{"id":"F2006B06915","name":"AD/SEATS/1 - Pilots Seat - Reinforcement","slug":"ad-seats-1-pilots-seat-reinforcement","collection":"legislative_instrument","jurisdiction":"commonwealth","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":114795,"registerId":"commonwealth-F2006B06915-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-03","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"AD/SEATS/1 - Pilots Seat - Reinforcement","content":"COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA (Civil Aviation Regulations 1998), PART 39 \\- 107 CIVIL AVIATION SAFETY AUTHORITY\n\nSCHEDULE OF AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES\n\n![](image.001.png)  \nSeats and Berths\n\nAD/SEATS/1 Pilots Seat \\- Reinforcement 1/84\n\nApplicability: A.M.I. Pilot Seat Model 716-1, \\-2, \\-11, \\-12, \\-21 and \\-22 and Model 865-1 to \\-9 and\n\n\\-11.\n\nRequirement: Reinforce pilot seat frame assembly P/N 865J10005-1 by installation of A.M.I. Industries, Inc. seat frame brace kit P/N 865K9000-1 I.A.W. AMI Industries Inc., service Bulletin No 25-10-865-01, dated January 31, 1983.\n\nNote: FAA AD 83-21-06 refers.\n\nCompliance: Unless previously accomplished, before 30 April 1984.\n\nBackground: Failure of the pilots seat during a survivable emergency landing contributed to occupant injury. Subsequent T.S.O. tests verified failure of the seat frame at loads below the 9G. forward requirement. AD/BEECH 18/23 and AD/BEECH 90/72 address specific aircraft installations.","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":2,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"This is a discrete, time-bound safety directive addressing a specific mechanical defect in specific seat models. It has not expanded beyond its original purpose of mandating a physical reinforcement to prevent seat failure."},"complexity_factors":["Very short document (under 200 words)","Only 2 defined applicability criteria (seat model numbers)","Single, unambiguous compliance requirement with clear deadline","No nested exceptions or conditional logic","One cross-reference to FAA AD and two related Australian ADs for context only","Technical but straightforward — refers to specific part numbers and manufacturer's bulletin"],"plain_english_summary":"This is an **Airworthiness Directive (AD)** — essentially a mandatory safety order issued by Australia's Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA). It requires owners and operators of specific aircraft to fix a dangerous flaw in pilot seats made by A.M.I. Industries.\n\n**What the problem is:**\nThe pilot seat frame can fail during emergency landings that would otherwise be survivable. Testing showed the seat breaks under forces weaker than the 9G (9 times gravity) forward impact standard it should meet. This has already caused injuries.\n\n**Who must act:**\nAnyone with an aircraft using these specific A.M.I. pilot seat models: 716-1, -2, -11, -12, -21, -22, or 865-1 through -9 and -11.\n\n**What must be done:**\nInstall a reinforcement brace kit (part number 865K9000-1) to strengthen the seat frame, following the manufacturer's service bulletin instructions.\n\n**When:**\nThe fix had to be completed before 30 April 1984 (unless already done).\n\n**Why it matters:**\nThis prevents pilots from being injured or killed because their seat collapses in a crash. It references a similar US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) directive, showing this was an international safety concern."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"The AD imposes a mandatory retrofit requirement for the listed seat models that changes the installed configuration of affected aircraft: it requires installation of a specific reinforcement kit (Requirement) because tests and an in-service failure showed the seat could fail below the 9G forward requirement (Background). In that sense the directive changes the practical scope of obligations on owners/operators from maintaining the original seat installation to implementing the specified structural modification by the compliance date (Applicability; Compliance)."},"complexity_factors":["Narrow technical scope: applies only to a finite list of specific seat models (Applicability)","Mandated technical action: installation of a named kit by part number and adherence to a specific service bulletin (Requirement)","Hard compliance deadline that creates operational scheduling and cost effects (Compliance)","Cross-references to other ADs and the FAA AD that require owners/operators to check related directives for particular aircraft installations (Note; Background)","Reliance on correct installation per the manufacturer’s service bulletin, creating implementation and verification risk (Requirement)"],"plain_english_summary":"What this instrument does, in plain terms\n\n- Mechanically, this Airworthiness Directive (AD) requires that certain A.M.I. pilot seat frame assemblies be physically reinforced. The exact action is installation of A.M.I. Industries seat frame brace kit P/N 865K9000-1, installed in accordance with A.M.I. Industries service Bulletin No 25-10-865-01 (Requirement). The AD applies to specific A.M.I. pilot seat models listed in the applicability section (Applicability).\n\nWho must act and who decides\n\n- The Civil Aviation Safety Authority (as the issuer under the Civil Aviation Regulations, Part 39; header) is the authority requiring this work. Aircraft owners/operators with the listed seat models are the parties required to ensure the reinforcement is done (Applicability; Requirement; Compliance). The AD sets a firm deadline: unless already done, the reinforcement must be completed before 30 April 1984 (Compliance).\n\nWhy the change was ordered (official rationale)\n\n- The AD states that a pilot seat failed during a survivable emergency landing and that subsequent Technical Standard Order (T.S.O.) tests showed the seat frame could fail under loads below the 9G forward requirement. That safety finding is given as the reason for requiring the reinforcement (Background).\n\nHow it works and the concrete effects\n\n- Scope: Only the listed seat models are covered (Applicability). The AD explicitly prescribes the exact part number of the reinforcement kit and the service bulletin that describes how to install it; compliance requires following that bulletin (Requirement).\n- Who pays: The text makes the owners/operators of affected aircraft responsible for compliance; therefore they will bear the cost and any aircraft downtime required to have the kit fitted by a maintenance organisation (Applicability; Requirement; Compliance).\n- Supplier and market effect: The AD specifies an A.M.I. Industries kit and bulletin (Requirement). That channels demand for the specified kit to A.M.I.; affected owners/operators must obtain and install that kit or have it installed in order to comply.\n- Compliance burden and implementation risk: The burden is the physical work of installing the brace kit in accordance with the manufacturer’s service bulletin and meeting the compliance date. Implementation risk centres on correct installation to the service bulletin standard; the AD cross-references related ADs for specific installations (AD/BEECH 18/23 and AD/BEECH 90/72) which owners/operators must also check where relevant (Requirement; Background).\n- Legal effect: The AD imposes a mandatory retrofit requirement (a modification to existing installed equipment) on aircraft with the listed seat models; until the modification is done owners/operators remain non-compliant with the AD’s deadline (Requirement; Compliance).\n\nTrade-offs, incentives and opportunity costs (mechanical, source-grounded observations)\n\n- Concentrated cost, concentrated benefit: The installation cost and downtime are concentrated on the owners/operators of aircraft with the listed seats. The commercial benefit from sales of the specific brace kit accrues to A.M.I. Industries because the AD prescribes that part number and directs compliance with the manufacturer’s service bulletin (Requirement).\n- Choice and substitution: The AD prescribes a particular retrofit kit and bulletin, which limits operators’ options for how to achieve compliance to the method stated in the AD. Operators may need to source that kit or comply by demonstrating an equivalent modification only if authorised under the regulatory framework (Requirement).\n- Enforcement and further cross-checks: The AD references an FAA AD (Note) and other ADs addressing specific aircraft installations (Background), so owners/operators must consider these cross-references when determining complete compliance for a given aircraft installation.\n\nKey source citations (sections of the AD used above): Applicability; Requirement; Compliance; Background; Note."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/ad-seats-1-pilots-seat-reinforcement","history":"/api/acts/ad-seats-1-pilots-seat-reinforcement/history","analysis":"/api/acts/ad-seats-1-pilots-seat-reinforcement/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/ad-seats-1-pilots-seat-reinforcement/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/ad-seats-1-pilots-seat-reinforcement/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/ad-seats-1-pilots-seat-reinforcement/documents"}}