Harmonization of Airworthiness Standards-Gust and Maneuver Load Requirements, 73462-73469 [2014-28938]
Download as PDF
73462
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Public Protection Notification
The NRC may not conduct or sponsor,
and a person is not required to respond
to, a request for information or an
information collection requirement
unless the requesting document
displays a currently valid Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) control
number.
VI. Plain Writing
The Plain Writing Act of 2010 (Pub.
L. 111–274) requires Federal agencies to
write documents in a clear, concise, and
well-organized manner. The NRC has
written this document to be consistent
with the Plain Writing Act as well as the
Presidential Memorandum, ‘‘Plain
Language in Government Writing,’’
published June 10, 1998 (63 FR 31883).
VII. Backfitting and Issue Finality
The NRC has determined that the
amendments in this final rule do not
constitute backfitting and are not
inconsistent with any of the issue
finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52.
The amendments are non-substantive in
nature, and include adding three
inadvertently omitted addenda to
Section XI of the ASME B&PV Code to
the list of documents approved for
incorporation by reference and
correcting a footnote number. They
impose no new requirements and make
no substantive changes to the
regulations. The amendments do not
involve any provisions that would
impose backfits as defined in 10 CFR
part 50, or would be inconsistent with
the issue finality provisions in 10 CFR
part 52. For these reasons, the issuance
of the rule in final form would not
constitute backfitting or represent an
inconsistency with any of the issue
finality provisions in 10 CFR part 52.
Therefore, the NRC has not prepared
any additional documentation for this
final rule addressing backfitting or issue
finality.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
VIII. Congressional Review Act
In accordance with the Congressional
Review Act of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 801–808),
the NRC has determined that this action
is not a major rule and has verified this
determination with the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Office of Management and Budget.
List of Subjects in 10 CFR Part 50
Antitrust, Classified information,
Criminal penalties, Fire protection,
Incorporation by reference,
Intergovernmental relations, Nuclear
power plants and reactors, Radiation
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:05 Dec 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
protection, Reactor siting criteria,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
For the reasons set out in the
preamble and under the authority of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended;
the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974,
as amended; and 5 U.S.C. 552 and 553,
the NRC is adopting the following
amendments to 10 CFR part 50.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Cindy Bladey,
Chief, Rules, Announcements, and Directives
Branch, Division of Administrative Services,
Office of Administration.
PART 50—DOMESTIC LICENSING OF
PRODUCTION AND UTILIZATION
FACILITIES
Federal Aviation Administration
1. The authority citation for part 50
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: Atomic Energy Act secs. 102,
103, 104, 105, 147, 149, 161, 181, 182, 183,
186, 189, 223, 234 (42 U.S.C. 2132, 2133,
2134, 2135, 2167, 2169, 2201, 2231, 2232,
2233, 2236, 2239, 2273, 2282); Energy
Reorganization Act secs. 201, 202, 206 (42
U.S.C. 5841, 5842, 5846); Nuclear Waste
Policy Act sec. 306 (42 U.S.C. 10226);
Government Paperwork Elimination Act sec.
1704 (44 U.S.C. 3504 note); Energy Policy Act
of 2005, Pub. L. 109–58, 119 Stat. 194 (2005).
Section 50.7 also issued under Pub. L. 95–
601, sec. 10, as amended by Pub. L. 102–486,
sec. 2902 (42 U.S.C. 5851). Section 50.10 also
issued under Atomic Energy Act secs. 101,
185 (42 U.S.C. 2131, 2235); National
Environmental Protection Act sec. 102 (42
U.S.C. 4332). Sections 50.13, 50.54(d), and
50.103 also issued under Atomic Energy Act
sec. 108 (42 U.S.C. 2138). Sections 50.23,
50.35, 50.55, and 50.56 also issued under
Atomic Energy Act sec. 185 (42 U.S.C. 2235).
Appendix Q also issued under National
Environmental Protection Act sec. 102 (42
U.S.C. 4332). Sections 50.34 and 50.54 also
issued under sec. 204 (42 U.S.C. 5844).
Sections 50.58, 50.91, and 50.92 also issued
under Pub. L. 97–415 (42 U.S.C. 2239).
Section 50.78 also issued under Atomic
Energy Act sec. 122 (42 U.S.C. 2152).
Sections 50.80–50.81 also issued under
Atomic Energy Act sec. 184 (42 U.S.C. 2234).
2. In § 50.55a, add paragraphs
(a)(1)(ii)(B)(5) through (7) to read as
follows:
■
§ 50.55a
Codes and standards.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) * * *
(B) * * *
(5) 1975 Winter Addenda,
(6) 1976 Summer Addenda, and
(7) 1976 Winter Addenda.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 50.55a
[Amended]
3. In § 50.55a, paragraph (e)(1), in the
second sentence, remove footnote ‘‘9’’
and add, in its place, footnote ‘‘7’’.
■
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 8th day
of December 2014.
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
[FR Doc. 2014–29037 Filed 12–10–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
14 CFR Part 25
[Docket No.: FAA–2013–0142; Amdt. No.
25–141]
RIN 2120–AK12
Harmonization of Airworthiness
Standards—Gust and Maneuver Load
Requirements
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
This final rule amends certain
airworthiness regulations for transport
category airplanes, based on
recommendations from the FAAsponsored Aviation Rulemaking
Advisory Committee (ARAC). This
amendment eliminates regulatory
differences between the airworthiness
standards of the FAA and European
Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). It does
not add new requirements beyond what
manufacturers currently meet for EASA
certification and does not affect current
industry design practices. This final rule
revises the pitch maneuver design loads
criteria; revises the gust and turbulence
design loads criteria; revises the
application of gust loads to engine
mounts, high lift devices, and other
control surfaces; adds a ‘‘round-theclock’’ discrete gust criterion and a
multi-axis discrete gust criterion for
airplanes equipped with wing-mounted
engines; revises the engine torque loads
criteria; adds an engine failure dynamic
load condition; revises the ground gust
design loads criteria; revises the criteria
used to establish the rough air design
speed; and requires the establishment of
a rough air Mach number.
DATES: Effective February 9, 2015.
ADDRESSES: For information on where to
obtain copies of rulemaking documents
and other information related to this
final rule, see ‘‘How To Obtain
Additional Information’’ in the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical questions concerning this
action, contact Todd Martin, Airframe
and Cabin Safety Branch, ANM–115,
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\11DER1.SGM
11DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft
Certification Service, Federal Aviation
Administration, 1601 Lind Avenue SW.,
Renton, WA 98057–3356; telephone
(425) 227–1178; facsimile (425) 227–
1232; email Todd.Martin@faa.gov.
For legal questions concerning this
action, contact Sean Howe, Office of the
Regional Counsel, ANM–7, Federal
Aviation Administration, 1601 Lind
Avenue SW., Renton, Washington
98057–3356; telephone (425) 227–2591;
facsimile (425) 227–1007; email
Sean.Howe@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority for This Rulemaking
The FAA’s authority to issue rules on
aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the
United States Code. Subtitle I, Section
106 describes the authority of the FAA
Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the
scope of the agency’s authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated
under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section
44701, ‘‘General Requirements.’’ Under
that section, the FAA is charged with
promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in
air commerce by prescribing regulations
and minimum standards for the design
and performance of aircraft that the
Administrator finds necessary for safety
in air commerce. This regulation is
within the scope of that authority. It
prescribes new safety standards for the
design and operation of transport
category airplanes.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
I. Overview of Final Rule
The FAA is amending Title 14, Code
of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Part 25
as described below. This action
harmonizes part 25 requirements with
the corresponding requirements in Book
1 of the EASA Certification
Specifications and Acceptable Means of
Compliance for Large Aeroplanes (CS–
25). As such, this action—
1. Revises § 25.331, ‘‘Symmetric
maneuvering conditions,’’ to prescribe
both positive and negative checked
pitch maneuver loads that take into
account the size of the airplane and any
effects of the flight control system. The
introductory paragraph, § 25.331(c), is
revised by moving some criteria to
§ 25.331(c)(2) where those criteria
apply.
2. Removes appendix G to part 25,
‘‘Continuous Gust Design Criteria,’’ and
§ 25.341(b) now clearly sets forth the
continuous turbulence requirement.
3. Revises § 25.341, ‘‘Gust and
turbulence loads,’’ to—
• Remove the optional mission
analysis method currently specified in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:05 Dec 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
appendix G in favor of the design
envelope analysis method.
• Update the turbulence intensity
criteria in § 25.341(b) to take into
account in-service measurements of
derived gust intensities.
• Update § 25.341(a) to require
evaluation of discrete gust conditions at
airplane speeds from design speed for
maximum gust intensity, VB, to design
cruising speed, VC, (previously required
only at VC) and to specify reference gust
velocities up to 60,000 feet, rather than
the previously specified 50,000 feet.
• Add a new paragraph § 25.341(c)
that specifies a ‘‘round-the-clock’’
discrete gust criterion and a multi-axis
discrete gust criterion for airplanes
equipped with wing-mounted engines.
4. Revises § 25.343, ‘‘Design fuel and
oil loads,’’ § 25.345, ‘‘High lift devices,’’
§ 25.371, ‘‘Gyroscopic loads,’’ § 25.373,
‘‘Speed control devices,’’ and § 25.391,
‘‘Control surface loads: General,’’ by
adding to each of these regulations a
requirement to evaluate the continuous
turbulence loads criteria in § 25.341(b).
5. Revises § 25.361, ‘‘Engine and
auxiliary power unit torque,’’ to—
• Remove the requirement to assess
engine torque loads due to engine
structural failures (this requirement is
re-established in the new § 25.362,
outlined below).
• Provide specific engine torque load
criteria for auxiliary power unit
installations.
• Remove the requirements that apply
to reciprocating engines.
• Change the title of § 25.361 from
‘‘Engine torque’’ to ‘‘Engine and
auxiliary power unit torque.’’
6. Adds new § 25.362, ‘‘Engine failure
loads,’’ to require engine mounts and
supporting airframe structure be
designed for 1g flight loads combined
with the most critical transient dynamic
loads and vibrations resulting from
failure of a blade, shaft, bearing or
bearing support, or bird strike event.
7. Revises § 25.391, ‘‘Control surface
loads: General,’’ and § 25.395, ‘‘Control
system,’’ to remove references to the
ground gust requirements in § 25.415.
8. Revises § 25.415, ‘‘Ground gust
conditions’’ to—
• Reorganize and clarify the design
conditions to be considered.
• Identify the components and parts
of the control system to which each of
the conditions apply.
• Make it stand alone in regard to the
required multiplying factors and to
provide an additional multiplying factor
to account for dynamic amplification.
9. Revises § 25.1517, ‘‘Rough air
speed, VRA’’ to remove the reference to
VB in the definition of rough air speed
and to require that a rough air Mach
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
73463
number, MRA, be established in
addition to rough air speed. Also, this
action removes the reference to
§ 25.1585, ‘‘Operating procedures,’’
because it is no longer applicable since
that regulation was modified.
II. Background
A. Statement of the Problem
Part 25 prescribes airworthiness
standards for type certification of
transport category airplanes for products
certified in the United States. EASA CS–
25 Book 1 prescribes the corresponding
airworthiness standards for products
certified in Europe. While part 25 and
CS–25 Book 1 are similar, they differ in
several respects.
The FAA tasked ARAC through the
Loads and Dynamics Harmonization
Working Group (LDHWG) to review
existing structures regulations and
recommend changes that would
eliminate differences between the U.S.
and European airworthiness standards.
The LDHWG developed
recommendations, which EASA has
incorporated into CS–25 with some
changes. The FAA agrees with the
ARAC recommendations as adopted by
EASA, and this final rule amends part
25 accordingly.
B. Summary of the NPRM
On May 6, 2013, the FAA issued a
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM), Notice No. 25–139,1 Docket
No. FAA–2013–0142, to amend
§§ 25.331, 25.341, 25.343, 25.345,
25.361, 25.371, 25.373, 25.391, 25.395,
25.415, and 25.1517; to add § 25.362;
and to remove appendix G of 14 CFR
part 25. That NPRM was published in
the Federal Register on May 28, 2013
(78 FR 31851). In the NPRM, the FAA
proposed to (1) revise the pitch
maneuver design loads criteria; (2)
revise the gust and turbulence design
loads criteria; (3) revise the application
of gust loads to engine mounts, high lift
devices, and other control surfaces; (4)
add a ‘‘round-the-clock’’ discrete gust
criterion and a multi-axis discrete gust
criterion for airplanes equipped with
wing-mounted engines; (5) revise the
engine torque loads criteria and add an
engine failure dynamic load condition;
(6) revise the ground gust design loads
criteria; (7) revise the criteria used to
establish the rough air design speed;
and (8) require the establishment of a
rough air Mach number.
1 On April 16, 2014, the Federal Register
published a correction (79 FR 21413) changing the
Notice No. to ‘‘13–04’’ for the NPRM that published
May 28, 2013 (78 FR 31851) and for subsequent
NPRM corrections that published June 24, 2013 (78
FR 37722) and July 16, 2013 (78 FR 42480).
E:\FR\FM\11DER1.SGM
11DER1
73464
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
The FAA proposed these changes to
eliminate regulatory differences
between the airworthiness standards of
the FAA and EASA. The NPRM
comment period closed on August 26,
2013.
On June 24, 2013, the Federal
Register published a correction to the
NPRM to correct three equations in the
proposed amendments to § 25.341 (78
FR 37722). On July 16, 2013, the
Federal Register published a second
correction to one equation in the
proposed amendments to § 25.341 (78
FR 42480). The equations in this final
rule have not changed from those in the
corrected NPRM.
C. General Overview of Comments
The FAA received two comments.
One commenter supported the NPRM
and the ongoing international
harmonization of certification
requirements. The other comment
addressed § 25.341 and is discussed
below.
III. Discussion of Public Comments and
Final Rule
A. Section 25.341, ‘‘Gust and
Turbulence Loads’’
Section 25.341(a)(6) uses the term
Zmo, which is the maximum operating
altitude, in feet, specifically defined in
§ 25.1527. A commenter noted that the
units for the term Zmo are not provided
in the current rule. While § 25.341(a)(6)
was not being revised as part of this
rulemaking, the commenter
recommended that this paragraph be
revised to include the appropriate units
for Zmo (feet) for ease of reference. We
agree, and revise the rule as
recommended.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. Section 25.415, ‘‘Ground Gust
Conditions’’
After further FAA review of what we
proposed by NPRM, we now specify
that control system gust locks are to be
taken into account only when the
airplane is so equipped. As proposed,
§ 25.415 would have required that the
airplane be evaluated while taxiing with
the controls locked and unlocked, and
while parked with the controls locked.
However, many transport category
airplanes with powered flight controls
do not have control system gust locks.
As noted in the NPRM, these airplanes
rely on their hydraulic actuators to
provide protection from ground gusts.
We, therefore, now revise § 25.415 to
clarify that, for all airplanes, the ground
gust conditions apply when the airplane
is taxiing and while parked. For
airplanes that include control system
gust locks, the taxiing condition must be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:05 Dec 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
evaluated with the controls locked and
unlocked, and the parked condition
must be evaluated with the controls
locked. Airplanes not equipped with
gust locks are to be evaluated in their
normal configuration while taxiing and
while parked. With these changes to
§ 25.415, the rule wording will no
longer be exactly the same as CS 25.415;
however, the intent of the two rules is
the same in how airplanes with and
without gust locks are evaluated.
C. Advisory Material
On May 31, 2013, the FAA published
and solicited public comments on three
proposed ACs that describe acceptable
means for showing compliance with the
NPRM’s proposed regulations. The
comment period for the proposed ACs
closed on September 26, 2013. The FAA
did not receive any comments on the
proposed ACs. Concurrently with this
final rule, the FAA is issuing the
following final ACs to provide guidance
material for the new regulations adopted
by this amendment:
• AC 25.341–1, ‘‘Dynamic Gust
Loads.’’
• AC 25.362–1, ‘‘Engine Failure
Loads.’’
• AC 25.415–1, ‘‘Ground Gust
Conditions.’’
IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
A. Regulatory Evaluation
Changes to Federal regulations must
undergo several economic analyses.
First, Executive Order 12866 and
Executive Order 13563 direct that each
Federal agency shall propose or adopt a
regulation only upon a reasoned
determination that the benefits of the
intended regulation justify its costs.
Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act
of 1980 (Public Law 96–354) requires
agencies to analyze the economic
impact of regulatory changes on small
entities. Third, the Trade Agreements
Act (Pub. L. 96–39) prohibits agencies
from setting standards that create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States. In
developing U.S. standards, the Trade
Act requires agencies to consider
international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis of
U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L.
104–4) requires agencies to prepare a
written assessment of the costs, benefits,
and other effects of proposed or final
rules that include a Federal mandate
likely to result in the expenditure by
State, local, or tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100 million or more annually (adjusted
for inflation with base year of 1995).
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
This portion of the preamble
summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the
economic impacts of this final rule.
Department of Transportation Order
DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies and
procedures for simplification, analysis,
and review of regulations. If the
expected cost impact is so minimal that
a proposed or final rule does not
warrant a full evaluation, this order
permits that a statement to that effect
and the basis for it be included in the
preamble if a full regulatory evaluation
of the cost and benefits is not prepared.
Such a determination has been made for
this final rule. The reasoning for this
determination follows.
The FAA is amending certain
airworthiness standards for transport
category airplanes. Adopting this final
rule will eliminate regulatory
differences between the airworthiness
standards of the FAA and EASA. This
final rule does not add new
requirements beyond what
manufacturers currently meet for EASA
certification and does not affect current
industry design practices. Meeting two
sets of certification requirements raises
the cost of developing new transport
category airplanes with little to no
increase in safety. In the interest of
fostering international trade, lowering
the cost of manufacturing new transport
category airplanes, and making the
certification process more efficient, the
FAA, EASA, and several industry
working groups came together to create,
to the maximum extent possible, a
single set of certification requirements
that would be accepted in both the
United States and Europe. Therefore, as
a result of these harmonization efforts,
the FAA is amending the airworthiness
regulations described in section I of this
final rule, ‘‘Overview of Final Rule.’’
This action harmonizes part 25
requirements with the corresponding
requirements in EASA CS–25 Book 1.
Currently, all manufacturers of
transport category airplanes, certificated
under part 25 are expected to continue
their current practice of compliance
with the EASA certification
requirements in CS–25 Book 1. Since
future certificated transport airplanes
are expected to meet CS–25 Book 1, and
this rule simply adopts EASA
requirements, manufacturers will incur
minimal or no additional cost resulting
from this final rule. The FAA made this
same determination in the NPRM and
received no comments.
The FAA has, therefore, determined
that this final rule is not a ‘‘significant
regulatory action’’ as defined in section
3(f) of Executive Order 12866, and is not
‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s
Regulatory Policies and Procedures.
E:\FR\FM\11DER1.SGM
11DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(Public Law 96–354) (RFA) establishes
‘‘as a principle of regulatory issuance
that agencies shall endeavor, consistent
with the objectives of the rule and of
applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and
informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and
governmental jurisdictions subject to
regulation. To achieve this principle,
agencies are required to solicit and
consider flexible regulatory proposals
and to explain the rationale for their
actions to assure that such proposals are
given serious consideration.’’ The RFA
covers a wide-range of small entities,
including small businesses, not-forprofit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
Agencies must perform a review to
determine whether a rule will have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. If
the agency determines that it will, the
agency must prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis as described in the
RFA.
However, if an agency determines that
a rule is not expected to have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities,
section 605(b) of the RFA provides that
the head of the agency may so certify,
and a regulatory flexibility analysis is
not required. The certification must
include a statement providing the
factual basis for this determination, and
the reasoning should be clear.
In the NPRM, the FAA determined
that this rule would not impose more
than minimal cost.
The FAA believes that this final rule
does not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities for the following reasons. We
did not receive any comments from
small entities. All United States
transport category airplane
manufacturers exceed the Small
Business Administration small-entity
criteria of 1,500 employees. Therefore,
as provided in section 605(b), the head
of the FAA certifies that this rulemaking
will not result in a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
C. International Trade Impact
Assessment
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979
(Pub. L. 96–39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub.
L. 103–465), prohibits Federal agencies
from establishing standards or engaging
in related activities that create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign
commerce of the United States.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:05 Dec 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
73465
Pursuant to these Acts, the
establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to
the foreign commerce of the United
States, so long as the standard has a
legitimate domestic objective, such the
protection of safety, and does not
operate in a manner that excludes
imports that meet this objective. The
statute also requires consideration of
international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for
U.S. standards. The FAA has assessed
the potential effect of this final rule and
determined that it is in accord with the
Trade Agreements Act as the rule
furthers the legitimate domestic
objectives of safety, creates no
unnecessary obstacles to foreign
commerce, does not exclude imports,
and uses European standards as the
basis for United States regulation.
2012), promotes international regulatory
cooperation to meet shared challenges
involving health, safety, labor, security,
environmental, and other issues and
reduce, eliminate, or prevent
unnecessary differences in regulatory
requirements. The FAA has analyzed
this action under the policy and agency
responsibilities of Executive Order
13609, Promoting International
Regulatory Cooperation. The agency has
determined that this action would
eliminate differences between U.S.
aviation standards and those of other
civil aviation authorities by creating a
single set of certification requirements
for transport category airplanes that
would be acceptable in both the United
States and Europe.
D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4)
requires each Federal agency to prepare
a written statement assessing the effects
of any Federal mandate in a proposed or
final agency rule that may result in an
expenditure of $100 million or more (in
1995 dollars) in any one year by State,
local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector; such
a mandate is deemed to be a ‘‘significant
regulatory action.’’ The FAA currently
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $151
million in lieu of $100 million. This
final rule does not contain such a
mandate; therefore, the requirements of
Title II of the Act do not apply.
FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA
actions that are categorically excluded
from preparation of an environmental
assessment or environmental impact
statement under the National
Environmental Policy Act in the
absence of extraordinary circumstances.
The FAA has determined this
rulemaking action qualifies for the
categorical exclusion identified in
paragraph 312f of Order 1050.1E and
involves no extraordinary
circumstances.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires that the
FAA consider the impact of paperwork
and other information collection
burdens imposed on the public. The
FAA has determined that there is no
new requirement for information
collection associated with this final
rule.
F. International Compatibility and
Cooperation
(1) In keeping with U.S. obligations
under the Convention on International
Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to
conform to International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO) Standards and
Recommended Practices to the
maximum extent practicable. The FAA
has reviewed the corresponding ICAO
Standards and Recommended Practices
and has identified no differences with
these regulations.
(2) Executive Order (EO) 13609,
Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation (77 FR 26413, May 4,
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
G. Environmental Analysis
V. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this final rule
under the principles and criteria of
Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The
agency determined that this action will
not have a substantial direct effect on
the States, or the relationship between
the Federal Government and the States,
or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government, and, therefore,
does not have Federalism implications.
B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
The FAA analyzed this final rule
under Executive Order 13211, Actions
Concerning Regulations that
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The
agency has determined that it is not a
‘‘significant energy action’’ under the
executive order and it is not likely to
have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy.
E:\FR\FM\11DER1.SGM
11DER1
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
VI. How To Obtain Additional
Information
A. Rulemaking Documents
An electronic copy of a rulemaking
document may be obtained by using the
Internet—
1. Search the Federal eRulemaking
Portal (https://www.regulations.gov),
2. Visit the FAA’s Regulations and
Policies Web page at https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/, or
3. Access the Government Printing
Office’s Web page at https://
www.gpo.gov/fdsys/.
Copies may also be obtained by
sending a request (identified by notice,
amendment, or docket number of this
rulemaking) to the Federal Aviation
Administration, Office of Rulemaking,
ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue
SW., Washington, DC 20591; or by
calling (202) 267–9680.
B. Comments Submitted to the Docket
Comments received may be viewed by
going to https://www.regulations.gov and
following the online instructions to
search the docket number for this
action. Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of all comments
received into any of the FAA’s dockets
by the name of the individual
submitting the comment (or signing the
comment, if submitted on behalf of an
association, business, labor union, etc.).
C. Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
The Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996 requires the FAA to comply with
small entity requests for information or
advice about compliance with statutes
and regulations within its jurisdiction.
A small entity with questions regarding
this document, may contact its local
FAA official, or the person listed under
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
heading at the beginning of the
preamble. To find out more about
SBREFA on the Internet, visit https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/
rulemaking/sbre_act/.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:05 Dec 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
The Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
amends part 25 of title 14, Code of
Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 25—AIRWORTHINESS
STANDARDS: TRANSPORT
CATEGORY AIRPLANES
initial direction, d(t) is limited to d1. In
the reverse direction, d(t) may be
truncated at the maximum available
displacement of the flight deck pitch
control as limited by the control system
stops, control surface stops, or by pilot
effort in accordance with 25.397(b);
tmax = 3p/2w;
w = the circular frequency (radians/second)
of the control deflection taken equal to
the undamped natural frequency of the
short period rigid mode of the airplane,
with active control system effects
included where appropriate; but not less
than:
1. The authority citation for part 25
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701,
44702, and 44704.
2. Amend § 25.331 by revising
paragraph (c) introductory text and
paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows:
■
§ 25.331 Symmetric maneuvering
conditions.
*
Where
V = the speed of the airplane at entry to the
maneuver.
VA = the design maneuvering speed
prescribed in § 25.335(c).
(ii) For nose-up pitching maneuvers,
the complete flight deck pitch control
displacement history may be scaled
down in amplitude to the extent
necessary to ensure that the positive
limit load factor prescribed in § 25.337
is not exceeded. For nose-down pitching
maneuvers, the complete flight deck
control displacement history may be
scaled down in amplitude to the extent
necessary to ensure that the normal
acceleration at the center of gravity does
not go below 0g.
(iii) In addition, for cases where the
airplane response to the specified flight
deck pitch control motion does not
achieve the prescribed limit load
factors, then the following flight deck
pitch control motion must be used:
*
*
*
*
(c) Maneuvering pitching conditions.
The following conditions must be
investigated:
*
*
*
*
*
(2) Checked maneuver between VA
and VD. Nose-up checked pitching
maneuvers must be analyzed in which
the positive limit load factor prescribed
in § 25.337 is achieved. As a separate
condition, nose-down checked pitching
maneuvers must be analyzed in which
a limit load factor of 0g is achieved. In
defining the airplane loads, the flight
deck pitch control motions described in
paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through (iv) of this
section must be used:
(i) The airplane is assumed to be
flying in steady level flight at any speed
between VA and VD and the flight deck
pitch control is moved in accordance
with the following formula:
d(t) = d1 sin(wt) for 0 ≤ t ≤t max
d(t) = d1 sin(wt) for 0 ≤ t ≤ t1
d(t) = d1 for t1 ≤ t ≤ t2
d(t) = d1 sin(w[t + t1 ¥ t2]) for t2 ≤ t ≤
tmax
Where—
d1 = the maximum available displacement of
the flight deck pitch control in the initial
direction, as limited by the control
system stops, control surface stops, or by
pilot effort in accordance with
§ 25.397(b);
d(t) = the displacement of the flight deck
pitch control as a function of time. In the
Where—
t1 = p/2w
t2 = t1 + Dt
tmax = t2 + p/w;
Dt = the minimum period of time necessary
to allow the prescribed limit load factor
to be achieved in the initial direction,
but it need not exceed five seconds (see
figure below).
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\11DER1.SGM
11DER1
ER11DE14.023
73466
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Zmo = Maximum operating altitude defined in
§ 25.1527 (feet).
*
*
*
*
*
(b) Continuous turbulence design
criteria. The dynamic response of the
airplane to vertical and lateral
continuous turbulence must be taken
into account. The dynamic analysis
must take into account unsteady
aerodynamic characteristics and all
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:05 Dec 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
Where—
H(W) = the frequency response function,
determined by dynamic analysis, that
relates the loads in the aircraft structure
to the atmospheric turbulence; and
F(W) = normalized power spectral density of
atmospheric turbulence given by—
Where—
W = reduced frequency, radians per foot; and
L = scale of turbulence = 2,500 ft.
(3) The limit turbulence intensities,
Uσ, in feet per second true airspeed
required for compliance with this
paragraph are—
(i) At airplane speeds between VB and
VC: Uσ = Uσρεφ Fg
Where—
Uσρεφ is the reference turbulence intensity
that varies linearly with altitude from 90
fps (TAS) at sea level to 79 fps (TAS) at
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(ii) At speed VD: Uσ is equal to 1⁄2 the
values obtained under paragraph
(b)(3)(i) of this section.
(iii) At speeds between VC and VD: Uσ
is equal to a value obtained by linear
interpolation.
(iv) At all speeds, both positive and
negative incremental loads due to
continuous turbulence must be
considered.
(4) When an automatic system
affecting the dynamic response of the
airplane is included in the analysis, the
effects of system non-linearities on
loads at the limit load level must be
taken into account in a realistic or
conservative manner.
(5) If necessary for the assessment of
loads on airplanes with significant nonlinearities, it must be assumed that the
turbulence field has a root-mean-square
velocity equal to 40 percent of the Uσ
values specified in paragraph (b)(3) of
this section. The value of limit load is
that load with the same probability of
exceedance in the turbulence field as
AUσ of the same load quantity in a
linear approximated model.
(c) Supplementary gust conditions for
wing-mounted engines. For airplanes
equipped with wing-mounted engines,
the engine mounts, pylons, and wing
supporting structure must be designed
for the maximum response at the nacelle
center of gravity derived from the
following dynamic gust conditions
applied to the airplane:
(1) A discrete gust determined in
accordance with § 25.341(a) at each
angle normal to the flight path, and
separately,
(2) A pair of discrete gusts, one
vertical and one lateral. The length of
each of these gusts must be
independently tuned to the maximum
response in accordance with § 25.341(a).
The penetration of the airplane in the
combined gust field and the phasing of
E:\FR\FM\11DER1.SGM
11DER1
ER11DE14.026
(2) Values of A must be determined
according to the following formula:
Gust and turbulence loads.
(a) * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(5) * * *
(i) At airplane speeds between VB and
VC: Positive and negative gusts with
reference gust velocities of 56.0 ft/sec
EAS must be considered at sea level.
The reference gust velocity may be
reduced linearly from 56.0 ft/sec EAS at
sea level to 44.0 ft/sec EAS at 15,000
feet. The reference gust velocity may be
further reduced linearly from 44.0 ft/sec
EAS at 15,000 feet to 20.86 ft/sec EAS
at 60,000 feet.
*
*
*
*
*
(6) * * *
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Where—
PL = limit load;
PL¥1g = steady 1g load for the condition;
A = ratio of root-mean-square incremental
load for the condition to root-meansquare turbulence velocity; and
Uσ = limit turbulence intensity in true
airspeed, specified in paragraph (b)(3) of
this section.
24,000 feet and is then constant at 79 fps
(TAS) up to the altitude of 60,000 feet.
Fg is the flight profile alleviation factor
defined in paragraph (a)(6) of this
section;
ER11DE14.025
§ 25.341
significant structural degrees of freedom
including rigid body motions. The limit
loads must be determined for all critical
altitudes, weights, and weight
distributions as specified in § 25.321(b),
and all critical speeds within the ranges
indicated in § 25.341(b)(3).
(1) Except as provided in paragraphs
(b)(4) and (5) of this section, the
following equation must be used:
PL = PL¥1g ± UσA
ER11DE14.024
(iv) In cases where the flight deck
pitch control motion may be affected by
inputs from systems (for example, by a
stick pusher that can operate at high
load factor as well as at 1g), then the
effects of those systems shall be taken
into account.
(v) Airplane loads that occur beyond
the following times need not be
considered:
(A) For the nose-up pitching
maneuver, the time at which the normal
acceleration at the center of gravity goes
below 0g;
(B) For the nose-down pitching
maneuver, the time at which the normal
acceleration at the center of gravity goes
above the positive limit load factor
prescribed in § 25.337;
(C) tmax..
■ 3. Amend § 25.341 by revising
paragraphs (a)(5)(i), (a)(6), and (b), and
by adding paragraph (c) to read as
follows:
73467
73468
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
Where—
PL = limit load;
PL-1g = steady 1g load for the condition;
LV = peak incremental response load due to
a vertical gust according to § 25.341(a);
and
LL = peak incremental response load due to
a lateral gust according to § 25.341(a).
4. Amend § 25.343 by revising
paragraph (b)(1)(ii) to read as follows:
■
§ 25.343
Design fuel and oil loads.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) The gust and turbulence
conditions of § 25.341(a) and (b), but
assuming 85% of the gust velocities
prescribed in § 25.341(a)(4) and 85% of
the turbulence intensities prescribed in
§ 25.341(b)(3).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. Amend § 25.345 by revising
paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows:
§ 25.345
High lift devices.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(2) The vertical gust and turbulence
conditions prescribed in § 25.341(a) and
(b).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. Revise § 25.361 to read as follows:
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 25.361
torque.
Engine and auxiliary power unit
(a) For engine installations—
(1) Each engine mount, pylon, and
adjacent supporting airframe structures
must be designed for the effects of—
(i) A limit engine torque
corresponding to takeoff power/thrust
and, if applicable, corresponding
propeller speed, acting simultaneously
with 75% of the limit loads from flight
condition A of § 25.333(b);
(ii) A limit engine torque
corresponding to the maximum
continuous power/thrust and, if
applicable, corresponding propeller
speed, acting simultaneously with the
limit loads from flight condition A of
§ 25.333(b); and
(iii) For turbopropeller installations
only, in addition to the conditions
specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (ii)
of this section, a limit engine torque
corresponding to takeoff power and
propeller speed, multiplied by a factor
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:05 Dec 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
accounting for propeller control system
malfunction, including quick feathering,
acting simultaneously with 1g level
flight loads. In the absence of a rational
analysis, a factor of 1.6 must be used.
(2) The limit engine torque to be
considered under paragraph (a)(1) of
this section must be obtained by—
(i) For turbopropeller installations,
multiplying mean engine torque for the
specified power/thrust and speed by a
factor of 1.25;
(ii) For other turbine engines, the
limit engine torque must be equal to the
maximum accelerating torque for the
case considered.
(3) The engine mounts, pylons, and
adjacent supporting airframe structure
must be designed to withstand 1g level
flight loads acting simultaneously with
the limit engine torque loads imposed
by each of the following conditions to
be considered separately:
(i) Sudden maximum engine
deceleration due to malfunction or
abnormal condition; and
(ii) The maximum acceleration of
engine.
(b) For auxiliary power unit
installations, the power unit mounts
and adjacent supporting airframe
structure must be designed to withstand
1g level flight loads acting
simultaneously with the limit torque
loads imposed by each of the following
conditions to be considered separately:
(1) Sudden maximum auxiliary power
unit deceleration due to malfunction,
abnormal condition, or structural
failure; and
(2) The maximum acceleration of the
auxiliary power unit.
■ 7. Add § 25.362 to read as follows:
§ 25.371
§ 25.362
*
Engine failure loads.
(a) For engine mounts, pylons, and
adjacent supporting airframe structure,
an ultimate loading condition must be
considered that combines 1g flight loads
with the most critical transient dynamic
loads and vibrations, as determined by
dynamic analysis, resulting from failure
of a blade, shaft, bearing or bearing
support, or bird strike event. Any
permanent deformation from these
ultimate load conditions must not
prevent continued safe flight and
landing.
(b) The ultimate loads developed from
the conditions specified in paragraph (a)
of this section are to be—
(1) Multiplied by a factor of 1.0 when
applied to engine mounts and pylons;
and
(2) Multiplied by a factor of 1.25
when applied to adjacent supporting
airframe structure.
■ 8. Revise § 25.371 to read as follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Gyroscopic loads.
The structure supporting any engine
or auxiliary power unit must be
designed for the loads, including
gyroscopic loads, arising from the
conditions specified in §§ 25.331,
25.341, 25.349, 25.351, 25.473, 25.479,
and 25.481, with the engine or auxiliary
power unit at the maximum rotating
speed appropriate to the condition. For
the purposes of compliance with this
paragraph, the pitch maneuver in
§ 25.331(c)(1) must be carried out until
the positive limit maneuvering load
factor (point A2 in § 25.333(b)) is
reached.
■ 9. Amend § 25.373 by revising
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
§ 25.373
Speed control devices.
*
*
*
*
*
(a) The airplane must be designed for
the symmetrical maneuvers prescribed
in §§ 25.333 and 25.337, the yawing
maneuvers in § 25.351, and the vertical
and lateral gust and turbulence
conditions prescribed in § 25.341(a) and
(b) at each setting and the maximum
speed associated with that setting; and
*
*
*
*
*
■ 10. Amend § 25.391 by revising the
introductory text to read as follows:
§ 25.391
Control surface loads: General.
The control surfaces must be designed
for the limit loads resulting from the
flight conditions in §§ 25.331, 25.341(a)
and (b), 25.349, and 25.351, considering
the requirements for—
*
*
*
*
*
■ 11. Amend § 25.395 by revising
paragraph (b) to read as follows:
§ 25.395
Control system.
*
*
*
*
(b) The system limit loads of
paragraph (a) of this section need not
exceed the loads that can be produced
by the pilot (or pilots) and by automatic
or power devices operating the controls.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 12. Revise § 25.415 to read as follows:
§ 25.415
Ground gust conditions.
(a) The flight control systems and
surfaces must be designed for the limit
loads generated when the airplane is
subjected to a horizontal 65-knot ground
gust from any direction while taxiing
and while parked. For airplanes
equipped with control system gust
locks, the taxiing condition must be
evaluated with the controls locked and
unlocked, and the parked condition
must be evaluated with the controls
locked.
(b) The control system and surface
loads due to ground gust may be
E:\FR\FM\11DER1.SGM
11DER1
ER11DE14.027
the vertical and lateral component gusts
must be established to develop the
maximum response to the gust pair. In
the absence of a more rational analysis,
the following formula must be used for
each of the maximum engine loads in all
six degrees of freedom:
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 238 / Thursday, December 11, 2014 / Rules and Regulations
assumed to be static loads, and the
hinge moments H must be computed
from the formula:
H = K (1/2) ro V2 c S
Where—
K = hinge moment factor for ground gusts
derived in paragraph (c) of this section;
ro = density of air at sea level;
V = 65 knots relative to the aircraft;
S = area of the control surface aft of the hinge
line;
c = mean aerodynamic chord of the control
surface aft of the hinge line.
(c) The hinge moment factor K for
ground gusts must be taken from the
following table:
Surface
Position of
controls
K
(1) Aileron .......
0.75
(2) Aileron .......
* ±0.50
(3) Elevator .....
* ±0.75
(4) Elevator .....
(5) Rudder .......
* ±0.75
0.75
(6) Rudder .......
0.75
Control column
locked or
lashed in
mid-position.
Ailerons at full
throw.
Elevator full
down.
Elevator full up.
Rudder in neutral.
Rudder at full
throw.
tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
* A positive value of K indicates a moment
tending to depress the surface, while a negative value of K indicates a moment tending to
raise the surface.
(d) The computed hinge moment of
paragraph (b) of this section must be
used to determine the limit loads due to
ground gust conditions for the control
surface. A 1.25 factor on the computed
hinge moments must be used in
calculating limit control system loads.
(e) Where control system flexibility is
such that the rate of load application in
the ground gust conditions might
produce transient stresses appreciably
higher than those corresponding to
static loads, in the absence of a rational
analysis substantiating a different
dynamic factor, an additional factor of
1.6 must be applied to the control
system loads of paragraph (d) of this
section to obtain limit loads. If a rational
analysis is used, the additional factor
must not be less than 1.2.
(f) For the condition of the control
locks engaged, the control surfaces, the
control system locks, and the parts of
any control systems between the
surfaces and the locks must be designed
to the resultant limit loads. Where
control locks are not provided, then the
control surfaces, the control system
stops nearest the surfaces, and the parts
of any control systems between the
surfaces and the stops must be designed
to the resultant limit loads. If the control
system design is such as to allow any
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:05 Dec 10, 2014
Jkt 235001
part of the control system to impact
with the stops due to flexibility, then
the resultant impact loads must be taken
into account in deriving the limit loads
due to ground gust.
(g) For the condition of taxiing with
the control locks disengaged, or where
control locks are not provided, the
following apply:
(1) The control surfaces, the control
system stops nearest the surfaces, and
the parts of any control systems between
the surfaces and the stops must be
designed to the resultant limit loads.
(2) The parts of the control systems
between the stops nearest the surfaces
and the flight deck controls must be
designed to the resultant limit loads,
except that the parts of the control
system where loads are eventually
reacted by the pilot need not exceed:
(i) The loads corresponding to the
maximum pilot loads in § 25.397(c) for
each pilot alone; or
(ii) 0.75 times these maximum loads
for each pilot when the pilot forces are
applied in the same direction.
■
13. Revise 25.1517 to read as follows:
§ 25.1517
Rough air speed, VRA.
(a) A rough air speed, VRA, for use as
the recommended turbulence
penetration airspeed, and a rough air
Mach number, MRA, for use as the
recommended turbulence penetration
Mach number, must be established.
VRA/MRA must be sufficiently less than
VMO/MMO to ensure that likely speed
variation during rough air encounters
will not cause the overspeed warning to
operate too frequently.
(b) At altitudes where VMO is not
limited by Mach number, in the absence
of a rational investigation substantiating
the use of other values, VRA must be less
than VMO—35 KTAS.
(c) At altitudes where VMO is limited
by Mach number, MRA may be chosen
to provide an optimum margin between
low and high speed buffet boundaries.
Appendix G to Part 25 [Removed and
Reserved]
14. Remove and reserve appendix G to
part 25.
■
Issued under authority provided by 49
U.S.C. 106(f) and 44701(a) in Washington,
DC, on November 14, 2014.
Michael P. Huerta,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2014–28938 Filed 12–10–14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
73469
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 25
[Docket No. FAA–2014–0668; Special
Conditions No. 25–572–SC]
Special Conditions: AAR Engineering
Services, Boeing 757–200 Series
Airplane; Seats With Non-Traditional,
Large, Non-Metallic Panels
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final special condition; request
for comments.
AGENCY:
These special conditions are
issued for the Boeing 757–200 series
airplane. This airplane, as modified by
AAR Engineering Services, will have
novel or unusual design features when
compared to the state of technology
envisioned in the airworthiness
standards for transport-category
airplanes. This design feature includes
seats with non-traditional, large, nonmetallic panels on Boeing 757–200
series airplanes. 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: This action is effective on AAR
Engineering Services on December 11,
2014. We must receive your comments
by January 26, 2015.
ADDRESSES: Send comments identified
by docket number FAA–2014–0668
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
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\11DER1.SGM
11DER1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 238 (Thursday, December 11, 2014)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 73462-73469]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28938]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 25
[Docket No.: FAA-2013-0142; Amdt. No. 25-141]
RIN 2120-AK12
Harmonization of Airworthiness Standards--Gust and Maneuver Load
Requirements
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule amends certain airworthiness regulations for
transport category airplanes, based on recommendations from the FAA-
sponsored Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC). This amendment
eliminates regulatory differences between the airworthiness standards
of the FAA and European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA). It does not add
new requirements beyond what manufacturers currently meet for EASA
certification and does not affect current industry design practices.
This final rule revises the pitch maneuver design loads criteria;
revises the gust and turbulence design loads criteria; revises the
application of gust loads to engine mounts, high lift devices, and
other control surfaces; adds a ``round-the-clock'' discrete gust
criterion and a multi-axis discrete gust criterion for airplanes
equipped with wing-mounted engines; revises the engine torque loads
criteria; adds an engine failure dynamic load condition; revises the
ground gust design loads criteria; revises the criteria used to
establish the rough air design speed; and requires the establishment of
a rough air Mach number.
DATES: Effective February 9, 2015.
ADDRESSES: For information on where to obtain copies of rulemaking
documents and other information related to this final rule, see ``How
To Obtain Additional Information'' in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this action, contact Todd Martin, Airframe and Cabin Safety Branch,
ANM-115,
[[Page 73463]]
Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service, Federal
Aviation Administration, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, WA 98057-3356;
telephone (425) 227-1178; facsimile (425) 227-1232; email
Todd.Martin@faa.gov.
For legal questions concerning this action, contact Sean Howe,
Office of the Regional Counsel, ANM-7, Federal Aviation Administration,
1601 Lind Avenue SW., Renton, Washington 98057-3356; telephone (425)
227-2591; facsimile (425) 227-1007; email Sean.Howe@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Authority for This Rulemaking
The FAA's authority to issue rules on aviation safety is found in
Title 49 of the United States Code. Subtitle I, Section 106 describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701, ``General
Requirements.'' Under that section, the FAA is charged with promoting
safe flight of civil aircraft in air commerce by prescribing
regulations and minimum standards for the design and performance of
aircraft that the Administrator finds necessary for safety in air
commerce. This regulation is within the scope of that authority. It
prescribes new safety standards for the design and operation of
transport category airplanes.
I. Overview of Final Rule
The FAA is amending Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
Part 25 as described below. This action harmonizes part 25 requirements
with the corresponding requirements in Book 1 of the EASA Certification
Specifications and Acceptable Means of Compliance for Large Aeroplanes
(CS-25). As such, this action--
1. Revises Sec. 25.331, ``Symmetric maneuvering conditions,'' to
prescribe both positive and negative checked pitch maneuver loads that
take into account the size of the airplane and any effects of the
flight control system. The introductory paragraph, Sec. 25.331(c), is
revised by moving some criteria to Sec. 25.331(c)(2) where those
criteria apply.
2. Removes appendix G to part 25, ``Continuous Gust Design
Criteria,'' and Sec. 25.341(b) now clearly sets forth the continuous
turbulence requirement.
3. Revises Sec. 25.341, ``Gust and turbulence loads,'' to--
Remove the optional mission analysis method currently
specified in appendix G in favor of the design envelope analysis
method.
Update the turbulence intensity criteria in Sec.
25.341(b) to take into account in-service measurements of derived gust
intensities.
Update Sec. 25.341(a) to require evaluation of discrete
gust conditions at airplane speeds from design speed for maximum gust
intensity, VB, to design cruising speed, VC,
(previously required only at VC) and to specify reference
gust velocities up to 60,000 feet, rather than the previously specified
50,000 feet.
Add a new paragraph Sec. 25.341(c) that specifies a
``round-the-clock'' discrete gust criterion and a multi-axis discrete
gust criterion for airplanes equipped with wing-mounted engines.
4. Revises Sec. 25.343, ``Design fuel and oil loads,'' Sec.
25.345, ``High lift devices,'' Sec. 25.371, ``Gyroscopic loads,''
Sec. 25.373, ``Speed control devices,'' and Sec. 25.391, ``Control
surface loads: General,'' by adding to each of these regulations a
requirement to evaluate the continuous turbulence loads criteria in
Sec. 25.341(b).
5. Revises Sec. 25.361, ``Engine and auxiliary power unit
torque,'' to--
Remove the requirement to assess engine torque loads due
to engine structural failures (this requirement is re-established in
the new Sec. 25.362, outlined below).
Provide specific engine torque load criteria for auxiliary
power unit installations.
Remove the requirements that apply to reciprocating
engines.
Change the title of Sec. 25.361 from ``Engine torque'' to
``Engine and auxiliary power unit torque.''
6. Adds new Sec. 25.362, ``Engine failure loads,'' to require
engine mounts and supporting airframe structure be designed for 1g
flight loads combined with the most critical transient dynamic loads
and vibrations resulting from failure of a blade, shaft, bearing or
bearing support, or bird strike event.
7. Revises Sec. 25.391, ``Control surface loads: General,'' and
Sec. 25.395, ``Control system,'' to remove references to the ground
gust requirements in Sec. 25.415.
8. Revises Sec. 25.415, ``Ground gust conditions'' to--
Reorganize and clarify the design conditions to be
considered.
Identify the components and parts of the control system to
which each of the conditions apply.
Make it stand alone in regard to the required multiplying
factors and to provide an additional multiplying factor to account for
dynamic amplification.
9. Revises Sec. 25.1517, ``Rough air speed, VRA'' to
remove the reference to VB in the definition of rough air speed and to
require that a rough air Mach number, MRA, be established in addition
to rough air speed. Also, this action removes the reference to Sec.
25.1585, ``Operating procedures,'' because it is no longer applicable
since that regulation was modified.
II. Background
A. Statement of the Problem
Part 25 prescribes airworthiness standards for type certification
of transport category airplanes for products certified in the United
States. EASA CS-25 Book 1 prescribes the corresponding airworthiness
standards for products certified in Europe. While part 25 and CS-25
Book 1 are similar, they differ in several respects.
The FAA tasked ARAC through the Loads and Dynamics Harmonization
Working Group (LDHWG) to review existing structures regulations and
recommend changes that would eliminate differences between the U.S. and
European airworthiness standards. The LDHWG developed recommendations,
which EASA has incorporated into CS-25 with some changes. The FAA
agrees with the ARAC recommendations as adopted by EASA, and this final
rule amends part 25 accordingly.
B. Summary of the NPRM
On May 6, 2013, the FAA issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM), Notice No. 25-139,\1\ Docket No. FAA-2013-0142, to amend
Sec. Sec. 25.331, 25.341, 25.343, 25.345, 25.361, 25.371, 25.373,
25.391, 25.395, 25.415, and 25.1517; to add Sec. 25.362; and to remove
appendix G of 14 CFR part 25. That NPRM was published in the Federal
Register on May 28, 2013 (78 FR 31851). In the NPRM, the FAA proposed
to (1) revise the pitch maneuver design loads criteria; (2) revise the
gust and turbulence design loads criteria; (3) revise the application
of gust loads to engine mounts, high lift devices, and other control
surfaces; (4) add a ``round-the-clock'' discrete gust criterion and a
multi-axis discrete gust criterion for airplanes equipped with wing-
mounted engines; (5) revise the engine torque loads criteria and add an
engine failure dynamic load condition; (6) revise the ground gust
design loads criteria; (7) revise the criteria used to establish the
rough air design speed; and (8) require the establishment of a rough
air Mach number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ On April 16, 2014, the Federal Register published a
correction (79 FR 21413) changing the Notice No. to ``13-04'' for
the NPRM that published May 28, 2013 (78 FR 31851) and for
subsequent NPRM corrections that published June 24, 2013 (78 FR
37722) and July 16, 2013 (78 FR 42480).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 73464]]
The FAA proposed these changes to eliminate regulatory differences
between the airworthiness standards of the FAA and EASA. The NPRM
comment period closed on August 26, 2013.
On June 24, 2013, the Federal Register published a correction to
the NPRM to correct three equations in the proposed amendments to Sec.
25.341 (78 FR 37722). On July 16, 2013, the Federal Register published
a second correction to one equation in the proposed amendments to Sec.
25.341 (78 FR 42480). The equations in this final rule have not changed
from those in the corrected NPRM.
C. General Overview of Comments
The FAA received two comments. One commenter supported the NPRM and
the ongoing international harmonization of certification requirements.
The other comment addressed Sec. 25.341 and is discussed below.
III. Discussion of Public Comments and Final Rule
A. Section 25.341, ``Gust and Turbulence Loads''
Section 25.341(a)(6) uses the term Zmo, which is the
maximum operating altitude, in feet, specifically defined in Sec.
25.1527. A commenter noted that the units for the term Zmo
are not provided in the current rule. While Sec. 25.341(a)(6) was not
being revised as part of this rulemaking, the commenter recommended
that this paragraph be revised to include the appropriate units for
Zmo (feet) for ease of reference. We agree, and revise the
rule as recommended.
B. Section 25.415, ``Ground Gust Conditions''
After further FAA review of what we proposed by NPRM, we now
specify that control system gust locks are to be taken into account
only when the airplane is so equipped. As proposed, Sec. 25.415 would
have required that the airplane be evaluated while taxiing with the
controls locked and unlocked, and while parked with the controls
locked. However, many transport category airplanes with powered flight
controls do not have control system gust locks. As noted in the NPRM,
these airplanes rely on their hydraulic actuators to provide protection
from ground gusts. We, therefore, now revise Sec. 25.415 to clarify
that, for all airplanes, the ground gust conditions apply when the
airplane is taxiing and while parked. For airplanes that include
control system gust locks, the taxiing condition must be evaluated with
the controls locked and unlocked, and the parked condition must be
evaluated with the controls locked. Airplanes not equipped with gust
locks are to be evaluated in their normal configuration while taxiing
and while parked. With these changes to Sec. 25.415, the rule wording
will no longer be exactly the same as CS 25.415; however, the intent of
the two rules is the same in how airplanes with and without gust locks
are evaluated.
C. Advisory Material
On May 31, 2013, the FAA published and solicited public comments on
three proposed ACs that describe acceptable means for showing
compliance with the NPRM's proposed regulations. The comment period for
the proposed ACs closed on September 26, 2013. The FAA did not receive
any comments on the proposed ACs. Concurrently with this final rule,
the FAA is issuing the following final ACs to provide guidance material
for the new regulations adopted by this amendment:
AC 25.341-1, ``Dynamic Gust Loads.''
AC 25.362-1, ``Engine Failure Loads.''
AC 25.415-1, ``Ground Gust Conditions.''
IV. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
A. Regulatory Evaluation
Changes to Federal regulations must undergo several economic
analyses. First, Executive Order 12866 and Executive Order 13563 direct
that each Federal agency shall propose or adopt a regulation only upon
a reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation
justify its costs. Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(Public Law 96-354) requires agencies to analyze the economic impact of
regulatory changes on small entities. Third, the Trade Agreements Act
(Pub. L. 96-39) prohibits agencies from setting standards that create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States. In
developing U.S. standards, the Trade Act requires agencies to consider
international standards and, where appropriate, that they be the basis
of U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4) requires agencies to prepare a written assessment of
the costs, benefits, and other effects of proposed or final rules that
include a Federal mandate likely to result in the expenditure by State,
local, or tribal governments, in the aggregate, or by the private
sector, of $100 million or more annually (adjusted for inflation with
base year of 1995). This portion of the preamble summarizes the FAA's
analysis of the economic impacts of this final rule.
Department of Transportation Order DOT 2100.5 prescribes policies
and procedures for simplification, analysis, and review of regulations.
If the expected cost impact is so minimal that a proposed or final rule
does not warrant a full evaluation, this order permits that a statement
to that effect and the basis for it be included in the preamble if a
full regulatory evaluation of the cost and benefits is not prepared.
Such a determination has been made for this final rule. The reasoning
for this determination follows.
The FAA is amending certain airworthiness standards for transport
category airplanes. Adopting this final rule will eliminate regulatory
differences between the airworthiness standards of the FAA and EASA.
This final rule does not add new requirements beyond what manufacturers
currently meet for EASA certification and does not affect current
industry design practices. Meeting two sets of certification
requirements raises the cost of developing new transport category
airplanes with little to no increase in safety. In the interest of
fostering international trade, lowering the cost of manufacturing new
transport category airplanes, and making the certification process more
efficient, the FAA, EASA, and several industry working groups came
together to create, to the maximum extent possible, a single set of
certification requirements that would be accepted in both the United
States and Europe. Therefore, as a result of these harmonization
efforts, the FAA is amending the airworthiness regulations described in
section I of this final rule, ``Overview of Final Rule.'' This action
harmonizes part 25 requirements with the corresponding requirements in
EASA CS-25 Book 1.
Currently, all manufacturers of transport category airplanes,
certificated under part 25 are expected to continue their current
practice of compliance with the EASA certification requirements in CS-
25 Book 1. Since future certificated transport airplanes are expected
to meet CS-25 Book 1, and this rule simply adopts EASA requirements,
manufacturers will incur minimal or no additional cost resulting from
this final rule. The FAA made this same determination in the NPRM and
received no comments.
The FAA has, therefore, determined that this final rule is not a
``significant regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, and is not ``significant'' as defined in DOT's
Regulatory Policies and Procedures.
[[Page 73465]]
B. Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Public Law 96-354) (RFA)
establishes ``as a principle of regulatory issuance that agencies shall
endeavor, consistent with the objectives of the rule and of applicable
statutes, to fit regulatory and informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and governmental jurisdictions
subject to regulation. To achieve this principle, agencies are required
to solicit and consider flexible regulatory proposals and to explain
the rationale for their actions to assure that such proposals are given
serious consideration.'' The RFA covers a wide-range of small entities,
including small businesses, not-for-profit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions.
Agencies must perform a review to determine whether a rule will
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. If the agency determines that it will, the agency must
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis as described in the RFA.
However, if an agency determines that a rule is not expected to
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities, section 605(b) of the RFA provides that the head of the
agency may so certify, and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required. The certification must include a statement providing the
factual basis for this determination, and the reasoning should be
clear.
In the NPRM, the FAA determined that this rule would not impose
more than minimal cost.
The FAA believes that this final rule does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities for the
following reasons. We did not receive any comments from small entities.
All United States transport category airplane manufacturers exceed the
Small Business Administration small-entity criteria of 1,500 employees.
Therefore, as provided in section 605(b), the head of the FAA certifies
that this rulemaking will not result in a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.
C. International Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (Pub. L. 96-39), as amended by the
Uruguay Round Agreements Act (Pub. L. 103-465), prohibits Federal
agencies from establishing standards or engaging in related activities
that create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States. Pursuant to these Acts, the establishment of standards is not
considered an unnecessary obstacle to the foreign commerce of the
United States, so long as the standard has a legitimate domestic
objective, such the protection of safety, and does not operate in a
manner that excludes imports that meet this objective. The statute also
requires consideration of international standards and, where
appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards. The FAA has
assessed the potential effect of this final rule and determined that it
is in accord with the Trade Agreements Act as the rule furthers the
legitimate domestic objectives of safety, creates no unnecessary
obstacles to foreign commerce, does not exclude imports, and uses
European standards as the basis for United States regulation.
D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Public Law
104-4) requires each Federal agency to prepare a written statement
assessing the effects of any Federal mandate in a proposed or final
agency rule that may result in an expenditure of $100 million or more
(in 1995 dollars) in any one year by State, local, and tribal
governments, in the aggregate, or by the private sector; such a mandate
is deemed to be a ``significant regulatory action.'' The FAA currently
uses an inflation-adjusted value of $151 million in lieu of $100
million. This final rule does not contain such a mandate; therefore,
the requirements of Title II of the Act do not apply.
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)) requires
that the FAA consider the impact of paperwork and other information
collection burdens imposed on the public. The FAA has determined that
there is no new requirement for information collection associated with
this final rule.
F. International Compatibility and Cooperation
(1) In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards and
Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable. The FAA has
reviewed the corresponding ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices and
has identified no differences with these regulations.
(2) Executive Order (EO) 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation (77 FR 26413, May 4, 2012), promotes international
regulatory cooperation to meet shared challenges involving health,
safety, labor, security, environmental, and other issues and reduce,
eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory
requirements. The FAA has analyzed this action under the policy and
agency responsibilities of Executive Order 13609, Promoting
International Regulatory Cooperation. The agency has determined that
this action would eliminate differences between U.S. aviation standards
and those of other civil aviation authorities by creating a single set
of certification requirements for transport category airplanes that
would be acceptable in both the United States and Europe.
G. Environmental Analysis
FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA actions that are categorically
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy
Act in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has
determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical
exclusion identified in paragraph 312f of Order 1050.1E and involves no
extraordinary circumstances.
V. Executive Order Determinations
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this final rule under the principles and
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The agency determined
that this action will not have a substantial direct effect on the
States, or the relationship between the Federal Government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government, and, therefore, does not have Federalism
implications.
B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
The FAA analyzed this final rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The agency has determined that it
is not a ``significant energy action'' under the executive order and it
is not likely to have a significant adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
[[Page 73466]]
VI. How To Obtain Additional Information
A. Rulemaking Documents
An electronic copy of a rulemaking document may be obtained by
using the Internet--
1. Search the Federal eRulemaking Portal (https://www.regulations.gov),
2. Visit the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/, or
3. Access the Government Printing Office's Web page at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/.
Copies may also be obtained by sending a request (identified by
notice, amendment, or docket number of this rulemaking) to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591; or by calling (202) 267-9680.
B. Comments Submitted to the Docket
Comments received may be viewed by going to https://www.regulations.gov and following the online instructions to search the
docket number for this action. Anyone is able to search the electronic
form of all comments received into any of the FAA's dockets by the name
of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the comment, if
submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
C. Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of
1996 requires the FAA to comply with small entity requests for
information or advice about compliance with statutes and regulations
within its jurisdiction. A small entity with questions regarding this
document, may contact its local FAA official, or the person listed
under the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT heading at the beginning of
the preamble. To find out more about SBREFA on the Internet, visit
https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
The Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends part 25 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations
as follows:
PART 25--AIRWORTHINESS STANDARDS: TRANSPORT CATEGORY AIRPLANES
0
1. The authority citation for part 25 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, and 44704.
0
2. Amend Sec. 25.331 by revising paragraph (c) introductory text and
paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 25.331 Symmetric maneuvering conditions.
* * * * *
(c) Maneuvering pitching conditions. The following conditions must
be investigated:
* * * * *
(2) Checked maneuver between VA and VD. Nose-up checked pitching
maneuvers must be analyzed in which the positive limit load factor
prescribed in Sec. 25.337 is achieved. As a separate condition, nose-
down checked pitching maneuvers must be analyzed in which a limit load
factor of 0g is achieved. In defining the airplane loads, the flight
deck pitch control motions described in paragraphs (c)(2)(i) through
(iv) of this section must be used:
(i) The airplane is assumed to be flying in steady level flight at
any speed between VA and VD and the flight deck
pitch control is moved in accordance with the following formula:
[delta](t) = [delta]1 sin([omega]t) for 0 <= t <=t
max
Where--
[delta]1 = the maximum available displacement of the
flight deck pitch control in the initial direction, as limited by
the control system stops, control surface stops, or by pilot effort
in accordance with Sec. 25.397(b);
[delta](t) = the displacement of the flight deck pitch control as a
function of time. In the initial direction, [delta](t) is limited to
[delta]1. In the reverse direction, [delta](t) may be
truncated at the maximum available displacement of the flight deck
pitch control as limited by the control system stops, control
surface stops, or by pilot effort in accordance with 25.397(b);
tmax = 3[pi]/2[omega];
[omega] = the circular frequency (radians/second) of the control
deflection taken equal to the undamped natural frequency of the
short period rigid mode of the airplane, with active control system
effects included where appropriate; but not less than:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR11DE14.023
Where
V = the speed of the airplane at entry to the maneuver.
VA = the design maneuvering speed prescribed in Sec.
25.335(c).
(ii) For nose-up pitching maneuvers, the complete flight deck pitch
control displacement history may be scaled down in amplitude to the
extent necessary to ensure that the positive limit load factor
prescribed in Sec. 25.337 is not exceeded. For nose-down pitching
maneuvers, the complete flight deck control displacement history may be
scaled down in amplitude to the extent necessary to ensure that the
normal acceleration at the center of gravity does not go below 0g.
(iii) In addition, for cases where the airplane response to the
specified flight deck pitch control motion does not achieve the
prescribed limit load factors, then the following flight deck pitch
control motion must be used:
[delta](t) = [delta]1 sin([omega]t) for 0 <= t <=
t1
[delta](t) = [delta]1 for t1 <= t <=
t2
[delta](t) = [delta]1 sin([omega][t + t1 -
t2]) for t2 <= t <= tmax
Where--
t1 = [pi]/2[omega]
t2 = t1 + [Delta]t
tmax = t2 + [pi]/[omega];
[Delta]t = the minimum period of time necessary to allow the
prescribed limit load factor to be achieved in the initial
direction, but it need not exceed five seconds (see figure below).
[[Page 73467]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR11DE14.024
(iv) In cases where the flight deck pitch control motion may be
affected by inputs from systems (for example, by a stick pusher that
can operate at high load factor as well as at 1g), then the effects of
those systems shall be taken into account.
(v) Airplane loads that occur beyond the following times need not
be considered:
(A) For the nose-up pitching maneuver, the time at which the normal
acceleration at the center of gravity goes below 0g;
(B) For the nose-down pitching maneuver, the time at which the
normal acceleration at the center of gravity goes above the positive
limit load factor prescribed in Sec. 25.337;
(C) tmax..
0
3. Amend Sec. 25.341 by revising paragraphs (a)(5)(i), (a)(6), and
(b), and by adding paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 25.341 Gust and turbulence loads.
(a) * * *
* * * * *
(5) * * *
(i) At airplane speeds between VB and VC:
Positive and negative gusts with reference gust velocities of 56.0 ft/
sec EAS must be considered at sea level. The reference gust velocity
may be reduced linearly from 56.0 ft/sec EAS at sea level to 44.0 ft/
sec EAS at 15,000 feet. The reference gust velocity may be further
reduced linearly from 44.0 ft/sec EAS at 15,000 feet to 20.86 ft/sec
EAS at 60,000 feet.
* * * * *
(6) * * *
Zmo = Maximum operating altitude defined in Sec. 25.1527
(feet).
* * * * *
(b) Continuous turbulence design criteria. The dynamic response of
the airplane to vertical and lateral continuous turbulence must be
taken into account. The dynamic analysis must take into account
unsteady aerodynamic characteristics and all significant structural
degrees of freedom including rigid body motions. The limit loads must
be determined for all critical altitudes, weights, and weight
distributions as specified in Sec. 25.321(b), and all critical speeds
within the ranges indicated in Sec. 25.341(b)(3).
(1) Except as provided in paragraphs (b)(4) and (5) of this
section, the following equation must be used:
PL = PL-1g U[sigma]A
Where--
PL = limit load;
PL-1g = steady 1g load for the condition;
A = ratio of root-mean-square incremental load for the condition to
root-mean-square turbulence velocity; and
U[sigma] = limit turbulence intensity in true airspeed, specified in
paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
(2) Values of A must be determined according to the following
formula:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR11DE14.025
Where--
H([Omega]) = the frequency response function, determined by dynamic
analysis, that relates the loads in the aircraft structure to the
atmospheric turbulence; and
[Phi]([Omega]) = normalized power spectral density of atmospheric
turbulence given by--
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR11DE14.026
Where--
[Omega] = reduced frequency, radians per foot; and
L = scale of turbulence = 2,500 ft.
(3) The limit turbulence intensities, U[sigma], in feet per second
true airspeed required for compliance with this paragraph are--
(i) At airplane speeds between VB and VC:
U[sigma] = U[sigma]ref Fg
Where--
U[sigma]ref is the reference turbulence intensity that varies
linearly with altitude from 90 fps (TAS) at sea level to 79 fps
(TAS) at 24,000 feet and is then constant at 79 fps (TAS) up to the
altitude of 60,000 feet.
Fg is the flight profile alleviation factor defined in
paragraph (a)(6) of this section;
(ii) At speed VD: U[sigma] is equal to \1/2\ the values
obtained under paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section.
(iii) At speeds between VC and VD: U[sigma]
is equal to a value obtained by linear interpolation.
(iv) At all speeds, both positive and negative incremental loads
due to continuous turbulence must be considered.
(4) When an automatic system affecting the dynamic response of the
airplane is included in the analysis, the effects of system non-
linearities on loads at the limit load level must be taken into account
in a realistic or conservative manner.
(5) If necessary for the assessment of loads on airplanes with
significant non-linearities, it must be assumed that the turbulence
field has a root-mean-square velocity equal to 40 percent of the
U[sigma] values specified in paragraph (b)(3) of this section. The
value of limit load is that load with the same probability of
exceedance in the turbulence field as AU[sigma] of the same load
quantity in a linear approximated model.
(c) Supplementary gust conditions for wing-mounted engines. For
airplanes equipped with wing-mounted engines, the engine mounts,
pylons, and wing supporting structure must be designed for the maximum
response at the nacelle center of gravity derived from the following
dynamic gust conditions applied to the airplane:
(1) A discrete gust determined in accordance with Sec. 25.341(a)
at each angle normal to the flight path, and separately,
(2) A pair of discrete gusts, one vertical and one lateral. The
length of each of these gusts must be independently tuned to the
maximum response in accordance with Sec. 25.341(a). The penetration of
the airplane in the combined gust field and the phasing of
[[Page 73468]]
the vertical and lateral component gusts must be established to develop
the maximum response to the gust pair. In the absence of a more
rational analysis, the following formula must be used for each of the
maximum engine loads in all six degrees of freedom:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR11DE14.027
Where--
PL = limit load;
PL-1g = steady 1g load for the condition;
LV = peak incremental response load due to a vertical
gust according to Sec. 25.341(a); and
LL = peak incremental response load due to a lateral gust
according to Sec. 25.341(a).
0
4. Amend Sec. 25.343 by revising paragraph (b)(1)(ii) to read as
follows:
Sec. 25.343 Design fuel and oil loads.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) * * *
(ii) The gust and turbulence conditions of Sec. 25.341(a) and (b),
but assuming 85% of the gust velocities prescribed in Sec.
25.341(a)(4) and 85% of the turbulence intensities prescribed in Sec.
25.341(b)(3).
* * * * *
0
5. Amend Sec. 25.345 by revising paragraph (c)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 25.345 High lift devices.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(2) The vertical gust and turbulence conditions prescribed in Sec.
25.341(a) and (b).
* * * * *
0
6. Revise Sec. 25.361 to read as follows:
Sec. 25.361 Engine and auxiliary power unit torque.
(a) For engine installations--
(1) Each engine mount, pylon, and adjacent supporting airframe
structures must be designed for the effects of--
(i) A limit engine torque corresponding to takeoff power/thrust
and, if applicable, corresponding propeller speed, acting
simultaneously with 75% of the limit loads from flight condition A of
Sec. 25.333(b);
(ii) A limit engine torque corresponding to the maximum continuous
power/thrust and, if applicable, corresponding propeller speed, acting
simultaneously with the limit loads from flight condition A of Sec.
25.333(b); and
(iii) For turbopropeller installations only, in addition to the
conditions specified in paragraphs (a)(1)(i) and (ii) of this section,
a limit engine torque corresponding to takeoff power and propeller
speed, multiplied by a factor accounting for propeller control system
malfunction, including quick feathering, acting simultaneously with 1g
level flight loads. In the absence of a rational analysis, a factor of
1.6 must be used.
(2) The limit engine torque to be considered under paragraph (a)(1)
of this section must be obtained by--
(i) For turbopropeller installations, multiplying mean engine
torque for the specified power/thrust and speed by a factor of 1.25;
(ii) For other turbine engines, the limit engine torque must be
equal to the maximum accelerating torque for the case considered.
(3) The engine mounts, pylons, and adjacent supporting airframe
structure must be designed to withstand 1g level flight loads acting
simultaneously with the limit engine torque loads imposed by each of
the following conditions to be considered separately:
(i) Sudden maximum engine deceleration due to malfunction or
abnormal condition; and
(ii) The maximum acceleration of engine.
(b) For auxiliary power unit installations, the power unit mounts
and adjacent supporting airframe structure must be designed to
withstand 1g level flight loads acting simultaneously with the limit
torque loads imposed by each of the following conditions to be
considered separately:
(1) Sudden maximum auxiliary power unit deceleration due to
malfunction, abnormal condition, or structural failure; and
(2) The maximum acceleration of the auxiliary power unit.
0
7. Add Sec. 25.362 to read as follows:
Sec. 25.362 Engine failure loads.
(a) For engine mounts, pylons, and adjacent supporting airframe
structure, an ultimate loading condition must be considered that
combines 1g flight loads with the most critical transient dynamic loads
and vibrations, as determined by dynamic analysis, resulting from
failure of a blade, shaft, bearing or bearing support, or bird strike
event. Any permanent deformation from these ultimate load conditions
must not prevent continued safe flight and landing.
(b) The ultimate loads developed from the conditions specified in
paragraph (a) of this section are to be--
(1) Multiplied by a factor of 1.0 when applied to engine mounts and
pylons; and
(2) Multiplied by a factor of 1.25 when applied to adjacent
supporting airframe structure.
0
8. Revise Sec. 25.371 to read as follows:
Sec. 25.371 Gyroscopic loads.
The structure supporting any engine or auxiliary power unit must be
designed for the loads, including gyroscopic loads, arising from the
conditions specified in Sec. Sec. 25.331, 25.341, 25.349, 25.351,
25.473, 25.479, and 25.481, with the engine or auxiliary power unit at
the maximum rotating speed appropriate to the condition. For the
purposes of compliance with this paragraph, the pitch maneuver in Sec.
25.331(c)(1) must be carried out until the positive limit maneuvering
load factor (point A2 in Sec. 25.333(b)) is reached.
0
9. Amend Sec. 25.373 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 25.373 Speed control devices.
* * * * *
(a) The airplane must be designed for the symmetrical maneuvers
prescribed in Sec. Sec. 25.333 and 25.337, the yawing maneuvers in
Sec. 25.351, and the vertical and lateral gust and turbulence
conditions prescribed in Sec. 25.341(a) and (b) at each setting and
the maximum speed associated with that setting; and
* * * * *
0
10. Amend Sec. 25.391 by revising the introductory text to read as
follows:
Sec. 25.391 Control surface loads: General.
The control surfaces must be designed for the limit loads resulting
from the flight conditions in Sec. Sec. 25.331, 25.341(a) and (b),
25.349, and 25.351, considering the requirements for--
* * * * *
0
11. Amend Sec. 25.395 by revising paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 25.395 Control system.
* * * * *
(b) The system limit loads of paragraph (a) of this section need
not exceed the loads that can be produced by the pilot (or pilots) and
by automatic or power devices operating the controls.
* * * * *
0
12. Revise Sec. 25.415 to read as follows:
Sec. 25.415 Ground gust conditions.
(a) The flight control systems and surfaces must be designed for
the limit loads generated when the airplane is subjected to a
horizontal 65-knot ground gust from any direction while taxiing and
while parked. For airplanes equipped with control system gust locks,
the taxiing condition must be evaluated with the controls locked and
unlocked, and the parked condition must be evaluated with the controls
locked.
(b) The control system and surface loads due to ground gust may be
[[Page 73469]]
assumed to be static loads, and the hinge moments H must be computed
from the formula:
H = K (1/2) [rho]o V\2\ c S
Where--
K = hinge moment factor for ground gusts derived in paragraph (c) of
this section;
[rho]o = density of air at sea level;
V = 65 knots relative to the aircraft;
S = area of the control surface aft of the hinge line;
c = mean aerodynamic chord of the control surface aft of the hinge
line.
(c) The hinge moment factor K for ground gusts must be taken from
the following table:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Surface K Position of controls
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Aileron......................... 0.75 Control column locked
or lashed in mid-
position.
(2) Aileron......................... * 0.5
0
(3) Elevator........................ * 0.7
5
(4) Elevator........................ * 0.7
5
(5) Rudder.......................... 0.75 Rudder in neutral.
(6) Rudder.......................... 0.75 Rudder at full throw.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* A positive value of K indicates a moment tending to depress the
surface, while a negative value of K indicates a moment tending to
raise the surface.
(d) The computed hinge moment of paragraph (b) of this section must
be used to determine the limit loads due to ground gust conditions for
the control surface. A 1.25 factor on the computed hinge moments must
be used in calculating limit control system loads.
(e) Where control system flexibility is such that the rate of load
application in the ground gust conditions might produce transient
stresses appreciably higher than those corresponding to static loads,
in the absence of a rational analysis substantiating a different
dynamic factor, an additional factor of 1.6 must be applied to the
control system loads of paragraph (d) of this section to obtain limit
loads. If a rational analysis is used, the additional factor must not
be less than 1.2.
(f) For the condition of the control locks engaged, the control
surfaces, the control system locks, and the parts of any control
systems between the surfaces and the locks must be designed to the
resultant limit loads. Where control locks are not provided, then the
control surfaces, the control system stops nearest the surfaces, and
the parts of any control systems between the surfaces and the stops
must be designed to the resultant limit loads. If the control system
design is such as to allow any part of the control system to impact
with the stops due to flexibility, then the resultant impact loads must
be taken into account in deriving the limit loads due to ground gust.
(g) For the condition of taxiing with the control locks disengaged,
or where control locks are not provided, the following apply:
(1) The control surfaces, the control system stops nearest the
surfaces, and the parts of any control systems between the surfaces and
the stops must be designed to the resultant limit loads.
(2) The parts of the control systems between the stops nearest the
surfaces and the flight deck controls must be designed to the resultant
limit loads, except that the parts of the control system where loads
are eventually reacted by the pilot need not exceed:
(i) The loads corresponding to the maximum pilot loads in Sec.
25.397(c) for each pilot alone; or
(ii) 0.75 times these maximum loads for each pilot when the pilot
forces are applied in the same direction.
0
13. Revise 25.1517 to read as follows:
Sec. 25.1517 Rough air speed, VRA.
(a) A rough air speed, VRA, for use as the recommended
turbulence penetration airspeed, and a rough air Mach number,
MRA, for use as the recommended turbulence penetration Mach
number, must be established. VRA/MRA must be
sufficiently less than VMO/MMO to ensure that
likely speed variation during rough air encounters will not cause the
overspeed warning to operate too frequently.
(b) At altitudes where VMO is not limited by Mach
number, in the absence of a rational investigation substantiating the
use of other values, VRA must be less than VMO--
35 KTAS.
(c) At altitudes where VMO is limited by Mach number,
MRA may be chosen to provide an optimum margin between low
and high speed buffet boundaries.
Appendix G to Part 25 [Removed and Reserved]
0
14. Remove and reserve appendix G to part 25.
Issued under authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f) and 44701(a)
in Washington, DC, on November 14, 2014.
Michael P. Huerta,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2014-28938 Filed 12-10-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P