Special Conditions: Embraer S.A., Model EMB-550 Airplane; Interaction of Systems and Structures, 70941-70945 [2012-28768]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
70941
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
Vol. 77, No. 229
Wednesday, November 28, 2012
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains notices to the public of the proposed
issuance of rules and regulations. The
purpose of these notices is to give interested
persons an opportunity to participate in the
rule making prior to the adoption of the final
rules.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 25
[Docket No. FAA–2012–1246; Notice No. 25–
12–16–SC]
Special Conditions: Embraer S.A.,
Model EMB–550 Airplane; Interaction
of Systems and Structures
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed special
conditions.
AGENCY:
This action proposes special
conditions for the Embraer S.A. Model
EMB–550 airplane. This airplane will
have a novel or unusual design
feature(s) associated with the interaction
of systems and structures. The
applicable airworthiness regulations do
not contain adequate or appropriate
safety standards for this design feature.
These proposed 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: Send your comments on or
before January 14, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Send comments identified
by docket number [FAA–2012–1246]
using any of the following methods:
• Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov/ and follow
the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
• Mail: Send comments to Docket
Operations, M–30, U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Room W12–140, West
Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC
20590–0001.
• Hand Delivery or Courier: Take
comments to Docket Operations in
Room W12–140 of the West Building
Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 8
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except federal holidays.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:16 Nov 27, 2012
Jkt 229001
• Fax: Fax comments to Docket
Operations at 202–493–2251.
Privacy: The FAA will post all
comments it receives, without change,
to https://www.regulations.gov/,
including any personal information the
commenter provides. Using the search
function of the docket Web site, anyone
can find and read the electronic form of
all comments received into any FAA
docket, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or
signing the comment for an association,
business, labor union, etc.). DOT’s
complete Privacy Act Statement can be
found in the Federal Register published
on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–19478),
as well as at
https://DocketsInfo.dot.gov/.
Docket: Background documents or
comments received may be read at
https://www.regulations.gov/ at any time.
Follow the online instructions for
accessing the docket or go to the Docket
Operations in Room W12–140 of the
West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Todd Martin, FAA, Airframe and Cabin
Safety Branch, ANM–115, Transport
Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue
SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356;
telephone 425–227–1178; facsimile
425–227–1232.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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
specific portion of the special
conditions, explain the reason for any
recommended change, and include
supporting data.
We will consider all comments we
receive on or before the closing date for
comments. We may change these special
conditions based on the comments we
receive.
Background
On May 14, 2009, Embraer S.A.
applied for a type certificate for their
new Model EMB–550 airplane. The
Model EMB–550 airplane is the first of
a new family of jet airplanes designed
for corporate flight, fractional, charter,
and private owner operations. The
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
aircraft has a conventional configuration
with low wing and T-tail empennage.
The primary structure is metal with
composite empennage and control
surfaces. The Model EMB–550 airplane
is designed for 8 passengers, with a
maximum of 12 passengers. It is
equipped with two Honeywell
HTF7500–E medium bypass ratio
turbofan engines mounted on aft
fuselage pylons. Each engine produces
approximately 6,540 pounds of thrust
for normal takeoff. The primary flight
controls consist of hydraulically
powered fly-by-wire elevators, aileron
and rudder, controlled by the pilot or
copilot sidestick.
The Model Embraer EMB–550
airplane is equipped with systems that,
directly or as a result of failure or
malfunction, affect its structural
performance. Current regulations do not
take into account loads for the airplane
due to the effects of systems on
structural performance including
normal operation and failure conditions
with strength levels related to
probability of occurrence. Special
conditions are needed to account for
these features.
Type Certification Basis
Under the provisions of Title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 21.17,
Embraer S.A. must show that the Model
EMB–550 airplane meets the applicable
provisions of part 25, as amended by
Amendments 25–1 through 25–127
thereto.
If the Administrator finds that the
applicable airworthiness regulations
(i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain
adequate or appropriate safety standards
for the Model EMB–550 airplane
because of a novel or unusual design
feature, special conditions are
prescribed under the provisions of
§ 21.16.
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, the special
conditions would also apply to the other
model under § 21.101.
In addition to the applicable
airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Embraer S.A. Model
EMB–550 airplane must comply with
the fuel vent and exhaust emission
requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and the
E:\FR\FM\28NOP1.SGM
28NOP1
70942
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 28, 2012 / Proposed Rules
noise certification requirements of 14
CFR part 36 and the FAA must issue a
finding of regulatory adequacy under
§ 611 of Public Law 92–574, the ‘‘Noise
Control Act of 1972.’’
The FAA issues special conditions, as
defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in accordance
with § 11.38, and they become part of
the type-certification basis under
§ 21.17(a)(2).
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with
Novel or Unusual Design Features
The Embraer S.A. Model EMB–550
airplane is equipped with systems that,
directly or as a result of failure or
malfunction, affect its structural
performance. Current regulations do not
take into account loads for the airplane
due to the effects of systems on
structural performance including
normal operation and failure conditions
with strength levels related to
probability of occurrence. Special
conditions are needed to account for
these features.
These special conditions define
criteria to be used in the assessment of
the effects of these systems on
structures. The general approach of
accounting for the effect of system
failures on structural performance
would be extended to include any
system in which partial or complete
failure, alone or in combination with
other system partial or complete
failures, would affect structural
performance.
Discussion
These airplanes are equipped with
systems that, directly or as a result of
failure or malfunction, affect its
structural performance. Current
regulations do not take into account
loads for the aircraft due to the effects
of systems on structural performance
including normal operation and failure
conditions with strength levels related
to probability of occurrence. These
special conditions define criteria to be
used in the assessment of the effects of
these systems on structures.
Special conditions have been applied
on past airplane programs to require
consideration of the effects of systems
on structures. The regulatory authorities
and industry developed standardized
criteria in the Aviation Rulemaking
Advisory Committee (ARAC) forum
based on the criteria defined in
Advisory Circular 25.672, Active Flight
Controls, dated November 11, 1983. The
ARAC recommendations have been
incorporated in European Aviation
Safety Agency (EASA) Certification
Specifications (CS) 25.302 and CS 25
Appendix K. FAA rulemaking on this
subject is not complete, thus the need
for the special conditions.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:16 Nov 27, 2012
Jkt 229001
The proposed special conditions are
similar to those previously applied to
other airplane models and to CS 25.302.
The major differences between these
proposed special conditions and the
current CS 25.302 are as follows:
1. Both these special conditions and
CS 25.302 specify the design load
conditions to be considered. In
paragraphs 2(a)(1) and 2(b)(2)(i) of these
special conditions, the special
conditions clarify that, in some cases,
different load conditions are to be
considered due to other special
conditions or equivalent level of safety
findings.
2. Paragraph 2(b)(2)(i) of these special
conditions include the additional
ground-handling conditions of
§§ 25.493(d) and 25.503. These
conditions are added in case the
Embraer S.A. Model EMB–550 airplane
has systems that affect braking and
pivoting.
3. Both CS 25.302 and paragraph
(2)(d) of these special conditions allow
consideration of the probability of being
in a dispatched configuration when
assessing subsequent failures and
potential ‘‘continuation of flight’’ loads.
However, these special conditions also
allow using probability when assessing
failures that induce loads at the ‘‘time
of occurrence,’’ whereas CS 25.302 does
not.
Applicability
As discussed above, these special
conditions are applicable to the Embraer
S.A. Model EMB–550 airplane. Should
Embraer S.A. 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 one model
of airplanes. It is not a rule of general
applicability.
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 Proposed Special Conditions
Accordingly, the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) proposes the
following special conditions as part of
the type certification basis for Embraer
S.A. Model EMB–550 airplanes to
address the effects of systems on
structures.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
1. General Interaction of Systems and
Structures
For airplanes equipped with systems
that affect structural performance, either
directly or as a result of a failure or
malfunction, the influence of these
systems and their failure conditions
must be taken into account when
showing compliance with the
requirements of Title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 25
subparts C and D.
The following criteria must be used
for showing compliance with these
special conditions for airplanes
equipped with flight control systems,
autopilots, stability augmentation
systems, load alleviation systems, fuel
management systems, and other systems
that either directly or as a result of
failure or malfunction affect structural
performance. If these special conditions
are used for other systems, it may be
necessary to adapt the criteria to the
specific system.
(a) The criteria defined herein only
address the direct structural
consequences of the system responses
and performances and cannot be
considered in isolation but should be
included in the overall safety evaluation
of the airplane. These criteria may in
some instances duplicate standards
already established for this evaluation.
These criteria are only applicable to
structure in which failure could prevent
continued safe flight and landing.
Specific criteria that define acceptable
limits on handling characteristics or
stability requirements when operating
in the system degraded or inoperative
mode are not provided in these special
conditions.
(b) The following definitions are
applicable to these special conditions.
(1) Structural performance: Capability
of the airplane to meet the structural
requirements of 14 CFR part 25.
(2) Flight limitations: Limitations that
can be applied to the airplane flight
conditions following an in-flight
occurrence and that are included in the
flight manual (e.g., speed limitations
and avoidance of severe weather
conditions).
(3) Operational limitations:
Limitations, including flight limitations,
that can be applied to the airplane
operating conditions before dispatch
(e.g., fuel, payload, and Master
Minimum Equipment List limitations).
(4) Probabilistic terms: The
probabilistic terms (i.e., probable,
improbable, and extremely improbable)
used in these special conditions are the
same as those used in § 25.1309.
(5) Failure condition: The term
‘‘failure condition’’ is the same as that
E:\FR\FM\28NOP1.SGM
28NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 28, 2012 / Proposed Rules
70943
design features that will not allow it to
exceed those limit conditions.
(3) The airplane must meet the
aeroelastic stability requirements of
§ 25.629.
(b) System in the failure condition.
For any system failure condition not
shown to be extremely improbable, the
following apply:
(1) At the time of occurrence. Starting
from 1-g level flight conditions, a
realistic scenario, including pilot
corrective actions, must be established
to determine the loads occurring at the
time of failure and immediately after
failure.
(i) For static strength substantiation,
these loads, multiplied by an
appropriate factor of safety that is
related to the probability of occurrence
of the failure, are ultimate loads to be
considered for design. The factor of
safety (FS) is defined in Figure 1.
(ii) For residual strength
substantiation, the airplane must be able
to withstand two-thirds of the ultimate
loads defined in paragraph 2(b)(1)(i) of
these special conditions. For
pressurized cabins, these loads must be
combined with the normal operating
differential pressure.
(iii) Freedom from aeroelastic
instability must be shown up to the
speeds defined in § 25.629(b)(2). For
failure conditions that result in speeds
beyond VC/MC, freedom from
aeroelastic instability must be shown to
increased speeds, so that the margins
intended by § 25.629(b)(2) are
maintained.
(iv) Failures of the system that result
in forced structural vibrations (e.g.,
oscillatory failures) must not produce
loads that could result in detrimental
deformation of primary structure.
(2) For the continuation of the flight.
For the airplane, in the system failed
state and considering any appropriate
reconfiguration and flight limitations,
the following apply:
(i) The loads derived from the
following conditions (or conditions
defined by special conditions or
equivalent level of safety in lieu of the
following special conditions) at speeds
up to VC/MC, or the speed limitation
prescribed for the remainder of the
flight, must be determined:
(A) The limit symmetrical
maneuvering conditions specified in
§§ 25.331 and 25.345.
(B) The limit gust and turbulence
conditions specified in §§ 25.341 and
25.345.
(C) The limit rolling conditions
specified in § 25.349 and the limit
unsymmetrical conditions specified in
§§ 25.367, 25.427(b), and 25.427(c).
(D) The limit yaw maneuvering
conditions specified in § 25.351.
(E) The limit ground loading
conditions specified in §§ 25.473,
25.491, 25.493(d) and 25.503.
(ii) For static strength substantiation,
each part of the structure must be able
to withstand the loads in paragraph
2(b)(2)(i) of these special conditions
multiplied by a factor of safety
depending on the probability of being in
this failure state. The factor of safety
(FS) is defined in Figure 2.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:16 Nov 27, 2012
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\28NOP1.SGM
28NOP1
EP28NO12.001</GPH>
2. Effect on Systems and Structures
The following criteria are used in
determining the influence of a system
and its failure conditions on the
airplane structure.
(a) System fully operative. With the
system fully operative, the following
apply:
(1) Limit loads must be derived in all
normal operating configurations of the
system from all the limit conditions
specified in Subpart C (or defined by
special condition or equivalent level of
safety in lieu of those specified in
Subpart C), taking into account any
special behavior of such a system or
associated functions or any effect on the
structural performance of the airplane
that may occur up to the limit loads. In
particular, any significant nonlinearity
(rate of displacement of control surface,
thresholds or any other system
nonlinearities) must be accounted for in
a realistic or conservative way when
deriving limit loads from limit
conditions.
(2) The airplane must meet the
strength requirements of part 25 (static
strength, residual strength), using the
specified factors to derive ultimate loads
from the limit loads defined above. The
effect of nonlinearities must be
investigated beyond limit conditions to
ensure the behavior of the system
presents no anomaly compared to the
behavior below limit conditions.
However, conditions beyond limit
conditions need not be considered when
it can be shown that the airplane has
used in § 25.1309. However, these
special conditions apply only to system
failure conditions that affect the
structural performance of the airplane
(e.g., system failure conditions that
induce loads, change the response of the
airplane to inputs such as gusts or pilot
actions, or lower flutter margins).
70944
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 28, 2012 / Proposed Rules
fatigue or damage tolerance then their
effects must be taken into account.
(v) Freedom from aeroelastic
instability must be shown up to a speed
determined from Figure 3. Flutter
clearance speeds V′ and V″ may be
based on the speed limitation specified
for the remainder of the flight using the
margins defined by § 25.629(b).
failure conditions to be less than 10¥9,
criteria other than those specified in this
paragraph may be used for structural
substantiation to show continued safe
flight and landing.
(c) Failure indications. For system
failure detection and indication, the
following apply:
(1) The system must be checked for
failure conditions, not extremely
improbable, that degrade the structural
capability below the level required by
14 CFR part 25 or significantly reduce
the reliability of the remaining system.
As far as reasonably practicable, the
flightcrew must be made aware of these
failures before flight. Certain elements
of the control system, such as
mechanical and hydraulic components,
may use special periodic inspections,
and electronic components may use
daily checks, in lieu of detection and
indication systems to achieve the
objective of this requirement. These
certification maintenance requirements
must be limited to components that are
not readily detectable by normal
detection and indication systems and
where service history shows that
inspections will provide an adequate
level of safety.
(2) The existence of any failure
condition, not extremely improbable,
during flight that could significantly
affect the structural capability of the
airplane and for which the associated
reduction in airworthiness can be
minimized by suitable flight limitations,
must be signaled to the flightcrew. For
example, failure conditions that result
in a factor of safety between the airplane
strength and the loads of Subpart C
below 1.25, or flutter margins below V″,
(vi) Freedom from aeroelastic
instability must also be shown up to V′
in Figure 3 above, for any probable
system failure condition combined with
any damage required or selected for
investigation by § 25.571(b).
(3) Consideration of certain failure
conditions may be required by other
sections of 14 CFR part 25 regardless of
calculated system reliability. Where
analysis shows the probability of these
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:16 Nov 27, 2012
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\28NOP1.SGM
28NOP1
EP28NO12.002</GPH> EP28NO12.003</GPH>
(iii) For residual strength
substantiation, the airplane must be able
to withstand two-thirds of the ultimate
loads defined in paragraph 2(b)(2)(ii) of
the special conditions. For pressurized
cabins, these loads must be combined
with the normal operating differential
pressure.
(iv) If the loads induced by the failure
condition have a significant effect on
V′ = Clearance speed as defined by
§ 25.629(b)(2).
V″ = Clearance speed as defined by
§ 25.629(b)(1).
Qj = (Tj)(Pj) where:
Tj = Average time spent in failure condition
j (in hours)
Pj = Probability of occurrence of failure mode
j (per hour)
Note: If Pj is greater than 10¥3 per flight
hour, then the flutter clearance speed
must not be less than V″.
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with
Qj = (Tj)(Pj) where:
Tj = Average time spent in failure condition
j (in hours)
Pj = Probability of occurrence of failure mode
j (per hour)
Note: If Pj is greater than 10¥3 per flight
hour then a 1.5 factor of safety must be
applied to all limit load conditions specified
in Subpart C.
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 28, 2012 / Proposed Rules
must be signaled to the flightcrew
during flight.
(d) Dispatch with known failure
conditions. If the airplane is to be
dispatched in a known system failure
condition that affects structural
performance, or affects the reliability of
the remaining system to maintain
structural performance, then the
provisions of these special conditions
must be met, including the provisions of
paragraph 2(a) for the dispatched
condition, and paragraph 2(b) for
subsequent failures. Expected
operational limitations may be taken
into account in establishing Pj as the
probability of failure occurrence for
determining the safety margin in Figure
1 of these special conditions. Flight
limitations and expected operational
limitations may be taken into account in
establishing Qj as the combined
probability of being in the dispatched
failure condition and the subsequent
failure condition for the safety margins
in Figures 2 and 3 of these special
conditions. These limitations must be
such that the probability of being in this
combined failure state and then
subsequently encountering limit load
conditions is extremely improbable. No
reduction in these safety margins is
allowed if the subsequent system failure
rate is greater than 10¥3 per hour.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on
November 21, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012–28768 Filed 11–27–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Bureau of Industry and Security
15 CFR Part 774
[Docket No. 120330233–2160–01]
RIN 0694–AF64
Revisions to the Export Administration
Regulations (EAR): Control of Military
Electronic Equipment and Related
Items the President Determines No
Longer Warrant Control Under the
United States Munitions List (USML)
Bureau of Industry and
Security, Department of Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
AGENCY:
This proposed rule describes
how certain articles the President
determines no longer warrant control
under the United States Munitions List
(USML) would be controlled on the
Commerce Control List (CCL). Those
erowe on DSK2VPTVN1PROD with
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
13:16 Nov 27, 2012
Jkt 229001
articles and the USML categories under
which they are currently controlled are:
Military electronics (Category XI) and
certain cryogenic and superconductive
equipment designed for installation in
military vehicles and that can operate
while in motion (Categories VI, VII, VIII,
and XV). Military electronics and
related items would be controlled by
new Export Control Classification
Numbers (ECCNs) 3A611, 3B611,
3D611, and 3E611 proposed by this rule.
Cryogenic and superconducting
equipment for military vehicles and
related items would be controlled under
new ECCNs 9A620, 9B620, 9D620, and
9E620. This proposed rule also would
amend ECCNs 7A001 and 7A101 to
apply the missile technology reason for
control only to items in those ECCNs on
the Missile Technology Control Regime
(MTCR) Annex.
This is one in a planned series of
proposed rules describing how various
types of articles the President
determines, as part of the
Administration’s Export Control Reform
Initiative, no longer warrant USML
control, would be controlled on the CCL
and by the EAR. This proposed rule is
being published in conjunction with a
proposed rule from the Department of
State, Directorate of Defense Trade
Controls, which would amend the list of
articles controlled by USML Category
XI.
DATES: Comments must be received by
January 28, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. The identification
number for this rulemaking is BIS–
2012–0045.
• By email directly to
publiccomments@bis.doc.gov. Include
RIN 0694–AF64 in the subject line.
• By mail or delivery to Regulatory
Policy Division, Bureau of Industry and
Security, U.S. Department of Commerce,
Room 2099B, 14th Street and
Pennsylvania Avenue NW., Washington,
DC 20230. Refer to RIN 0694–AF64.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brian Baker, Director, Electronics and
Materials Division, Office of National
Security and Technology Transfer
Controls, (202) 482–5534,
brian.baker@bis.doc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On July 15, 2011, as part of the
Administration’s ongoing Export
Control Reform Initiative, BIS published
a proposed rule (76 FR 41958) (‘‘the July
15 proposed rule’’) that set forth a
framework for how articles the
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
70945
President determines, in accordance
with section 38(f) of the Arms Export
Control Act (AECA) (22 U.S.C. 2778(f)),
would no longer warrant control on the
United States Munitions List (USML)
instead would be controlled on the
Commerce Control List (CCL).
BIS also published a proposed rule
(76 FR 68675, November 7, 2011),
primarily dealing with aircraft and
related items (‘‘the November 7
proposed rule’’) that made additions
and modifications to some of the
provisions of the July 15 proposed rule.
Following the structure of the July 15
and November 7 proposed rules, this
proposed rule describes BIS’s proposal
for controlling under the EAR’s CCL
certain military electronic equipment
and related articles now controlled by
the ITAR’s USML Category XI. This
proposed rule also would specifically
implement in U.S. export control
regulations Category ML20 Munitions
List of the Wassenaar Arrangement on
Export Controls for Conventional Arms
and Dual-Use Goods and Technologies
(Wassenaar Arrangement Munitions List
or WAML), which pertains to certain
cryogenic and superconducting
equipment. These items are currently
controlled by ‘‘catch all’’ provisions of
the ITAR’s USML Categories VI, VII,
VIII, and XV. Finally, this proposed rule
would correct two ECCNs in CCL
Category 7 to apply the missile
technology reason for control only to
items that are on the MTCR Annex.
The changes described in this
proposed rule and the State
Department’s proposed amendment to
Category XI of the USML are based on
a review of Category XI by the Defense
Department, which worked with the
Departments of State and Commerce in
preparing the proposed amendments.
The review was focused on identifying
the types of articles that are now
controlled by USML Category XI that are
either (i) inherently military and
otherwise warrant control on the USML
or (ii) if it is of a type common to nonmilitary electronic equipment
applications, possess parameters or
characteristics that provide a critical
military or intelligence advantage to the
United States, and that are almost
exclusively available from the United
States. If an article satisfied one or both
of those criteria, the article remained on
the USML. If an article did not satisfy
either criterion but was nonetheless a
type of article that is, as a result of
differences in form and fit, ‘‘specially
designed’’ for military applications or
for the intelligence applications
described in proposed ECCN 3A611.b, it
was identified in the new ECCNs
proposed in this notice. The licensing
E:\FR\FM\28NOP1.SGM
28NOP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 229 (Wednesday, November 28, 2012)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 70941-70945]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-28768]
========================================================================
Proposed Rules
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains notices to the public of
the proposed issuance of rules and regulations. The purpose of these
notices is to give interested persons an opportunity to participate in
the rule making prior to the adoption of the final rules.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 229 / Wednesday, November 28, 2012 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 70941]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 25
[Docket No. FAA-2012-1246; Notice No. 25-12-16-SC]
Special Conditions: Embraer S.A., Model EMB-550 Airplane;
Interaction of Systems and Structures
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed special conditions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This action proposes special conditions for the Embraer S.A.
Model EMB-550 airplane. This airplane will have a novel or unusual
design feature(s) associated with the interaction of systems and
structures. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain
adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design feature. These
proposed 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: Send your comments on or before January 14, 2013.
ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number [FAA-2012-1246]
using any of the following methods:
Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/ and follow the online instructions for sending
your comments electronically.
Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Room
W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Hand Delivery or Courier: Take comments to Docket
Operations in Room W12-140 of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except federal holidays.
Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at 202-493-2251.
Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to https://www.regulations.gov/, including any personal
information the commenter provides. Using the search function of the
docket Web site, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all
comments received into any FAA docket, including the name of the
individual sending the comment (or signing the comment for an
association, business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act
Statement can be found in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477-19478), as well as at https://DocketsInfo.dot.gov/.
Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
https://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Todd Martin, FAA, Airframe and Cabin
Safety Branch, ANM-115, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-
3356; telephone 425-227-1178; facsimile 425-227-1232.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
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 specific portion of the special conditions, explain the
reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data.
We will consider all comments we receive on or before the closing
date for comments. We may change these special conditions based on the
comments we receive.
Background
On May 14, 2009, Embraer S.A. applied for a type certificate for
their new Model EMB-550 airplane. The Model EMB-550 airplane is the
first of a new family of jet airplanes designed for corporate flight,
fractional, charter, and private owner operations. The aircraft has a
conventional configuration with low wing and T-tail empennage. The
primary structure is metal with composite empennage and control
surfaces. The Model EMB-550 airplane is designed for 8 passengers, with
a maximum of 12 passengers. It is equipped with two Honeywell HTF7500-E
medium bypass ratio turbofan engines mounted on aft fuselage pylons.
Each engine produces approximately 6,540 pounds of thrust for normal
takeoff. The primary flight controls consist of hydraulically powered
fly-by-wire elevators, aileron and rudder, controlled by the pilot or
copilot sidestick.
The Model Embraer EMB-550 airplane is equipped with systems that,
directly or as a result of failure or malfunction, affect its
structural performance. Current regulations do not take into account
loads for the airplane due to the effects of systems on structural
performance including normal operation and failure conditions with
strength levels related to probability of occurrence. Special
conditions are needed to account for these features.
Type Certification Basis
Under the provisions of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14
CFR) 21.17, Embraer S.A. must show that the Model EMB-550 airplane
meets the applicable provisions of part 25, as amended by Amendments
25-1 through 25-127 thereto.
If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the Model EMB-550 airplane because of
a novel or unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed
under the provisions of Sec. 21.16.
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, the special conditions would also
apply to the other model under Sec. 21.101.
In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Embraer S.A. Model EMB-550 airplane must comply with
the fuel vent and exhaust emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and
the
[[Page 70942]]
noise certification requirements of 14 CFR part 36 and the FAA must
issue a finding of regulatory adequacy under Sec. 611 of Public Law
92-574, the ``Noise Control Act of 1972.''
The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec. 11.38, and they become part of the type-
certification basis under Sec. 21.17(a)(2).
Novel or Unusual Design Features
The Embraer S.A. Model EMB-550 airplane is equipped with systems
that, directly or as a result of failure or malfunction, affect its
structural performance. Current regulations do not take into account
loads for the airplane due to the effects of systems on structural
performance including normal operation and failure conditions with
strength levels related to probability of occurrence. Special
conditions are needed to account for these features.
These special conditions define criteria to be used in the
assessment of the effects of these systems on structures. The general
approach of accounting for the effect of system failures on structural
performance would be extended to include any system in which partial or
complete failure, alone or in combination with other system partial or
complete failures, would affect structural performance.
Discussion
These airplanes are equipped with systems that, directly or as a
result of failure or malfunction, affect its structural performance.
Current regulations do not take into account loads for the aircraft due
to the effects of systems on structural performance including normal
operation and failure conditions with strength levels related to
probability of occurrence. These special conditions define criteria to
be used in the assessment of the effects of these systems on
structures.
Special conditions have been applied on past airplane programs to
require consideration of the effects of systems on structures. The
regulatory authorities and industry developed standardized criteria in
the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) forum based on the
criteria defined in Advisory Circular 25.672, Active Flight Controls,
dated November 11, 1983. The ARAC recommendations have been
incorporated in European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) Certification
Specifications (CS) 25.302 and CS 25 Appendix K. FAA rulemaking on this
subject is not complete, thus the need for the special conditions.
The proposed special conditions are similar to those previously
applied to other airplane models and to CS 25.302. The major
differences between these proposed special conditions and the current
CS 25.302 are as follows:
1. Both these special conditions and CS 25.302 specify the design
load conditions to be considered. In paragraphs 2(a)(1) and 2(b)(2)(i)
of these special conditions, the special conditions clarify that, in
some cases, different load conditions are to be considered due to other
special conditions or equivalent level of safety findings.
2. Paragraph 2(b)(2)(i) of these special conditions include the
additional ground-handling conditions of Sec. Sec. 25.493(d) and
25.503. These conditions are added in case the Embraer S.A. Model EMB-
550 airplane has systems that affect braking and pivoting.
3. Both CS 25.302 and paragraph (2)(d) of these special conditions
allow consideration of the probability of being in a dispatched
configuration when assessing subsequent failures and potential
``continuation of flight'' loads. However, these special conditions
also allow using probability when assessing failures that induce loads
at the ``time of occurrence,'' whereas CS 25.302 does not.
Applicability
As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
Embraer S.A. Model EMB-550 airplane. Should Embraer S.A. 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 one model of airplanes. It is not a rule of general applicability.
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 Proposed Special Conditions
Accordingly, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) proposes the
following special conditions as part of the type certification basis
for Embraer S.A. Model EMB-550 airplanes to address the effects of
systems on structures.
1. General Interaction of Systems and Structures
For airplanes equipped with systems that affect structural
performance, either directly or as a result of a failure or
malfunction, the influence of these systems and their failure
conditions must be taken into account when showing compliance with the
requirements of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 25
subparts C and D.
The following criteria must be used for showing compliance with
these special conditions for airplanes equipped with flight control
systems, autopilots, stability augmentation systems, load alleviation
systems, fuel management systems, and other systems that either
directly or as a result of failure or malfunction affect structural
performance. If these special conditions are used for other systems, it
may be necessary to adapt the criteria to the specific system.
(a) The criteria defined herein only address the direct structural
consequences of the system responses and performances and cannot be
considered in isolation but should be included in the overall safety
evaluation of the airplane. These criteria may in some instances
duplicate standards already established for this evaluation. These
criteria are only applicable to structure in which failure could
prevent continued safe flight and landing. Specific criteria that
define acceptable limits on handling characteristics or stability
requirements when operating in the system degraded or inoperative mode
are not provided in these special conditions.
(b) The following definitions are applicable to these special
conditions.
(1) Structural performance: Capability of the airplane to meet the
structural requirements of 14 CFR part 25.
(2) Flight limitations: Limitations that can be applied to the
airplane flight conditions following an in-flight occurrence and that
are included in the flight manual (e.g., speed limitations and
avoidance of severe weather conditions).
(3) Operational limitations: Limitations, including flight
limitations, that can be applied to the airplane operating conditions
before dispatch (e.g., fuel, payload, and Master Minimum Equipment List
limitations).
(4) Probabilistic terms: The probabilistic terms (i.e., probable,
improbable, and extremely improbable) used in these special conditions
are the same as those used in Sec. 25.1309.
(5) Failure condition: The term ``failure condition'' is the same
as that
[[Page 70943]]
used in Sec. 25.1309. However, these special conditions apply only to
system failure conditions that affect the structural performance of the
airplane (e.g., system failure conditions that induce loads, change the
response of the airplane to inputs such as gusts or pilot actions, or
lower flutter margins).
2. Effect on Systems and Structures
The following criteria are used in determining the influence of a
system and its failure conditions on the airplane structure.
(a) System fully operative. With the system fully operative, the
following apply:
(1) Limit loads must be derived in all normal operating
configurations of the system from all the limit conditions specified in
Subpart C (or defined by special condition or equivalent level of
safety in lieu of those specified in Subpart C), taking into account
any special behavior of such a system or associated functions or any
effect on the structural performance of the airplane that may occur up
to the limit loads. In particular, any significant nonlinearity (rate
of displacement of control surface, thresholds or any other system
nonlinearities) must be accounted for in a realistic or conservative
way when deriving limit loads from limit conditions.
(2) The airplane must meet the strength requirements of part 25
(static strength, residual strength), using the specified factors to
derive ultimate loads from the limit loads defined above. The effect of
nonlinearities must be investigated beyond limit conditions to ensure
the behavior of the system presents no anomaly compared to the behavior
below limit conditions. However, conditions beyond limit conditions
need not be considered when it can be shown that the airplane has
design features that will not allow it to exceed those limit
conditions.
(3) The airplane must meet the aeroelastic stability requirements
of Sec. 25.629.
(b) System in the failure condition. For any system failure
condition not shown to be extremely improbable, the following apply:
(1) At the time of occurrence. Starting from 1-g level flight
conditions, a realistic scenario, including pilot corrective actions,
must be established to determine the loads occurring at the time of
failure and immediately after failure.
(i) For static strength substantiation, these loads, multiplied by
an appropriate factor of safety that is related to the probability of
occurrence of the failure, are ultimate loads to be considered for
design. The factor of safety (FS) is defined in Figure 1.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28NO12.001
(ii) For residual strength substantiation, the airplane must be
able to withstand two-thirds of the ultimate loads defined in paragraph
2(b)(1)(i) of these special conditions. For pressurized cabins, these
loads must be combined with the normal operating differential pressure.
(iii) Freedom from aeroelastic instability must be shown up to the
speeds defined in Sec. 25.629(b)(2). For failure conditions that
result in speeds beyond VC/MC, freedom from
aeroelastic instability must be shown to increased speeds, so that the
margins intended by Sec. 25.629(b)(2) are maintained.
(iv) Failures of the system that result in forced structural
vibrations (e.g., oscillatory failures) must not produce loads that
could result in detrimental deformation of primary structure.
(2) For the continuation of the flight. For the airplane, in the
system failed state and considering any appropriate reconfiguration and
flight limitations, the following apply:
(i) The loads derived from the following conditions (or conditions
defined by special conditions or equivalent level of safety in lieu of
the following special conditions) at speeds up to VC/
MC, or the speed limitation prescribed for the remainder of
the flight, must be determined:
(A) The limit symmetrical maneuvering conditions specified in
Sec. Sec. 25.331 and 25.345.
(B) The limit gust and turbulence conditions specified in
Sec. Sec. 25.341 and 25.345.
(C) The limit rolling conditions specified in Sec. 25.349 and the
limit unsymmetrical conditions specified in Sec. Sec. 25.367,
25.427(b), and 25.427(c).
(D) The limit yaw maneuvering conditions specified in Sec. 25.351.
(E) The limit ground loading conditions specified in Sec. Sec.
25.473, 25.491, 25.493(d) and 25.503.
(ii) For static strength substantiation, each part of the structure
must be able to withstand the loads in paragraph 2(b)(2)(i) of these
special conditions multiplied by a factor of safety depending on the
probability of being in this failure state. The factor of safety (FS)
is defined in Figure 2.
[[Page 70944]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28NO12.002
Qj = (Tj)(Pj) where:
Tj = Average time spent in failure condition j (in hours)
Pj = Probability of occurrence of failure mode j (per
hour)
Note: If Pj is greater than 10-3 per
flight hour then a 1.5 factor of safety must be applied to all limit
load conditions specified in Subpart C.
(iii) For residual strength substantiation, the airplane must be
able to withstand two-thirds of the ultimate loads defined in paragraph
2(b)(2)(ii) of the special conditions. For pressurized cabins, these
loads must be combined with the normal operating differential pressure.
(iv) If the loads induced by the failure condition have a
significant effect on fatigue or damage tolerance then their effects
must be taken into account.
(v) Freedom from aeroelastic instability must be shown up to a
speed determined from Figure 3. Flutter clearance speeds V' and V'' may
be based on the speed limitation specified for the remainder of the
flight using the margins defined by Sec. 25.629(b).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP28NO12.003
V' = Clearance speed as defined by Sec. 25.629(b)(2).
V'' = Clearance speed as defined by Sec. 25.629(b)(1).
Qj = (Tj)(Pj) where:
Tj = Average time spent in failure condition j (in hours)
Pj = Probability of occurrence of failure mode j (per
hour)
Note: If Pj is greater than 10-3 per flight
hour, then the flutter clearance speed must not be less than V''.
(vi) Freedom from aeroelastic instability must also be shown up to
V' in Figure 3 above, for any probable system failure condition
combined with any damage required or selected for investigation by
Sec. 25.571(b).
(3) Consideration of certain failure conditions may be required by
other sections of 14 CFR part 25 regardless of calculated system
reliability. Where analysis shows the probability of these failure
conditions to be less than 10-9, criteria other than those
specified in this paragraph may be used for structural substantiation
to show continued safe flight and landing.
(c) Failure indications. For system failure detection and
indication, the following apply:
(1) The system must be checked for failure conditions, not
extremely improbable, that degrade the structural capability below the
level required by 14 CFR part 25 or significantly reduce the
reliability of the remaining system. As far as reasonably practicable,
the flightcrew must be made aware of these failures before flight.
Certain elements of the control system, such as mechanical and
hydraulic components, may use special periodic inspections, and
electronic components may use daily checks, in lieu of detection and
indication systems to achieve the objective of this requirement. These
certification maintenance requirements must be limited to components
that are not readily detectable by normal detection and indication
systems and where service history shows that inspections will provide
an adequate level of safety.
(2) The existence of any failure condition, not extremely
improbable, during flight that could significantly affect the
structural capability of the airplane and for which the associated
reduction in airworthiness can be minimized by suitable flight
limitations, must be signaled to the flightcrew. For example, failure
conditions that result in a factor of safety between the airplane
strength and the loads of Subpart C below 1.25, or flutter margins
below V'',
[[Page 70945]]
must be signaled to the flightcrew during flight.
(d) Dispatch with known failure conditions. If the airplane is to
be dispatched in a known system failure condition that affects
structural performance, or affects the reliability of the remaining
system to maintain structural performance, then the provisions of these
special conditions must be met, including the provisions of paragraph
2(a) for the dispatched condition, and paragraph 2(b) for subsequent
failures. Expected operational limitations may be taken into account in
establishing Pj as the probability of failure occurrence for
determining the safety margin in Figure 1 of these special conditions.
Flight limitations and expected operational limitations may be taken
into account in establishing Qj as the combined probability
of being in the dispatched failure condition and the subsequent failure
condition for the safety margins in Figures 2 and 3 of these special
conditions. These limitations must be such that the probability of
being in this combined failure state and then subsequently encountering
limit load conditions is extremely improbable. No reduction in these
safety margins is allowed if the subsequent system failure rate is
greater than 10-3 per hour.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on November 21, 2012.
Ali Bahrami,
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-28768 Filed 11-27-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
