PDA

View Full Version : Structure of AD Numbers


O. Sami Saydjari
May 23rd 05, 04:03 PM
Do Airworthiness Directive Numbers have any meaning and structure? For
example, AD 82-27-3. Does one part mean year issued? Another refer to
type equipment effected? Another, perhaps a serial number of the AD
itself? Just Curious.

-Sami

Blanche Cohen
May 23rd 05, 05:02 PM
O. Sami Saydjari > wrote:
>Do Airworthiness Directive Numbers have any meaning and structure? For
>example, AD 82-27-3. Does one part mean year issued? Another refer to
>type equipment effected? Another, perhaps a serial number of the AD
>itself? Just Curious.


Not really. the first 2 digits are the year. The last two(one) digits
are numerical order. The middle two? Ah, this is the fun part. IIRC,
and I may not, this is the week of the year. So AD 82-27-3 is the
3rd AD published in the 27th week of 1982.

I think.

Jon Woellhaf
May 23rd 05, 05:18 PM
FAA Advisory Circular 43-16A No. 135 states, "AD Numbering and
Identification - AD numbers are composed of three basic elements (example:
89-01-02). The first two digits represent the year in which the AD was
issued. The second two digits indicate the biweekly period within the year
(normally, a year contains 26 biweekly periods). The last two digits are
sequential numbers assigned to each AD issued within a biweekly period
(sequential numbers assigned to telegraphic AD's begin with number 51
instead of 01). Thus, AD 89-01-02 identifies the second AD issued during the
first biweekly period of 1989."

The sequential numbers do not always indicate the order of the effective
dates. For example, AD 2005-07-17 is effective May 12th and AD 2005-07-18 is
effective May 11th. The effective dates of sequential ADs are sometimes much
further apart -- not that it makes any difference.

"O. Sami Saydjari" > wrote in message
...
> Do Airworthiness Directive Numbers have any meaning and structure? For
> example, AD 82-27-3. Does one part mean year issued? Another refer to
> type equipment effected? Another, perhaps a serial number of the AD
> itself? Just Curious.
>
> -Sami

Google