# AD 2000-02-24: Spring Rod Assemblies

- Type: Airworthiness directive
- Status: Current
- Products: Airbus A300 B2-1A, A300 B2-1C, A300 B2-203, A300 B2K-3C, A300 B4-103, A300 B4-203, A300 B4-2C, A300 B4-601, A300 B4-603, A300 B4-605R, A300 B4-620, A300 B4-622 and 12 more
- Effective: March 9, 2000
- Published: February 3, 2000, 65 FR 5243–5245
- Issued: January 25, 2000
- Issued as: Final rule
- Superseded by: Nothing supersedes this AD
- Product type: Aircraft, Large airplane
- Amendment: 39-11542
- Docket: 99-NM-247-AD
- Registered aircraft: 124 may be affected, by airframe or engine model (OpenAirDocs)
- Official PDF: https://openairdocs.org/files/sha256/15/a9/15a933fc29e6544424dfdeab320885e7700157c3072df69c54eaf0d06b50bdbc (from https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2000-02-03/pdf/00-2083.pdf)
- Federal Register: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2000/02/03/00-2083/airworthiness-directives-airbus-model-a300-a310-and-a300-600-series-airplanes
- FAA DRS: https://drs.faa.gov/browse/excelExternalWindow/2104C3FC25F19BDA862569FB006C1827.0001
- DRS record last changed: May 30, 2024
- Page: https://openairdocs.org/ad/2000-02-24

## Summary

This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD), applicable to certain Airbus Model A300, A310, and A300-600 series airplanes, that requires either replacement of the spring rod assemblies of the rudder servo controls with improved spring rod assemblies; or modification of the existing spring rod assemblies. For certain airplanes, this amendment requires a one-time visual inspection to determine whether certain parts of the spring rod assemblies of the rudder servo controls are installed; and corrective actions, if necessary. This amendment is prompted by issuance of mandatory continuing airworthiness information by a foreign civil airworthiness authority. The actions specified by this AD are intended to prevent corrosion of the spring rod assemblies of the rudder servo controls, which could result in the jamming of the rudder servo controls and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.

## The airworthiness directive

### Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:

1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

## Rule preamble

### Dates

Effective March 9, 2000.

The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as of March 9, 2000.

### Addresses

The service information referenced in this AD may be obtained from Airbus Industrie, 1 Rond Point Maurice Bellonte, 31707 Blagnac Cedex, France. This information may be examined at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

### For further information contact

Norman B. Martenson, Manager, International Branch, ANM-116, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 227-2110; fax (425) 227-1149.

### SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness directive (AD) that is applicable to certain Airbus Model A300, A310, and A300-600 series airplanes was published in the Federal Register on November 4, 1999 (64 FR 60138). That action proposed to require either replacement of the spring rod assemblies of the rudder servo controls with improved spring rod assemblies; or modification of the existing spring rod assemblies. For certain airplanes, that action proposed to require a one-time visual inspection to determine whether certain parts of the spring rod assemblies of the rudder servo controls are installed; and corrective actions, if necessary.

Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate in the making of this amendment. No comments were submitted in response to the proposal or the FAA's determination of the cost to the public.

### French Airworthiness Directive Revision

Since issuance of the proposed AD, the Direction Go no rale de l'Aviation Civile (DGAC), which is the airworthiness authority for France, has revised the corresponding French airworthiness directive. The DGAC issued 1999-240-288(B) R1, dated December 15, 1999, to provide operators with an exhaustive list of appropriate part numbers (P/N) for rudder servo control input spring rod assemblies. The FAA has reviewed this information and has determined that paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of the proposed AD should be revised to include an additional part number. These paragraphs specify acceptable spring rod assemblies as those having either P/N A2727086500400 or A2727086500600. However, P/N A2727114900000 also is acceptable for installation. Paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2) of the AD have been revised to include this P/N.

### Conclusion

After careful review of the available data, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public interest require the adoption of the rule with the change described previously. The FAA has determined that this change will neither increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of the AD.

### Cost Impact

The FAA estimates that 156 airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this AD.

If an operator elects to replace the spring rod assemblies: It will take approximately 4 work hours per airplane to accomplish the replacement, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts will cost approximately $3,720 per airplane. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the replacement on U.S. operators is estimated to be $3,960 per airplane.

If an operator elects to modify the spring rod assemblies: It will take approximately 7 work hours per airplane to accomplish the modification, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts will cost approximately $294 per airplane. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the modification on U.S. operators is estimated to be $714 per airplane.

If an operator is required to accomplish the one-time inspection: It will take approximately 1 work hour per airplane to accomplish that inspection, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of the inspection on U.S. operators is estimated to be $60 per airplane.

The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions that no operator has yet accomplished any of the requirements of this AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the future if this AD were not adopted.

### Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will not have a substantial direct effect 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, it is determined that this final rule does not have federalism implications under Executive Order 13132.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) Is not a “significant regulatory action” under Executive Order 12866; (2) Is not a “significant rule” under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) 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 final evaluation has been prepared for this action and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption ADDRESSES.

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by reference, Safety.

## Affected data sheets (1) (OpenAirDocs)

The type certificate data sheets whose models the AD names.

- [TCDS A35EU](https://openairdocs.org/tcds/A35EU): Airbus SAS; names 17 of 17 models: A310-203, A300 B4-622R, A300 F4-605R, A300 B4-601, A310-204, A310-221, A300 B4-603, A300 B4-622…

## Registered aircraft it may apply to (OpenAirDocs)

Matched by airframe and engine model; the AD's applicability may narrow it by serial number, part number or equipment.

- Aircraft: 124 (124 by airframe model, 0 by engine model)
- Makers: Airbus Industrie 76, Airbus 48

Models with the most aircraft:

- [Airbus Industrie A300 F4-605R](https://openairdocs.org/model/airbus-industrie-a300-f4-605r): 36 aircraft (airframe model)
- [Airbus A300 F4-622R](https://openairdocs.org/model/airbus-a300-f4-622r): 31 aircraft (airframe model)
- [Airbus Industrie A300 F4-622R](https://openairdocs.org/model/airbus-industrie-a300-f4-622r): 21 aircraft (airframe model)
- [Airbus A300 B4-622R](https://openairdocs.org/model/airbus-a300-b4-622r): 11 aircraft (airframe model)
- [Airbus Industrie A300 B4-622R](https://openairdocs.org/model/airbus-industrie-a300-b4-622r): 10 aircraft (airframe model)
- [Airbus A300 F4-605R](https://openairdocs.org/model/airbus-a300-f4-605r): 6 aircraft (airframe model)
- [Airbus Industrie A300 B4-605R](https://openairdocs.org/model/airbus-industrie-a300-b4-605r): 3 aircraft (airframe model)
- [Airbus Industrie A310-203](https://openairdocs.org/model/airbus-industrie-a310-203): 2 aircraft (airframe model)
- [Airbus Industrie A310-222](https://openairdocs.org/model/airbus-industrie-a310-222): 2 aircraft (airframe model)
- [Airbus Industrie A300 B4-622](https://openairdocs.org/model/airbus-industrie-a300-b4-622): 2 aircraft (airframe model)

All 10 models: https://openairdocs.org/ad/2000-02-24/models.md
Every aircraft: https://openairdocs.org/ad/2000-02-24/aircraft.md

## Related documents

- [Proposed rule 99-NM-247-AD](https://openairdocs.org/proposed/99-NM-247-AD): Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM), published Nov 4, 1999

Its text cites no advisory circulars or STCs.

---
OpenAirDocs.org is an independent research project of [Contrail Labs](https://contraillabs.com/). It is not affiliated with the FAA or the NTSB. Source documents are U.S. government works in the public domain.