AD/CESSNA 340/35 - Fuel Flow Transducer

The AD is built on a small number of concrete technical and regulatory concepts drawn from the source text.

• Applicability by airframe serial number. The AD applies only to Cessna Model 340A aeroplanes with an explicit list of serial numbers. The table in the instrument lists serial numbers including 0959, 0961, 0962, 0967, 0972, 0978, 0982, 0983, 0984, 0985, 0998, 1002, 1003, 1012, 1014, and 1019. The applicability is therefore narrow and tied to specific aircraft identities rather than to a fleet-wide type rating or production range generally.

• Part-specific focus. The operative parts are fuel flow transducers bearing Cessna P/N 9910395-9, which the instrument cross-references to Aerosonics Corp P/N 33184-2. The AD’s inspection and replacement obligations apply to that P/N only.

• Serial-number range trigger. The risk condition is defined by the transducer serial numbers. Units with serial numbers in the block 2364 through 2930 are treated as potentially defective and must be replaced. The concrete trigger is a serial-number match.

• Two-tier requirement structure. Requirement 1 is an inspection to determine serial numbers. Requirement 2 is conditional replacement where the serial number falls in the disallowed block. Timing distinctions are central: the inspection must precede issuance of the Australian Certificate of Airworthiness, and replacement (if required) must occur before any further flight.

• Cross-jurisdictional referral. The AD explicitly refers to FAA AD 80-13-14 (Amendment 39-3844) and frames the Australian AD as reflecting the State of design requirement. The instrument notes that compliance with the FAA AD, evidenced in maintenance records, will be considered acceptable by CASA.

• Administrative effect on certification. The AD’s compliance timing ties into CASA’s Certificate of Airworthiness process. The inspection is a condition precedent to issuing that certificate for affected airframes; the replacement requirement is a condition precedent to continuing flight where a defective unit is found.

These concepts together convert a manufacturing or maintenance defect concern identified by the FAA into a regulatory obligation tied to Australian airworthiness certification and flight permissibility. The AD is narrowly targeted in scope but definitive in operational effect for any aeroplane meeting the serial-number applicability.

The instrument identifies a clearly delimited set of affected parties and decision points.

• Aircraft owners and operators of the specifically listed Cessna 340A serial numbers. The AD applies only to Cessna Model 340A aeroplanes that match the enumerated serial numbers in the AD. If an owner or operator possesses an affected serial-number aeroplane, they are directly subject to the inspection requirement and, where necessary, the replacement requirement.

• Importers and those seeking an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness. The inspection must be completed prior to the issue of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness. Therefore an importer proposing to register one of the listed airframes in Australia will need to ensure the inspection (and any necessary replacement) has been carried out, or that maintenance records demonstrate prior compliance with FAA AD 80-13-14.

• Maintenance organisations and certifying engineers. The inspection to determine the transducer serial number, and any replacement, must be performed and recorded by appropriately authorised maintenance personnel. The AD’s acceptance of FAA AD compliance shown in maintenance records means maintainers are the de facto evidence-gatherers for CASA.

• Parts suppliers and installers. Owners requiring replacement must source a transducer whose serial number is not in the disallowed block. That creates obligations for parts suppliers to provide transducers that carry acceptable serial numbers and for installers to certify the replacement work.

• CASA and certification officers. CASA staff issuing Certificates of Airworthiness have an administrative gatekeeping role: for any of the listed airframes, the inspection must be recorded as done prior to certificate issuance. The AD places a compliance check in the certificate issuance workflow.

• Operators planning to fly an affected aeroplane in Australian territory. The replacement requirement is explicit that, where a disallowed transducer is found, the aircraft must not fly until the transducer is replaced, because replacement must occur before further flight after the inspection.

CASA also records that at the time of issuing the AD there were no 340A aeroplanes within the affected serial-number range registered in Australia. Despite that, CASA positions the AD as a forward-looking requirement designed to capture any such airframe that may be imported later and which may not have complied with the FAA AD. That acknowledgement identifies importers and prospective registrants as a particular anticipated set of affected parties.

Duties imposed by the AD are specific and procedural; rights are largely evidentiary and administrative.

Primary duties

• Inspection duty. Owners/operators or their maintenance providers must inspect the fuel flow transducer P/N 9910395-9 (Aerosonics P/N 33184-2) on each engine to determine the transducer serial number. This duty is labelled Requirement 1 in the AD and must be discharged in accordance with the AD’s timing requirements.

• Replacement duty conditional on inspection results. If the transducer has a serial number included in the block 2364 through 2930, that transducer must be replaced with a unit whose serial number is not included in the block. This is Requirement 2.

• Timing duties. The inspection (Requirement 1) must be performed prior to the issue of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness for the affected airframe. The replacement, if needed, must be done before further flight after the inspection.

Evidentiary and procedural rights

• Right to rely on existing FAA compliance evidence. The AD explicitly states that if the requirements of the FAA AD 80-13-14 were accomplished prior to the aircraft’s arrival in Australia and the aircraft’s maintenance records indicate compliance, that is acceptable evidence of compliance with this CASA AD. Note 1 makes this clear.

• Right to follow referenced FAA material. The AD itself refers to FAA AD 80-13-14 Amendment 39-3844, providing a direct evidentiary reference point. Operators and maintainers can therefore rely on the FAA AD’s procedures and records as the source of evidence to demonstrate compliance to CASA.

Administrative interplay

• Certificate-linked duty. Because Requirement 1 is required prior to issuance of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness, the AD places an administrative duty on applicants for certification to present evidence that the inspection has been completed and, where replacements were necessary, that they have been completed prior to flight.

The AD does not articulate any discretionary exceptions or derogations beyond the acceptance of FAA AD compliance records. It does not specify an appeals mechanism or alternative means of compliance within the text provided. The procedural rights are therefore principally evidentiary: where the required work was already done and documented under the FAA AD, the documented compliance is acceptable to CASA.

The AD sets compliance requirements and timing but does not enumerate monetary penalties, criminal sanctions, or administrative fines within the provided text. The instrument instead ties enforceability to regulatory certification and operational permissibility in specific, verifiable ways.

Enforcement mechanisms visible in the source

• Certification linkage. The inspection (Requirement 1) is required prior to issue of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness. Practically that makes the inspection a condition precedent to certification. CASA’s role in issuing the Certificate of Airworthiness provides a clear administrative enforcement mechanism: absence of an inspection record will impede certificate issuance for an affected aircraft.

• Operational prohibition until replacement. Where an affected transducer is identified, replacement is required before further flight after the inspection. That imposes an operational constraint: an aircraft found to have a transducer within the serial-number block cannot lawfully continue to fly until the replacement is completed. CASA’s oversight of operations and the Certificate of Airworthiness regime gives an enforcement pathway tied to operations.

• Referential enforcement through FAA AD. The AD explicitly refers to FAA AD 80-13-14 (Amendment 39-3844). CASA’s statement that records of compliance with the FAA AD are acceptable indicates that CASA will recognise compliance evidence from the State of design process. That cross-reference channels enforcement toward record-based verification.

What the AD does not state

• No explicit fines or penalties are provided in the text. The instrument does not specify civil penalties, criminal offences, or infringement notices that will be applied for non-compliance. It also contains no appeal or alternative means-of-compliance clause in the provided text.

• No delegation of enforcement actions beyond certificate issuance and flight permissibility is described. Any additional enforcement action (such as prosecutions or infringement notices) is not addressed in the AD text supplied.

From the material given, the practical enforcement levers available to CASA are administrative: the airworthiness certification process and oversight of aeroplane operations. Those levers can prevent an affected aeroplane from being certificated or flying in Australia until compliance is demonstrated. The AD’s acceptance of FAA AD compliance records creates a clear compliance-evidence pathway for operators and maintainers.

The AD directly references and is positioned as responsive to regulatory action taken by the State of design of the aircraft, namely the United States Federal Aviation Administration. The source documents a deliberate cross-jurisdictional relationship and a limited set of administrative interactions.

Direct cross-reference to FAA AD

• FAA AD 80-13-14 (Amendment 39-3844) is the FAA instrument the CASA AD mirrors. The CASA AD states that the FAA action was originally issued to detect and replace possible defective fuel flow transducers which may cause fuel leaks in the engine compartment, and explicitly refers to FAA AD 80-13-14 Amdt 39-3844. The CASA AD therefore imports the FAA’s substantive safety concern and converts it into an Australian certification and operational requirement for defined aircraft.

Interaction with Australian Certificate of Airworthiness process

• The CASA AD ties compliance to the issuance of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness. Requirement 1 must be satisfied prior to issuance. That means the AD interacts operationally with the domestic airworthiness certification regime and its procedures for registering and certificating imported or existing aircraft.

Evidentiary interaction with maintenance records and prior compliance

• The AD expressly accepts that compliance with the FAA AD, shown in the aircraft’s maintenance records, will be considered acceptable for compliance with this CASA AD. That creates a legal and administrative interaction: an aircraft owner or maintenance organisation can rely upon maintenance records created under the FAA AD process as satisfying CASA’s requirement. That interaction avoids duplication of work where FAA compliance has already been achieved and documented.

Regulatory obligation to reflect State of design ADs

• The document states CASA is obliged to issue an AD reflecting the requirements of an AD issued by the State of design of the aircraft or appliance. That points to an administrative principle of harmonisation or reciprocity: CASA will generally mirror critical safety directives from the State of design to ensure consistent safety outcomes in Australian-registered aircraft.

Absence of interaction with other domestic statutes in the text

• The AD contains no express references to other Australian statutes, civil aviation criminal provisions, or administrative penalty regimes in the text provided. Any further interaction with broader aviation law, enforcement statutes, or administrative procedures would be governed by the broader CASA regulatory framework and aviation statutes, but such connections are not specified within this instrument.

In short, the AD functions as a domestication of a FAA airworthiness mandate, interfacing concretely with the Australian Certificate of Airworthiness process and with maintenance records as the primary evidence channel for compliance.

The instrument provides a limited but clear amendment and issuance history in the text supplied.

• Identification and date. The AD is designated AD/CESSNA 340/35, Fuel Flow Transducer, 5/2008. The document was signed by David Punshon as a CASA delegate on 6 March 2008. The AD states an effective date of 8 May 2008.

• Referential amendment. The AD explicitly references FAA AD 80-13-14, Amendment 39-3844. The instrument cites the FAA AD as the origin of the safety requirement CASA is reflecting. No further amendments or subsequent Australian AD numbers are referenced in the material provided.

• No subsequent Australian amendments recorded in the text. The document does not provide evidence of prior Australian AD versions for the same subject nor any in-force amendments following the 5/2008 instrument. The text does not assert that the AD has been superseded or revised.

• Administrative background explaining issuance. CASA states the AD follows an internal review which indicated an Australian AD had not been issued in response to FAA AD 80-13-14. CASA explains its obligation to issue an AD when a State of design AD exists, even though no affected 340A aeroplanes were then registered in Australia. This background functions as the immediate administrative history explaining why CASA issued the AD in May 2008.

• Effective operational timeframe. The compliance timings specified in the AD are: Requirement 1 prior to issue of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness, and Requirement 2 before further flight after the inspection. The effective date (8 May 2008) is when those compliance timings become operative in the Australian regulatory context.

No later amendment dates, revocations, or consolidations are present in the supplied text. If users need to confirm whether the AD has been superseded, rescinded, or further amended after May 2008, they will need to consult CASA’s current AD register or later legislative materials; the instrument itself contains no such updates.

The AD text supplied contains no references to litigation, court decisions, or administrative appeals in respect of AD/CESSNA 340/35. The instrument does not cite any judicial or tribunal authority, nor does it document any contested enforcement action arising from its issuance.

What is explicit in the source:

• No recorded litigation or challenge in the AD. The AD’s language is administrative and does not mention court proceedings, appeals, or disputes. It frames administrative obligations and compliance timing without reference to legal contestation.

• Reliance on FAA materials rather than judicial precedent. The AD relies on the FAA AD 80-13-14 as the State-of-design source for the safety action. That reliance is administrative and technical, not judicial.

Implication for researchers

• Absence of litigation in the AD text means there is no litigation history recorded in this document. If a practitioner needs to know whether this AD produced disputes,such as appeals against CASA’s certificate refusal, contested enforcement actions, or judicial review of the AD’s scope,that information will not be found in the AD itself. Such matters, if they exist, must be sought in court records, tribunal files, or CASA enforcement records beyond the text.

• For compliance-related disputes regarding interpretation (for example, contested definitions of applicability or disputed evidence of FAA AD compliance), the document contains no guidance on appeal routes or alternative means of compliance. Any disputes would therefore arise against the broader CASA administrative and aviation law framework, not from within the AD’s text.

In short, the supplied instrument contains no litigation history; it is an administrative directive evidencing CASA’s adoption of an FAA airworthiness requirement for specified aircraft and parts.

This AD contains several practical pitfalls and points where misinterpretation or administrative oversight can cause non-compliance risk. The following are source-grounded issues to watch.

• Narrow applicability by serial number. The AD applies only to the listed Cessna 340A serial numbers. If a practitioner or maintainer assumes the AD covers all 340A aeroplanes or other Cessna 340 variants, that would be an error. Confirm the aircraft’s serial number against the explicit list (for example 0959, 0961, 0962, 0967, 0972, 0978, 0982, 0983, 0984, 0985, 0998, 1002, 1003, 1012, 1014, 1019) before applying the AD.

• Part-number specificity. The AD targets Cessna P/N 9910395-9, which is cross-referenced to Aerosonics Corp P/N 33184-2. If a transducer bears a different P/N, this AD’s inspection/replacement obligation does not apply as written. Do not substitute other part numbers without authoritative direction.

• Serial-number block inclusive range. The disallowed serial numbers are stated as the block 2364 through 2930. That is an inclusive block trigger. Ensure serial number reading and recording are accurate; differences in stamping, corrosion, or partial legibility could cause misclassification. If the serial is illegible, maintenance personnel will need to document the condition and discuss acceptable evidence with CASA or follow the referenced FAA procedure.

• Dual-engine inspection obligation. The AD requires inspection of the fuel flow transducer on each engine. Inspect both engines’ transducers even if only one looks suspect.

• Timing traps on certification and flight. Requirement 1 must be satisfied prior to the issue of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness. If an importer or owner seeks certification without the inspection record, certification officers will treat the AD as unsatisfied. Where a transducer is found to be within the disallowed serial-number block, Requirement 2 requires replacement before further flight after inspection. That means the aircraft cannot lawfully continue to fly until replacement is complete.

• Reliance on FAA compliance records requires documentation. The AD allows that FAA AD compliance shown in maintenance records is acceptable. However that acceptance is evidentiary: the records must demonstrably show FAA AD compliance. Owners who assume an earlier maintenance event implies compliance without paperwork risk refusal of certificate or operational permission.

• No alternative means of compliance specified in the text. The AD does not state any alternate compliance procedure or provide an exemption mechanism within the text. If a party believes an alternative inspection or corrective action is equivalently safe, the AD text supplied gives no process for approval; such matters would need to be pursued through CASA’s general administrative channels.

• Parts sourcing constraint. The replacement requirement is to install a transducer whose serial number is not in the specified block. The AD does not discuss availability or lead times for replacement parts. Practically, if acceptable replacement units are scarce, the aircraft may be grounded until a conforming part is obtained and installed.

• CASA’s acknowledgement of current non-registration does not nullify obligations. CASA states that at the issue date no affected 340A aeroplanes were registered in Australia. That acknowledgement does not remove the AD’s force; it functions as a forward-looking obligation for future imports or registrations.

Careful verification of serial numbers, part numbers, documentation, and timing with respect to certification and operations is essential to avoid inadvertent non-compliance. Maintenance records are central evidence; ensure clear, legible, and complete entries that reference the FAA AD where appropriate.

The AD sets a short, documentary, and mechanical compliance pathway. The following steps are distilled directly from the AD’s requirements and notes.

1. Confirm applicability.

   • Verify the aircraft type is Cessna Model 340A and that its airframe serial number is one of those listed in the AD. The AD lists specific serial numbers (0959, 0961, 0962, 0967, 0972, 0978, 0982, 0983, 0984, 0985, 0998, 1002, 1003, 1012, 1014, 1019). If the serial number is not on the list, this AD does not apply as written.

2. Identify the relevant transducer P/N.

   • Locate and inspect the fuel flow transducer on each engine. The AD targets Cessna P/N 9910395-9, which corresponds to Aerosonics Corp P/N 33184-2. Confirm the P/N on the installed transducer before proceeding.

3. Perform the inspections required by Requirement 1.

   • Inspect the identified transducer on both engines to determine the serial number. Record the serial number accurately in the aircraft maintenance records. Because Requirement 1 must be performed prior to the issue of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness, ensure the inspection is completed and documented before submitting any certification application that requires that certificate.

4. Check for disallowed serial numbers.

   • Compare the transducer serial numbers to the block 2364 through 2930. If a transducer’s serial number falls within that inclusive block, the AD requires replacement under Requirement 2.

5. If replacement is required, follow Requirement 2 before further flight.

   • Do not operate the aeroplane after the inspection if a transducer in the disallowed block is found, until the transducer has been replaced by one whose serial number is not included in the block. Ensure the replacement transducer’s P/N and serial number are recorded in the maintenance log.

6. Use FAA AD compliance records where available.

   • If the FAA AD 80-13-14 was already complied with prior to the aircraft’s arrival in Australia, and the maintenance records demonstrate that compliance, CASA accepts those records as evidence of compliance with this AD. When relying on existing FAA AD compliance, ensure documentation explicitly references FAA AD 80-13-14 and shows the inspection/replacement actions taken, dates, and approver signatures.

7. Document compliance for certification.

   • Prepare the maintenance documentation and evidence required for the Australian Certificate of Airworthiness application. Include clear statements of the inspections performed, serial numbers recorded, any replacement work completed, and cross-reference to FAA AD compliance documentation where applicable.

8. Use competent maintenance personnel.

   • Ensure inspections and replacements are performed by appropriately authorised maintenance personnel and that the work is signed off according to the regulatory requirements for maintenance records. The AD’s acceptance of FAA AD compliance makes clear that standard maintenance recordkeeping practices are the evidentiary route for CASA.

9. Retain records.

   • Keep the inspection and replacement records as part of the aeroplane’s maintenance logbook. These will be necessary to demonstrate ongoing compliance to CASA or a future regulator.

10. If there is uncertainty, consult CASA guidance.

    • The AD text does not set out alternate means of compliance or an exemption route in the instrument itself. If a party believes an alternative solution is necessary, contact CASA to determine the appropriate administrative pathway for seeking relief or alternative compliance methods.

Following these steps will meet the AD’s explicit requirements: inspect the specified transducers, replace any unit with a serial within the block 2364-2930, complete the inspection prior to issue of an Australian Certificate of Airworthiness and complete any necessary replacement prior to further flight.