n- The directive’s stated purpose is to address the defect by requiring the SB action (modification), which the amendment says is a terminating action in place of ongoing inspections. (Background; Amendment 1)\n\nCosts, incentives and trade-offs (source-grounded)\n\n- Who pays: aircraft owners/operators will bear the direct cost of performing the SB modification and any parts or workshop labour required, because the Requirement specifies action in accordance with the manufacturer SB to be performed on the applicable aircraft. (Requirement)\n- Compliance burden and downtime: operators must schedule maintenance within the specified 50 hours time-in-service window after 21 May 1992; this creates a short-term scheduling burden and potential aircraft downtime. (Compliance)\n- Substitution effect: the amendment substitutes a one-time modification for recurrent inspections. This converts a continuing inspection cost into a likely one-off modification cost and removes continuing inspection time if the terminating action is completed. (Amendment 1)\n- Incentives for maintenance providers: the mandatory SB work creates demand for parts and qualified maintenance labour; independent maintenance organisations can perform the work subject to certification/contractual constraints (not specified in the text). (Requirement)\n- Implementation risks and practical constraints: the directive relies on the SB as the technical method. Any delay or difficulty in obtaining parts or completing the SB would affect operators’ ability to meet the 50-hour deadline. The directive cross-references a foreign authority AD (DGAC AD 89-074(A)R1), indicating the action aligns with the manufacturer and country-of-origin regulator. (Note; Background)\n\nDecision authority and discretion\n\n- The requirement is expressed as a mandatory action to be performed \"in accordance with\" the specified SB; the directive itself does not set alternative options beyond the SB, and it states that the modification constitutes terminating action instead of repetitive inspections. Enforcement and any extension or alternative measures would depend on the civil aviation authority’s administrative processes (not set out in the text). (Requirement; Amendment 1)\n\nConcrete behavioural change required\n\n- Operators must either perform the SB modification within the 50-hour window or, under the prior regime, perform inspections at the older intervals; after the SB-modification requirement in Amendment 1, completing the modification ends the need for the repetitive inspections. (Compliance; Background; Amendment 1)\n\nKey document references inside the instrument\n\n- Applicability: Models as listed in the Requirement Document. (Applicability)\n- Technical action: Avions Pierre Robin SB 114 Rev.1. (Requirement)\n- Compliance timing: Within 50 hours time in service after 21 May 1992. (Compliance)\n- Background and link to DGAC AD: Manufacturer reported possible defective quick-disconnect link; DGAC AD 89-074(A)R1 referred. (Background; Note)\n\n"},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This amendment stays within the original scope of addressing a specific safety defect in Robin aircraft seatbelts. The change from repetitive inspections to a one-time modification is a refinement of the solution method, not an expansion of scope."},"complexity_factors":["Very short document (under 300 words)","Only 1 defined term implicitly understood (time in service)","No cross-references to other legislation beyond a single note about a French aviation authority document","Simple conditional structure: single requirement with one compliance deadline","Clear, direct language aimed at aircraft mechanics and owners"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this is:** An Airworthiness Directive (AD) — a mandatory safety order issued by Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) that requires aircraft owners to fix a specific mechanical problem.\n\n**What it does:**\n- **Targets:** Robin Aviation series aeroplanes (light aircraft made by a French manufacturer)\n- **The problem:** The safety harness (seatbelt) has a quick-disconnect link that could be defective — meaning it might fail in a crash, letting the pilot or passenger fly out of their seat\n- **The fix:** Owners must follow the manufacturer's Service Bulletin (SB 114 Rev.1) to modify or replace the faulty link\n\n**Who it affects:**\n- Owners and operators of Robin Aviation aircraft\n- Maintenance engineers who work on these planes\n\n**Why it matters:**\n- **Safety critical:** A failed seatbelt in turbulence or a crash can kill\n- **Amendment 1 changes the rules:** Originally, owners had to inspect the link every 50 hours of flying time (repetitive inspections forever). Now, they can do a one-time modification to permanently fix the problem — this is called \"terminating action\" because it ends the need for repeated checks\n- **Compliance deadline:** Within 50 hours of flying time after 21 May 1992\n\n**Key terms explained:**\n- **Airworthiness Directive (AD):** A legally binding safety order — you cannot fly the aircraft until you comply\n- **Service Bulletin:** Manufacturer's official instructions for fixing a problem\n- **Time in service:** Actual flying hours (not calendar time)\n- **Terminating action:** A permanent fix that stops the need for ongoing inspections"}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/ad-robin-12-amdt-1-safety-harness-link","history":"/api/acts/ad-robin-12-amdt-1-safety-harness-link/history","analysis":"/api/acts/ad-robin-12-amdt-1-safety-harness-link/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/ad-robin-12-amdt-1-safety-harness-link/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/ad-robin-12-amdt-1-safety-harness-link/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/ad-robin-12-amdt-1-safety-harness-link/documents"}}