AD/ERJ-190/2 - Full Authority Digital Engine Control Software

The Directive rests on a narrow technical failure mode and defines a two-step regulatory response that is both operational and technical.

Failure mechanism described in the Directive: re-stow of the thrust reverser may fail or be delayed if the throttle lever is moved back out of the reverse range within a very short time window (less than 0.2 seconds) after the reverser has been commanded. The immediate risk is that subsequent take-off with a partially deployed thrust reverser could occur; the Directive frames this as an unsafe condition affecting flight safety (Background). The Directive therefore separates immediate risk mitigation (crew behaviour and procedures) from the longer-term corrective modification (software).

Operational mitigation concept: Requirement 1 mandates an AFM limitation statement, the exact text of which is provided. That statement tells flight crews: "After applying thrust reverser, do not move the throttle back to the forward thrust range, unless the REV icon on the EICAS is shown amber or green." The Directive permits accomplishing the AFM amendment by inserting a copy of the Directive into the AFM (Requirement 1). The Directive gives seven days from the effective date to implement that AFM change (Compliance).

Technical corrective concept: Requirement 2 mandates installation of specific FADEC software versions (5.10 or 5.20, as applicable) or higher, performed in accordance with specified Embraer Service Bulletins or later ANAC-approved revisions (Requirement 2). The Service Bulletins named are SB 190-73-0005 (9 Nov 2006) and SB 190-73-0009 (21 Dec 2007). The installation must be completed within 1,200 hours TIS after the AD’s effective date (Compliance). The Directive thereby ties the corrective action to manufacturer-prescribed procedures and to foreign regulator approval (ANAC).

Scope and applicability concept: The AD applies selectively to ERJ-190 models that do not already have the FADEC software at or above the specified versions. That creates a binary appliance test for operators: either the AD applies (software older than required) or it does not (software at or above required version).

Regulatory linkage and approval concept: The Directive refers to resilience of the regulatory chain by requiring adherence to Embraer SBs or later revisions approved by ANAC and refers to ANAC AD 2006-03-03R1. In practical terms, the mechanical corrective step is contingent on compliance with manufacturer service procedures and certification/approval by the Brazilian authority.

Temporal staging: The AD imposes an immediate short-term procedural control (AFM change within seven days) followed by a longer window for the hardware/software change (1,200 hours TIS). This staged approach reflects the Directive’s engineering judgement that the software patch is the solution but that an operational instruction is necessary while installations are scheduled.

Record and proof concepts: The Directive explicitly allows inserting a copy into the AFM as the means of complying with the AFM amendment. The Directive does not set out further documentary or inspection procedures in the text provided; it prescribes methods and deadlines but does not in this text set out audit or certification mechanics beyond following the SBs and ANAC approvals.

Aircraft operators and owners of Embraer ERJ-190 series aeroplanes are the primary parties affected. The Directive applies to "All ERJ-190 models without engine FADEC software version 5.10 or 5.20, as applicable, or higher" (Applicability). That means any operator whose aircraft have FADEC software older than those specified versions must comply with the AFM amendment and later software installation. Operators whose aircraft already carry FADEC software at or above 5.10/5.20 are outside the Directive’s applicability.

Maintenance organisations and maintenance personnel are directly affected by the software-install requirement. The Directive mandates that the FADEC software be installed "in accordance with Embraer Service Bulletin (SB) 190-73-0005 dated 9 November 2006 or SB 190-73-0009 dated 21 December 2007 or later revisions approved by the Brazilian Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC)" (Requirement 2). That requires maintenance providers to procure, schedule and carry out the SB tasks and to ensure any revision used has ANAC approval.

Design and certification authorities have an indirect role. The Directive references ANAC, and the SBs must be used as written or later ANAC-approved revisions. The Directive also notes ANAC AD 2006-03-03R1, indicating cross-jurisdictional regulatory alignment. CASA, through the signing delegate (David Punshon), is the issuing authority in Australia.

Pilots and flight crew are affected operationally by the AFM amendment. The Crew must follow the new AFM limitation: do not move the throttle back to forward thrust range after applying thrust reverser unless the REV icon on the EICAS is amber or green. This places a procedural constraint on crew actions during landing rollout and any aborted landing sequence.

Operators’ scheduling and planning functions are affected by the compliance timeframes. The AFM amendment must be done within seven days after the effective date. The FADEC installation must be completed within 1,200 hours time-in-service after the effective date. Therefore flight operations, maintenance windows, and aircraft availability will need adjustment to meet those deadlines.

Suppliers and software support entities for Embraer FADEC systems are affected insofar as they must supply and support the specified FADEC software versions and ensure the software installations comply with the Embraer SBs and any ANAC approvals. If a software installation requires parts, licensing, or specialised tooling, suppliers will be expected to provide those elements in line with the SB instructions.

Regulatory compliance teams, legal and safety departments within operator organisations must track applicability status (software version), ensure timely AFM amendment insertion, ensure SB-led installation within the 1,200 hours window, and follow any ANAC approvals for SB revisions. They are accountable for interpreting applicability and ensuring the aircraft records reflect compliance, although the Directive text itself only prescribes the AFM insertion method and references the SBs for the technical change.

Key duties imposed by the Directive are specific and time-bound. They are stated in two Requirements and a Compliance section.

Duty: Insert AFM limitation (Requirement 1). If not previously accomplished, operators must revise the Limitations Section of the approved AFM to add the specified statement: "After applying thrust reverser, do not move the throttle back to the forward thrust range, unless the REV icon on the EICAS is shown amber or green." The Directive explicitly allows this to be accomplished by inserting a copy of the Directive into the referred AFM section. This duty must be completed within seven days after the Directive’s effective date (Compliance).

Duty: Install FADEC software (Requirement 2). Operators must install engine FADEC software version 5.10 or 5.20, as applicable, or higher, in accordance with Embraer SB 190-73-0005 (9 Nov 2006) or SB 190-73-0009 (21 Dec 2007), or later revisions approved by ANAC. The duty must be satisfied within the next 1,200 hours time-in-service after the effective date of the Directive (Compliance).

Duty: Use manufacturer procedures and regulator approvals. The installation duty is not freeform; it is constrained to the Embraer SBs or later ANAC-approved revisions. That limits the method of compliance to approved manufacturer-recommended instructions and to revision(s) that have regulatory acceptance by ANAC.

Right/allowed action: The Directive permits a specific, simple method for meeting the AFM amendment duty: insertion of the Directive into the AFM. This is an explicit concession that a physical or document insertion meets the requirement, rather than requiring a formal AFM reissue or reprinting.

Enforcement implicit duty: The Directive’s effective date and compliance deadlines are explicit obligations; operators subject to the AD must meet those deadlines. The Directive names the effective date as 20 March 2008 (Compliance statement) and was signed on 13 March 2008. The AD text does not in itself list records to be kept or certify-off steps beyond the requirements and the referenced SBs; however, the SBs likely set out the technical work scope and acceptance criteria for the FADEC installation (the Directive says to follow those SBs).

Constraints on deviation: The Directive ties the software installation to specific SBs or later ANAC-approved revisions. That constrains alternative repair or mitigation methods unless an operator obtains an alternative method of compliance that would presumably require regulatory approval; the AD text provided does not discuss alternative methods explicitly, so any deviation would need regulatory engagement.

Who makes decisions: Operators make operational decisions about when to schedule the FADEC software installation within the 1,200 TIS window, and maintenance organisations execute the installation according to the SB. The issuing authority decisions include enforcing the AD and recognising ANAC-approved SB revisions. The text is prescriptive rather than discretionary for affected aircraft.

Scope of the AFM change: The Directorate supplies the exact AFM text, which reduces interpretation risk about what crew warning is required. The AFM statement is mandatory and must be in the Limitations section.

Interplay of duties: The AFM limitation is an immediate, short-term duty intended to mitigate the risk until the longer-term duty (FADEC software installation) is executed. The Directive’s staging makes the AFM duty a prerequisite in practice: until FADEC versions are brought up to required baseline, crew operations must be modified as per AFM.

The Directive text supplied does not itself specify monetary fines, criminal penalties, or civil enforcement mechanisms. As an Airworthiness Directive, it functions as a mandatory safety directive issued by the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) via its delegate (David Punshon, as named). Enforcement in practice typically follows from the regulator’s statutory powers to require compliance with airworthiness directives and to suspend or revoke operators’ approvals, but such statutory enforcement provisions are not set out in the provided text. The Directive does, however, establish clear compliance deadlines and prescriptive methods to correct the unsafe condition.

Mechanism of enforcement implied by the text: The AD sets mandatory corrective actions and deadlines,AFM amendment within seven days and FADEC installation within 1,200 hours TIS. CASA or its delegate issued the Directive (signed 13 March 2008) and set the effective date (20 March 2008). That issuance implies that CASA will expect operators to comply and that non-compliance could be actionable under the aviation safety regulatory framework. The Directive does not itself enumerate the regulatory penalties for non-compliance.

Compliance evidence and inspection: The Directive permits insertion of the Directive copy into the AFM to satisfy Requirement 1. For Requirement 2, the work is required to be performed "in accordance with Embraer Service Bulletin... or later revisions approved by ANAC." The SBs typically include specific procedures and acceptance checks; adherence to those SBs will create documentary evidence of compliance (work cards, sign-offs, maintenance release). The AD text itself, however, does not specify how CASA will audit or demand proof.

Cross-jurisdictional enforcement cues: The AD references ANAC AD 2006-03-03R1 and requires installation per Embraer SBs or ANAC-approved revisions. That cross-reference to ANAC suggests that CASA is harmonising its AD with the Brazilian regulator’s actions. This reduces regulatory ambiguity about acceptable methods and provides a technical standard for enforcement: the SB-approved method by the manufacturer and ANAC.

Operational consequences of non-compliance: The AD’s safety rationale identifies a condition that could result in an aircraft getting airborne with a partially deployed thrust reverser. While the AD text does not spell out penalties, the safety-critical nature of the failure mode implies that CASA would treat non-compliance seriously during surveillance, inspections, and in evaluating occurrences. The Directive contains mandatory words (e.g., "requirement", "must" implied by the structure), and thus non-compliance would likely be subject to regulatory follow-up.

No specified variance mechanism in the provided text: The AD does not include an explicit alternative method of compliance clause in the portion supplied. To pursue an alternative method would therefore require regulatory engagement with CASA (or reliance on standard AD processes for AMOCs) but the text supplied does not describe those processes or timelines.

The Directive explicitly references regulatory action and approvals outside the issuing authority. It cites ANAC AD 2006-03-03R1 and requires that the FADEC software installation be performed "in accordance with Embraer Service Bulletin... or later revisions approved by the Brazilian Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC)" (Requirement 2 and Note). That creates an administrative interaction where CASA’s AD defers to manufacturer SBs and to ANAC’s approvals for the technical means of compliance. Operators must therefore consider both CASA’s AD and any relevant ANAC-approved revisions to the SBs when planning work.

The Directive is administrative safety regulation rather than primary legislation. It relies on CASA’s statutory ability to issue mandatory airworthiness directives; the statutory underpinning is not in the supplied text. The AD’s effective date and compliance deadlines create obligations that must be met within the regulatory framework,operators should treat the AD as a binding operational and maintenance requirement under aviation safety regulation. The supplied text does not detail the statutory enforcement mechanisms, administrative appeal routes, or criminal penalties; those would be found in the governing aviation safety statutes and regulations, not in the AD text provided.

Relation to manufacturer documentation and approvals: The AD makes manufacturer SBs normative for the corrective action. That creates an interface between regulatory obligations and manufacturer technical documentation. ANAC’s approval is the required regulator-endorsement for any SB revision cited; therefore international regulatory coordination is embedded in the compliance path.

Effect on airworthiness documentation: The AD directly modifies AFM content by requiring insertion of a limitation statement. The AFM is a regulated document; changing it to include the Directive’s statement interacts with rules governing approved AFMs, which may require that AFM changes be approved or at least included as temporary limitations. The Directive simplifies that interaction by permitting insertion of the Directive copy into the AFM; this reduces procedural friction by authorising a temporary, explicit text insertion to achieve compliance.

Maintenance and certification interplay: Installation of FADEC software per an Embraer SB will interact with maintenance certification, release to service, and logbook entries. The AD references the SBs as the methods of compliance; therefore any record-keeping and certification obligations under the maintenance regulations that correspond to completing an SB task fall into the compliance chain. The AD itself does not state which logbook entries are required or who must certify the work; those matters remain governed by maintenance regulations and the SB instructions.

No conflict with other laws stated in the text: The AD does not identify any statutory inconsistency, transitional arrangements, or repeal of prior directives. It references ANAC AD 2006-03-03R1, indicating that it is consistent with an existing foreign regulator’s action rather than intended to supersede or conflict with other directives. If operators are subject to other national or bilateral regulatory requirements, they must ensure compliance with both CASA’s AD and those other applicable legal requirements, but the AD text itself provides no detail on reconciling multiple directives.

The Directive as provided contains limited historical information. It references ANAC AD 2006-03-03R1, indicating that a related measure exists in Brazil and that this CASA AD aligns with or follows ANAC’s prior action (Note). The Directive requires compliance with Embraer Service Bulletin 190-73-0005 dated 9 November 2006 or SB 190-73-0009 dated 21 December 2007, or later revisions approved by ANAC (Requirement 2). Those SB dates provide a trace of when manufacturer corrective work was issued.

The Directive itself records its procedural history in the header and signature block: it is AD/ERJ-190/2, dated 5/2008 TX and became effective on 20 March 2008. The signing delegate is David Punshon, Delegate of the Civil Aviation Safety Authority, with the AD signed 13 March 2008. Those dates and identifiers are the only temporal metadata in the text that indicate when CASA issued the Directive and the time at which compliance obligations commence.

No subsequent amendments, revocations, or supersessions are listed in the text supplied. The Directive allows later revisions of the Embraer SBs provided the revisions are approved by ANAC; this implies that the technical compliance method could evolve through SB revisions, subject to ANAC approval, without the need for immediate CASA amendment to the AD text (Requirement 2). However, the AD text itself does not list any post-issuance amendments or changes to the AD.

The reference to multiple SBs (SB 190-73-0005 and SB 190-73-0009) suggests that Embraer issued at least two successive SBs addressing the FADEC software change. The AD accepts either SB or later ANAC-approved revisions as the method for compliance. That structure allows for a dynamic technical compliance path while fixing the AD’s obligations and timeframes.

No other amendment markers are present in the provided text, such as successive AD numbers or official amendment statements. The AD’s limited amendment history in the text is confined to: the dates of the referenced SBs, the ANAC AD citation, the CASA AD issue date and effective date, and the signatory. Any subsequent amendment history would need to be checked in CASA’s AD database or external regulatory records, but such records are not contained in the text supplied.

The supplied Directive text contains no litigation references, judicial decisions, appeals, or disputes. It names no cases, contains no references to judicial review, and lists no administrative appeals against the AD. The document is an administrative safety instrument directed to operators and maintenance organisations.

Given the absence of litigation or dispute records in the text, there is nothing in this Directive to indicate that it was subject to court challenge or that any prosecutions arose directly from non-compliance with this AD, at least within the text provided. The AD does reference ANAC AD 2006-03-03R1, but that is another regulator’s action and not a litigated matter within this document.

If stakeholders require information about any litigation, review, or enforcement actions related to compliance or non-compliance, they would need to consult CASA enforcement records, court databases, or public registries. Those records are outside the scope of the Directive text provided here, which remains silent on legal contests.

Several practical and legal pitfalls are apparent from the Directive’s text and structure.

1. Applicability hinge on software version. The AD applies only to aircraft "without engine FADEC software version 5.10 or 5.20, as applicable, or higher" (Applicability). Operators must verify the exact FADEC software version on each aircraft. Misreading applicability could lead to unnecessary work or non-compliance. The Directive does not provide a verification protocol; operators must rely on their maintenance records and the FADEC system readouts to determine applicability.

2. Short deadline for AFM amendment. Requirement 1 must be implemented within seven days after the effective date (Compliance). That is a short window to brief crews, update operational documentation, and ensure AFMs onboard reflect the limitation. The Directive permits insertion of a copy of the Directive into the AFM as the method of compliance; however, operators must ensure that distributed AFMs (paper or electronic) on each aeroplane carry that insertion within the seven-day window.

3. Scheduling the software installation. The FADEC installation must be done within 1,200 hours TIS of the effective date. Operators must plan maintenance slots and may need to coordinate with authorised Embraer maintenance providers to execute the SB work. The Directive ties the procedure to specific SBs or later ANAC-approved revisions, so operators must confirm which SB revision they will use and whether that revision is ANAC-approved. Failure to account for SB lead times, parts, or support availability could cause missed deadlines.

4. Use of later SB revisions only if ANAC-approved. The Directive allows "later revisions approved by the Brazilian Agência Nacional de Aviação Civil (ANAC)" (Requirement 2). That requires operators to verify ANAC approval status for any SB revision they intend to use. Using a later SB revision that lacks ANAC approval could be non-compliant with the AD.

5. AFM amendment method is limited but not comprehensive. The Directive allows AFM insertion of a copy of the Directive. Operators must ensure the insertion is accepted within their national documentation control processes and that crews are informed, trained, and able to comply with the AFM statement operationally. A failure of communication or documentation distribution to crews remains an operational risk even if an insertion meets the literal compliance requirement.

6. No alternative method of compliance detailed. The AD does not set out an alternative means of compliance or a process for approval of such alternatives in the text provided. Operators seeking a different mitigation or different timing would need to engage CASA for approval; that process is not described in the Directive’s text.

7. Cross-jurisdictional coordination. The AD’s reliance on Embraer SBs and ANAC approvals means that supply chain or certification delays in Brazil could affect compliance in Australia. Operators must track ANAC approvals and Embraer SB revisions to ensure they use an approved method.

8. Potential operational constraints. The AFM limitation may change pilot response options during rejected landings, balked landings, or go-arounds. Operators should consider training and procedural updates to reflect the AFM limitation and ensure pilots understand the EICAS REV indication criteria referenced in the AFM text.

9. Documentation of compliance. The Directive does not specify the documentary evidence to be kept post-compliance (beyond the admission that insertion into the AFM is acceptable). Operators should be prepared to show maintenance records for any FADEC software installation and to demonstrate that AFMs onboard contain the required statement, since CASA may inspect for compliance.

10. Ambiguity on which FADEC variant is "as applicable". The phrase "as applicable" could require judgment on whether 5.10 or 5.20 is the applicable baseline for a particular aircraft configuration. Operators must determine which FADEC version is the correct target for their specific engines/configurations and ensure installations meet the "as applicable" standard.

Follow the Directive’s two-step compliance path and the specified deadlines and methods.

Step 1 , AFM amendment (Requirement 1, Compliance). Within seven days after the Directive’s effective date (20 March 2008), revise the Limitations Section of the approved AFM to include the exact statement provided: "After applying thrust reverser, do not move the throttle back to the forward thrust range, unless the REV icon on the EICAS is shown amber or green." The Directive explicitly permits accomplishing this by inserting a copy of the Directive into the relevant AFM section. Practical compliance steps:

• Identify all AFM copies and AFM databases (paper and electronic) in operational use across the fleet.
• Insert a copy of the Directive into each AFM Limitations section or update the AFM to include the statement if the operator’s AFM control process requires formal revision.
• Issue a flight crew notice or AMM/Operations Bulletin to ensure pilot awareness and training on the new statement and its operational implications.
• Ensure that the cockpit EICAS REV indication criteria (amber or green) are understood by crews so they can apply the AFM instruction correctly during landing/rollout and potential go-around or rejected take-off situations.

Step 2 , FADEC software installation (Requirement 2, Compliance). Within the next 1,200 hours time-in-service after the Directive’s effective date, install engine FADEC software version 5.10 or 5.20, as applicable, or higher. The installation must be performed in accordance with Embraer SB 190-73-0005 (9 Nov 2006) or SB 190-73-0009 (21 Dec 2007), or later revisions approved by ANAC. Practical compliance steps:

• Verify each aircraft’s current FADEC software version to determine applicability and the scope of work required.
• Determine which SB (190-73-0005 or 190-73-0009) applies to the aircraft configuration, or whether a later SB revision is available and ANAC-approved.
• Confirm with Embraer and/or authorised maintenance organisations that the SB revision intended for use has ANAC approval, as the AD conditions compliance on such approval.
• Schedule maintenance slots within the 1,200 hours TIS window, factoring in aircraft utilisation, maintenance base availability, and potential supply constraints for any required tools or parts.
• Perform the FADEC software installation strictly in accordance with the referenced SB instructions. Ensure the maintenance organisation follows the SB’s acceptance criteria and tests.
• Record the work in the aircraft maintenance records and logbooks in accordance with maintenance regulations and the SB’s instructions, maintaining proof of compliance.

Recordkeeping and audit-readiness. The AD allows insertion of the Directive into the AFM to meet Requirement 1; keep a dated record of that insertion and any notices to flight crew. For Requirement 2, retain the maintenance release, SB revision number used, sign-off details, and any test records generated during FADEC software installation per the SB instructions to evidence compliance.

Coordination with regulators and manufacturer. Check the ANAC approval status of any SB revision intended for use. If an operator contemplates an alternative method of compliance or has operational constraints preventing timely compliance, early engagement with CASA is prudent. The Directive text does not provide an alternative method clause, so any deviation should be formally discussed with CASA to obtain approval or an alternative compliance pathway.

Operational control while awaiting software installation. Until FADEC software is installed, ensure all crews comply with the AFM limitation and that operational procedures reflect the new limitation. Incorporate the limitation into simulator or operator recurrent training where appropriate to ensure consistent pilot responses in scenarios that might otherwise lead to rapid throttle movement after reverse application.

Verification checklist for compliance:

• Confirm aircraft FADEC software version; record applicability determination.
• Insert Directive copy into AFM Limitations for each applicable aircraft within seven days.
• Issue operational notice to flight crew and appropriate training bulletins.
• Plan and schedule FADEC software installation per Embraer SB or ANAC-approved SB revision within 1,200 hours TIS.
• Execute SB per manufacturer instructions; retain maintenance records and sign-offs.
• Be ready to demonstrate AFM insertion and maintenance records to CASA upon inspection.

The Directive’s text provides the required measures, deadlines, and the method for the technical action (manufacturer SBs and ANAC approvals). Operators must follow those prescriptions exactly to meet the AD’s obligations.