Overview
Title
Airworthiness Directives; De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited (Type Certificate Previously Held by Bombardier, Inc.) Airplanes
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The FAA wants to make some changes to a part of certain airplanes called the nose wheel steering system. This new rule is to make sure the airplanes don’t accidentally go the wrong way on the runway, and people can tell the FAA what they think about this rule until April 12, 2021.
Summary AI
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has proposed a new rule to address safety concerns with certain De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited Model DHC-8-400 series airplanes. This proposed rule seeks to replace an earlier Airworthiness Directive (AD) from 2015. The new rule would require modifications to the nose wheel steering (NWS) system to prevent issues that could cause the airplane to veer off the runway. The public is invited to submit comments on this proposal until April 12, 2021.
Abstract
The FAA proposes to supersede Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2015-17-08, which applies to certain Bombardier, Inc. Model DHC-8-400 series airplanes. AD 2015-17-08 requires installing new cable assemblies with a pull-down resistor. Since the FAA issued AD 2015-17- 08, a modification has been developed to address all known single point failures that could lead to runaway of the nose wheel steering (NWS) system. This proposed AD would require modifications to the NWS system. The FAA is proposing this AD to address the unsafe condition on these products.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
General Summary
The document in question is a proposal from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) which seeks to amend existing safety regulations for certain airplanes manufactured by De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited. More specifically, the proposal aims to supersede a directive issued in 2015 with new requirements to modify the nose wheel steering (NWS) system. This modification is intended to address potential failures that could cause the airplane to lose control while on the runway. The FAA invites public comments on this proposal until April 12, 2021.
Significant Issues or Concerns
One major issue with this document is the heavy use of technical jargon. Terms like "nose wheel steering," "Airworthiness Directive," and "runway excursion" may not be readily accessible to those without a background in aviation. Such language could impede public understanding and participation in the commenting process, which is critical for regulatory proposals.
Another point of concern is the perception of favoritism, as specific service bulletins from companies like De Havilland and UTC Aerospace Systems are mentioned. While necessary for the technical specificity of the modifications, this mention could raise questions if not explicitly justified within the document.
Additionally, the document does not offer a detailed cost estimate for the mandatory modifications, which could be an important factor for those directly affected. Potential economic implications for operators of the affected aircraft are left largely unarticulated, which may leave stakeholders without a full understanding of the financial impacts.
The dispersion of critical information about submitting comments and examining relevant documents could also be clarified. Consolidating this information in one section might improve user experience and comprehension.
Finally, the absence of a detailed discussion on alternative methods of compliance (AMOCs) might limit the flexibility stakeholders are looking for when adapting to new regulations.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, this document could have implications for passenger safety and airline operations. By addressing potential failure modes of the NWS system, the FAA aims to enhance the overall safety of flights operating these specific aircraft models. This could reassure the traveling public regarding the safety of the aircraft they board.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
For airlines and operators who use De Havilland Model DHC-8-400 series airplanes, this proposed rule may necessitate significant modifications to their fleets. While such actions aim to improve safety, they could also involve substantial costs, both in terms of financial outlay for the modifications and potential downtime for aircraft.
Aircraft maintenance and engineering firms might find potential business opportunities through this regulation, offering services to fulfill the FAA's requirements.
Regulatory compliance specialists and legal professionals might also see increased demand for their expertise as stakeholders navigate the complexities of implementing the new mandate.
Overall, while this proposal seeks to address critical safety concerns, its broader implications and requirements present various challenges and opportunities for different stakeholders involved.
Issues
• The document uses technical jargon specific to aviation and Airworthiness Directives, which may be difficult for laypersons to understand.
• There is a potential perception of favoritism as specific companies (e.g., De Havilland Aircraft of Canada Limited and UTC Aerospace Systems) are mentioned for required service bulletins. However, this is likely due to the technical and proprietary nature of aircraft systems.
• The document does not provide any cost estimate details for the modifications required by the proposed AD, which might be helpful to understand the economic impact on the affected parties.
• Instructions for submitting comments and accessing relevant documents are dispersed throughout the text. Providing a consolidated section for this information would improve clarity.
• The document does not include a detailed summary of potential alternative methods of compliance (AMOCs), which might be relevant for stakeholders affected by this AD.
• The document assumes familiarity with previous Airworthiness Directives (e.g., AD 2015-17-08) and does not provide a summary within the current document, which may hinder comprehension for those not familiar with past directives.