{"id":"F2006B07115","name":"AD/S-PUMA/38 Amdt 3 - Main Frame 5295","slug":"ad-s-puma-38-amdt-3-main-frame-5295","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":48921,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2006B07115-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-02","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"AD/S-PUMA/38 Amdt 3 - Main Frame 5295","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)  \n![](image.002.png)  \nEurocopter AS 332 (Super Puma) Series Helicopters\n\nAIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE\n\n![](image.002.png)\n\n![](image.003.png)For the reasons set out in the background section, the CASA delegate whose signature appears below revokes Airworthiness Directive (AD) AD/S-PUMA/38 Amdt 2 and issues the following AD under subregulation 39.1 (1) of CAR 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\nCompliance: 1. For aircraft that have logged more than 5,000 hours total time in service:\n\n    Within 50 hours time in service after 6 December 2000, unless already accomplished; then a second inspection within 200 hours time in service after the initial inspection is accomplished.\n\n    b. Carry out a third inspection within 250 hours time in service after the second inspection is accomplished.\n\n    c. Thereafter carry out routine inspections at intervals not to exceed 200 hours time in service following the third inspection.\n\n    2. For aircraft that have logged less than 5,000 hours total time in service:\n\n    Within 50 hours time in service after logging 5,000 hours total time in service; then a second inspection within 200 hours time in service after the initial inspection is accomplished.\n\n    b. Thereafter carry out routine inspections at intervals not to exceed 200 hours time in service following the second inspection.\n\n![](image.004.png)The compliance inspection times remain unchanged by this issue. This amendment becomes effective on 27 December 2001.\n\nCOMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (Civil Aviation Regulations 1998), PART 39 \\- 105 CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY\n\nSCHEDULE OF AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES\n\n![](image.005.png)Background: The DGAC received a report of cracks found on the right-hand side in main frame 5295 of a Model AS 332 helicopter.\n\nAmendment 1 defined a second inspection pending terminating action. Amendment 2 required additional inspections including a repetitive inspection.\n\nAmendment 3 is issued in response to a revision of the related DGAC AD which introduces Revision 4 of the Requirement document. This changes applicability, but, not the technical content.\n\nAmendment 2 of this Airworthiness Directive became effective on 27 June 2001. Amendment 1 of this Airworthiness Directive became effective on 17 May 2001.\n\n![](image.006.png)The original issue of this Airworthiness Directive became effective on 6 December 2000.\n\n![](image.007.png)  \n\nDavid Alan Villiers\n\nDelegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority 14 November 2001\n\n![](image.002.png)  \n\nThe above AD is notified in the Commonwealth of Australia Gazette on 5 December 2001.","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"The amendment explicitly states it changes 'applicability, but, not the technical content' compared to previous versions. The scope remains focused on main frame 5295 inspections of AS 332 helicopters. The amendment appears to be an administrative update to align with French DGAC documentation changes rather than an expansion of regulatory scope."},"complexity_factors":["Multiple nested compliance pathways based on aircraft flight hours (two distinct tracks with 3-4 steps each)","Cross-reference to French aviation authority (DGAC) source documentation and external 'Requirement document' Revision 4","Amendment history tracking (original issue plus Amendments 1, 2, and 3 with different effective dates)","Specific technical terminology requiring aviation engineering knowledge (main frame 5295, 'time in service', 'terminating action')","Conditional logic for compliance timing ('unless already accomplished', 'thereafter')"],"plain_english_summary":"This CASA Airworthiness Directive for Eurocopter AS 332 Super Puma helicopters revokes the prior amendment and reinstates mandatory, recurring inspections of main frame 5295 to detect structural cracks. It sets inspection timing tied to airframe hours (more frequent once aircraft exceed 5,000 hours), affecting owners, operators and maintenance organisations. The change updates applicability and administrative details but keeps the same technical inspection requirements to mitigate serious structural risk."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":4,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"Amendment 3 adjusts the AD’s applicability to align with a DGAC revision (Revision 4 of the Requirement document) but does not alter the technical inspection requirements. In practical terms, the amended AD changes which individual helicopters or serial ranges are captured by the mandate (applicability) while keeping the inspection schedule and technical content the same (Background). This is a change in scope (who is affected) rather than a change in the substantive safety measures."},"complexity_factors":["Two conditional compliance tracks depending on aircraft total time-in-service (>= 5,000 h vs < 5,000 h)","Multiple sequential inspection steps (initial, second, third, then recurring) with different intervals (50 h, 200 h, 250 h)","Cross-reference to an external DGAC Requirement document (Revision 4) for technical instructions","Revocation and replacement of prior ADs (Amdt 1 and 2), creating a version-history dependency","Reference to a previously mentioned \"terminating action\" in earlier amendment (creates potential ambiguity about whether a terminating action exists in this amendment)","Legal authority citation (subregulation 39.1(1) CAR 1998) and effective date separate from inspection deadlines"],"plain_english_summary":"**What this instrument does (mechanics)\n\n- It is an Airworthiness Directive (AD) that requires repeated inspections of main frame number 5295 on Eurocopter AS 332 (Super Puma) helicopters because cracks were found on the right-hand side of that main frame (Background).\n\n- The AD sets mandatory inspection times depending on the helicopter's total time in service (Compliance):\n  - For helicopters that already have more than 5,000 hours total time in service:\n    - Do an initial inspection within 50 hours time-in-service after 6 December 2000 (unless already done).\n    - Do a second inspection within 200 hours after the initial inspection.\n    - Do a third inspection within 250 hours after the second inspection.\n    - After the third inspection, continue routine inspections at intervals not exceeding 200 hours time-in-service.\n  - For helicopters with less than 5,000 hours total time in service:\n    - Do the initial inspection within 50 hours time-in-service after the helicopter reaches 5,000 total hours.\n    - Do a second inspection within 200 hours after the initial inspection.\n    - Thereafter, routine inspections at intervals not exceeding 200 hours time-in-service.\n\n- The AD revokes the previous AD version and is issued under CASA’s power in subregulation 39.1(1) of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1998. The technical inspection requirements are taken from a related DGAC (French aviation authority) document; Amendment 3 updates the AD’s applicability to match a DGAC revision but does not change the technical content (Background).\n\nWho this affects\n\n- Operators and owners of Eurocopter AS 332 (Super Puma) helicopters that use main frame 5295.\n- Maintenance organisations and engineers who perform the inspections and any required repairs.\n\nWhy it matters (purpose claim and practical consequences)\n\n- Purpose claim: The AD aims to detect and correct cracks in the specified main frame to maintain structural integrity and flight safety (Background).\n\n- Practical consequences and mechanics:\n  - Operators must schedule and pay for the mandated inspections and any resulting repairs or part replacements; inspections create aircraft downtime.\n  - Maintenance providers will perform inspections and any follow-up work according to the AD and the referenced technical/requirement document.\n  - The AD’s inspection cadence (initial + follow‑ups + recurring intervals) replaces or supplements an operator’s existing maintenance schedule for the affected component (Compliance).\n\nCosts, incentives and trade-offs (mechanisms, not judgments)\n\n- Who pays: aircraft owners/operators pay direct costs — labour, inspection materials, parts, and lost revenue from aircraft downtime.\n- Incentives created: regular inspections raise the marginal cost of operating ageing Super Pumas with this main frame (more maintenance, more downtime). That changes fleet maintenance planning and could influence decisions to retire, sell, or restrict use of affected helicopters.\n- Market effects: increased demand for specialised maintenance and inspection services for this component; possible short‑term strain on maintenance capacity if many helicopters require inspection at once.\n- Opportunity cost: resources spent on these inspections and repairs are not available for other maintenance or investment.\n\nImplementation risks and compliance burden\n\n- Implementation depends on operators monitoring total time-in-service and scheduling inspections at the specified hour thresholds (Compliance).\n- Risk of non-compliance or missed inspections if record-keeping is poor. Detecting small cracks depends on inspection quality and methods; effectiveness therefore depends on maintenance practices and technician skill.\n- The AD references a DGAC requirement document (Revision 4) for technical instructions; reliance on an external document creates an administrative dependency and requires access to that material.\n\nBureaucratic discretion and terminating action\n\n- The AD revokes earlier versions and follows a DGAC revision for applicability. Amendment 1 earlier referenced a possible \"terminating action\" but Amendment 3 does not change the technical requirements. The AD as issued imposes continuing inspection obligations rather than specifying a universal terminating (one-off fix) action in this text; any terminating action would need to be specified in the referenced requirement document or a future AD (Background, Compliance).\n\nNet behavioural change (concise)\n\n- Operators must inspect main frame 5295 on the schedule set out (initial, follow-ups, then recurring). If cracks are found, operators must follow repair instructions (from the requirement document or manufacturer) before returning the aircraft to service.\n\n(References: Compliance section (numbered points 1–2) and Background section of the AD.)"},"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"}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/ad-s-puma-38-amdt-3-main-frame-5295","history":"/api/acts/ad-s-puma-38-amdt-3-main-frame-5295/history","analysis":"/api/acts/ad-s-puma-38-amdt-3-main-frame-5295/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/ad-s-puma-38-amdt-3-main-frame-5295/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/ad-s-puma-38-amdt-3-main-frame-5295/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/ad-s-puma-38-amdt-3-main-frame-5295/documents"}}