AD/ECUREUIL/78 Amdt 2 - Sliding Door

The directive names the affected equipment precisely: Eurocopter AS 350 helicopters, versions B, BA, BB, B1, B2, B3 and D, that are equipped with sliding doors and that do not have MOD 073287 and/or MOD 073290 or Eurocopter Service Bulletin No. 52.00.29 incorporated. That formulation means the directive is limited to a subset of AS 350 airframes determined by variant, door configuration, and modification status. The text is explicit: applicability is conditional on the absence of specified modifications or service bulletin incorporation.

Practically, the parties that will need to act to comply are the owners, operators and maintenance organisations responsible for those aircraft. The Requirement imposes an inspection procedure "in accordance with paragraph 2.B.1" of a Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin; therefore the organisation responsible for maintenance must obtain and follow that Eurocopter document to carry out the specified measurement. The directive requires a placard "to be affixed to the instrument panel of the helicopter" if the measured criteria do not meet the thresholds; affixing that placard is an airframe-level action that the operator or maintenance provider must execute and document.

The text does not name a particular class of operator (commercial, private, aerial work, training) or a particular registry; it identifies equipment by model and modification status. The directive is issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority and is signed by the Delegate, David Villiers, dated 13 September 2006 and effective 26 October 2006, which situates responsibility under CASA's regulatory instruments. The directive also cross-refers to EASA AD 2006-0249 and Eurocopter service documents, so organisations with international maintenance oversight or that rely on EASA material will need to reconcile those technical references.

Note the exclusion condition: aircraft that have incorporated MOD 073287 and/or MOD 073290, or Eurocopter Service Bulletin No. 52.00.29, are outside the stated applicability; those aircraft do not fall within the check-and-restrict regime described here. The directive therefore affects only aircraft that remain in their unmodified configuration with sliding doors.

The document imposes a set of clear duties and prescribes a required chain of actions, but it does not grant any affirmative rights beyond operational permission contingent on measured compliance.

Key duties specified in the text:

• Carry out the dimensional inspection: "Check the diameter of the sliding door roller and the dimension of the front end opening of the middle rail, in accordance with paragraph 2.B.1 of EurocopterAS 350 Alert Service Bulletin No. 05.00.41 Revision 2.2." This duty requires following a Eurocopter-specified measurement procedure.
• Apply the action criteria: follow paragraph 2.B.2 to interpret measurement results and select the subsequent operational state. The directive sets numeric pass levels for C1 and C2: C1 ≥ 5 mm and C2 ≥ 1.5 mm allow door operation in flight; C1 < 5 mm and/or C2 < 1.5 mm prohibit door operation in flight.
• Placard the aircraft where restriction applies: "A placard specifying this restriction is to be affixed to the instrument panel of the helicopter." That is an aircraft marking duty following a measured failure.
• Observe timing and recurrence: perform the initial check "before further flight after 3 July 2002" and thereafter "at intervals not to exceed 100 flight hours." The directive emphasises the continuing nature of the inspection duty by setting a flight-hour recurrence.

Operational conditional permission:

• If the inspection yields measurements meeting or exceeding the thresholds, the owner/operator has the explicit operational permission to "allow door operation in flight." That permission is conditional on maintaining the measurement criteria at subsequent checks and on not having the excluded modifications.

Rights and omissions in the text:

• The directive does not set out any process for appeals, exemptions, or alternate compliance methods within the text provided. It does not specify who is authorised to perform the check (licence or certificated organisation), nor does it specify record-keeping formats; those matters would typically be governed by other procedures, but they are not stated in this text.
• The document does not specify penalties, enforcement mechanisms, or reporting obligations in the text. It provides compliance measures, timing and a placarding obligation but does not itself list enforcement steps or sanctions.

In short, the key duties are inspection, interpretation against numeric criteria, placarding where required, and recurring checks at defined intervals. The practical right created is conditional permission to operate the sliding door in flight if and only if the measurements meet the thresholds set out in the Requirement.

The directive text as supplied contains no express penalty schedule, monetary fines, or adjudicative process. It prescribes technical requirements and explicit compliance times, but it does not set out enforcement mechanisms, administrative sanctions, or criminal penalties within its own text. The document is signed by a CASA Delegate, David Villiers, and includes effective dates and compliance timing; those features indicate an authoritative safety directive, but the instrument as provided does not itself describe how non-compliance will be handled, what evidence is required to demonstrate compliance, or which agency processes apply to enforcement.

Consequently, within the four corners of this text, one must note the following:

• The directive imposes duties (inspections, placarding, recurrent checks) but does not specify enforcement procedures or penalties for failing to carry them out. The absence of explicit penalties in the text means that the reader cannot identify punitive measures from this document alone.
• The text also does not set out reporting obligations tied to the inspection outcomes, such as mandatory notifications to CASA or Eurocopter, nor does it list required maintenance log entries or conformity documentation. It only directs the inspection, action and placarding, and provides compliance timing.
• The document does reference other authorities and documents, notably EASA AD 2006-0249 and Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletins, which may themselves be part of a broader regulatory framework that includes enforcement provisions; however, those external documents are not reproduced here and no enforcement detail is quoted.

For practitioners, this means that the directive contains operational and inspection obligations that must be adhered to, but to understand enforcement, acceptable records, and possible remedies or penalties for non-compliance, the operator or maintainer will need to consult governing aviation safety regulations, CASA guidance, and the referenced EASA and Eurocopter materials. Those sources are not part of the text supplied, and the directive as provided does not itself state an enforcement regime.

The directive explicitly cross-references and defers technical requirements to other instruments: paragraph 2.B.1 and 2.B.2 of Eurocopter AS 350 Alert Service Bulletin No. 05.00.41 Revision 2.2, and EASA AD 2006-0249. It also uses modification status as an interaction point by excluding aircraft that have MOD 073287 and/or MOD 073290 or Eurocopter Service Bulletin No. 52.00.29 incorporated. These references create a chain of dependency, where the AD prescribes compliance measured against manufacturer and European Aviation Safety Agency material.

Specific interactions apparent in the text:

• Technical interaction with Eurocopter documentation. The inspection procedure and the decision logic are not fully reproduced in this directive; instead the directive requires inspections "in accordance with paragraph 2.B.1" of a named Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin, and actions as per paragraph 2.B.2. That means the practical content of the required inspection is determined by a separate manufacturer document. Operators must therefore consult and apply the Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin in conducting the mandated checks.
• Interaction with EASA ADs. The directive states "Note: EASA AD 2006-0249 refers." And the Amendment 2 entry records that it "is issued in response to a new EASA AD, which introduces a revision of the Requirement document, and limits applicability to unmodified aircraft." This indicates that the AD aligns Australian requirements with an EASA action, and that the EASA AD was a driver for revising the Requirement document and narrowing applicability. The directive thereby links domestic action to an international airworthiness authority’s directive.
• Interaction with modification status. The directive limits applicability to unmodified aircraft, explicitly excluding those with MOD 073287 and/or MOD 073290 or having incorporated Eurocopter Service Bulletin No. 52.00.29. That creates an interaction whereby the presence of certain modifications or service bulletin incorporation removes the aircraft from the scope of this directive; consequently, aircraft owners and maintenance organisations must track modification status and service bulletin incorporation to determine applicability.
• Background safety reporting. The Background text mentions a DGAC report of sliding door aft roller dislodgement in flight due to severe wear on the rail. This references another authority’s safety reporting and shows the directive’s technical trigger comes from an investigation or occurrence report.

Absent from the text are explicit references to national aviation legislation, record-keeping regulations, or penalties. Therefore the directive interacts with other laws only insofar as it borrows technical requirements and triggers from Eurocopter and EASA documents and conditions applicability on specific MODs/service bulletins. To understand how this AD fits into the broader statutory enforcement and certification regime, operators will need to consult domestic aviation safety legislation and CASA procedural documents outside the text supplied.

The directive records a concise amendment history within the text. The key points are:

• Original action (prior to Amendment 1): The Background states that the DGAC received a report of sliding door aft roller dislodgement in flight due to severe rail wear, and that an initial corrective action was issued. The initial compliance time referenced in the current document is noted as unchanged by this issue of the Directive, implying an original directive with initial timing already set (the text records "The initial compliance time remains unchanged by this issue of the Directive").

• Amendment 1: The document states that Amendment 1 "converted the previous Alert Telex to an Alert Service Bulletin, with no change in technical content; but introduced an additional check criterion in order to prevent the risk of the aft guide roller coming out of the middle rail when the door is opened in flight." That records two mechanical changes in the regulatory chain: a format change from Alert Telex to Alert Service Bulletin and the addition of a new check criterion to better prevent a specific failure mode.

• Amendment 2: The header identifies this document as "AD/ECUREUIL/78 Amdt 2" and the amendment block says: "Amendment 2 is issued in response to a new EASA AD, which introduces a revision of the Requirement document, and limits applicability to unmodified aircraft." The printed effective date of this Amendment is 26 October 2006, although the signature block is dated 13 September 2006 and the reference code shows "11/2006." This Amendment therefore performed at least two functions: it updated the Requirement document in line with EASA AD 2006-0249, and it narrowed the set of aircraft to which the directive applies by excluding those with specified modifications or service bulletin incorporation.

• Dates and formalities. The compliance section restates the initial compliance time remains unchanged and sets recurring inspection intervals not to exceed 100 flight hours. The document displays a signature block: "David Villiers, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, 13 September 2006." The text also displays the code "AD/ECUREUIL/78 Amdt 2" multiple times along with the title and date "Sliding Door 11/2006", showing the amendment identity and timing.

The amendment history contained in the text therefore documents an evolution from an initial alert format to a service bulletin, the insertion of an additional check criterion to address a failure mode, and a later amendment that aligns the Requirement with an updated EASA AD and narrows applicability to unmodified aircraft. The document does not reproduce the earlier versions in full, nor does it include a detailed changelog beyond the summary statements quoted.

The provided directive text contains no references to litigation, court decisions, appeals, or legal challenges. There are no cases cited, no administrative appeals described, and no adjudicative outcomes or precedents mentioned in this document. The only external authorities cited are Eurocopter service documents, EASA AD 2006-0249, and a DGAC report as background to the safety concern. The signature indicates administrative issuance by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority delegate, but no litigation history or disputes are recorded in the text.

Accordingly, users of this directive will not find any recorded litigation context or case law in the material supplied. If litigation history is relevant to a client matter, practitioners will need to identify and consult external legal databases, CASA enforcement records, or court registries; none of those sources are included or summarised in the directive text itself.

This directive contains several specific features that can be risks for misinterpretation or non-compliance if overlooked:

• Narrow applicability by modification status. The applicability is limited to aircraft "without MOD 073287 and/or MOD 073290 or Eurocopter Service Bulletin No. 52.00.29 incorporated." That conditional phrasing can be misread; practitioners must check whether the aircraft have either of those MODs or the SB incorporated. If they have, the AD does not apply; if they have not, it does apply. Failure to verify modification records could lead to unnecessary inspections or, conversely, missed mandatory checks.

• Reliance on an external Requirement document. The inspection procedure and decision criteria are defined by reference to "paragraph 2.B.1" and "paragraph 2.B.2" of Eurocopter AS 350 Alert Service Bulletin No. 05.00.41 Revision 2.2. The AD does not reproduce the procedural steps, measurement methods, or tolerances beyond the two numeric thresholds for C1 and C2. Therefore, the correct performance of the inspection requires obtaining and following that Alert Service Bulletin precisely. Misapplying the measurement method could yield incorrect C1/C2 values and produce incorrect operational restrictions.

• Numeric thresholds tied to operational permission. The thresholds are exact: C1 must be equal to or greater than 5 mm, and C2 equal to or greater than 1.5 mm, to permit door operation in flight. The directive states that if either C1 < 5 mm or C2 < 1.5 mm, flight operation of the door is prohibited. Because the condition is conjunctive/disjunctive in the wording ("and/or"), operators must treat any failure of either threshold as sufficient to prohibit door operation. Ambiguity in interpreting "and/or" could lead to inconsistent decisions.

• Placarding mandatory where prohibition applies. The directive requires a placard affixed to the instrument panel where door operation in flight is prohibited. That is a persistent aircraft-level control and must be installed and maintained. The text does not describe the exact wording or format of the placard beyond "specifying this restriction," so operators must determine a compliant placard that unambiguously communicates the prohibition, and ensure it remains legible.

• Timing carries a legacy initial compliance date. The AD mandates the initial check "Before further flight after 3 July 2002" but also states "The initial compliance time remains unchanged by this issue of the Directive." For aircraft that have not complied previously, that initial deadline is long passed; the AD nonetheless demands the initial action and the recurring 100-flight-hour checks. Operators must ensure that records reflect when checks were first done and that recurrent inspections continue.

• Multiple documents involved. The directive references EASA AD 2006-0249 and Eurocopter Service Bulletins; failure to reconcile differences or subsequent revisions in those documents could produce compliance gaps. The Amendment notes that Amendment 2 responds to a new EASA AD which introduced a "revision of the Requirement document." Practitioners must therefore use the correct revision of the Alert Service Bulletin (No. 05.00.41 Revision 2.2 as named) and be careful if later revisions exist.

• No enforcement or record-keeping detail in the text. The directive does not state what records must be kept, how to demonstrate compliance to regulators, or what penalties apply. That absence can lead to uncertainty for operators about acceptable proof of inspection history, maintenance entries, or placard installation evidence.

• Potential operational impacts. If an aircraft fails the inspection, the directive prohibits in-flight door operation. For certain operations that rely on doors open in flight (aerial work, photography, passenger configuration), this prohibition could materially affect the mission. The directive does not provide exception routes or alternative risk mitigations in the document; operators must anticipate operational substitution or consider fitting the excluded MODs or service bulletin if available.

These are concrete pitfalls emerging from the text that warrant attention during compliance planning.

The directive sets a straightforward set of compliance steps and timing; to comply with the directive as written, an operator or maintenance organisation should take the following actions, based directly on the text:

1. Verify applicability. Confirm the helicopter is an AS 350 series aircraft of versions B, BA, BB, B1, B2, B3 or D, that it is equipped with sliding doors, and that it has not had MOD 073287 and/or MOD 073290 or Eurocopter Service Bulletin No. 52.00.29 incorporated. If any of those MODs or the SB is incorporated, the AD is not applicable.

2. Obtain the referenced Eurocopter document. Secure Eurocopter AS 350 Alert Service Bulletin No. 05.00.41 Revision 2.2 and locate paragraph 2.B.1 (the inspection method) and paragraph 2.B.2 (the action logic). The directive requires checks "in accordance with paragraph 2.B.1" and actions per paragraph 2.B.2; therefore compliance requires following the manufacturer-prescribed measurement procedures.

3. Perform the initial inspection by the mandated deadline. The AD states that the checks must be completed "Before further flight after 3 July 2002." If that initial inspection has not yet been performed, perform it before the next flight. The directive also notes the initial compliance time remains unchanged by this issue of the Directive; ensure that the initial inspection is recorded.

4. Measure criteria C1 and C2 and apply thresholds. Using the method in paragraph 2.B.1, determine criterion C1 and criterion C2. Apply the threshold tests as the directive prescribes:

   • If C1 is equal to or greater than 5 mm and C2 is equal to or greater than 1.5 mm, door operation in flight is allowed.
   • If C1 is less than 5 mm and/or C2 is less than 1.5 mm, door operation in flight is prohibited.

5. Install a placard where prohibition applies. If the test outcomes require prohibition, install a placard "specifying this restriction" on the instrument panel. Ensure the placard remains legible and secured as part of the aircraft's configuration until measurements again permit in-flight door operation.

6. Establish a recurring inspection schedule. The directive mandates recurring checks "at intervals not to exceed 100 flight hours." Implement maintenance planning so that the measurement is repeated within each 100-flight-hour block. Record each inspection in the aircraft’s maintenance records consistent with standard maintenance log practices, noting measurements, outcomes, actions taken and placard installation or removal.

7. Document results and link to configuration status. Maintain evidence of the aircraft’s modification status (whether MOD 073287, MOD 073290 or SB 52.00.29 has been incorporated) because that status determines applicability. Keep copies of the Eurocopter Alert Service Bulletin Revision 2.2 and any revisions relied upon for the inspection procedure.

8. If measurements fail, consider permitted remedies outside this text. The AD itself prescribes prohibition and placarding when thresholds are not met; it does not prescribe repair or modification steps in this text. Operators should consult Eurocopter technical guidance, the referenced Alert Service Bulletin, or approved maintenance procedures to remedy wear (for example, replacing worn rollers or rails) so that subsequent inspections can demonstrate compliance. The AD does not provide an alternate method of compliance in the text; remedial work should be documented and measured to show C1/C2 thresholds are met.

9. Monitor for related directives. The Amendment notes it was issued "in response to a new EASA AD" and it references other service bulletins; practitioners should monitor Eurocopter, EASA and CASA publications for any further revisions or related ADs that affect the Requirement document or modification applicability.

10. Ensure operators are aware of operational impacts. If an aircraft is found to require prohibition of door operation in flight, communicate and plan for operational restrictions that result. Adjust flight planning and mission profiles where in-flight door operation is required for the task.

Follow these steps strictly as the directive articulates them: the text requires the specific inspection method referenced, numeric threshold evaluation, placarding where required, and recurrence at no more than 100 flight-hour intervals, with initial compliance timed relative to 3 July 2002. The directive’s effective date and authority are recorded (signed by the CASA Delegate on 13 September 2006, effective 26 October 2006), and operators should preserve inspection records to demonstrate adherence to the AD and to track when the next inspection is due.