AD/SWSA226/95 - Pitch Trim Actuator

The AD revolves around a narrow technical component and its operational consequences: the pitch trim actuator and its modes of failure, and the regulatory steps required to mitigate the risk.

• The component and failure mode: The pitch trim actuator is the mechanical unit that adjusts horizontal stabiliser trim. The Background states the safety issue: mechanical failure of the pitch trim actuator has been reported to cause the horizontal stabiliser to move to a full nose‑up position (Background). The AD seeks specifically to detect excessive freeplay and rod slippage, and to lessen pitch upset severity if an actuator mechanically fails.

• Part numbering and population mapping: Table 1 lists the affected actuator part numbers and their manufacturers. Barber‑Coleman part numbers included are 27‑19008‑001, ‑002, ‑004, ‑005, ‑006, ‑007. Simmonds‑Precision part numbers included are DL5040M5, DL5040M6, DL5040M8. The Applicability clause identifies all models SA226 and SA227 listed that are equipped with the actuators in Table 1; the AD therefore applies to all serial numbers of those model types fitted with those P/Ns (Applicability).

• Two regulatory levers: operational limitations (AFM inserts) and maintenance controls (inspections/overhauls/replacements). Requirement 1 imposes AFM limitations for aircraft with particular Barber‑Coleman P/Ns; Requirement 2 prescribes inspections/functional checks (and references the Fairchild Service Letters for the inspection instructions); Requirement 3 requires replacement per maintenance manual; Requirements 4 and 5 forbid installation of specific P/Ns as replacement parts for specified airframes.

• Time-based and condition‑based triggers: The AD sets initial inspection windows tied to accumulated TIS on the actuator or specified calendar dates, and repetitive inspection intervals measured in TIS. Replacements are required before specified cumulative TIS thresholds or within set days after the AD effective date, whichever occurs later (see Table 2). The Compliance section additionally states that certain actions remain unchanged from prior ADs for timing around dates (for example, "before further flight after 14 September 1998" or "before further flight after 23 February 2000") and that installation of an FAA‑approved alternative terminates Requirement 1 actions.

• Interaction with manufacturer service letters and maintenance manuals: The AD does not invent inspection methods; it mandates the use of the INSTRUCTIONS sections of certain Fairchild Aircraft Service Letters (SL 226‑SL‑005, SL 227‑SL‑011, CC7‑SL‑028, SL 226‑SL‑014, SL 227‑SL‑031, CC7‑SL‑021) or overhaul according to the applicable maintenance manual (Requirement 2 and 3, Note 1). Several of those service letters are identified as FAA approved and with revision dates; the AD requires following those instructions.

• Exceptions and model differentials: The SA227‑CC and SA227‑DC have different requirements for some P/Ns (Table 2 conditions (vii) and (viii)), and Requirements 4 and 5 distinguish replacement installation prohibitions between "all aeroplane models except SA227‑CC/DC" (Requirement 4) and "all aeroplane Models SA227‑CC and SA227‑DC" (Requirement 5). Thus the AD’s controls are not uniformly the same across all model variants.

• Substitution pathway: The AD provides a termination pathway: installation of any FAA‑approved pitch trim actuator other than the listed problematic P/Ns will terminate the AFM limitation actions of Requirement 1 (Compliance section). The AD also names specific acceptable replacement P/Ns (DL5040M6, DL5040M8, 27‑19008‑006, 27‑19008‑007, or an FAA‑approved equivalent) that satisfy the Repetitive Replacement column.

These concepts combine technical diagnosis (freeplay, rod slippage) with prescriptive compliance (AFM limits, inspection and replacement schedules, prohibition on certain P/Ns). The AD delegates the exact inspection methods to the manufacturer service letters and mandates replacement with specified part numbers or FAA‑approved equivalents.

The AD explicitly affects multiple classes of actors and specific aircraft configurations. Primary affected parties are aircraft operators and owners of Fairchild (Swearingen) SA226 and SA227 series aeroplanes containing any of the pitch trim actuators listed in Table 1. The Applicability clause specifies "All Models SA226‑AT, SA226‑T, SA226‑T(B), SA226‑TC, SA227‑AC (C‑26A), SA227‑AT, SA227‑BC (C‑26A), SA227‑CC, SA227‑DC (C‑26B), SA227‑PC, and SA227‑TT aeroplanes, all serial numbers, that are equipped with pitch trim actuators listed in Table 1" (Applicability). Therefore, even within an operator fleet, only aircraft fitted with those listed P/Ns are captured.

Maintenance organisations, certificated engineers and licensed maintenance personnel are secondarily affected because the AD prescribes inspection procedures, overhauls and replacements to be carried out "in accordance with" the INSTRUCTIONS sections of named Fairchild Service Letters or "following the applicable maintenance manual" (Requirement 2 and Requirement 3). Those technical actions require appropriately certificated personnel and recordkeeping.

Pilots are affected in two ways. First, Requirement 1 requires revision of the AFM for aeroplanes with specified Barber‑Coleman actuators, inserting speed and crew restrictions into the Limitations Section. The AD explicitly allows that AFM insertion to be actioned and signed for by a pilot holding at least a private pilot licence (note after first HTML table). Second, the AD’s Compliance clause contains "before further flight" triggers (for example, the AFM revision remains unchanged as detailed in AD/SWSA226/85 Amdt 1 "Before further flight after 14 September 1998; or ... before further flight after 23 February 2000" for certain P/Ns), which directly affects pilots' legal ability to operate an aircraft pending compliance.

Parts suppliers, overhaul shops and spare‑parts distributors are affected commercially because the AD prohibits installation of certain actuator P/Ns as replacement parts (Requirements 4 and 5) and effectively increases demand for permitted replacement parts (DL5040M6, DL5040M8, 27‑19008‑006, 27‑19008‑007, or FAA‑approved equivalents). The AD also creates an overhaul market for specific P/Ns - e.g., P/N 27‑19008‑006/007 require overhaul before 2,000 hours TIS (Table 2 x).

Regulators and designated delegates are affected institutionally. The AD is issued under CASA authority (signed by CASA delegate Charles Lenarcic, 10 September 2007) and references FAA ADs; it therefore sits in the regulatory relationship between CASA and FAA directives. Note 2 explicitly refers to FAA AD 2007‑16‑03 and states that this AD supersedes FAA ADs 98‑19‑15R and 2000‑03‑17 (Notes and Compliance).

Finally, airside operators that rely on availability of aircraft for commercial services will be indirectly affected by aircraft downtime for inspections, overhaul and replacements. The AD’s multiple time windows and repetitive inspection intervals (some as short as 250 hours TIS) require schedule planning and record‑keeping that will fall to operators and their maintenance control organisations.

Duties imposed by the AD are explicit and operationally precise. The AD sets multiple mandatory actions and constraints, which can be grouped by function.

AFM revision duty (Requirement 1)

• For aeroplanes fitted with Barber‑Coleman P/N 27‑19008‑001, ‑002, ‑004, or ‑005, the Aircraft Flight Manual must be revised to include two Limitations: limit maximum indicated airspeed to manoeuvring airspeed (VA) as shown in the AFM, and specify that the minimum crew required is two pilots. The AD permits insertion of a copy of the AD into the AFM and allows a pilot with at least a private pilot licence to action and sign this revision (Requirement 1 and subsequent note). Compliance text clarifies that installation of any FAA‑approved pitch trim actuator other than P/N 27‑19008‑001, ‑002, ‑004, or ‑005 will terminate the Requirement 1 AFM actions.

Inspection and testing duties (Requirement 2)

• For actuators with P/Ns DL5040M5, DL5040M6, DL5040M8 the AD requires measurement of freeplay and inspection for rod slippage using the INSTRUCTIONS in specified Fairchild Service Letters (e.g., SL 226‑SL‑005, SL 227‑SL‑011, CC7‑SL‑028) (Requirement 2a).
• For Barber‑Coleman P/Ns 27‑19008‑001, ‑002, ‑004, ‑005 the AD requires a functional inspection per other specified Fairchild Service Letters (SL 226‑SL‑014, SL 227‑SL‑031, CC7‑SL‑021) (Requirement 2b).
• For P/Ns 27‑19008‑006 or 27‑19008‑007 the AD requires overhaul following the applicable maintenance manual (Requirement 2c). These inspection methods are imposed by reference to the service letters named in the AD; the AD indicates that those service letters are FAA approved in some instances (Note 1).

Replacement and overhaul duties (Requirements 3, Table 2)

• Table 2 prescribes initial inspection or overhaul deadlines, repetitive inspection intervals and mandatory replacement times measured in cumulative actuator TIS or calendar windows (often "or within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later"). Replacement actions must use permitted P/Ns (DL5040M6, DL5040M8, 27‑19008‑006, 27‑19008‑007, or FAA‑approved equivalent) per the Repetitive Replacement column.

Prohibitions on installation (Requirements 4 and 5)

• For all aeroplane models except SA227‑CC and SA227‑DC, do not install as a replacement P/Ns 27‑19008‑001, ‑002, ‑004, ‑005, or DL5040M5 (Requirement 4).
• For SA227‑CC and SA227‑DC specifically, do not install as a replacement P/Ns 27‑19008‑001, ‑002, ‑004, ‑005, DL5040M5, or DL5040M6 (Requirement 5). These installation prohibitions are mandatory from the effective date of the AD.

Conditional compliance trigger (Compliance section)

• The AD contains several "before further flight" triggers: e.g., Requirement 1 actions remain unchanged "Before further flight after 14 September 1998; or ... before further flight after 23 February 2000" for certain actuators. The Compliance section also stipulates that if inspection finds freeplay beyond limits, rod slippage, or a ratcheting sound, replacement must occur "before further flight" (Compliance, paragraph 3).

Rights and termination pathways in the AD

• The AD includes a contractual/legal right for operators to terminate some AFM limitations by installing an FAA‑approved pitch trim actuator other than the problematic P/Ns; specifically, installation of any FAA‑approved actuator other than P/N 27‑19008‑001, ‑002, ‑004, or ‑005 terminates Requirement 1 (Compliance).
• The AD recognises FAA approvals: many service letters are listed as FAA approved (Note 1) and some replacement parts can be FAA‑approved equivalents, indicating a route to compliance that relies on FAA parts approvals rather than a CASA‑only parts approval.

Delegations and authorised persons

• The AD records that a pilot with at least a private pilot licence may perform and sign the AFM insertion; however, the technical inspections and overhauls are required to follow the service letters and maintenance manuals, implying performance by certificated maintenance personnel (Requirement 1 note; Requirement 2 and 3).

Recordkeeping and traceability duties (implied)

• The AD bases requirements on actuator cumulative TIS and overhaul/zero‑timing status. Accurate logbook entries and maintenance records are therefore an implied duty to calculate initial inspection windows, repetitive inspection intervals and replacement deadlines (see Table 2 conditions referencing hours TIS and "zero‑timed" status).

Sources of the duties: the AD text itself and the specified service letters and maintenance manuals are the operative instruments. The AD is issued by CASA (signed by the delegate), so the duties arise from the AD as an enforceable airworthiness requirement; the AD’s Compliance section and Requirements 1-5 define the scope and timing.

The AD text itself does not specify criminal or civil penalties; it establishes legally binding airworthiness obligations and compliance timelines that determine when an aircraft is considered airworthy in respect of this issue. The AD becomes effective on 25 October 2007 and is signed by the CASA delegate (Charles Lenarcic), thereby setting regulatory expectations (effective date and signature). The Compliance section prescribes "before further flight" conditions for a range of triggers, for example: the AFM revision requirement stipulated for certain P/Ns remains "Before further flight after 14 September 1998" or "before further flight after 23 February 2000" depending on actuator P/N; the AD also states that replacement is required "before further flight" when inspections reveal freeplay beyond limits, rod slippage or a ratcheting sound (Compliance, paragraph 3).

Operational enforcement mechanisms are implicit in the nature of ADs. In practice, regulatory agencies enforce AD compliance by controlling the aircraft's airworthiness status and certificates; non‑compliant aircraft would not meet the AD’s requirements and therefore would be in breach of their airworthiness directives. The AD itself does not list the enforcement processes, fines or sanctions, nor does it provide administrative appeal mechanisms; those matters are governed by the broader aviation regulatory framework and enforcement procedures outside the AD text. The AD does cross‑reference FAA AD 2007‑16‑03 and notes that it supersedes earlier FAA ADs; in cross‑jurisdictional contexts, conformity with the FAA’s AD can affect recognition of parts and approvals (Note 2).

The AD imposes immediate operational constraints in some cases (e.g., AFM limitations that must be inserted before further flight in specified situations), and it sets fixed replacement deadlines often expressed as "before accumulating X hours TIS" or "within 30 days after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs later" (Table 2 Repetitive Replacement column). Those deadlines create practical enforcement points: until those tasks have been completed, an aircraft may not be legally operated for the relevant flights. The AD therefore effectively creates ground‑and‑repair requirements enforceable through normal airworthiness oversight channels.

Because the AD relies on service letters and maintenance manuals for inspection and overhaul standards (Requirement 2 and 3), compliance also depends on use of those approved instructions. If an operator used different procedures not approved by CASA or not consistent with the AD’s referenced service letters, that would risk non‑compliance. The AD also provides a route to "terminating action" (installation of FAA‑approved alternative actuators) that, if implemented, relieves some restrictions; that creates a compliance strategy recognised within the AD text (Compliance).

For specifics of fines, certificate suspension, or prosecution for non‑compliance, the AD is silent and one must consult CASA enforcement regulations and statutory provisions. The AD should be treated by operators and maintenance organisations as a direct airworthiness requirement: failure to comply will affect the aircraft’s airworthiness status as defined under the regulatory regime that gave rise to the AD.

The AD positions itself within a network of prior ADs, manufacturer service letters and the FAA’s regulatory actions. The AD explicitly supersedes and interacts with named instruments and approvals.

Superseding and cross‑references

• The AD states that it supersedes AD/SWSA226/68 Amdt 5 and AD/SWSA226/85 Amdt 1 (Background). It also explicitly refers to and incorporates the relevance of FAA AD 2007‑16‑03 (Note 2) and states that "This AD supersedes FAA AD 98‑19‑15R and AD 2000‑03‑17" (Note 2). Those statements show the AD updating the regulatory position in respect of the same safety problem, aligning CASA’s direction with the FAA’s later AD.

Use of FAA approvals and service letters

• The AD repeatedly references Fairchild Service Letters and identifies them as FAA approved (e.g., Fairchild Service Letter 226‑SL‑017, 227‑SL‑033 and CC7‑SL‑023 noted as FAA Approved and dated 26 August 1998; revised 2 September 1998; other service letters are listed with revision dates). The AD instructs inspections to be performed following the INSTRUCTIONS sections of specific service letters (Requirement 2). It also permits installation of "an FAA‑approved equivalent pitch trim actuator" as an acceptable replacement P/N (Table 2 Repetitive Replacement column). Thus the AD delegates method and performance standards to FAA‑approved service material and accepts FAA parts approvals as lawful means of compliance.

Precedence between maintenance manuals, service letters and the AD

• The AD requires actions "in accordance with" specified service letters or "following the applicable maintenance manual" (Requirement 2 and 3). In regulatory practice, an AD is binding; therefore, where the AD prescribes compliance by following service‑letter instructions, those instructions function as incorporated compliance standards. The AD therefore meshes CASA’s AD authority with manufacturer‑issued, FAA‑approved technical instructions. The AD does not create a hierarchy between maintenance manuals and service letters other than to endorse the specified documents as the required instructions for the tasks.

Temporal interplay with prior deadlines and dates

• The AD’s Compliance section preserves certain earlier "before further flight" deadlines from the previous ADs (for example, "Before further flight after 14 September 1998; or in the case of aircraft with actuators P/N 27‑19008‑004, or P/N 27‑19008‑005, before further flight after 23 February 2000"). It therefore carries forward earlier legal time frames into the new directive, ensuring continuity and clarifying the immediate effect of the AD relative to prior mandates.

Effect on parts approval and international recognition

• The AD’s acceptance of FAA‑approved equivalents and its referral to FAA ADs indicates cross‑recognition between CASA and FAA approvals in this subject matter. That provides operators with a regulatoryly recognised route for parts and service approvals that are FAA‑approved, reducing potential friction for operators using FAA‑approved parts internationally. The AD does not, however, address the process for CASA to accept an FAA approval in a specific case; it relies on the language "FAA‑approved equivalent" in the text.

Regulatory scope and industry obligations

• The AD creates duties that intersect with obligations under maintenance regulations, airworthiness certification and operations rules (e.g., duties to keep logbooks and perform required maintenance). The AD’s "before further flight" triggers and specified TIS‑based replacement windows create enforceable airworthiness obligations that must be integrated into operators’ maintenance control systems and into the statutory framework that governs operating certificates, licences and maintenance release authorities.

In sum, the AD integrates CASA’s directive with FAA approvals and manufacturer service letters. It supersedes earlier directives, preserves certain earlier compliance deadlines, and provides a pathway using FAA‑approved parts and FAA‑approved service letters as recognised means to satisfy CASA’s requirements.

The document itself records a short, explicit amendment and supersession history directly within the AD text and the Compliance and Background sections.

• Current AD reference and date: The instrument is recorded as AD/SWSA226/95, captioned "11/2007", signed by the CASA delegate Charles Lenarcic on 10 September 2007, and it states that the Airworthiness Directive becomes effective on 25 October 2007 (signature block and Compliance section).

• Supersessions recorded in the AD: The Background section states that "This AD supersedes AD/SWSA226/68 Amdt 5 and AD/SWSA226/85 Amdt 1 which are cancelled" (Background). Note 2 states that FAA AD 2007‑16‑03 is referred to, and the AD states "This AD supersedes FAA AD 98‑19‑15R and AD 2000‑03‑17" (Note 2). The Compliance section also notes that Requirement 1 "Remains unchanged as detailed in AD/SWSA226/85 Amdt 1 as - Before further flight after 14 September 1998; or in the case of aircraft with actuators P/N 27‑19008‑004, or P/N 27‑19008‑005, before further flight after 23 February 2000." This indicates the AD carries forward certain prior timing obligations.

• Service letters and revisions: The AD lists multiple Fairchild service letters with revision or issue dates as part of the actions it requires. For example, Fairchild Service Letter 226‑SL‑017, 227‑SL‑033, CC7‑SL‑023 are cited as FAA approved and dated 26 August 1998; revised 2 September 1998 (note after first table). Other service letters referenced include SL 226‑SL‑005 and SL 227‑SL‑011 (Revised: 3 August 1999), CC7‑SL‑028 (Issued: 12 August 1999) for DL5040M5/DL5040M6/DL5040M8 inspections, and SL 226‑SL‑014, SL 227‑SL‑031, CC7‑SL‑021 (all Revised: 1 February 1999) for functional inspections of the Barber‑Coleman P/Ns (Requirement 2).

• Historical compliance dates preserved: The AD’s Compliance section preserves several historical "before further flight" deadlines such as 14 September 1998 and 23 February 2000, and it also references 1 December 1997 and 17 April 1995 within Table 2 and the text. Table 2 entries reference earlier dates for certain initial inspection deadlines (e.g., inspect within 50 hours TIS after 17 April 1995, or inspect before 500 hours total TIS or within 50 hours after 1 December 1997 for newly fabricated actuators).

• Relationship to FAA ADs: Note 2 explicitly references FAA AD 2007‑16‑03 Amdt 39‑15142 dated 27 July 2007, and states that the CASA AD supersedes former FAA ADs (98‑19‑15R and 2000‑03‑17). That records cross‑jurisdictional amendments: CASA’s AD follows and updates its prior ADs while referencing the FAA’s corresponding AD action history.

For a practitioner tracking the amendment chain, this AD functionally replaces earlier CASA ADs on the same hardware and adopts or recognises FAA amendments up to mid‑2007. The AD’s listed service letters and their revision dates form a contemporaneous set of technical documents that the AD incorporates by reference for procedural requirements.

The AD text supplied contains no reference to litigation, legal challenges, judicial review or administrative appeals. It records the issuance date, the signature of the CASA delegate and the effective date, but it does not report any court proceedings, injunctions, or contested case history. The Background, Compliance and Notes describe technical reasons for the AD and its relationship to earlier regulatory actions but do not describe any litigation outcomes.

For those seeking litigation history, the AD itself cannot be used as a record of court proceedings. To establish whether this AD has been subject to legal challenge, judicial review or enforcement litigation, one must search court and tribunal databases, administrative appeals records and CASA enforcement records external to this document. The AD does not include internal references to appeals provisions or any specific administrative review outcomes.

Because the AD relies on FAA service letters and references FAA ADs, any litigation directly involving those FAA instruments would appear in U.S. judicial or administrative records rather than in this CASA AD text; the AD does not summarise or refer to any such proceedings. Practitioners needing a litigation history should therefore consult the relevant court registries, CASA administrative records and the FAA’s docket history for the cross‑referenced ADs.

Several specific drafting features, timing traps and practical pitfalls in the AD are likely to cause operator confusion or compliance mistakes if not carefully handled.

1. Multiple P/N branches with differing requirements

• The AD distinguishes actions by installed actuator P/N and by whether the actuator is original, replacement, newly fabricated, overhauled and zero‑timed, or contains replaced nut assemblies (Table 2 conditions (i)-(vi)). Each branch has different initial inspection windows, repetitive intervals and replacement thresholds. Failure to correctly classify the actuator’s history (original vs replacement vs overhauled/zero‑timed) will lead to misapplication of inspection or replacement obligations.

2. Model exceptions (SA227‑CC and SA227‑DC)

• SA227‑CC and SA227‑DC are treated differently in several entries in Table 2 and in Requirements 4 and 5. For those two models the AD prohibits installation of an additional P/N (DL5040M6) that remains potentially installable on other models. Operators with mixed fleets must apply the model‑specific rules precisely.

3. AFM revision: who may sign

• Requirement 1 allows a pilot with at least a private pilots licence to action and sign the AFM insertion. That might seem to transfer responsibility to flight crew, but the AFM insert is itself a regulatory document and the AFM change does not obviate technical inspection duties. Operators must ensure that a signed AFM insertion is consistent with maintenance records and that the pilot who signs is aware of the limitations’ consequences.

4. Termination option tied to FAA approvals

• The AD states that "Installation of any FAA‑approved pitch trim actuator other than P/N 27‑19008‑001, P/N 27‑19008‑002, P/N 27‑19008‑004, or P/N 27‑19008‑005 terminates the actions detailed in Requirement 1." That termination depends on the availability of an FAA‑approved alternative and on proper installation/approval documentation. Sourcing an FAA‑approved replacement may be commercially attractive to avoid ongoing AFM limitations and inspection burdens, but operators must ensure the replacement is indeed FAA‑approved and that records establish the installation date and new P/N.

5. Tight calendar windows and "whichever occurs later"

• Table 2 commonly prescribes replacement before accumulating a particular TIS OR within 30 days after the effective date of the AD, whichever occurs later. For many operators this creates an operational risk: parts procurement, scheduling for installation and downtime must be arranged within the AD’s tight 30‑day windows (or earlier if TIS thresholds are reached). The AD also preserves older "before further flight" triggers from prior ADs, which can require immediate action.

6. Inspection standards referenced by service letters

• The AD requires inspections "using the INSTRUCTIONS section" of specific Fairchild Service Letters. Those SLs are the operative technical instructions; failure to use the correct revision of the SL or to follow it precisely may lead to non‑compliance. Note 1 lists several service letters with specific revision dates and states they are FAA approved; use of an incorrect revision or an unapproved equivalence may not satisfy the AD.

7. Overhaul and zero‑timing semantics

• Several Table 2 entries distinguish "overhauled and zero‑timed" actuators and whether nut assemblies were replaced with new assemblies during overhaul. Those distinctions affect the initial inspection window and replacement deadlines. Operators must ensure overhaul documentation explicitly records zero‑timing and parts replaced; absent explicit documentation, the operator may be required to use the more conservative inspection/replacement schedule.

8. Mixed fleets and parts inventory controls

• Requirements 4 and 5 prohibit installation of specific P/Ns as replacement parts for particular model groups. Parts managers must block procurement and installation of prohibited P/Ns for the relevant models; inadvertent installation could contravene the AD. Conversely, some P/Ns (DL5040M6, DL5040M8, 27‑19008‑006, 27‑19008‑007) are the permitted replacements and will likely see increased demand and possible lead times.

9. Thresholds tied to actuator TIS, not aircraft TIS

• The AD measures many thresholds by the actuator’s hours TIS, not the airframe hours. If an actuator has been transferred between airframes, accurate actuator log tracking is essential. Operators must maintain traceability of actuator TIS across installations to ensure compliance with Table 2 replacement thresholds.

10. "Before further flight" triggers tied to inspection findings

• The Compliance text states that if inspections reveal that the freeplay limitations are exceeded, rod slippage is found, or a ratcheting sound occurs, replacement is required "before further flight." That creates an immediate grounding obligation for any aircraft where such a defect is detected during an inspection under the AD.

11. Overlap with prior AD time windows and possible confusion

• The Compliance section retains references to older dates (e.g., 17 April 1995, 1 December 1997, 14 September 1998, 23 February 2000, 10 April 2000), mixed with the AD’s effective date of 25 October 2007. Ensuring the correct date triggers for particular actuator histories will require careful reading.

In short, the principal "gotchas" are classification errors (incorrect P/N or overhaul/zero‑time status), misapplication of model exceptions, failure to follow the exact referenced service letter revision, and inadequate recordkeeping of actuator TIS. Operators should treat the AD as prescriptive and exacting in its technical distinctions.

A practical, stepwise compliance checklist drawn directly from the AD text is below. Each step cites the AD provisions that require or permit the action.

1. Identify affected aeroplanes and actuators (Applicability; Table 1)

• Determine which aeroplanes in the operator’s fleet are SA226/SA227 models listed in the Applicability clause.
• Physically verify the actuator P/N installed on each aeroplane (compare with Table 1: Barber‑Coleman P/Ns 27‑19008‑001, ‑002, ‑004, ‑005, ‑006, ‑007 and Simmonds‑Precision DL5040M5, DL5040M6, DL5040M8).

2. Update the AFM where required (Requirement 1)

• For aeroplanes with Barber‑Coleman P/N 27‑19008‑001, ‑002, ‑004, or ‑005: insert the two Limitations into the AFM Limitations Section: a) "Limit the maximum indicated airspeed to manoeuvring airspeed (VA) as shown in the appropriate AFM"; and b) "The minimum crew required is two pilots."
• The AD permits insertion of a copy of this AD into the AFM and allows a pilot with at least a private pilot licence to action and sign this insertion. Maintain a copy in the AFM as proof of compliance.

3. Plan and perform inspections per Requirement 2 and Table 2

• For DL5040M5, DL5040M6, DL5040M8: perform the freeplay measure and rod slippage inspection following the INSTRUCTIONS in Fairchild SA226 SL 226‑SL‑005 or SA227 SL 227‑SL‑011 or SA227 CC7‑SL‑028, as applicable (Requirement 2a). Observe initial inspection windows and repetitive intervals set out in Table 2 based on whether the actuator is original or replacement, and model exceptions.
• For Barber‑Coleman P/Ns 27‑19008‑001, ‑002, ‑004, ‑005: perform a functional inspection following Fairchild SA226 SL 226‑SL‑014 or SA227 SL 227‑SL‑031 or CC7‑SL‑021 INSTRUCTIONS (Requirement 2b). Observe the Table 2 timelines.
• For P/N 27‑19008‑006 or 27‑19008‑007: overhaul according to the applicable maintenance manual following Requirement 2c and relevant Table 2 initial/repetitive timing.

4. Replace or overhaul per Table 2 Repetitive Replacement column

• Replace the pitch trim actuator with an acceptable P/N (DL5040M6, DL5040M8, 27‑19008‑006, 27‑19008‑007, or an FAA‑approved equivalent) before the cumulative TIS listed in Table 2 for the actuator’s condition, or within 30 days after the AD effective date where that option is stated (Table 2 Repetitive Replacement column). Examples:
  • For original DL5040M5 on many models: replace before accumulating 5,000 hours TIS, or 500 hours after the initial inspection, or within 30 days after effective date, whichever is later (Table 2 (i) Repetitive Replacement).
  • For DL5040M8 installed on any affected aeroplane: replace before accumulating 9,900 hours TIS or within 30 days after the specified April 10, 2000 or the AD effective date as set out in Table 2 (ix).
• For 27‑19008‑006/007: overhaul before accumulating 2,000 hours TIS per Table 2 (x).

5. Do not install prohibited P/Ns (Requirements 4 and 5)

• For all aeroplane models except SA227‑CC and SA227‑DC, do not install as replacement P/Ns 27‑19008‑001, ‑002, ‑004, ‑005, or DL5040M5 (Requirement 4).
• For SA227‑CC and SA227‑DC, do not install as replacement P/Ns 27‑19008‑001, ‑002, ‑004, ‑005, DL5040M5, or DL5040M6 (Requirement 5).
• Implement parts control measures to block prohibited P/Ns for the relevant airframes and update procurement/stock records.

6. If inspection reveals excessive freeplay, rod slippage or ratcheting, replace before further flight (Compliance paragraph 3)

• The AD requires replacement before further flight if any inspection (done under Requirement 2) reveals freeplay beyond limits, rod slippage, or a ratcheting sound as specified in the service letters. Carry out replacement and document the action prior to next flight.

7. Maintain and document actuator TIS and overhaul/zero‑timed status

• Table 2’s schedules are actuator TIS‑specific and depend on whether the actuator was overhauled and zero‑timed, and whether nut assemblies were renewed during overhaul. Verify overhaul records and logbooks to determine applicable initial inspection windows and replacement deadlines.

8. Use the correctly referenced service letters and maintenance manuals

• Perform inspections and functional checks following the INSTRUCTIONS sections of the exact service letters listed in the AD. Note their revision dates as specified in the AD (e.g., SL 226‑SL‑005 and SL 227‑SL‑011 Revised: 3 August 1999; SL 226‑SL‑014 Revised: 1 February 1999). Ensure maintenance personnel use the correct revision.

9. Consider the termination pathway where appropriate

• Installing any FAA‑approved actuator other than P/Ns 27‑19008‑001, ‑002, ‑004, ‑005 will terminate Requirement 1 AFM limitations (Compliance). If this is the selected compliance strategy, ensure the replacement is documented and that the part is indeed FAA‑approved as an equivalent.

10. Record actions, maintain traceability and plan logistics

• Maintain evidence of AFM revision, inspection results referencing the service letters used, replacement or overhaul certificates, part P/Ns installed, actuator TIS entries and dates of works. Where replacement within 30 days is required, ensure parts procurement and work scheduling are arranged to meet the deadline.

11. Refer to Note 1 and Note 2 where relevant

• Note 1 identifies specific Fairchild Service Letters that "address the subject matter of this AD" and are FAA approved. Note 2 refers to FAA AD 2007‑16‑03 and the supersessions. Keep copies of these referenced documents accessible for audit and compliance checks.

12. Plan for operational impact and costs

• The AD’s inspection cadence (often 250-300 hours TIS repetitive intervals for some configurations) and replacement deadlines mean maintenance programmes should be updated, and operators should budget for parts, labour and aircraft downtime. These are practical consequences of compliance duties set out in the AD.

If in doubt, escalate to CASA or a certificated maintenance authority for formal interpretation. The AD itself sets the compliance prescriptions; following the precise Table 2 line that corresponds to the aircraft model and the actuator’s P/N and maintenance history is the direct means to comply.