[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 86 (Thursday, May 4, 1995)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 22013-22014]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-10989]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. 95-NM-31-AD]
Airworthiness Directives; Beech Model 400 and 400A Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document proposes the adoption of a new airworthiness
directive (AD) that is applicable to certain Beech Model 400 and 400A
airplanes. This proposal would require modification of the autopilot
and rudder boost interlock. This proposal is prompted by a report
indicating that the rudder boost system installed on these airplanes
does not operate correctly during deployment of a thrust reverser. The
actions specified by the proposed AD are intended to prevent incorrect
operation of the rudder boost system during deployment of a thrust
reverser and to prevent the autopilot from exceeding certain bank angle
limits; these conditions could result in reduced controllability of the
airplane.
DATES: Comments must be received by June 13, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments in triplicate to the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103,
Attention: Rules Docket No. 95-NM-31-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,
Washington 98055-4056. Comments may be inspected at this location
between 9:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
The service information referenced in the proposed rule may be
obtained from Beech Aircraft Corporation, Commercial Service
Department, P.O. Box 85, Wichita, Kansas 67201-0085. This information
may be examined at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind
Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the FAA, Small Airplane
Directorate, Wichita Aircraft Certification Office, 1801 Airport Road,
Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dale Vassalli, Aerospace Engineer,
Systems and Equipment Branch, ACE-130W, FAA, Wichita Aircraft
Certification Office, Small Airplane Directorate, 1801 Airport Road,
Room 100, Mid-Continent Airport, Wichita, Kansas 67209; telephone (316)
946-4132; fax (316) 946-4407.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of the
proposed rule by submitting such written data, views, or arguments as
they may desire. Communications shall identify the Rules Docket number
and be submitted in triplicate to the address specified above. All
communications received on or before the closing date for comments,
specified above, will be considered before taking action on the
proposed rule. The proposals contained in this notice may be changed in
light of the comments received.
Comments are specifically invited on the overall regulatory,
economic, environmental, and energy aspects of the proposed rule. All
comments submitted will be available, both before and after the closing
date for comments, in the Rules Docket for examination by interested
persons. A report summarizing each FAA-public contact concerned with
the substance of this proposal will be filed in the Rules Docket.
Commenters wishing the FAA to acknowledge receipt of their comments
submitted in response to this notice must submit a self-addressed,
stamped postcard on which the following statement is made: ``Comments
to Docket Number 95-NM-31-AD.'' The postcard will be date stamped and
returned to the commenter.
Availability of NPRMs
Any person may obtain a copy of this NPRM by submitting a request
to the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, ANM-103, Attention: Rules
Docket No. 95-NM-31-AD, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98055-
4056.
Discussion
The FAA received a report from the airplane manufacturer indicating
that, during ground operation, the rudder boost system installed on
Beech Model 400 and 400A airplanes is disabled only when the left
thrust reverser is deployed. Operation of either the right or left
thrust reverser during ground operation should disable the rudder boost
system. Additionally, during flight, the rudder boost system on these
airplanes is disabled when inadvertent deployment of the left thrust
reverser occurs. However, inadvertent deployment of a thrust reverser
should not disable the rudder boost system.
The FAA also discovered that, when landing the airplane with a
failed left engine, use of the right thrust reverser will result in a
rudder boost in the wrong direction. (When landing with a failed right
engine, use of the left thrust reverser will disable the rudder boost
system, as it should.) Further, inadvertent deployment of the left
thrust reverser will result in disengagement of the rudder boost
system. Should this condition occur during takeoff, rudder forces could
exceed the limits specified in the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR).
These conditions, if not corrected, could result in reduced
controllability of the airplane.
The FAA has reviewed and approved Beechcraft Service Bulletin No.
2533, dated October 1994, which describes procedures for modification
of the autopilot and rudder boost interlock. The modification entails
installing an autopilot and rudder boost improvement kit. Installation
of the kit will disable the rudder boost feature during operation of
the thrust reverser with only one engine operating in order to
alleviate control input requirements. In addition, the service bulletin
describes removal of a placard if one [[Page 22014]] was installed in
accordance with Beechcraft Service Bulletin No. 2502, dated May 1993.
Since an unsafe condition has been identified that is likely to
exist or develop on other products of this same type design, the
proposed AD would require modification of the autopilot and rudder
boost interlock. The actions would be required to be accomplished in
accordance with the service bulletin described previously.
As a result of recent communications with the Air Transport
Association (ATA) of America, the FAA has learned that, in general,
some operators may misunderstand the legal effect of AD's on airplanes
that are identified in the applicability provision of the AD, but that
have been altered or repaired in the area addressed by the AD. The FAA
points out that all airplanes identified in the applicability provision
of an AD are legally subject to the AD. If an airplane has been altered
or repaired in the affected area in such a way as to affect compliance
with the AD, the owner or operator is required to obtain FAA approval
for an alternative method of compliance with the AD, in accordance with
the paragraph of each AD that provides for such approvals. A note has
been included in this notice to clarify this long-standing requirement.
There are approximately 92 Model 400 and 400A airplanes of the
affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA estimates that 69
airplanes of U.S. registry would be affected by this proposed AD, that
it would take approximately 24 work hours per airplane to accomplish
the proposed actions, and that the average labor rate is $60 per work
hour. Required parts would be provided by the manufacturer at no cost
to operators. Based on these figures, the total cost impact of the
proposed AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $99,360, or $1,440 per
airplane.
The total cost impact figure discussed above is based on
assumptions that no operator has yet accomplished any of the proposed
requirements of this AD action, and that no operator would accomplish
those actions in the future if this AD were not adopted.
The regulations proposed herein would not have substantial direct
effects on the States, on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in
accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this
proposal would not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant
the preparation of a Federalism Assessment.
For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this proposed
regulation (1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under the DOT
Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979);
and (3) if promulgated, will not have a significant economic impact,
positive or negative, on a substantial number of small entities under
the criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. A copy of the draft
regulatory evaluation prepared for this action is contained in the
Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained by contacting the Rules
Docket at the location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39
Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
The Proposed Amendment
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration proposes to amend
part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as
follows:
PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES
1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. App. 1354(a), 1421 and 1423; 49 U.S.C.
106(g); and 14 CFR 11.89.
Sec. 39.13 [Amended]
2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new
airworthiness directive:
Beech Aircraft Corporation: Docket 95-NM-31-AD.
Applicability: Model 400 airplanes, serial RJ-61; and Model 400A
airplanes, serials RK-1 through RK-77 inclusive, and RK-79 through
RK-92 inclusive; certificated in any category.
Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the
preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been
modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the
requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,
altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of
this AD is affected, the owner/operator must use the authority
provided in paragraph (b) to request approval from the FAA. This
approval may address either no action, if the current configuration
eliminates the unsafe condition; or different actions necessary to
address the unsafe condition described in this AD. Such a request
should include an assessment of the effect of the changed
configuration on the unsafe condition addressed by this AD. In no
case does the presence of any modification, alteration, or repair
remove any airplane from the applicability of this AD.
Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished
previously.
To prevent reduced controllability of the airplane, accomplish
the following:
(a) At the next scheduled inspection, but no later than 200
hours time-in-service after the effective date of this AD, install
an autopilot and rudder boost improvement kit in accordance with
Beechcraft Service Bulletin No. 2533, dated October 1994.
(b) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the
compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be
used if approved by the Manager, Wichita Aircraft Certification
Office (ACO), FAA, Small Airplane Directorate.
Operators shall submit their requests through an appropriate FAA
Principal Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send
it to the Manager, Wichita ACO.
Note 2: Information concerning the existence of approved
alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be
obtained from the Wichita ACO.
(c) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with
sections 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14
CFR 21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where
the requirements of this AD can be accomplished. Issued in Renton,
Washington, on April 28, 1995.
James V. Devany,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 95-10989 Filed 5-3-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-U