AD/DH 82/18 — Inspection of Wooden Structure

The AD sets out several core concepts and operational hooks that determine how the rule functions.

• Scope and applicability: the AD states it applies to "all variants of DH 82 and DH 82A aircraft" (Applicability). That is the universe of regulated aircraft under this instrument; there are no listed exemptions or variant carve-outs within the AD text.
• Definitions and external references: the AD defines DHSL as de Havilland Support Ltd and TNS as "DHSL Technical News Sheet CT (Moth) No. 32, Issue 3, dated 1 December 2008" (Definitions). The AD does not reproduce the inspection criteria itself; it points to Appendix B paragraph 6 of the TNS for the required inspection content and to Appendix G Figure 3 of the TNS for required physical fittings (inspection rings and drainage provisions). The AD therefore operates by reference to a technical publication and to unspecified "approved data" for repairs (Requirement 2(d)).
• Immediate operational restriction: aerobatic flight is suspended by Requirement 1. Compliance 1 requires this suspension within two weeks of the AD taking effect, and specifies that aerobatic flying may only resume once airworthiness of the wooden structure has been established under Requirement 2.
• Prescriptive inspection steps: Requirement 2 is a multipart set of actions. It is procedural and invasive: install inspection rings/drainage per a specified figure in the TNS (2(a)); gain access by removing pop-in panels or cutting fabric from inside the inspection rings to access the entire internal wooden structure (2(b)); perform a detailed inspection in accordance with the inspection criteria at Appendix B paragraph 6 of the TNS (2(c)); remove defective wood or repair in accordance with approved data (2(d)).
• Reporting duty: Requirement 3 requires reporting of defects to CASA via the Service Difficulty Reporting System. Compliance 3 links that duty to the existing regulatory framework, Part 4B - Defect Reporting of CAR 1988.
• Recurrent inspection regime: the AD imposes a repeating inspection requirement (Compliance: repetition clause) to be performed at the earliest of (i) every 200 hours, (ii) within 36 months of the previous inspection, or (iii) after a ground strike, birdstrike or wing strike that leaves witness marks on the fabric covering or otherwise shows obvious damage. The AD specifies that in such an event, both top and bottom wings on the side of impact are to be inspected.
• Timings and prioritisation: the AD sets earlier deadlines for aircraft used for commercial purposes prescribed in regulation 206 of CAR 1988 , by 30 October 2014 , and later deadlines for other aircraft , by 31 December 2015 (Compliance 2(a)-(b)). It also mandates immediate suspension of aerobatics within two weeks of the effective date (Compliance 1).
• Legal anchoring and effective date: the AD states an effective date of 14 August 2014 and references CAR 1988 for defect reporting and commercial-use classification. The AD was signed off by a CASA delegate (Nicholas Ward) on 11 August 2014.

These concepts show the AD as a combination of an immediate safety restriction, a set of specific physical inspection and modification tasks that depend on an external technical publication, recurring monitoring tied to hours/time/impact events, and mandatory defect reporting into CASA’s system.

The AD applies to "all variants of DH 82 and DH 82A aircraft" (Applicability). That phrase identifies aircraft owners, operators, and maintainers of those types as the regulated population. The AD also differentiates between aircraft used "for commercial purposes prescribed in regulation 206 of CAR 1988" and "all other aircraft" for the purposes of compliance deadlines (Compliance 2(a)-(b)), which creates two cohorts with different time-to-completion obligations.

Directly affected parties

• Owners and registered operators: legally responsible for ensuring compliance with ADs. They must arrange suspension of aerobatic activity, schedule and pay for installation of inspection rings and drainage provisions, remove panels or cut fabric to access internal structure, perform prescribed inspections, and undertake repairs or removals where defects are found (Requirement 1-2).
• Maintenance organisations and licensed engineers: engaged to carry out the inspections and repairs, following the inspection criteria at Appendix B paragraph 6 of the TNS and "approved data" for repairs (Requirement 2(c)-(d)). The AD's demand for access to internal wooden structure will involve shop time and potentially specialised techniques (removing pop-in panels, cutting fabric).
• Pilots conducting aerobatics: aerobatic pilots who operate on DH 82/82A types will be constrained by the aerobatics suspension; aeroplane owners/operators must ensure pilots do not perform aerobatics until airworthiness is confirmed per Requirement 2 and the AD’s compliance instruction (Requirement 1; Compliance 1).
• Commercial operators as defined under CAR 1988 reg 206: these operators face the earlier compliance date (by 30 October 2014) and therefore must prioritise inspections and any necessary repairs to resume commercial operations or continue them in compliance with the AD (Compliance 2(a)).
• Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA): tasked with receiving Service Difficulty Reports and with oversight/enforcement; the AD was issued by CASA and refers reporting obligations to Part 4B Defect Reporting of CAR 1988 (Requirement 3; Compliance 3).

Indirectly affected parties

• Insurers and brokers: the AD can affect airworthiness status and, by requiring removal of unserviceable wooden structure or repairs per approved data, may affect coverage conditions or premium calculations. The AD text does not mention insurance, but the required actions alter an aircraft’s configuration and operational permissions (Requirement 2; Compliance 1).
• Maintenance parts suppliers and DHSL: installation of inspection rings and drainage provisions per the TNS (Requirement 2(a)) will create demand for specified fittings; de Havilland Support Ltd (DHSL) is the author of the TNS and is defined in the AD (Definitions).
• Event organisers, flying schools, and aerobatic event holders: because aerobatic flight is suspended until airworthiness is re-established, organisations that rely on aerobatic capability in DH 82 variants must adjust scheduling or grounding of aircraft in their fleets (Requirement 1; Compliance 1).

Who pays and who decides

• Owners/operators pay for inspections, installation of inspection rings/drainage, access works (panel removal or fabric cutting), recurring inspections, and repairs or replacements of wooden structure (Requirement 2). Maintenance organisations exercise technical judgment within the AD’s boundaries but must follow the TNS inspection criteria and use "approved data" for repairs (Requirement 2(c)-(d)).
• CASA decides on enforcement and takes defects reported under Part 4B; the AD was issued by CASA and references the Service Difficulty Reporting System as the reporting mechanism (Requirement 3; Compliance 3).

Geographic and temporal scope

• The AD has an effective date (14 August 2014) and immediate operational requirements (suspension within two weeks) and staged deadlines for completing inspections depending on commercial use (Compliance 1-2). The recurring inspection schedule imposes ongoing obligations tied to hours/time or impact events.

The AD imposes mandatory duties and prescribes limited conditional rights tied to compliance outcomes. There are no permissive or optional language elements for core requirements , the AD uses terms such as "must" and prescribes actions and deadlines.

Principal duties

• Suspend aerobatic flight: Requirement 1 mandates suspension of all aerobatic flight. Compliance 1 requires this suspension within two weeks of the AD's effective date and conditions the resumption of aerobatic flight on establishment of the airworthiness of the wooden structure in accordance with Requirement 2.
• Install inspection rings and drainage provisions: Requirement 2(a) requires installation "in accordance with the provisions of Figure 3 of Appendix G of the TNS." The duty is specific about the source of the required fittings and their placement.
• Gain access to the internal wooden structure: Requirement 2(b) requires removal of all ‘pop-in’ panels or cutting away fabric from inside inspection rings to facilitate access to the entire internal wooden structure. This is procedural and prescriptive about access methodology.
• Perform a detailed inspection: Requirement 2(c) obliges a "detailed inspection of the internal wooden structure in accordance with the inspection criteria provided at Appendix B, paragraph 6 ‘Inspection Content’ of the TNS." The AD therefore delegates technical inspection content to the TNS and makes compliance contingent on that content.
• Remove or repair unserviceable wooden structure: Requirement 2(d) requires removing unserviceable wood from service or conducting repairs "in accordance with approved data." The repair standard is therefore approval-dependent.
• Report defects discovered: Requirement 3 requires reporting of all defects to CASA via the Service Difficulty Reporting System, and Compliance 3 explicitly ties the reporting action to Part 4B - Defect Reporting of CAR 1988.

Recurring duties and triggers

• Reinspection schedule: the AD requires repeating Requirement 2 at the earlier of every 200 hours, within 36 months, or following a qualifying strike event that leaves witness marks or obvious damage (repetition clause). The AD specifies that if such an impact event occurs, both the top and bottom wings on the side of the aircraft where the impact occurred must be inspected.

Rights conditioned on compliance

• Resumption of aerobatic flying: aerobatic flight may be resumed, but only when the owner/operator has "established the airworthiness of the wooden structure of the wings and empennage in accordance with Requirement 2" (Compliance 1). The right to carry out aerobatic operations is therefore preserved but conditional on completion of the AD’s inspection and repair sequence.
• Use of "approved data" for repairs: Requirement 2(d) allows repairs "in accordance with approved data," which preserves repair options so long as repair methods and materials are approved by the appropriate authority. The AD does not prescribe particular repair minutiae, but it conditions repairs on approval status.

Duties linked to other regulations and processes

• Reporting under Part 4B: Requirement 3 and Compliance 3 link defect reporting to the statutory framework in CAR 1988 Part 4B. The AD does not replace that framework; it routes defect reports into it.
• Differential deadlines for commercial operators: Compliance 2(a) requires compliance by 30 October 2014 for aircraft used for commercial purposes as prescribed in regulation 206 of CAR 1988; Compliance 2(b) sets 31 December 2015 for others. That creates prioritisation obligations for commercial operators.

Enforcement is implicit through CASA and statutory reporting obligations. The AD itself does not set out penalty provisions within its text but references CAR 1988 for defect reporting and is issued by a CASA delegate, signalling regulatory force.

The AD text does not itself list specific monetary penalties or criminal sanctions; instead it establishes mandatory actions and cross-references existing regulatory machinery for defect reporting and oversight. Enforcement implications arise from the AD’s status as a CASA airworthiness directive and its references.

Enforcement architecture and mechanism

• CASA oversight and the Service Difficulty Reporting System: Requirement 3 requires that all defects discovered be reported to CASA via the Service Difficulty Reporting System. Compliance 3 expressly states that this action "must be taken in accordance with Part 4B - Defect Reporting of CAR 1988." That cross-reference places defect reporting and its enforcement within the CAR 1988 framework, which governs how CASA receives, acts upon and enforces reporting obligations.
• Regulatory instrument status: The AD is issued by CASA, signed by a CASA delegate (Nicholas Ward); as an AD, it is a mandatory continuing airworthiness requirement. Non-compliance with an AD is typically actionable under the broader civil aviation regulatory regime. The AD itself does not specify a penalty table, but it imposes mandatory duties enforceable by CASA under its statutory powers and enforcement mechanisms in CAR 1988 and other aviation safety legislation.
• Operational consequences: Compliance obligations have immediate operational impact , notably the suspension of aerobatic flight until inspections and repairs are completed. An operator who continues aerobatic operations in breach of the AD would be operating beyond the permission narrowly preserved in Compliance 1 and could be subject to regulatory action by CASA.

What enforcement is not explicitly stated

• No penalty amounts or infringement schedule within the AD text: the AD does not enumerate fines, licence suspensions, or criminal penalties. Instead it integrates with Part 4B for reporting and leaves enforcement to the regulator under the broader statutory and regulatory powers.
• No appeal or review mechanism listed in the AD: the text does not set out review pathways, waivers, or alternative compliance methods; it requires actions "in accordance with" the TNS and "approved data" for repairs. Any application for alternative compliance or relief would need to be sought under CASA’s established processes outside the AD text.

Practical enforcement risks for operators

• Operational groundings: CASA can ground aircraft or prohibit certain activities if the regulator determines airworthiness is not met. The AD itself suspends aerobatics and conditions resumption on successful inspection and repair; failure to comply could lead to broader operational restrictions enforced by CASA.
• Record-keeping scrutiny and reporting obligations: Requirement 3 requires reporting through the Service Difficulty Reporting System and Compliance 3 channels the duty to Part 4B. CASA may inspect records and verify that inspections and repairs have been completed per the TNS and approved data; failing to report defects as required may give CASA cause to take enforcement action.
• Repeated non-compliance: the AD’s recurrence regime (every 200 hours or within 36 months or following an impact) creates ongoing obligations. Recurrent non-compliance may attract progressively serious regulatory response under the CAR 1988 enforcement framework.

Summary

The AD is enforceable through CASA’s existing powers rather than by listing discrete penalties inside the AD. The AD creates duties that can lead to operational consequences and regulatory action if ignored, and ties reporting to the Part 4B procedures in CAR 1988. The text itself does not list penalty amounts or enforcement process steps.

The AD explicitly references two elements of the broader Australian aviation regulatory framework and relies on external technical publications and approvals. Those references determine the AD's interactions with other law and regulatory instruments.

Direct cross-references

• CAR 1988 Part 4B - Defect Reporting: Requirement 3 requires that defects discovered be reported "to CASA via the Service Difficulty Reporting System" and Compliance 3 states that "The action in Requirement 3 must be taken in accordance with Part 4B - Defect Reporting of CAR 1988." That connects the AD’s defect-reporting duty to the statutory defect reporting regime in the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988, which governs the procedure and obligations for reporting service difficulties and defects.
• CAR 1988 regulation 206: Compliance 2(a) applies an earlier deadline to "aircraft used for commercial purposes prescribed in regulation 206 of CAR 1988." The AD thereby leverages CAR 1988 to categorize aircraft into commercial-use versus other categories for differential compliance timing. The AD itself does not define reg 206, but it uses that regulation as the reference point for the earlier deadline.

Interaction with technical approvals and external documents

• TNS and approved data: The AD delegates substantive technical inspection content and certain installation details to DHSL Technical News Sheet CT (Moth) No. 32 Issue 3 dated 1 December 2008, specifically Appendix B paragraph 6 for inspection content and Appendix G Figure 3 for installation of inspection rings and drainage provisions (Requirement 2(a) and 2(c)). The AD also permits repairs "in accordance with approved data" (Requirement 2(d)). This means compliance requires following technical material that exists outside the AD text and using repair data approved by the appropriate approvals authority. Thus the AD interacts with the administrative processes that grant approval to repair data and with obligations to follow manufacturer or supplemental type data where relevant.
• CASA’s Service Difficulty Reporting System: the AD requires use of CASA’s reporting mechanism. That ties operator and maintainer record-keeping and communications to CASA’s administrative systems and to the legal obligations under Part 4B.

Delegation, discretion and administrative practice

• CASA delegate issuance: the AD is signed by a CASA delegate (Nicholas Ward). The issuance and management of ADs are administrative acts by CASA and its delegates, and operational discretion over enforcement is exercised under CASA’s statutory powers outside the AD text. The AD prescribes mandatory actions but relies on CASA’s administrative regime for enforcement and management of reports.
• Approved data process: the AD leaves room for discretion in what constitutes "approved data" for repairs. Approval processes are governed by CASA or other designated approval authorities; the AD does not itself define the approval criteria or procedures.

Limits and boundaries

• The AD does not purport to amend CAR 1988 or alter Part 4B; it embeds its reporting requirement into the existing Part 4B process rather than displacing it (Requirement 3; Compliance 3).
• The AD prescribes a specific technical path by reference to the TNS; operators must therefore reconcile AD actions with their regulatory obligations under CAR 1988 and with any airworthiness approvals. The AD does not create new approval mechanisms; it requires adherence to the TNS and use of approved repair data.

In short, the AD functions inside the existing civil aviation regulatory ecosystem: it borrows CAR 1988 for reporting and commercial-use categorisation, relies on an external TNS for inspection and installation detail, and depends on existing approval processes for repair standards.

The AD text as provided contains only a single issuance: AD/DH 82/18, effective date 14 August 2014, issued on 11 August 2014 (signed by Nicholas Ward). The document itself does not record subsequent amendments, revisions or repeal.

What the AD states

• Effective date: The AD explicitly states "The effective date of this AD is 14 August 2014." The signature block records the AD as signed by the CASA delegate on 11 August 2014.
• No amendment entries within the text: the AD contains no further entries or footnotes indicating later amending ADs, corrigenda, updates to the TNS reference, or revocations. The provided document is a single, self-contained directive.

Implications from the absence of amendment history in the text

• Single-issue instrument: The absence of an amendment history in the AD document indicates that, at least in the document as given, CASA issued this AD once and did not record any subsequent changes in the same text. Any later amendments or superseding ADs would be recorded in separate AD issuances or in CASA’s database; they are not included in the AD text provided.
• Reliance on external technical documents: because the AD depends on the TNS (DHSL Technical News Sheet CT (Moth) No. 32 Issue 3) and on "approved data" for repair, updates to that external material may change compliance practice without an amendment to the AD itself. However, the AD as drafted binds operators to the specific referenced TNS material and to approved repair data; changes to the TNS would typically produce a new TNS issue or a new AD if CASA considers it necessary.

How to confirm current status in practice (procedural note rather than legal claim)

• Practitioners should check CASA’s AD database or official AD register to determine whether this AD has been superseded, varied, or withdrawn after 14 August 2014. The AD text does not supply that subsequent administrative history.

The AD document does not record any litigation, judicial review, or legal challenges relating to AD/DH 82/18. The AD contains no references to cases or legal proceedings. Therefore the document itself provides no record of litigation history.

What is and is not present in the source

• No named cases: the AD does not name or refer to any judicial decisions or precedents that interpret it.
• No recorded challenges: there is no mention in the AD of judicial review applications, injunctions, or declaratory relief having been sought against the AD, nor of any court-ordered stays of operation.

How litigation would arise and what the AD reveals about potential issues (analytical observation rooted in the text)

• Grounds for litigation would typically be brought in administrative law if a party alleged procedural flaws in CASA’s issuance, or in contract/tort if an enforcement action arose from non-compliance and a party sought relief. The AD itself does not set out procedural history beyond signature and effective date.
• Technical disputes about what constitutes compliance might arise because the AD delegates substantive inspection content to the TNS and permits repairs "in accordance with approved data." Disputes could concern whether particular repair data is "approved" or whether a given inspection satisfies Appendix B paragraph 6 of the TNS. The AD’s reliance on external technical material and approval processes creates potential factual disputes that, if litigated, would require recourse to the TNS and the approvals record.

Practical note for practitioners

• Since the AD text contains no litigation record, lawyers or compliance officers needing to know if the AD has been litigated will need to search court records, tribunal databases, or CASA enforcement notices. The AD itself gives no litigative history.

The AD contains several precise technical and procedural requirements that can catch operators, maintainers and pilots if not read carefully. The following items are drawn only from the AD text and pose practical pitfalls where compliance risk is material.

1. Aerobatics suspension and conditional resumption (Requirement 1; Compliance 1)

• The AD requires suspension of all aerobatic flight within two weeks of the effective date and allows aerobatics only after the wooden structure’s airworthiness is established in accordance with Requirement 2. Practitioners often miss that aerobatics is suspended as a category, not just for aircraft pending inspection. Resuming aerobatics requires completion of the detailed inspection and any necessary repairs per Requirement 2.

2. Differential compliance deadlines (Compliance 2(a)-(b))

• The AD imposes earlier deadlines for "aircraft used for commercial purposes prescribed in regulation 206 of CAR 1988" (by 30 October 2014) and later ones for "all other aircraft" (by 31 December 2015). Operators must correctly classify the aircraft under reg 206 to determine which deadline applies. Misclassification could lead to late compliance for a commercial operator.

3. Reliance on TNS for inspection content and fittings (Requirement 2(a), 2(c))

• The AD does not describe the inspection criteria or the installation figure; it references Appendix B paragraph 6 and Appendix G Figure 3 of the TNS. Non-possession or misinterpretation of the TNS could lead to inadequate inspections. Operators must obtain the specific TNS issue referenced (CT (Moth) No. 32, Issue 3, dated 1 December 2008) and ensure inspections and installations conform exactly to the referenced parts.

4. Invasive access methods may be required (Requirement 2(b))

• The AD authorises removal of all ‘pop-in’ panels or "otherwise cut away the fabric from inside inspection rings" to facilitate access to the entire internal wooden structure. Cutting fabric or removing panels can affect the finish and may require re-covering or repair themselves. Operators should plan for the consequences of invasive access, both in terms of parts and certified repair methods.

5. Repairs must follow "approved data" (Requirement 2(d))

• The AD requires removal of unserviceable wooden structure or repairs in accordance with approved data. What counts as "approved data" is not defined in the AD and will depend on CASA approvals and maintenance approval holders. Using non-approved repair methods risks non-compliance.

6. Repetition triggers are the earliest of several events (Compliance: repetition clause)

• The inspection repetition requirement is the earlier of every 200 hours, within 36 months, or after a ground strike, birdstrike, or any other wing strike leaving witness marks. Operators must track both flight hours and calendar time and be alert to any impact events that mandate immediate inspection. Failing to inspect both top and bottom wings on the side of impact (as required) is a specific pitfall.

7. Mandatory defect reporting under Part 4B (Requirement 3; Compliance 3)

• All defects discovered must be reported to CASA via the Service Difficulty Reporting System and in accordance with Part 4B of CAR 1988. Failure to report defects as required could expose an operator to enforcement under CAR 1988 mechanisms.

8. Scope applies to all variants (Applicability)

• The AD applies to "all variants of DH 82 and DH 82A aircraft." That broad scope leaves no variant-based exemption. Operators with modified or amateur-built derivatives that still fall within the variant categorisation must assess applicability carefully.

9. Timing of initial suspension (Compliance 1)

• The AD requires the action in Requirement 1 to be taken within two weeks of the effective date (14 August 2014). The two-week window is relatively short; operators who were not monitoring ADs closely risked being in breach during that early period.

10. Source conformity and record-keeping

• Because the AD ties compliance to external documents and to "approved data", operators must retain traceable records showing inspections followed the TNS criteria, the exact approved data used for any repairs, and that defects were reported to CASA. Poor record-keeping can make otherwise-complete compliance unverifiable.

Each of these items arises directly from the AD language. The practical implication is that compliance is not only a one-off inspection but an administrative and technical programme: sourcing the TNS, installing hardware, conducting invasive inspections, documenting repairs under approved data, reporting defects, and repeating inspections on a specified schedule.

This section sets out a step-by-step, source-grounded compliance checklist and operational considerations based solely on the AD text.

Immediate steps (within two weeks of effective date; Compliance 1)

1. Suspend aerobatic flight.

• Action: Ensure all operators and pilots cease aerobatic flight for each DH 82/82A subject to the AD, within two weeks of 14 August 2014 as required by Compliance 1.
• Record: Log the suspension and date implemented.

Prioritisation and scheduling (Compliance 2(a)-(b))

2. Identify whether the aircraft is used for commercial purposes as prescribed in regulation 206 of CAR 1988.

• Action: Classify the aircraft per reg 206 CAR 1988 to determine which initial completion deadline applies , commercial operators must comply by 30 October 2014; other operators by 31 December 2015.
• Record: Document the basis for classification and the scheduled date for completion.

Technical preparatory steps (Requirement 2(a)-(b))

3. Obtain the referenced TNS and any other required approvals.

• Action: Acquire DHSL Technical News Sheet CT (Moth) No. 32, Issue 3, dated 1 December 2008, and ensure the maintenance and engineering team is familiar with Appendix G Figure 3 (installation of inspection rings and drainage provisions) and Appendix B paragraph 6 (inspection content).
• Rationale: The AD requires installations and inspections "in accordance with" these TNS provisions.
• Note: If any clarification or updated TNS content is needed, seek it from DHSL and verify any changes with CASA if necessary.

4. Plan for installation of inspection rings and drainage provisions (Requirement 2(a)).

• Action: Schedule and resource installation in conformity with Figure 3 of Appendix G of the TNS. Confirm parts and fitment specifications with DHSL or approved suppliers.
• Considerations: Installation may require specialist fittings or approvals and could be the gating item for inspection access.

5. Arrange access to internal wooden structure (Requirement 2(b)).

• Action: Either remove all pop-in panels or prepare to cut fabric from inside inspection rings to permit inspection of the entire internal wooden structure. Decide which access method is appropriate and obtain necessary materials and approval for any fabric cutting or re-covering.
• Record: Retain work orders and maintenance records that record the access method used, locations, and any subsequent restorative work.

Inspection and repair (Requirement 2(c)-(d))

6. Perform a detailed inspection of internal wooden structure in accordance with the TNS inspection criteria.

• Action: Conduct the detailed inspection pursuant to Appendix B paragraph 6 of the TNS. Ensure inspectors are briefed on the specific inspection content and use appropriate inspection tools and techniques.
• Record: Produce an inspection report documenting the condition of each inspected element and reference the TNS inspection criteria applied.

7. Remove or repair unserviceable wooden structure as required.

• Action: Remove any unserviceable wooden structure from service or effect repairs in accordance with "approved data" as required by Requirement 2(d). Confirm that repair data is formally approved and retain evidence of approval.
• Record: Document repair methodology, parts used, approval references, and test results where applicable.

Reporting (Requirement 3; Compliance 3)

8. Report defects to CASA.

• Action: For any defects discovered during inspection, lodge a report to CASA using the Service Difficulty Reporting System in accordance with Part 4B - Defect Reporting of CAR 1988.
• Record: Keep copies of all Service Difficulty Reports and related correspondence.

Recurrent compliance (repetition clause)

9. Implement the recurring inspection regime.

• Action: Repeat Requirement 2 inspections at the earlier of every 200 hours, within 36 months of the previous inspection, or after any ground strike, birdstrike or other wing strike of sufficient magnitude to leave witness marks on the fabric covering, or otherwise obvious damage to a wing. When an impact event occurs, inspect both top and bottom wings on the side where the impact occurred.
• Record: Maintain a schedule of next inspections tied to flight-hour counters and calendar intervals. Update records immediately after any qualifying event.

Operational resumption of aerobatics (Compliance 1)

10. Re-allow aerobatic flight only when airworthiness has been established following Requirement 2.

• Action: Only permit aerobatic operations after the detailed inspection and any necessary repairs are complete and documented as satisfying the TNS inspection criteria and repair approvals.

Administrative and governance measures

11. Centralise documentation and evidence of compliance.

• Action: Keep a compliance folder for each aircraft that includes TNS copies, inspection reports, installation records for inspection rings and drainage provisions, repair approvals and records, Service Difficulty Reports, and a traceable log of inspections and flight hours.
• Rationale: Because the AD ties compliance to external documents and approved data, verifiable documentation is necessary to demonstrate conformity.

12. Liaise with CASA and DHSL where necessary.

• Action: If there is uncertainty about what constitutes an “approved” repair or how to apply the TNS, contact CASA or DHSL for guidance and retain written correspondence. For unusual damage scenarios, seek CASA guidance about whether additional actions are required beyond the AD.

13. Maintenance planning and budgeting

• Action: Budget for the installation of inspection rings/drainage, potential re-covering of fabric, labour for invasive inspections, parts for repairs or replacement of wooden structure, downtime while inspections and repairs are carried out, and the cost of recurrent inspections at 200-hour or 36-month intervals.
• Rationale: The AD imposes both immediate and ongoing costs; planning reduces risk of non-compliance.

14. Ensure pilots and operational staff are briefed

• Action: Circulate AD requirements to pilots, ops managers and event planners, emphasising the aerobatics suspension, the conditional nature of resumption, and the need to report any impact events that could trigger immediate inspections.

Compliance verification

• Internal audits: Schedule internal compliance audits to confirm that inspections are being performed per the TNS, repairs are backed by approved data, and defect reports are lodged correctly under Part 4B.
• External inspections: Be prepared for CASA oversight and to produce the records required to show compliance.

This compliance blueprint flows directly from the AD’s Requirements and Compliance sections and is designed to convert the AD’s prose into actionable operational steps while ensuring documentary evidence exists to demonstrate conformity with the AD and with Part 4B reporting obligations.