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