Special Conditions: Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X; Enhanced Flight Visibility System (EFVS), 47176-47180 [2010-19073]

Download as PDF 47176 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 150 / Thursday, August 5, 2010 / Rules and Regulations (b)(3) Fees Imposed * * * * * 2. Itemizing fees by type. In itemizing fees imposed more than once in the period, credit unions may group fees if they are the same type. (See § 707.11(a)(1) of this part regarding certain fees that are required to be grouped.) *** * * * * * Section 707.11—Additional Disclosures Regarding the Payment of Overdrafts (a) Disclosure of total fees on periodic statements (a)(1) General * * * * * 2. Fees for paying overdrafts. Credit unions must disclose on periodic statements a total dollar amount for all fees or charges imposed on the account for paying overdrafts. The credit union must disclose separate totals for the statement period and for the calendar year-to-date. The total dollar amount for each of these periods includes per-item fees as well as interest charges, daily or other periodic fees, or fees charged for maintaining an account in overdraft status, whether the overdraft is by check, debit card transaction, or by any other transaction type. It also includes fees charged when there are insufficient funds because previously deposited funds are subject to a hold or are uncollected. It does not include fees for transferring funds from another account of the member to avoid an overdraft, or fees charged under a service subject to the Federal Reserve Board’s Regulation Z (12 CFR part 226). See also comment 11(c)–2. Under § 707.11(a)(1)(i), the disclosure must describe the total dollar amount for all fees or charges imposed on the account for the statement period and calendar year-to-date for paying overdrafts using the term ‘‘Total Overdraft Fees.’’ This requirement applies notwithstanding comment 3(a)–2. * * * * * (c) Disclosure of account balances wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1 * * * * * 2. Retail sweep programs. In a retail sweep program, a credit union establishes two legally distinct subaccounts, a share draft subaccount and a share savings subaccount, which together make up the member’s account. The credit union allocates and transfers funds between the two subaccounts in order to maximize the balance in the share savings account while complying with the monthly limitations on transfers out of savings accounts under the Federal Reserve Board’s Regulation D, 12 CFR 204.2(d)(2). Retail sweep programs are generally not established for the purpose of covering overdrafts. Rather, credit unions typically establish retail sweep programs by agreement with the member in order for the credit union to minimize its transaction account reserve requirements and, in some cases, to provide a higher interest rate than the member would earn on a share draft account alone. Section 707.11(c) does not require a credit union to exclude funds from the member’s balance that may be transferred from another account pursuant to a retail sweep program that is VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:16 Aug 04, 2010 Jkt 220001 established for such purposes and that has the following characteristics: i. The account involved complies with the Federal Reserve Board’s Regulation D, 12 CFR 204.2(d)(2), ii. The member does not have direct access to the share savings subaccount that is part of the retail sweep program, and iii. The member’s periodic statements show the account balance as the combined balance in the subaccounts. 3. Additional balance. The credit union may disclose additional balances supplemented by funds that may be provided by the credit union to cover an overdraft, whether pursuant to a discretionary overdraft service, a service subject to the Federal Reserve Board’s Regulation Z (12 CFR part 226), or a service that transfers funds from another account held individually or jointly by the member, so long as the credit union prominently states that any additional balance includes these additional overdraft amounts. The credit union may not simply state, for instance, that the second balance is the members ‘‘available balance,’’ or contains ‘‘available funds.’’ Rather, the credit union should provide enough information to convey that the second balance includes these amounts. For example, the credit union may state that the balance includes ‘‘overdraft funds.’’ Where a member has not opted into, or as applicable, has opted out of the credit union’s discretionary overdraft service, any additional balance disclosed should not include funds that otherwise might be available under that service. Where a member has not opted into, or as applicable, has opted out of, the credit union’s discretionary overdraft service for some, but not all transactions (e.g., the member has not opted into overdraft services for ATM and one-time debit card transactions), a credit union that includes these additional overdraft funds in the second balance should convey that the overdraft funds are not available for all transactions. For example, the credit union could state that overdraft funds are not available for ATM and one-time (or everyday) debit card transactions. Similarly, if funds are not available for all transactions pursuant to a service subject to the Federal Reserve Board’s Regulation Z (12 CFR part 226) or a service that transfers funds from another account, a second balance that includes such funds should also indicate this fact. [FR Doc. 2010–19090 Filed 8–4–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 7535–01–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 25 [Docket No. NM432; Special Conditions No. 25–410–SC] Special Conditions: Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X; Enhanced Flight Visibility System (EFVS) Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. AGENCY: PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 Final special conditions; request for comments. ACTION: These special conditions are issued for certain Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X airplanes. This airplane will have an advanced, enhanced flight-visibility system (EFVS), which is a novel or unusual design feature consisting of a head-up display (HUD) system modified to display forward-looking infrared (FLIR) imagery. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design feature. These special conditions contain the additional safety standards that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards. DATES: The effective date of these special conditions is July 27, 2010. We must receive your comments by August 25, 2010. ADDRESSES: You must mail two copies of your comments to: Federal Aviation Administration, Transport Airplane Directorate, Attn: Rules Docket (ANM– 113), Docket No. NM432, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056. You may deliver two copies to the Transport Airplane Directorate at the above address. You must mark your comments: Docket No. NM432. Comments may be inspected in the Rules Docket weekdays, except Federal holidays, between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dale Dunford, FAA, Transport Standards Staff, ANM–111, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055–4056; telephone (425) 227–2239; fax (425) 227–1320; e-mail: dale.dunford@faa.gov. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has determined that notice of and opportunity for prior public comment on these special conditions is impracticable and would significantly delay issuance of the design approval and thus delivery of the affected aircraft. These particular special conditions were recently issued and only three nonsubstantive comments were received during the public-comment period. The FAA therefore finds that good cause exists for making these special conditions effective upon issuance. SUMMARY: Comments Invited We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments reference a E:\FR\FM\05AUR1.SGM 05AUR1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 150 / Thursday, August 5, 2010 / Rules and Regulations wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1 specific portion of the special conditions, explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data. We ask that you send us two copies of written comments. We will file in the docket all comments we receive, as well as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel about these special conditions. You can inspect the docket before and after the comment closing date. If you wish to review the docket in person, go to the address in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. We will consider all comments we receive by the closing date for comments. We will consider comments filed late if it is possible to do so without incurring expense or delay. We may change these special conditions based on the comments we receive. If you want us to let you know we received your comments on these special conditions, send us a selfaddressed, stamped postcard on which the docket number appears. We will stamp the date on the postcard and mail it back to you. Background On October 15, 2009, Dassault Aviation applied for a change to Type Certificate A59NM for the installation of an EFVS in the Dassault Model Falcon 7X airplane, a 19-passenger, transportcategory airplane powered by three aftmounted Pratt & Whitney PW307A high-bypass-ratio turbofan engines. Maximum takeoff weight is 69,000 pounds, and maximum certified altitude will be 51,000 feet with a range of 5,700 nautical miles. The electronic infrared image displayed between the pilot and the forward windshield represents a novel or unusual design feature in the context of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 25.773. Section 25.773 was not written in anticipation of such technology. The electronic image has the potential to enhance the pilot’s awareness of the terrain, hazards, and airport features. At the same time, the image may partially obscure the pilot’s direct, outside-compartment view. Therefore, the FAA needs adequate safety standards to evaluate the EFVS to determine that the imagery provides the intended visual enhancements without undue interference with the pilot’s outside-compartment view. The FAA intends that the pilot is able to use a combination of the information seen in the image and the natural view of the outside scene, as seen through the image as safely and effectively as a pilot- VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:16 Aug 04, 2010 Jkt 220001 compartment view without an EVS image, and that is compliant with § 25.773. Although the FAA has determined that the existing regulations are not adequate for certification of EFVSs, we believe that EFVSs could be certified through application of appropriate safety criteria. Therefore, the FAA has determined that special conditions should be issued for certification of EFVS to provide a level of safety equivalent to that provided by the standard in § 25.773. Note: The term ‘‘enhanced vision system’’ (EVS) commonly refers to a system comprised of a head-up display (HUD), imaging sensor(s), and avionics interfaces that display the sensor imagery on the HUD and overlay it with alpha-numeric and symbolic flight information. However, the term has also commonly refers to systems that display the sensor imagery, with or without other flight information, on a headdown display. To avoid confusion, the FAA created the term ‘‘enhanced flight visibility system’’ (EFVS) to refer to certain EVS systems that meet the requirements of the new operational rules—in particular, the requirement for a HUD and specified flight information—and can be used to determine ‘‘enhanced flight visibility.’’ EFVSs can be considered a subset of systems otherwise labeled EVSs. On January 9, 2004, the FAA published revisions to operational rules in 14 CFR parts 1, 91, 121, 125, and 135 to allow aircraft to operate below certain altitudes during a straight-in instrument approach while using an EFVS to meet visibility requirements. Prior to this rule change, the FAA issued Special Conditions No. 25–180– SC, which approved the use of an EVS on Gulfstream Model G–V airplanes. Those special conditions addressed the requirements for the pilot-compartment view and limited the scope of the intended functions permissible under the operational rules at the time. The intended function of the EVS imagery was to aid the pilot during the approach and allow the pilot to detect and identify the visual references for the intended runway down to 100 feet above the touchdown zone. However, the EVS imagery alone was not to be used as a means to satisfy visibility requirements below 100 feet. The recent operational rule change expands the permissible application of certain EVSs that are certified to meet the new EFVS standards. The new rule will allow the use of EFVSs for operation below the minimum descent altitude (MDA) or decision height (DH) to meet new visibility requirements of § 91.175(l). The purpose of these special conditions is not only to address the issue of the ‘‘pilot compartment view,’’ PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 47177 as was done by Special Conditions No. 25–180–SC, but also to define the scope of intended function consistent with § 91.175(l) and (m). Type Certification Basis Under the provisions of 14 CFR 21.101, Dassault Aviation must show that the Model Falcon 7X airplane, as changed, continues to meet the applicable provisions of the regulations incorporated by reference in Type Certificate A59NM or the applicable regulations in effect on the date of application for the change. The regulations incorporated by reference in the type certificate are commonly referred to as the ‘‘original type certification basis.’’ The regulations incorporated by reference in A59NM are as follows: Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 25, as amended by Amendment 25–1 through 25–111. The certification basis includes certain special conditions and exemptions that are not relevant to these special conditions. If the regulations incorporated by reference do not provide adequate standards regarding the change, the applicant must comply with certain regulations in effect on the date of application for the change. Dassault must show that the Falcon 7X, as modified, complies with 14 CFR part 25, as amended by Amendments 25–112 through 25–129. If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness regulations (i.e., part 25 as amended) do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for the Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X changed by Dassault Aviation, because of a novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed under the provisions of § 21.16. In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special conditions, the Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X airplane must comply with the fuel-vent and exhaust-emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34, and the noise certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36. The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, under § 11.38 and they become part of the type certification basis under § 21.101. Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended later to include any other model that incorporates the same or similar novel or unusual design feature, or should any other model already included on the same type certificate be modified to E:\FR\FM\05AUR1.SGM 05AUR1 47178 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 150 / Thursday, August 5, 2010 / Rules and Regulations wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1 incorporate the same or similar novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would also apply to the other model under § 21.101. Novel or Unusual Design Features The Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X airplane will incorporate an EFVS, which is a novel or unusual design feature because the EFVS projects a video image derived from a forwardlooking infrared (FLIR) camera through the HUD. The EFVS image is projected in the center of the ‘‘pilot-compartment view,’’ which is governed by § 25.773. The image is displayed with HUD symbology and overlays the forward outside view. Therefore, § 25.773 does not contain appropriate safety standards for the EFVS display. Operationally, during an instrument approach, the EFVS image is intended to enhance the pilot’s ability to detect and identify ‘‘visual references for the intended runway’’ [see 14 CFR 91.175(l)(3)] to continue the approach below decision height or minimum descent altitude. Depending on atmospheric conditions and the strength of infrared energy emitted and/or reflected from the scene, the pilot can see these visual references in the image better than can be seen through the window without EFVS. Scene contrast detected by infrared sensors can be much different from that detected by natural pilot vision. On a dark night, thermal differences of objects which are not detectable by the naked eye are easily detected by many imaging infrared systems. On the other hand, contrasting colors in visual wavelengths may be distinguished by the naked eye but not by an imaging infrared system. Where thermal contrast in the scene is sufficiently detectable, the pilot can recognize shapes and patterns of certain visual references in the infrared image. However, depending on conditions, those shapes and patterns in the infrared image can appear significantly different than they would with normal vision. Considering these factors, the EFVS image needs to be evaluated to determine that it can be accurately interpreted by the pilot. The EFVS image may improve the pilot’s ability to detect and identify items of interest. However, the EFVS needs to be evaluated to determine that the imagery allows the pilot to perform the normal duties of the flight crew and adequately see outside the window through the image, consistent with the safety intent of § 25.773(a)(2). Compared to a HUD displaying the EFVS image and symbology, a HUD that only displays stroke-written symbols is easier to see through. Stroke symbology VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:16 Aug 04, 2010 Jkt 220001 illuminates a small fraction of the total display area of the HUD, leaving much of that area free of reflected light that could interfere with the pilot’s view out the window through the display. However, unlike stroke symbology, the video image illuminates most of the total display area of the HUD (approximately 30 degrees horizontally and 25 degrees vertically) which is a significant fraction of the pilotcompartment view. The pilot cannot see around the larger illuminated portions of the video image, but must see the outside scene through it. Unlike the pilot’s external view, the EFVS image is a monochrome, twodimensional display. Many, but not all, of the depth cues found in the natural view are also found in the image. The quality of the EFVS image and the level of EFVS infrared-sensor performance could depend significantly on conditions of the atmospheric and external light sources. The pilot needs adequate control of sensor gain and image brightness, which can significantly affect image quality and transparency (i.e., the ability to see the outside view through the image). Certain system characteristics could create distracting and confusing display artifacts. Finally, because this is a sensor-based system intended to provide a conformal perspective corresponding with the outside scene, the system must be able to ensure accurate alignment. Therefore, safety standards are needed for each of the following factors: • An acceptable degree of image transparency; • Image alignment; • Lack of significant distortion; and • The potential for pilot confusion or misleading information. Section 25.773, Pilot compartment view, specifies that ‘‘Each pilot compartment must be free of glare and reflection that could interfere with the normal duties of the minimum flight crew * * *.’’ In issuing § 25.773, the FAA did not anticipate the development of the EFVS and does not consider § 25.773 to be adequate to address the specific issues related to such a system. Therefore, the FAA has determined that special conditions are needed to address the specific issues particular to the installation and use of an EFVS. Discussion The EFVS is intended to function by presenting an enhanced view during the approach. This enhanced view would help the pilot to see and recognize external visual references, as required by § 91.175(l), and to visually monitor the integrity of the approach, as PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 described in FAA Order 6750.24D (‘‘Instrument Landing System and Ancillary Electronic Component Configuration and Performance Requirements,’’ dated March 1, 2000). Based on this approved functionality, users would seek to obtain operational approval to conduct approaches, including approaches to Type I runways, in visibility conditions much lower than those for conventional Category I. The purpose of these special conditions is to ensure that the EFVS to be installed can perform the following functions: • Present an enhanced view that would aid the pilot during the approach. • Provide enhanced flight visibility to the pilot that is no less than the visibility prescribed in the standard instrument approach procedure. • Display an image that the pilot can use to detect and identify the ‘‘visual references for the intended runway’’ required by § 91.175(l)(3) to continue the approach with vertical guidance to 100 feet height above the touchdownzone elevation. Depending on the atmospheric conditions and the particular visual references that happen to be distinctly visible and detectable in the EFVS image, these functions would support its use by the pilot to visually monitor the integrity of the approach path. Compliance with these special conditions does not affect the applicability of any of the requirements of the operating regulations (i.e., 14 CFR parts 91, 121, and 135). Furthermore, use of the EFVS does not change the approach minima prescribed in the standard instrument-approach procedure being used; published minima still apply. The FAA certification of this EFVS is limited as follows: • The infrared-based EFVS image will not be certified as a means to satisfy the requirements for descent below 100 feet height above touchdown (HAT). • The EFVS may be used as a supplemental device to enhance the pilot’s situational awareness during any phase of flight or operation in which its safe use has been established. An EFVS image may provide an enhanced image of the scene that may compensate for any reduction in the clear outside view of the visual field framed by the HUD combiner. The pilot must be able to use this combination of information seen in the image and the natural view of the outside scene, as seen through the image as safely and effectively as the pilot would use a pilot-compartment view without an EVS E:\FR\FM\05AUR1.SGM 05AUR1 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 150 / Thursday, August 5, 2010 / Rules and Regulations image, and that is compliant with § 25.773. This is the fundamental objective of the special conditions. The FAA will also apply additional certification criteria, not as special conditions, for compliance with related regulatory requirements, such as §§ 25.1301 and 25.1309. These additional criteria address certain image characteristics, installation, demonstration, and system safety. Image-characteristic criteria include the following: • Resolution, • Luminance, • Luminance uniformity, • Low level luminance, • Contrast variation, • Display quality, • Display dynamics (e.g., jitter, flicker, update rate, and lag), and • Brightness controls. Installation criteria address visibility and access to EFVS controls and integration of EFVS in the cockpit. The EFVS demonstration criteria address the flight and environmental conditions that need to be covered. The FAA also intends to apply certification criteria relevant to highintensity radiated fields (HIRF) and lightning protection. Applicability As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X airplanes. Should Dassault Aviation apply at a later date for a change to the type certificate to include another model incorporating the same novel or unusual design feature, the special conditions would apply to that model as well. wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1 Conclusion This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features on Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X changed by Dassault Aviation. It is not a rule of general applicability. The substance of these special conditions has been subjected to the notice and comment period in several prior instances and has been derived without substantive change from those previously issued. It is unlikely that prior public comment would result in a significant change from the substance contained herein. Therefore, because a delay would significantly affect the certification of the airplane, which is imminent, the FAA has determined that prior public notice and comment are unnecessary and impracticable, and good cause exists for adopting these special conditions upon issuance. The FAA is requesting comments to allow interested persons to submit views that may not have been submitted in VerDate Mar<15>2010 15:16 Aug 04, 2010 Jkt 220001 response to the prior opportunities for comment described above. List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25 Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements. ■ The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows: Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704. The Special Conditions Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of the typecertification basis for Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X. 1. The EFVS imagery on the HUD must not degrade the safety of flight or interfere with the effective use of outside visual references for required pilot tasks during any phase of flight in which it is to be used. 2. To avoid unacceptable interference with the safe and effective use of the pilot-compartment view, the EFVS device must meet the following requirements: a. The EFVS design must minimize unacceptable display characteristics or artifacts (e.g., noise, ‘‘burlap’’ overlay, running water droplets) that obscure the desired image of the scene, impair the pilot’s ability to detect and identify visual references, mask flight hazards, distract the pilot, or otherwise degrade task performance or safety. b. Control of EFVS display brightness must be sufficiently effective in dynamically changing background (ambient) lighting conditions to prevent full or partial blooming of the display that would distract the pilot, impair the pilot’s ability to detect and identify visual references, mask flight hazards, or otherwise degrade task performance or safety. If automatic control for image brightness is not provided, it must be shown that a single manual setting is satisfactory for the range of lighting conditions encountered during a timecritical, high-workload phase of flight (e.g., low-visibility instrument approach). c. A readily accessible control must be provided that permits the pilot to immediately deactivate and reactivate display of the EFVS image on demand. d. The EFVS image on the HUD must not impair the pilot’s use of guidance information or degrade the presentation and pilot awareness of essential flight information displayed on the HUD, such as alerts, airspeed, attitude, altitude and direction, approach guidance, windshear guidance, TCAS resolution advisories, or unusual-attitude-recovery cues. PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 47179 e. The EFVS image and the HUD symbols, which are spatially referenced to the pitch scale, outside view and image, must be scaled and aligned (i.e., conformal) to the external scene. In addition, the EFVS image and the HUD symbols—when considered singly or in combination—must not be misleading, cause pilot confusion, or increase workload. Some airplane attitudes or cross-wind conditions may cause certain symbols (e.g., the zero-pitch line or flight-path vector) to reach field of view limits such that they cannot be positioned conformally with the image and external scene. In such cases, these symbols may be displayed, but with an altered appearance which makes the pilot aware that they are no longer displayed conformally (for example, ‘‘ghosting’’). f. A HUD system used to display EFVS images must, if previously certified, continue to meet all of the requirements of the original approval. 3. The safety and performance of the pilot tasks associated with the use of the pilot-compartment view must be not be degraded by the display of the EFVS image. These tasks include the following: a. Detection, accurate identification, and maneuvering, as necessary, to avoid traffic, terrain, obstacles, and other hazards of flight. b. Accurate identification and utilization of visual references required for every task relevant to the phase of flight. 4. Compliance with these special conditions will enable the EFVS to be used during instrument approaches in accordance with § 91.175(l) such that it may be found acceptable for the following intended functions: a. Presenting an image that would aid the pilot during a straight-in instrument approach. b. Enabling the pilot to determine that there is sufficient ‘‘enhanced flight visibility,’’ as required by § 91.175(l)(2), for descent and operation below minimum descent altitude/decision height. c. Enabling the pilot to use the EFVS imagery to detect and identify the ‘‘visual references for the intended runway,’’ required by § 91.175(l)(3), to continue the approach with vertical guidance to 100 feet height above touchdown-zone elevation. 5. Use of EFVS for instrumentapproach operations must be in accordance with the provisions of § 91.175(l) and (m). Appropriate limitations must be stated in the Operating Limitations section of the airplane flight manual to prohibit the E:\FR\FM\05AUR1.SGM 05AUR1 47180 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 150 / Thursday, August 5, 2010 / Rules and Regulations use of the EFVS for functions that have not been found to be acceptable. Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 27, 2010. Ali Bahrami, Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. [FR Doc. 2010–19073 Filed 8–4–10; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4910–13–P DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration 14 CFR Part 39 [Docket No. FAA–2010–0044; Directorate Identifier 2009–NM–084–AD; Amendment 39–16381; AD 2010–16–04] RIN 2120–AA64 Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing Company Model 767–200, –300, and –300F Series Airplanes Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Final rule. AGENCY: We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for certain Model 767–200, –300, and –300F series airplanes. This AD requires inspecting to verify the part number of the lowpressure flex-hoses of the flightcrew and supernumerary oxygen system installed under the oxygen mask stowage box at flightcrew and supernumerary oxygen mask locations, and replacing the flexhose with a new non-conductive lowpressure flex-hose if necessary. This AD results from reports of low-pressure flex-hoses of the flightcrew oxygen system that burned through due to inadvertent electrical current from a short circuit in an adjacent audio select panel. We are issuing this AD to prevent inadvertent electrical current, which can cause the low-pressure flex-hoses used in the flightcrew and supernumerary oxygen systems to melt or burn, resulting in oxygen system leakage and smoke or fire. DATES: This AD is effective September 9, 2010. The Director of the Federal Register approved the incorporation by reference of a certain publication listed in the AD as of September 9, 2010. ADDRESSES: For service information identified in this AD, contact Boeing Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services Management, P.O. Box 3707, MC 2H–65, Seattle, Washington 98124– 2207; telephone 206–544–5000, extension 1; fax 206–766–5680; e-mail me.boecom@boeing.com; Internet https://www.myboeingfleet.com. wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with RULES_PART 1 15:16 Aug 04, 2010 You may examine the AD docket on the Internet at https:// www.regulations.gov; or in person at the Docket Management Facility between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The AD docket contains this AD, the regulatory evaluation, any comments received, and other information. The address for the Docket Office (telephone 800–647–5527) is the Document Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Operations, M–30, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Susan L. Monroe, Aerospace Engineer, Cabin Safety and Environmental Systems Branch, ANM–150S, FAA, Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; telephone (425) 917–6457; fax (425) 917–6590. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Discussion SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 Examining the AD Docket Jkt 220001 We issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to amend 14 CFR part 39 to include an airworthiness directive (AD) that would apply to certain Model 767–200, –300, and –300F series airplanes. That NPRM was published in the Federal Register on January 22, 2010 (75 FR 3656). That NPRM proposed to require inspecting to verify the part number of the lowpressure flex-hoses of the flightcrew and supernumerary oxygen system installed under the oxygen mask stowage box at flightcrew and supernumerary oxygen mask locations, and replacing the flexhose with a new non-conductive lowpressure flex-hose if necessary. Comments We gave the public the opportunity to participate in developing this AD. We considered the comments received. Support for the NPRM Boeing concurs with the contents of the NPRM. United Airlines and the Air Line Pilots Association, International, (ALPA) both support the intent of the NPRM. Request To Take Into Account a NonProcurable Part United Airlines states that paragraph (g)(1) of the NPRM refers to the Accomplishment Instructions in Boeing Service Bulletin 767–35A0034, Revision 1, dated June 22, 2000, which specifies the use of tape having part number 232T8002–26. United Airlines states that this tape is no longer available. PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 United Airlines states that Boeing has advised them to procure tape having part number 5841007529 instead. United Airlines states that because compliance is mandated in accordance with Boeing Service Bulletin 767– 35A0034, this will require all operators to request an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) to use the alternate part numbered tape. United Airlines points out that it has formally asked Boeing to use the term ‘‘or equivalent’’ in their service bulletins when specifying part numbers for such items as tapes, marking pens, and solvents, but Boeing has responded that the FAA expressly forbids them to do so. United Airlines states that this is an on-going problem that leads to nuisance AMOC requests that can be avoided. From these statements, we infer that United Airlines requests that we revise the NPRM to either specify another tape or add the term ‘‘or equivalent,’’ so that operators will not have to request AMOCs. We disagree with adding the term ‘‘or equivalent’’ to the AD. We have consulted with Boeing regarding this issue. Boeing has stated that tape having part number 232T8002–26 is a valid part number. Boeing states that when the customer receives a part number, the tape only shows the material code. The omission of the part number is being resolved by Boeing. Also, paragraphs 2.C.2.(d) and 2.C.2.(e) of Boeing Service Bulletin 767–35A0034, Revision 1, dated June 22, 2000, describe the tape that is required and can be purchased from Boeing with just a reference to the name of the tape, ‘‘3/4 wide Permacel P29.’’ No change has been made to the AD in this regard. Request for Clarification Regarding Use of Tape or Sleeving United Airlines states that there is a disparity between the Accomplishment Instructions of Boeing Service Bulletins 737–35A1053, 747–35A2101, and 757– 35A0015, and Boeing Service Bulletin 767–35A0034, Revision 1, dated June 22, 2000, referenced in the NPRM. United Airlines states that Model 747 and 767 airplanes are required to wrap the new hose assemblies with tape or sleeving, but it is not required on Model 737 or 757 airplanes. United Airlines states that the function of this tape or sleeving is to satisfy National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Safety Recommendation A–09–47, dated July 8, 2009. United Airlines points out that application of this safety recommendation does not appear to be consistent. From these statements, we infer that United Airlines requests clarification regarding use of tape or sleeving. We E:\FR\FM\05AUR1.SGM 05AUR1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 150 (Thursday, August 5, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47176-47180]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-19073]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 25

[Docket No. NM432; Special Conditions No. 25-410-SC]


Special Conditions: Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X; Enhanced 
Flight Visibility System (EFVS)

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final special conditions; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for certain Dassault 
Aviation Model Falcon 7X airplanes. This airplane will have an 
advanced, enhanced flight-visibility system (EFVS), which is a novel or 
unusual design feature consisting of a head-up display (HUD) system 
modified to display forward-looking infrared (FLIR) imagery. The 
applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain adequate or 
appropriate safety standards for this design feature. These special 
conditions contain the additional safety standards that the 
Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of safety 
equivalent to that established by the existing airworthiness standards.

DATES: The effective date of these special conditions is July 27, 2010. 
We must receive your comments by August 25, 2010.

ADDRESSES: You must mail two copies of your comments to: Federal 
Aviation Administration, Transport Airplane Directorate, Attn: Rules 
Docket (ANM-113), Docket No. NM432, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, 
Washington 98055-4056. You may deliver two copies to the Transport 
Airplane Directorate at the above address. You must mark your comments: 
Docket No. NM432. Comments may be inspected in the Rules Docket 
weekdays, except Federal holidays, between 7:30 a.m. and 4 p.m.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dale Dunford, FAA, Transport Standards 
Staff, ANM-111, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington 98055-4056; 
telephone (425) 227-2239; fax (425) 227-1320; e-mail: 
dale.dunford@faa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA has determined that notice of and 
opportunity for prior public comment on these special conditions is 
impracticable and would significantly delay issuance of the design 
approval and thus delivery of the affected aircraft. These particular 
special conditions were recently issued and only three non-substantive 
comments were received during the public-comment period. The FAA 
therefore finds that good cause exists for making these special 
conditions effective upon issuance.

Comments Invited

    We invite interested people to take part in this rulemaking by 
sending written comments, data, or views. The most helpful comments 
reference a

[[Page 47177]]

specific portion of the special conditions, explain the reason for any 
recommended change, and include supporting data. We ask that you send 
us two copies of written comments.
    We will file in the docket all comments we receive, as well as a 
report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA personnel 
about these special conditions. You can inspect the docket before and 
after the comment closing date. If you wish to review the docket in 
person, go to the address in the ADDRESSES section of this preamble 
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal 
holidays.
    We will consider all comments we receive by the closing date for 
comments. We will consider comments filed late if it is possible to do 
so without incurring expense or delay. We may change these special 
conditions based on the comments we receive.
    If you want us to let you know we received your comments on these 
special conditions, send us a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which 
the docket number appears. We will stamp the date on the postcard and 
mail it back to you.

Background

    On October 15, 2009, Dassault Aviation applied for a change to Type 
Certificate A59NM for the installation of an EFVS in the Dassault Model 
Falcon 7X airplane, a 19-passenger, transport-category airplane powered 
by three aft-mounted Pratt & Whitney PW307A high-bypass-ratio turbofan 
engines. Maximum takeoff weight is 69,000 pounds, and maximum certified 
altitude will be 51,000 feet with a range of 5,700 nautical miles.
    The electronic infrared image displayed between the pilot and the 
forward windshield represents a novel or unusual design feature in the 
context of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 25.773. 
Section 25.773 was not written in anticipation of such technology. The 
electronic image has the potential to enhance the pilot's awareness of 
the terrain, hazards, and airport features. At the same time, the image 
may partially obscure the pilot's direct, outside-compartment view. 
Therefore, the FAA needs adequate safety standards to evaluate the EFVS 
to determine that the imagery provides the intended visual enhancements 
without undue interference with the pilot's outside-compartment view. 
The FAA intends that the pilot is able to use a combination of the 
information seen in the image and the natural view of the outside 
scene, as seen through the image as safely and effectively as a pilot-
compartment view without an EVS image, and that is compliant with Sec.  
25.773.
    Although the FAA has determined that the existing regulations are 
not adequate for certification of EFVSs, we believe that EFVSs could be 
certified through application of appropriate safety criteria. 
Therefore, the FAA has determined that special conditions should be 
issued for certification of EFVS to provide a level of safety 
equivalent to that provided by the standard in Sec.  25.773.

    Note: The term ``enhanced vision system'' (EVS) commonly refers 
to a system comprised of a head-up display (HUD), imaging sensor(s), 
and avionics interfaces that display the sensor imagery on the HUD 
and overlay it with alpha-numeric and symbolic flight information. 
However, the term has also commonly refers to systems that display 
the sensor imagery, with or without other flight information, on a 
head-down display. To avoid confusion, the FAA created the term 
``enhanced flight visibility system'' (EFVS) to refer to certain EVS 
systems that meet the requirements of the new operational rules--in 
particular, the requirement for a HUD and specified flight 
information--and can be used to determine ``enhanced flight 
visibility.'' EFVSs can be considered a subset of systems otherwise 
labeled EVSs.

    On January 9, 2004, the FAA published revisions to operational 
rules in 14 CFR parts 1, 91, 121, 125, and 135 to allow aircraft to 
operate below certain altitudes during a straight-in instrument 
approach while using an EFVS to meet visibility requirements.
    Prior to this rule change, the FAA issued Special Conditions No. 
25-180-SC, which approved the use of an EVS on Gulfstream Model G-V 
airplanes. Those special conditions addressed the requirements for the 
pilot-compartment view and limited the scope of the intended functions 
permissible under the operational rules at the time. The intended 
function of the EVS imagery was to aid the pilot during the approach 
and allow the pilot to detect and identify the visual references for 
the intended runway down to 100 feet above the touchdown zone. However, 
the EVS imagery alone was not to be used as a means to satisfy 
visibility requirements below 100 feet.
    The recent operational rule change expands the permissible 
application of certain EVSs that are certified to meet the new EFVS 
standards. The new rule will allow the use of EFVSs for operation below 
the minimum descent altitude (MDA) or decision height (DH) to meet new 
visibility requirements of Sec.  91.175(l). The purpose of these 
special conditions is not only to address the issue of the ``pilot 
compartment view,'' as was done by Special Conditions No. 25-180-SC, 
but also to define the scope of intended function consistent with Sec.  
91.175(l) and (m).

Type Certification Basis

    Under the provisions of 14 CFR 21.101, Dassault Aviation must show 
that the Model Falcon 7X airplane, as changed, continues to meet the 
applicable provisions of the regulations incorporated by reference in 
Type Certificate A59NM or the applicable regulations in effect on the 
date of application for the change. The regulations incorporated by 
reference in the type certificate are commonly referred to as the 
``original type certification basis.'' The regulations incorporated by 
reference in A59NM are as follows:
    Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) part 25, as amended by 
Amendment 25-1 through 25-111. The certification basis includes certain 
special conditions and exemptions that are not relevant to these 
special conditions.
    If the regulations incorporated by reference do not provide 
adequate standards regarding the change, the applicant must comply with 
certain regulations in effect on the date of application for the 
change. Dassault must show that the Falcon 7X, as modified, complies 
with 14 CFR part 25, as amended by Amendments 25-112 through 25-129.
    If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness 
regulations (i.e., part 25 as amended) do not contain adequate or 
appropriate safety standards for the Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X 
changed by Dassault Aviation, because of a novel or unusual design 
feature, special conditions are prescribed under the provisions of 
Sec.  21.16.
    In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special 
conditions, the Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X airplane must comply 
with the fuel-vent and exhaust-emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34, 
and the noise certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36.
    The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, 
under Sec.  11.38 and they become part of the type certification basis 
under Sec.  21.101.
    Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which 
they are issued. Should the type certificate for that model be amended 
later to include any other model that incorporates the same or similar 
novel or unusual design feature, or should any other model already 
included on the same type certificate be modified to

[[Page 47178]]

incorporate the same or similar novel or unusual design feature, the 
special conditions would also apply to the other model under Sec.  
21.101.

Novel or Unusual Design Features

    The Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X airplane will incorporate an 
EFVS, which is a novel or unusual design feature because the EFVS 
projects a video image derived from a forward-looking infrared (FLIR) 
camera through the HUD. The EFVS image is projected in the center of 
the ``pilot-compartment view,'' which is governed by Sec.  25.773. The 
image is displayed with HUD symbology and overlays the forward outside 
view. Therefore, Sec.  25.773 does not contain appropriate safety 
standards for the EFVS display.
    Operationally, during an instrument approach, the EFVS image is 
intended to enhance the pilot's ability to detect and identify ``visual 
references for the intended runway'' [see 14 CFR 91.175(l)(3)] to 
continue the approach below decision height or minimum descent 
altitude. Depending on atmospheric conditions and the strength of 
infrared energy emitted and/or reflected from the scene, the pilot can 
see these visual references in the image better than can be seen 
through the window without EFVS.
    Scene contrast detected by infrared sensors can be much different 
from that detected by natural pilot vision. On a dark night, thermal 
differences of objects which are not detectable by the naked eye are 
easily detected by many imaging infrared systems. On the other hand, 
contrasting colors in visual wavelengths may be distinguished by the 
naked eye but not by an imaging infrared system. Where thermal contrast 
in the scene is sufficiently detectable, the pilot can recognize shapes 
and patterns of certain visual references in the infrared image. 
However, depending on conditions, those shapes and patterns in the 
infrared image can appear significantly different than they would with 
normal vision. Considering these factors, the EFVS image needs to be 
evaluated to determine that it can be accurately interpreted by the 
pilot.
    The EFVS image may improve the pilot's ability to detect and 
identify items of interest. However, the EFVS needs to be evaluated to 
determine that the imagery allows the pilot to perform the normal 
duties of the flight crew and adequately see outside the window through 
the image, consistent with the safety intent of Sec.  25.773(a)(2).
    Compared to a HUD displaying the EFVS image and symbology, a HUD 
that only displays stroke-written symbols is easier to see through. 
Stroke symbology illuminates a small fraction of the total display area 
of the HUD, leaving much of that area free of reflected light that 
could interfere with the pilot's view out the window through the 
display. However, unlike stroke symbology, the video image illuminates 
most of the total display area of the HUD (approximately 30 degrees 
horizontally and 25 degrees vertically) which is a significant fraction 
of the pilot-compartment view. The pilot cannot see around the larger 
illuminated portions of the video image, but must see the outside scene 
through it.
    Unlike the pilot's external view, the EFVS image is a monochrome, 
two-dimensional display. Many, but not all, of the depth cues found in 
the natural view are also found in the image. The quality of the EFVS 
image and the level of EFVS infrared-sensor performance could depend 
significantly on conditions of the atmospheric and external light 
sources. The pilot needs adequate control of sensor gain and image 
brightness, which can significantly affect image quality and 
transparency (i.e., the ability to see the outside view through the 
image). Certain system characteristics could create distracting and 
confusing display artifacts. Finally, because this is a sensor-based 
system intended to provide a conformal perspective corresponding with 
the outside scene, the system must be able to ensure accurate 
alignment.
    Therefore, safety standards are needed for each of the following 
factors:
     An acceptable degree of image transparency;
     Image alignment;
     Lack of significant distortion; and
     The potential for pilot confusion or misleading 
information.
    Section 25.773, Pilot compartment view, specifies that ``Each pilot 
compartment must be free of glare and reflection that could interfere 
with the normal duties of the minimum flight crew * * *.'' In issuing 
Sec.  25.773, the FAA did not anticipate the development of the EFVS 
and does not consider Sec.  25.773 to be adequate to address the 
specific issues related to such a system. Therefore, the FAA has 
determined that special conditions are needed to address the specific 
issues particular to the installation and use of an EFVS.

Discussion

    The EFVS is intended to function by presenting an enhanced view 
during the approach. This enhanced view would help the pilot to see and 
recognize external visual references, as required by Sec.  91.175(l), 
and to visually monitor the integrity of the approach, as described in 
FAA Order 6750.24D (``Instrument Landing System and Ancillary 
Electronic Component Configuration and Performance Requirements,'' 
dated March 1, 2000).
    Based on this approved functionality, users would seek to obtain 
operational approval to conduct approaches, including approaches to 
Type I runways, in visibility conditions much lower than those for 
conventional Category I.
    The purpose of these special conditions is to ensure that the EFVS 
to be installed can perform the following functions:
     Present an enhanced view that would aid the pilot during 
the approach.
     Provide enhanced flight visibility to the pilot that is no 
less than the visibility prescribed in the standard instrument approach 
procedure.
     Display an image that the pilot can use to detect and 
identify the ``visual references for the intended runway'' required by 
Sec.  91.175(l)(3) to continue the approach with vertical guidance to 
100 feet height above the touchdown-zone elevation.
    Depending on the atmospheric conditions and the particular visual 
references that happen to be distinctly visible and detectable in the 
EFVS image, these functions would support its use by the pilot to 
visually monitor the integrity of the approach path.
    Compliance with these special conditions does not affect the 
applicability of any of the requirements of the operating regulations 
(i.e., 14 CFR parts 91, 121, and 135). Furthermore, use of the EFVS 
does not change the approach minima prescribed in the standard 
instrument-approach procedure being used; published minima still apply.
    The FAA certification of this EFVS is limited as follows:
     The infrared-based EFVS image will not be certified as a 
means to satisfy the requirements for descent below 100 feet height 
above touchdown (HAT).
     The EFVS may be used as a supplemental device to enhance 
the pilot's situational awareness during any phase of flight or 
operation in which its safe use has been established.
    An EFVS image may provide an enhanced image of the scene that may 
compensate for any reduction in the clear outside view of the visual 
field framed by the HUD combiner. The pilot must be able to use this 
combination of information seen in the image and the natural view of 
the outside scene, as seen through the image as safely and effectively 
as the pilot would use a pilot-compartment view without an EVS

[[Page 47179]]

image, and that is compliant with Sec.  25.773. This is the fundamental 
objective of the special conditions.
    The FAA will also apply additional certification criteria, not as 
special conditions, for compliance with related regulatory 
requirements, such as Sec. Sec.  25.1301 and 25.1309. These additional 
criteria address certain image characteristics, installation, 
demonstration, and system safety.
    Image-characteristic criteria include the following:
     Resolution,
     Luminance,
     Luminance uniformity,
     Low level luminance,
     Contrast variation,
     Display quality,
     Display dynamics (e.g., jitter, flicker, update rate, and 
lag), and
     Brightness controls.
    Installation criteria address visibility and access to EFVS 
controls and integration of EFVS in the cockpit.
    The EFVS demonstration criteria address the flight and 
environmental conditions that need to be covered.
    The FAA also intends to apply certification criteria relevant to 
high-intensity radiated fields (HIRF) and lightning protection.

Applicability

    As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to 
Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X airplanes. Should Dassault Aviation 
apply at a later date for a change to the type certificate to include 
another model incorporating the same novel or unusual design feature, 
the special conditions would apply to that model as well.

Conclusion

    This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features 
on Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X changed by Dassault Aviation. It 
is not a rule of general applicability.
    The substance of these special conditions has been subjected to the 
notice and comment period in several prior instances and has been 
derived without substantive change from those previously issued. It is 
unlikely that prior public comment would result in a significant change 
from the substance contained herein. Therefore, because a delay would 
significantly affect the certification of the airplane, which is 
imminent, the FAA has determined that prior public notice and comment 
are unnecessary and impracticable, and good cause exists for adopting 
these special conditions upon issuance. The FAA is requesting comments 
to allow interested persons to submit views that may not have been 
submitted in response to the prior opportunities for comment described 
above.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25

    Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping 
requirements.

0
The authority citation for these special conditions is as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 44704.

The Special Conditions

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the 
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of 
the type-certification basis for Dassault Aviation Model Falcon 7X.
    1. The EFVS imagery on the HUD must not degrade the safety of 
flight or interfere with the effective use of outside visual references 
for required pilot tasks during any phase of flight in which it is to 
be used.
    2. To avoid unacceptable interference with the safe and effective 
use of the pilot-compartment view, the EFVS device must meet the 
following requirements:
    a. The EFVS design must minimize unacceptable display 
characteristics or artifacts (e.g., noise, ``burlap'' overlay, running 
water droplets) that obscure the desired image of the scene, impair the 
pilot's ability to detect and identify visual references, mask flight 
hazards, distract the pilot, or otherwise degrade task performance or 
safety.
    b. Control of EFVS display brightness must be sufficiently 
effective in dynamically changing background (ambient) lighting 
conditions to prevent full or partial blooming of the display that 
would distract the pilot, impair the pilot's ability to detect and 
identify visual references, mask flight hazards, or otherwise degrade 
task performance or safety. If automatic control for image brightness 
is not provided, it must be shown that a single manual setting is 
satisfactory for the range of lighting conditions encountered during a 
time-critical, high-workload phase of flight (e.g., low-visibility 
instrument approach).
    c. A readily accessible control must be provided that permits the 
pilot to immediately deactivate and reactivate display of the EFVS 
image on demand.
    d. The EFVS image on the HUD must not impair the pilot's use of 
guidance information or degrade the presentation and pilot awareness of 
essential flight information displayed on the HUD, such as alerts, 
airspeed, attitude, altitude and direction, approach guidance, 
windshear guidance, TCAS resolution advisories, or unusual-attitude-
recovery cues.
    e. The EFVS image and the HUD symbols, which are spatially 
referenced to the pitch scale, outside view and image, must be scaled 
and aligned (i.e., conformal) to the external scene. In addition, the 
EFVS image and the HUD symbols--when considered singly or in 
combination--must not be misleading, cause pilot confusion, or increase 
workload. Some airplane attitudes or cross-wind conditions may cause 
certain symbols (e.g., the zero-pitch line or flight-path vector) to 
reach field of view limits such that they cannot be positioned 
conformally with the image and external scene. In such cases, these 
symbols may be displayed, but with an altered appearance which makes 
the pilot aware that they are no longer displayed conformally (for 
example, ``ghosting'').
    f. A HUD system used to display EFVS images must, if previously 
certified, continue to meet all of the requirements of the original 
approval.
    3. The safety and performance of the pilot tasks associated with 
the use of the pilot-compartment view must be not be degraded by the 
display of the EFVS image. These tasks include the following:
    a. Detection, accurate identification, and maneuvering, as 
necessary, to avoid traffic, terrain, obstacles, and other hazards of 
flight.
    b. Accurate identification and utilization of visual references 
required for every task relevant to the phase of flight.
    4. Compliance with these special conditions will enable the EFVS to 
be used during instrument approaches in accordance with Sec.  91.175(l) 
such that it may be found acceptable for the following intended 
functions:
    a. Presenting an image that would aid the pilot during a straight-
in instrument approach.
    b. Enabling the pilot to determine that there is sufficient 
``enhanced flight visibility,'' as required by Sec.  91.175(l)(2), for 
descent and operation below minimum descent altitude/decision height.
    c. Enabling the pilot to use the EFVS imagery to detect and 
identify the ``visual references for the intended runway,'' required by 
Sec.  91.175(l)(3), to continue the approach with vertical guidance to 
100 feet height above touchdown-zone elevation.
    5. Use of EFVS for instrument-approach operations must be in 
accordance with the provisions of Sec.  91.175(l) and (m). Appropriate 
limitations must be stated in the Operating Limitations section of the 
airplane flight manual to prohibit the

[[Page 47180]]

use of the EFVS for functions that have not been found to be 
acceptable.

    Issued in Renton, Washington, on July 27, 2010.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-19073 Filed 8-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.