Revision of Airworthiness Standards for Normal, Utility, Acrobatic, and Commuter Category Airplanes, 13451-13528 [2016-05493]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Vol. 81
Monday,
No. 49
March 14, 2016
Part II
Department of Transportation
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 21, 23, 35, et al.
Revision of Airworthiness Standards for Normal, Utility, Acrobatic, and
Commuter Category Airplanes; Proposed Rule
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4717
Sfmt 4717
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13452
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 21, 23, 35, 43, 91, 121,
and 135
[Docket No.: FAA–2015–1621; Notice No.
16–01]
RIN 2120–AK65
Revision of Airworthiness Standards
for Normal, Utility, Acrobatic, and
Commuter Category Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
The FAA proposes to amend
its airworthiness standards for normal,
utility, acrobatic, and commuter
category airplanes by removing current
prescriptive design requirements and
replacing them with performance-based
airworthiness standards. The proposed
standards would also replace the
current weight and propulsion divisions
in small airplane regulations with
performance- and risk-based divisions
for airplanes with a maximum seating
capacity of 19 passengers or less and a
maximum takeoff weight of 19,000
pounds or less. The proposed
airworthiness standards are based on,
and would maintain, the level of safety
of the current small airplane
regulations. Finally, the FAA proposes
to adopt additional airworthiness
standards to address certification for
flight in icing conditions, enhanced stall
characteristics, and minimum control
speed to prevent departure from
controlled flight for multiengine
airplanes. This notice of proposed
rulemaking addresses the Congressional
mandate set forth in the Small Airplane
Revitalization Act of 2013.
DATES: Send comments on or before
May 13, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Send comments identified
by docket number FAA–2015–1621
using any of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking 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 9
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except Federal holidays.
• Fax: Fax comments to Docket
Operations at 202–493–2251.
Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C.
553(c), DOT solicits comments from the
public to better inform its rulemaking
process. DOT posts these comments,
without edit, including any personal
information the commenter provides, to
www.regulations.gov, as described in
the system of records notice (DOT/ALL–
14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
https://www.dot.gov/privacy.
Docket: Background documents or
comments received may be read at
https://www.regulations.gov at any time.
Follow the online instructions for
accessing the docket or go to the Docket
Operations in Room W12–140 of the
West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
technical questions concerning this
action, contact Lowell Foster,
Regulations and Policy, ACE–111,
Federal Aviation Administration, 901
Locust St., Kansas City, MO 64106;
telephone (816) 329–4125; email
lowell.foster@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Later in
this preamble, under the Additional
Information section, we discuss how
you can comment on this proposal and
how we will handle your comments.
This discussion includes related
information about the docket, privacy,
and the handling of proprietary or
confidential business information. We
also discuss how you can get a copy of
this proposal and related rulemaking
documents.
All sections of part 23 would contain
proposed revisions, except the FAA
would not make any substantive
changes to the following sections:
§§ 23.1457, Cockpit Voice Recorders,
and 23.1459, Flight Data Recorders. The
only proposed changes to § 23.1459
would be for the purpose of aligning
part 23 references. These sections are
nevertheless included in this proposed
revision for context.
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose and History of the Proposed
Performance-Based Standards
B. Summary of Major Provisions
1. Performance Standards and Airplane
Crashworthiness
2. Loss of Control
3. Icing Certification Standards
C. Cost and Benefits
II. Authority for This Rulemaking
III. Background
A. Part 23 History
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
B. New Safety Requirements
C. Benefits for the Existing Fleet
D. Conforming Amendments and Other
Minor Amendments
E. Public Policy Implementation
1. Regulatory Planning and Review
2. Consensus Standards
3. International Cooperation Efforts for
Reorganizing Part 23
F. Means of Compliance
G. FAA Strategic Initiatives
IV. Discussion of Proposal
A. Reorganization of Airworthiness
Standards Based on Risk and
Performance
B. Introduction of Simple Airplanes
C. Establishing Performance-Based
Standards and the Use of Means of
Compliance
D. Crashworthiness as an Illustration of the
Benefits of Performance-Based
Regulations
E. Additional Requirements To Prevent
Loss of Control
F. Additional Requirements for Flight in
Icing Conditions
G. Production of Replacement and
Modification Articles
V. Key Terms and Concepts Used in This
Document
VI. Discussion of the Proposed Regulatory
Amendments
A. Part 23, Airworthiness Standards
1. Subpart A—General
2. Subpart B—Flight
3. Subpart C—Structures
4. Subpart D—Design and Construction
5. Subpart E—Powerplant
6. Subpart F—Equipment
7. Subpart G—Flightcrew Interface and
Other Information
8. Appendices to Part 23
B. Miscellaneous Amendments
1. Production of Replacement and
Modification Articles (§ 21.9)
2. Designation of Applicable Regulations
(§ 21.17)
3. Issuance of Type Certificate: Primary
Category Aircraft (§ 21.24)
4. Flight Tests (§ 21.35)
5. Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness and Manufacturer’s
Maintenance Manuals Having
Airworthiness Limitations Sections
(§ 21.50)
6. Designation of Applicable Regulations
(§ 21.101)
7. Applicability (§ 35.1)
8. Fatigue Limits and Evaluation (§ 35.37)
9. Altimeter System Test and Inspection
(Appendix E to Part 43)
10. Powered Civil Aircraft With Standard
Category U.S. Airworthiness Certificates:
Instrument and Equipment Requirements
(§ 91.205)
11. Restricted Category Civil Aircraft:
Operating Limitations (§ 91.313)
12. Increased Maximum Certification
Weights for Certain Airplanes Operated
in Alaska (§ 91.323)
13. Second In Command Requirements
(§ 91.531)
14. Additional Emergency Equipment
(§ 121.310)
15. Additional Airworthiness
Requirements (§ 135.169)
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
VII. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
A. Regulatory Evaluation Summary
B. Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Determination
C. International Trade Impact Assessment
D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
F. International Compatibility and
Cooperation
G. Environmental Analysis
H. Regulations Affecting Intrastate
Aviation in Alaska
VIII. Executive Order Determination
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
IX. Additional Information
A. Comments Invited
B. Availability of Rulemaking Documents
Appendix 1 to the Preamble—Current to
Proposed Regulations Cross-Reference
Table
Appendix 2 to the Preamble—Abbreviations
and Acronyms Frequently Used In This
Document
I. Executive Summary
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
A. Purpose and History of the Proposed
Performance-Based Standards
Part 23 of Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations (14 CFR) prescribes
airworthiness standards for issuance
and amendment of type certificates for
airplanes with a passenger-seating
configuration of 19 or less and a
maximum certificated takeoff weight of
19,000 pounds or less. Airplanes
certificated under part 23 are typically
used for recreation, training, personal
travel, and limited commercial
applications.
The current part 23 airworthiness
standards are largely prescriptive,
meaning that they describe detailed
design requirements, and are based on
airplane designs from the 1950’s and
1960’s. As a result of this prescriptive
framework, the FAA often requires a
design approval applicant seeking to
incorporate new or innovative
technology to provide additional
documentation that typically results in
the FAA’s issuance of special
conditions, exemptions, or equivalent
level of safety (ELOS) findings.1 The
FAA recognizes that these additional
1 Special conditions give the manufacturer
permission to build the aircraft, engine or propeller
with additional capabilities not addressed in the
regulations. A petition for exemption is a request
to the FAA by an individual or entity asking for
relief from the requirements of a regulation.
Equivalent level of safety findings are made when
literal compliance with a certification regulation
cannot be shown and compensating factors exist
which can be shown to provide an equivalent level
of safety. 14 CFR parts 11 and 21 provides
information on special conditions and exemptions.
FAA Order 8110–112A provides standard
procedures for issue paper and equivalent level of
safety memoranda.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
procedures and requirements are costly
to the FAA and industry, act as barriers
to certification, and discourage
innovation. Therefore, to encourage the
installation of new safety-enhancing
technology and streamline the
certification process, the FAA proposes
replacing the prescriptive requirements
found in the current part 23 with
performance-based standards.
The FAA believes this proposed
rulemaking would maintain the level of
safety associated with current part 23,
while providing greater flexibility to
applicants seeking certification of their
airplane designs. By doing so, this
proposed rulemaking would hasten the
adoption of safety enhancing technology
in type-certificated products while
reducing regulatory time and cost
burdens for the aviation industry and
FAA. This proposed rulemaking would
also reflect the FAA’s safety continuum
philosophy,2 which balances the need
for an acceptable level of safety with the
societal burden of achieving that level
safety, across the broad range of airplane
types certificated under part 23.
This proposed rulemaking is the
result of an effort the FAA began in
2008 to re-evaluate the way it sets
standards for different types of
airplanes. Through this effort, a joint
FAA and industry team produced the
Part 23 Certification Process Study 3
(CPS), which reviewed the life cycle of
part 23 airplanes to evaluate
certification processes and develop
recommendations. Two key
recommendations were to (1) reorganize
part 23 based on airplane performance
and complexity rather than the existing
weight and propulsion divisions, and
(2) permit the use of consensus
standards as a means to keep pace with
rapidly increasing design complexity in
the aviation industry.
In 2010, with the CPS as a foundation,
the FAA conducted a Part 23 Regulatory
Review and held meetings with the
public and industry to gain input on
revising part 23. These meetings
confirmed strong public and industry
support for the CPS recommendations to
revise part 23.
In 2011, the FAA formed the Part 23
Reorganization ARC to consider further
the CPS recommendation to reorganize
part 23 based on airplane performance
and complexity and to investigate the
use of consensus standards. The ARC
2 The FAA’s safety continuum philosophy is that
one level of safety may not be appropriate for all
aviation. The FAA accepts higher levels of risk,
with correspondingly fewer requirements for the
demonstration of compliance, when aircraft are
used for personal transportation.
3 See www.regulations.gov (Docket # FAA–2015–
1621).
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13453
recommendations,4 published in 2013,
echo the CPS recommendations.
On January 7, 2013, Congress passed
the Federal Aviation Modernization and
Reform Act of 2012 5 (Public Law 112–
95; 49 U.S.C. 40101 note) (FAMRA),
which requires the Administrator, in
consultation with the aviation industry,
to assess the aircraft certification and
approval process. Based on the ARC
recommendations and in response to
FAMRA, the FAA began work on this
proposed rulemaking on September 24,
2013. Subsequently, on November 27,
2013, Congress passed the Small
Airplane Revitalization Act of 2013
(Public Law 113–53, 49 U.S.C. 44704
note) (SARA), which requires the FAA
to issue a final rule revising the
certification requirements for small
airplanes by—
• Creating a regulatory regime that
will improve safety and decrease
certification costs;
• Setting safety objectives that will
spur innovation and technology
adoption;
• Replacing prescriptive rules with
performance-based regulations; and
• Using consensus standards to
clarify how safety objectives may be met
by specific designs and technologies.
The FAA believes that the
performance-based-standards
component of this proposal complies
with the FAMRA and the SARA because
it would improve safety, reduce
regulatory compliance costs, and spur
innovation and the adoption of new
technology. This proposal would
replace the weight-and propulsionbased prescriptive airworthiness
standards in part 23 with performanceand risk-based airworthiness standards
for airplanes with a maximum seating
capacity of 19 passengers or less and a
maximum takeoff weight of 19,000
pounds or less. The proposed standards
would maintain the level of safety
associated with the current part 23,
while also facilitating the adoption of
new and innovative technology in
general aviation (GA) airplanes.
B. Summary of Major Provisions
This proposal to revise part 23 has
two principal components: Establishing
a performance-based regulatory regime
and adding new certification standards
for loss of control (LOC) and icing.
Where the FAA proposes to establish
new certification requirements, these
requirements would be adopted within
the same performance-based framework
proposed for part 23 as a whole.
4 See www.regulations.gov (Docket # FAA–2015–
1621).
5 https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT112hrpt381/pdf/CRPT-112hrpt381.pdf.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13454
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
1. Performance Standards and Airplane
Crashworthiness
Airplane crashworthiness and
occupant safety is an example of how
moving towards performance-based
standards and providing greater
flexibility to industry would increase
aviation safety. Although the FAA has
over the years incrementally amended
part 23 to enhance occupant safety,
these amendments have focused on
individual system components, rather
than the safety of the system as a whole.
By building greater flexibility into FAA
regulations governing crash testing, this
proposal would allow the aviation
industry to develop and implement
novel solutions.
2. Loss of Control
One proposed revision to part 23
would improve general aviation safety
by creating additional certification
standards to reduce LOC accidents.
Inadvertent stalls resulting in airplane
LOC are the most common cause of
small airplane fatal accidents. These
LOC accidents frequently occur in the
traffic pattern or at low altitudes, where
the airplane is too low for a pilot to
recover control before impacting the
ground. The proposed revisions would
require applicants to use new design
approaches and technologies to improve
airplane stall characteristics and pilot
situational awareness to prevent such
accidents.
3. Icing Certification Standards
Another proposed revision to part 23
would improve GA safety by addressing
severe icing conditions. In the 1990s,
the FAA became aware of the need to
expand the icing conditions considered
during the certification of airplanes and
turbine aircraft engines. In particular,
the FAA determined that revised icing
certification standards should include
Supercooled Large Drops (SLD),6 mixed
phase, and ice crystals.
This proposed rule would require
manufacturers that choose to certify an
airplane for flight in SLD to demonstrate
safe operations in SLD conditions. For
those manufacturers who choose instead
to certify an airplane with a prohibition
against flight in SLD conditions, this
proposed rule would require a means
for detecting SLD conditions and
showing the airplane can safely exit
such conditions. Industry has indicated
that these requirements would not
impose significant additional cost
burden on industry because many
manufacturers already have equipped
recent airplanes with technology to
meet the standards for detecting and
exiting SLD conditions in accordance
with current FAA guidance.
C. Cost and Benefits
The goal of this proposal is to create
a cost-effective approach to certification
that facilitates the adoption of new
safety enhancing technologies and
allows for alternative means of
compliance. The FAA has analyzed the
benefits and costs associated with this
NPRM. If the proposed rule saves only
one human life, for example, by
improving stall characteristics and stall
warnings, that alone would result in
benefits outweighing the costs. The
following table shows these results.
ESTIMATED BENEFITS AND COSTS FROM 2017 TO 2036
[2014 $ millions]
Safety benefits + cost
savings = total benefits
Costs
Total ..........................................................................................................................................................
Present value ............................................................................................................................................
Accordingly, the FAA has determined
that the proposed rule would be cost
beneficial.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
II. 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. Under that section, the FAA is
charged with promoting safe flight of
civil airplanes in air commerce by
prescribing minimum standards
required in the interest of safety for the
design and performance of airplanes.
This regulation is within the scope of
that authority because it prescribes new
performance-based safety standards for
the design of normal, utility, acrobatic,
and commuter category airplanes.
6 SLD conditions include freezing drizzle and
freezing rain, which contain drops larger than those
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
Additionally, this rulemaking
addresses the Congressional mandate set
forth in the Small Airplane
Revitalization Act of 2013 (Public Law
113–53; 49 U.S.C. 44704 note) (SARA).
Section 3 of SARA requires the
Administrator to issue a final rule to
advance the safety and continued
development of small airplanes by
reorganizing the certification
requirements for such airplanes under
part 23 to streamline the approval of
safety advancements. SARA directs that
the rule address specific
recommendations of the 2013 Part 23
Reorganization Aviation Rulemaking
Committee (ARC).
III. Background
The range of airplanes certificated
under part 23 is diverse in terms of
performance capability, number of
passengers, design complexity,
technology, and intended use.
Currently, each part 23 airplane’s
certification requirements are
determined by reference to a
$3.9
3.9
combination of factors, including
weight, number of passengers, and
propulsion type. The resulting divisions
(i.e., normal, utility, acrobatic, and
commuter categories) historically were
appropriate because there was a clear
relationship between the propulsion
and weight of the airplane and its
associated performance and complexity.
Technological developments have
altered the dynamics of that
relationship. For example, highperformance and complex airplanes
now exist within the weight range that
historically was occupied by only light
and simple airplanes. The introduction
of high-performance, lightweight
airplanes required subsequent
amendments of part 23 to include more
stringent and demanding standards—
often based on the part 25 requirements
for larger transport category airplanes—
to ensure an adequate level of safety for
airplanes under part 23. The unintended
result is that some of the more stringent
and demanding standards for highperformance airplanes now apply to the
specified in appendix C to part 25, and can accrete
aft of wing leading edge ice protection systems.
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
$19.6 + $12.6 = $32.2.
$6.2 + $5.8 = $12.0.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
certification of simple and lowperformance airplanes.
A. Part 23 History
Part 23 originated from performancebased requirements developed by the
Bureau of Air Commerce and the Civil
Aeronautics Administration in the
1930s. These regulations were contained
in specific Civil Air Regulations (CAR)
for the certification of aircraft (i.e., CAR
3, 4, and 4a). These requirements, along
with various bulletins and related
documents, were subsequently revised
and first published as 14 CFR part 23 in
1964 (29 FR 17955, December 18, 1964).
Over the past five decades and after
numerous amendments, part 23 has
evolved into a body of highly complex
and prescriptive requirements
attempting to codify specific design
requirements, address specific problems
encountered during prior certification
projects, and respond to specific
recommendations from the National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
Although the intent of the
prescriptive language contained in
current part 23 was to increase the level
of safety, prevent confusion, and clarify
ambiguities, the current regulations
have also restrained manufacturers’
ability to employ new designs and
testing methodologies. The FAA
believes moving towards performancebased standards should significantly
reduce or eliminate barriers to
innovation and facilitate the
introduction of new safety-enhancing
technologies.
In 2008, the FAA conducted a review
of part 23 by initiating the Part 23 CPS.
Collaborating with industry, the team’s
challenge was to determine the future of
part 23, given today’s current products
and anticipated future products. The
team identified opportunities for
improvements by examining the entire
life cycle of a part 23 airplane. The CPS
recommended reorganizing part 23
using criteria focused on performance
and design complexity. The CPS also
recommended that the FAA implement
general airworthiness requirements,
with the means of compliance defined
in industry consensus standards
standards. In 2010, following the
publication of the Part 23 CPS, the FAA
held a series of public meetings to seek
feedback concerning the findings and
recommendations. Overall, the feedback
was supportive of and in some cases
augmented the CPS recommendations.
One notable difference between the
CPS findings and the public feedback
was the public’s request that the FAA
revise part 23 certification requirements
for simple, entry-level airplanes. Over
the past two decades, part 23 standards
have become more complex as industry
has generally shifted towards
correspondingly complex, highperformance airplanes. This transition
has placed an increased burden on
applicants seeking to certificate smaller,
simpler airplanes. Public comments
requested that the FAA focus on
reducing the costs and time burden
associated with certificating small
airplanes by restructuring the
requirements based on perceived risk.
The safety risk for most simple airplane
designs is typically low.
On August 15, 2011, the
Administrator chartered the Part 23
13455
Reorganization ARC to consider the
following CPS recommendations—
• Recommendation 1.1.1—Reorganize
part 23 based on airplane performance
and complexity, rather than the existing
weight and propulsion divisions; and
• Recommendation 1.1.2—
Certification requirements for part 23
airplanes should be written on a broad,
general, and progressive level,
segmented into tiers based on
complexity and performance.
The ARC’s recommendations took
into account the FAMRA, which
requires the Administrator, in
consultation with the aviation industry,
to assess the aircraft certification and
approval process. The purpose of the
ARC’s assessment was to develop
recommendations for streamlining and
reengineering the certification process
to improve efficiency, reduce costs, and
ensure that the Administrator can
conduct certifications and approvals in
a manner that supports and enables the
development of new products and
technologies and the global
competitiveness of the United States
aviation industry.7 FAMRA also directs
the Administrator to consider the
recommendations from the Part 23
Certification Process Study.8
ARC membership represented a broad
range of of stakeholder perspectives,
including U.S. and international
manufacturers, trade associations, and
foreign civil aviation authorities. The
ARC was supported by FAA subject
matter experts from all affected lines of
business, from design and production
certification to continued airworthiness
and alterations. The following table
identifies ARC participants:
U.S. Manufacturers
Avidyne ...............................................................
Cirrus ..................................................................
GAMI ..................................................................
Honda .................................................................
Lockheed Martin .................................................
Sensenich Propellers .........................................
Bendix-King ......................................................
Continental Motors ...........................................
Garmin .............................................................
Honeywell .........................................................
Rockwell-Collins ...............................................
Tamarack Aero ................................................
Cessna.
Cub Crafters.
Hawker Beechcraft.
Kestrel.
Quest.
TruTrak.
U.S. Organizations
Aircraft Electronics Association (AEA) ...............
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) ............
RTCA ..................................................................
Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association
(AOPA).
General Aviation Manufacturers Association
(GAMA).
SAE.
ASTM.
National Air Traffic Controllers Association
(NATCA).
International Manufacturers
Dassault Falcon ..................................................
Rotax ..................................................................
7 Section
312(c)
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Diamond ...........................................................
Socata.
8 Section
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Flight Design.
312 (b)(6)
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13456
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
International Civil Aviation Authorities
Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA) .........
Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC) ...
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) ........
Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand.
Each member or participant on the
committee represented an identified
segment of the aviation community,
with the authority to speak for that
segment. The ARC also invited subject
matter experts to support specialized
working groups and subgroups, as
necessary. These working groups
developed recommendations and
briefed the ARC as a whole. The ARC
then collectively discussed and voted to
accept or reject the recommendations.
All of the recommendations included in
the ARC’s report had overwhelming
majority agreement.
The ARC noted the prevailing view
within industry was that the only way
to reduce the program risk, or business
risk, associated with the certification of
new airplane designs was to avoid novel
design approaches and testing
methodologies. The certification of new
and innovative products today
frequently requires the FAA’s use of
ELOS findings, special conditions, and
exemptions. These take time, resulting
in uncertainty and high project costs.
The ARC emphasized that although
industry needs from the outset to
develop new airplanes designed to use
new technology, current certification
costs inhibit the introduction of new
technology. The ARC identified
prescriptive certification requirements
as a major barrier to installing
safety-enhancing modifications in the
existing fleet and to producing newer,
safer airplanes.
The ARC also examined the
harmonization of certification
requirements among the FAA and
foreign civil aviation authorities (CAAs),
and the potential for such
harmonization to improve safety while
reducing costs. Adopting performancebased safety regulations that facilitate
international harmonization, coupled
with internationally accepted means of
compliance, could result in both
significant cost savings and the enabling
of safety-enhancing equipment
installations. The ARC recommended
that internationally accepted means of
compliance should be reviewed and
voluntarily accepted by the appropriate
aviation authorities, in accordance with
a process established by those
authorities. Although each CAA would
be capable of rejecting all or part of any
particular means of compliance, the
intent would be to have full civil
authority participation in the creation of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
the means of compliance to ease
acceptance of the means of compliance.
B. New Safety Requirements
The performance-based standards
proposed in this NPRM are designed to
maintain the level of safety provided by
current part 23 requirements. The
current part 23 weight and propulsion
divisions were based on assumptions
that do not reflect the diversity of
performance capabilities, design
complexity, technology, intended use,
and seating capacity of today’s new
airplane designs, or the future airplane
designs that will become possible as
technology continues to evolve. The
FAA would therefore replace the
current divisions with certification
levels 1 thru 4, low performance, high
performance, and simple. Furthermore,
this would replace the current divisions
within the individual sections with
technical and operational capabilities
focused on the technical drivers (e.g.,
stall speed, Visual Flight Rules (VFR)
and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR)
operations, pressurization). These types
of technical and operational criteria
would apply a more appropriate set of
standards to each airplane, and continue
to accommodate the wide range of
airplane designs within part 23.
To begin, the FAA proposes to
eliminate commuter, utility, and
acrobatic airplane categories from part
23, retaining only a normal category for
all new part 23 type certificated airplane
design approvals. The differences
between normal, utility, and acrobatic
categories are currently very limited and
primarily affect airframe structure
requirements. Proposed part 23 would
continue to allow a normal category
airplane to be approved for aerobatics,
provided the airplane is certificated for
the safety factors and defined limits of
aerobatic operations.
In addition, the FAA proposes that
airplanes approved for spins be
certificated to aerobatic standards.
Under the current § 23.3(b), the utility
category provides airplanes additional
margin for the more stringent inertial
structural loads resulting from intended
spins and other maneuvers. An airplane
designed with traditional handling
qualities and designed to allow spin
training is more susceptible to
inadvertent departure from controlled
flight. The FAA therefore believes that
maintaining the current utility category
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
National Civil
(ANAC).
Aviation
Agency
of
Brazil
for spin and limited aerobatic maneuver
capable airplanes would negate the
largest, single safety gain expected from
this rulemaking action—the significant
reduction in inadvertent stall-related
departures from controlled flight.
Under this proposal, airplanes already
certificated in the commuter, utility,
and acrobatic categories would continue
to fall within those categories. Each new
airplane design, however, would be
subject to varying levels of analysis,
based on the potential risk and
performance of the airplane’s design. A
more rigorous standard, such as
currently applied to commuter category
airplanes, would apply to higher risk
and higher performance airplanes.
The proposed requirements would
also include new enhanced standards
for resistance to departure from
controlled flight. Recognizing that the
largest number of fatal accidents for part
23 airplanes results from LOC in flight,
the FAA proposes to update
certification standards to address these
risks. LOC happens when an airplane
enters a flight regime outside its normal
flight envelope or performance
capabilities and develops into a stall or
spin, an event that can surprise the
pilot. A pilot’s lack of awareness of the
state of the airplane in flight and the
airplane’s low-speed handling
characteristics are the main causal
factors of LOC accidents. Furthermore,
stall and departure accidents are
generally fatal because an airplane is
often too low to the ground for the pilot
to recover. Improving safety that
reduces stall and LOC accidents would
save lives. The FAA is therefore
proposing new rules for stall
characteristics and stall warnings that
would result in airplane designs more
resistant to inadvertently departing
controlled flight.
Another type of low-speed LOC
accident that occurs in significant
numbers involves minimum control
speed (VMC) in light twin-engine
airplanes. Virtually all twin-engine
airplanes have a VMC that allows
directional control to be maintained
after one engine fails. This speed is
usually above the stall speed of the
airplane. However, light twin-engine
airplanes typically have limited climb
capability on one engine. In the
accidents reviewed by the ARC and
FAA, often in these situations, pilots
attempted to maintain a climb or
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
maintain altitude, which slowed the
airplane down, rather than looking for
the best landing site immediately,
maintaining control the whole way. If
the airplane’s speed drops below VMC,
the pilot can lose control. In tying the
minimum control speed to the stall
speed of the airplane, pilots, rather than
attempting to maintain climb and lose
directional control, would instead react
appropriately with stall training
techniques, resulting in a controlled
descent rather than a loss of directional
control. This requirement will be on
new airplanes and should add little or
no cost because it can be designed in
from the start.
The FAA also has identified a need
for improved certification standards
related to operations in severe icing
conditions. More specifically, in the
1990’s, the FAA became aware of the
need to expand the icing conditions
considered during the certification of
airplanes and turbine aircraft engines, to
increase flight safety during some severe
icing conditions. The 1994 accident in
Roselawn, Indiana, involving an Avions
de Transport Regional ATR 72 series
airplane in SLD conditions, brought to
public and governmental attention
safety concerns about the adequacy of
the existing icing certification
standards.
As a result of the 1994 accident, and
consistent with related NTSB
recommendations, in 1997 the
Administrator tasked the Aviation
Rulemaking Advisory Committee
(ARAC) (62 FR 64621, December 8,
1997) with defining SLD, mixed phase,
and ice crystal icing environments, and
designing corresponding safety
requirements for those conditions. In
June 2000, the ARAC’s task was revised
to address only transport category
airplanes. More recent events, such as
an Air France Airbus model A330–203
AF447 9 accident, in 2009, highlighted
the negative effects of ice crystals on
airspeed indication systems and turbojet
engines.
The FAA ultimately published
amendments 25–140 (79 FR 65507,
November 4, 2014) and 33–34 (79 FR
65507, November 4, 2014), Airplane and
Engine Certification Requirements in
Supercooled Large Drop, Mixed Phase,
and Ice Crystal Icing Conditions that
expanded parts 25 and 33 icing
requirements, but did not amend part 23
requirements. On February 19, 2010, the
Administrator chartered a Part 23 Icing
ARC to review and recommend SLD,
mixed phase, and ice crystal icing
9 See www.regulations.gov (Docket #FAA–2015–
1621), Air France A330–203, Flight AF 447 Final
Accident Report
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
conditions regulations and guidance for
part 23. In February 2012, the Part 23
Icing ARC formally identified a need to
improve the part 23 regulations to
ensure safe operation of airplanes and
engines in SLD and ice crystal
conditions.10 In particular, the Part 23
Icing ARC recommended adopting most
of the part 25 icing rules, including the
requirement to show either that an
airplane can safely fly in SLD
conditions, or that it can detect and
safely exit SLD. The proposals in this
NPRM incorporate the
recommendations of the Part 23 Icing
ARC.
C. Benefits for the Existing Fleet
The proposed revisions would benefit
owners and modifiers of existing part 23
airplanes, as well as airplane designers
and manufacturers. Both currently and
under this proposal, airplanes may be
modified by: (1) An alteration to an
individual airplane; (2) a supplemental
type certificate (STC) for multiple
airplanes, or (3) an amendment to an
original type design via an amended
type certificate (TC). This proposal
would streamline each of these methods
for modifying airplanes.
The proposed change to § 21.9 would
facilitate FAA approval of low-risk
equipment produced for installation in
type-certificated airplanes, thereby
streamlining the process for owners to
upgrade equipment on their individual
airplanes. An example of how this
change would facilitate safety
improvements is the installation of
inexpensive weather display systems in
the cockpits of small airplanes. These
systems allow a pilot to view current
weather conditions along the planned
flight route and at the destination
airport, avoiding unexpected or
deteriorating weather conditions. Since
these systems are not required and
because they represent low safety risk
from failure, the FAA believes
streamlining its approval process to
produce them for use in existing
airplanes could lower costs and increase
availability of these systems.
The proposed changes in the rules
would also streamline the process for
design approval holders applying for a
type design change, or for a third party
modifier applying for an STC, to
incorporate new and improved
equipment in a model or several models
of airplanes. Since the revised part 23
standards would be much less
prescriptive, the certification process for
modifications would be simplified.
Certification of an amended TC or STC
10 See www.regulations.gov (Docket #FAA–2015–
1621)
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13457
under the proposed part 23 standards
would require fewer special conditions
or exemptions, lowering costs and
causing fewer project delays.
D. Conforming Amendments and Other
Minor Amendments
References to part 23 appear
throughout the FAA’s current
regulations. Accordingly, the FAA
proposes to amend the following parts
for consistency with the proposed
revisions to part 23: Part 21, part 35,
part 43, part 91, part 121, and part 135.
The FAA also proposes to revise part
21 to simplify the approval process for
low-risk articles. Specifically, the FAA
proposes amending § 21.9 to allow FAAapproved production of replacement
and modification articles using methods
not listed in § 21.9(a). This proposed
change is intended to reduce constraints
on the use of non-required, low risk
articles, such as carbon monoxide
detectors and weather display systems.
E. Public Policy Implementation
The intent of this NPRM is to reduce
regulatory barriers by establishing a
system based on safety-focused
performance requirements and FAA
acceptance—as a means of
compliance—of consensus standards.
FAA-accepted consensus standards
would add clarity to the certification
process and streamline FAA
involvement in the development of
means of compliance. Additionally,
adopting performance standards would
significantly reduce the complexity of
part 23. Furthermore, the introduction
of airplane certification levels based on
risk (i.e., number of passengers) and
performance (i.e., speed) would advance
the FAA’s effort to introduce risk-based
decision-making and better align with
the FAA’s safety continuum philosophy.
Together, the FAA believes these
changes would allow the FAA to
provide appropriate oversight based on
the safety continuum and would restore
a simple and cost effective certification
process based on proven engineering
practices.
1. Regulatory Planning and Review
In accordance with applicable
executive orders, the FAA has
determined that the proposed revisions
to part 23 are the most cost-beneficial
way of achieving the agency’s regulatory
objectives. This is because the proposal
would relieve industry of a significant
regulatory burden while maintaining or
improving the level of safety under the
regulations. In particular, Executive
Order 12866, Regulatory Planning and
Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993),
and Executive Order 13563, Improving
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
13458
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Regulation and Regulatory Review (76
FR 3821, January 21, 2011), direct each
Federal agency to propose or adopt a
regulation only upon a reasoned
determination that the benefits of the
intended regulation justify its costs.
This proposal is not an economically
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as
defined in section 3(f) of Executive
Order 12866 11 and it satisfies Executive
Order 13563 by protecting public
health, welfare, safety, while promoting
economic growth, innovation,
competitiveness, and job creation.
Under the above-referenced executive
orders, when an agency determines that
a regulation is the best available method
of achieving its regulatory objective, the
agency must design the regulation or
regulations in the most cost-effective
manner. In doing so, each agency must
consider incentives for innovation,
consistency, predictability, enforcement
and compliance costs (to the
government, regulated entities, and the
public), flexibility, distributive impacts,
and equity. Each agency must identify
and assess alternative forms of
regulation and shall specify, to the
extent feasible, performance objectives,
rather than specifying the behavior or
manner of compliance that regulated
entities must adopt. This proposal meets
these requirements because it would
implement performance objectives
rather than a prescriptive methodology,
thereby reducing time and cost burdens
on industry and increasing
opportunities for innovation.
Executive Order 13610, Identifying
and Reducing Regulatory Burdens (77
FR 28469, May 10, 2012) reiterates the
direction from Executive Order 13563 in
stating that our regulatory system must
measure, and seek to improve, the
actual results of regulatory
requirements. To promote this goal,
agencies are to engage in periodic
review of existing regulations, and are
required to develop retrospective review
plans to examine existing regulations in
order to determine whether any such
regulations should be modified,
streamlined, expanded, or repealed. The
purpose of this requirement is to make
the agency’s regulatory program more
effective or less burdensome in
achieving the regulatory objectives. In
response to Executive Orders13563 and
13610, agencies have developed and
made available for public comment
retrospective review plans. Both the Part
23 Reorganization ARC and this Part 23
Rulemaking Project are on the
Department of Transportation’s
retrospective review plans.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
2. Consensus Standards
Section 3(c) of SARA requires the
Administrator, when developing
regulations, to comply with the
requirements of the National
Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995 12 (Pub. L. 104–113; 15
U.S.C. 272 note) (NTTAA) and to use
consensus standards to the extent
practicable while maintaining
traditional methods for meeting part 23.
Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs
Federal agencies to use, either by
reference or by inclusion, voluntary
consensus standards in lieu of
government-mandated standards, except
where inconsistent with law or
otherwise impractical. The Office of
Management and Budget (OMB)
Circular A–119,13 Federal Participation
in the Development and Use of
Voluntary Consensus Standards and
Conformity Assessment Activities,
provides guidance to Executive agencies
in implementing the requirements of the
NTTAA.
Accordingly, the FAA proposes to
accept consensus standards as a means
of compliance with the proposed part 23
performance-based regulations. The use
of consensus standards would be one
means of compliance with the
performance-based standards of the
proposed part 23. Compliance with the
current prescriptive provisions within
current part 23 would be yet another
means of compliance available under
this proposal. Applicants would still
have the option to propose their own
means of compliance as they do today.
The process for reviewing new means of
compliance would not change
substantially from the process in place
today.
Although a consensus standard works
in some cases, the Part 23
Reorganization ARC expressed concerns
that a consensus standard could be
biased in favor of a few large
manufacturers and thereby create an
unfair competitive advantage. OMB
Circular A–119 also cautions regulators
to avoid such potential biases. The FAA
notes that industry groups associated
with the Part 23 Reorganization ARC
identified ASTM International (ASTM)
as the appropriate organization to
initiate the development of consensus
standards, and that ASTM permits any
interested party to participate in the
committees developing consensus
standards. The FAA expects other
consensus standards bodies to allow
similar opportunities for interested
12 https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW104publ113/pdf/PLAW-104publ113.pdf.
13 https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_
a119/.
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
parties to participate in their standardsdevelopment work. In addition to
consensus standards and the current
prescriptive design standards in part 23,
any individual or organization may
develop its own proposed means of
compliance that may be submitted to
the FAA for acceptance.
3. International Cooperation Efforts for
Reorganizing Part 23
Executive Order 13609, Promoting
International Regulatory Cooperation
(77 FR 26413, May 4, 2012), promotes
international regulatory cooperation to
meet shared challenges and reduce,
eliminate, or prevent unnecessary
differences in regulatory requirements.
Consistent with this Order, the FAA’s
proposal would address unnecessary
differences in regulatory requirements
between the United States and its major
trading partners. The U.S. GA industry
has repeatedly informed the FAA of the
high costs to address differences
between the airworthiness requirements
of the FAA and foreign CAAs. The FAA
believes this proposal has the potential
to achieve long-term harmonization at
an unprecedented level, and should
result in a significant savings for both
U.S. manufacturers exporting products
abroad and foreign manufacturers
exporting products to the U.S. The FAA
requests comments regarding the
potential cost savings.
The work of the Part 23
Reorganization ARC forms the
foundation of the proposed changes to
part 23. From the onset, the ARC was a
cooperative, international effort.
Representatives from several foreign
CAAs 14 and international members
from almost every GA manufacturer of
airplanes and avionics participated in
the Part 23 Reorganization ARC. Several
international light-sport aircraft
manufacturers, who were interested in
certificating their products using part 23
airworthiness standards, also
participated. In addition to
recommending changes to part 23, the
ARC developed proposals to help
reduce certification costs through more
international standardization of
certification processes and reducing or
eliminating redundant certification
activities associated with foreign
certification.
After the ARC issued its report, the
FAA, foreign CAAs, and industry
continued to work together to refine the
ARC rule language until the FAA began
drafting the NPRM in December 2014.
This included formal meetings in July
and November of 2014. EASA,
14 CAAs included participants from Brazil,
Canada, China, Europe, and New Zealand.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Transport Canada, other foreign
authorities, and industry offered
significant contributions to these efforts.
In addition, the CAAs from Europe,
Canada, Brazil, China, and New Zealand
are working to produce rules similar to
those contained in this proposal. EASA,
for example, published an Advance
Notice of Proposed Amendment (A–
NPA) 2015–06 on March 27, 2015,
which sets forth EASA’s concept for its
proposed reorganization of CS–23, and
on which the FAA provided comments.
Like the FAA’s current proposal,
EASA’s A–NPA was also based on the
proposed ARC language with the goal of
harmonization. Both proposals would
adopt performance-based standards that
facilitate the use of consensus standards
as a means of compliance.
F. Means of Compliance
This proposal would allow type
certificate applicants to use FAAaccepted means of compliance to
streamline the certification process.
This proposal, however, is shaped by
two concerns raised in the Part 23
Reorganization ARC. First, the rule
needs to clearly state that any applicant
must use a means of compliance
accepted by the Administrator when
showing compliance with part 23. The
FAA emphasizes that any means of
compliance would require FAA review
and acceptance by the Administrator.
Second, although a means of
compliance developed by a consensus
standards body (i.e., ASTM, SAE,
RTCA, etc.) may be available, any
individual or organization would also
be able to submit its own means of
compliance documentation to the
Administrator for consideration and
potential acceptance.
The FAA anticipates that both
individuals and organizations would
develop acceptable means of complying
with the proposed performance
standards. The industry groups
associated with the ARC discussed the
development of consensus-based
standards and selected ASTM as the
appropriate organization to initiate the
effort. A standards organization such as
ASTM could, for example, generate a
series of consensus-based standards for
review, acceptance, and public notice of
acceptance by the FAA. The ASTM
standards would be one way, but not the
only way, to demonstrate compliance
with part 23.
Using means of compliance
documents to satisfy compliance with
the proposed performance-based rules
would diminish the need for special
conditions, ELOS findings, and
exemptions to address new technology
advancements. Once the Administrator
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
accepted a means of compliance, it
could be used in future certification
applications unless formally rescinded.
Incorporating the use of consensus
standards as a means of compliance
with performance-based regulations
would provide the FAA with the agility
to more rapidly accept new technology
as it develops, leverage industry
experience and expectations to develop
of new means of compliance
documents, and encourage the use of
harmonized means of compliance
among the FAA, industry, and foreign
CAAs. Although an applicant would not
be required to use previously accepted
means of compliance documents, doing
so would streamline the certification
process by eliminating the need for the
FAA to develop an issue paper to
address the certification of new
technology. Proposed Advisory Circular
23.10, Accepted Means of Compliance,
would describe a process for applicants
to submit proposed means of
compliance to the FAA for acceptance
by the Administrator.
The Part 23 Reorganization ARC was
also concerned that specialists in the
industry could argue for complex means
of compliance when the FAA would
accept a simpler or more cost effective
approach. To address these concerns,
the FAA would continue to allow
applicants to propose their own means
of compliance when the larger industry
standard may be the appropriate level of
safety for one but not all certification
levels, consistent with the guidance in
OMB Circular A–119, which reminds
the regulator that the government is
responsible to the public for setting the
appropriate level of safety and avoiding
any unfair competitive advantage.
Additionally, the FAA proposes to
continue to allow the use of the
prescriptive means of compliance
currently codified in part 23 as yet
another alternative means of compliance
with proposed part 23. This would not
apply, however, to the proposed new
requirements, such as §§ 23.200, 23.215,
and 23.230.
G. FAA Strategic Initiatives
The FAA’s Strategic Initiatives 2014–
2018 communicates FAA goals for
addressing the challenges presented by
the changing aviation industry and how
the FAA intends to make the U.S.
aviation system safer and smarter, and
raise the bar on safety. Specifically, one
strategic initiative is for the FAA to
embrace and implement risk-based
decision making approaches, which
build on safety management principles
to address emerging safety risks using
consistent, data-informed approaches to
make smarter, quicker system-level
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13459
decisions. By establishing performancebased regulations, coupled with
industry standards, this proposed
rulemaking would provide a calibrated
and globally competitive regulatory
structure. This new approach would
increase safety in general aviation by
enabling and facilitating innovation and
the implementation of safety enhancing
designs in newly certificated products.
This rulemaking effort also directly
supports the FAA’s Global Leadership
Initiative, by encouraging global
harmonization and the consistent use of
regulations, standards, and practices for
general aviation airplanes.
IV. Discussion of Proposal
A. Reorganization of Airworthiness
Standards Based on Risk and
Performance
The FAA proposes replacing the
current weight and propulsion-based
airplane certification divisions with
airplane certification and performance
levels based on the number of potential
passengers and the performance of the
airplane. The FAA believes this
proposed regulatory change would
better accommodate the wide range of
airplanes certificated under part 23,
thereby reducing certification risk, time,
and costs.
Historically, turbine-powered
airplanes were assumed to fly at or
above 18,000 feet (5,486 meters) and at
high speeds, whereas piston engine
airplanes were assumed to fly below
18,000 feet (5,486 meters) and at lower
speeds. Today, with advancements in
aviation technology, these general
design and performance assumptions
may not be valid. Furthermore, the
current regulations do not account for
airplanes equipped with new
technologies, such as electric
propulsion systems, which may have
features that are entirely different from
piston and turbine engines. For these
reasons, the FAA is proposing
regulations based on airplane
performance and potential risk rather
than on assumptions about specific
technologies. These proposed standards
would be appropriate to each specific
airplane design.
Certification of airplanes under part
23 would either be conducted using
airplane certification levels based on
maximum passenger seating
configuration and airplane performance
levels based on speed, or occur as socalled ‘‘simple airplanes’’ that are lowspeed airplanes with a stalling speed
(VSO) ≤ 45 Knots Calibrated Airspeed
(KCAS) approved only for VFR
operations. The FAA proposes the
following airplane certification levels:
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13460
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
• Level 1—for airplanes with a maximum
seating configuration of 0 to 1 passengers,
including simple airplanes.
• Level 2—for airplanes with a maximum
seating configuration of 2 to 6 passengers.
• Level 3—for airplanes with a maximum
seating configuration of 7 to 9 passengers.
• Level 4—for airplanes with a maximum
seating configuration of 10 to 19 passengers.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
B. Introduction of Simple Airplanes
The regulations contained in part 23
have gradually become more focused on
high-performance, turbine-powered
airplanes, and this emphasis has
become a barrier to the efficient
certification and introduction to market
of new entry-level, simple airplanes.
The Part 23 Reorganization ARC
specifically noted that current part 23
does not have appropriate standards for
the certification of entry-level airplanes.
The FAA proposes to define ‘‘simple
airplanes’’ in § 23.5 to recognize the
entry-level airplane. Simple airplanes
would be limited to airplane designs
that allow transport of no more than one
passenger (in addition to the pilot), are
limited to VFR operations, and have
both a low top speed and a low stall
speed. These airplanes are similar to
EASA’s Certification Specification—
Very Light Aeroplanes (CS–VLA), which
are currently imported to the U.S. and
certificated as special class airplanes in
accordance with 14 CFR 21.17(b). The
proposed change would allow these
airplanes to be certified as normal
category airplanes under part 23.
The FAA believes that permitting
certification of simple airplanes would
allow more certified entry-level
airplanes to enter the marketplace. The
FAA expects simple airplanes to be a
more basic sublevel within proposed
certification level 1, but recognizes that
because of similarities between simple
and non-simple airplanes within
certification level 1, creating this
category may be unnecessary. For this
reason, the FAA is specifically asking
for comments concerning the utility of
creating a separate, simple airplane
sublevel.
C. Establishing Performance-Based
Standards and the Use of Means of
Compliance
The Part 23 Reorganization ARC was
aware the Administrator has accepted as
evidence of compliance various
manufacturers’ internal design
standards in the past, and the ARC
recommended expressly stating that
option in the proposal. Proposed
§ 23.10, Accepted Means of Compliance,
would allow individual persons or
companies to submit their internal
standards as means of compliance for
consideration by the Administrator.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
Proposed § 23.10 would also require an
applicant to show the FAA how it
would demonstrate compliance with
this part using a means of compliance,
which may include consensus standards
accepted by the Administrator. It would
further require an applicant requesting
acceptance of a means of compliance to
provide the means of compliance to the
FAA in a form and manner specified by
the Administrator. In addition,
proposed § 23.10 specifically recognizes
the use of consensus standards as a
means of compliance that could be
acceptable to the Administrator. If this
information is proprietary in nature, it
would be afforded the same protections
as are applied today in certification
applications submitted under 14 CFR
part 21.
The phrase ‘‘means of compliance’’
may have different connotations
depending on its context. Historically,
the FAA has treated an applicant’s
demonstration of compliance as a means
of compliance. Alternatively, as
indicated by sec. 3(b)(4) of the SARA,
consensus standards may constitute a
means of compliance that can address
new and novel designs and
technologies. In other words, as
suggested by the SARA, an applicant
would develop a design to satisfy a
performance-based standard, and the
design is the means of complying with
the standard.
Currently, an applicant for a type
certificate must show the FAA how it
satisfies the applicable airworthiness
standards. The applicant submits the
type design, test reports, and
computations necessary to show
compliance. The applicant approaches
the FAA and enters into negotiations
regarding what constitutes an adequate
demonstration—testing or analysis. The
FAA anticipates that, under the
proposed framework, standards
developed by consensus standards
bodies would provide a pre-existing
means by which any applicant may
demonstrate compliance with the
corresponding performance-based
requirements. For example, the
proposed fuel system requirements
would be broad enough to certificate
airplanes with electric propulsion
systems in which batteries and fuel cells
are used as fuel. Airplanes incorporating
these systems cannot currently be
certificated without applying for special
conditions or exemptions.
Elements of this proposal are already
in place today. Industry standards
bodies like RTCA, SAE, ASTM, and the
European Organization for Civil
Aviation Equipment (EUROCAE) have
already developed detailed means of
compliance documents that an
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
applicant for a type certificate may use
to demonstrate compliance with our
regulatory requirements in 14 CFR parts
23, 25, 27, and 29. For decades, the FAA
has identified these means of
compliance documents as an acceptable
means of complying with our regulatory
requirements. This proposal would
build on and expand this aspect of our
regulations by also transitioning part 23
towards a regulatory framework based
on performance standards.
D. Crashworthiness as an Illustration of
the Benefits of Performance-Based
Regulations
One area where the implications of a
change from prescriptive to
performance-based requirements are
most evident is in the demonstration of
crashworthiness. The current part 23
crashworthiness and occupant safety
requirements are based on seat and
restraint technology used in the 1980’s.
Currently, an applicant demonstrates
crashworthiness by a sled test. Under
the proposed standards, an applicant
would not necessarily have to perform
a sled test, but could instead employ a
different method accounting for many
other factors, several of which are
described below. The FAA is imposing
no new requirements, but would, under
this proposal, provide greater flexibility
to adopt new safety-testing
methodologies and, ultimately, more
advanced safety technologies.
The FAA proposes to allow greater
flexibility with respect to the testing and
demonstration, similar to advancements
made in the automotive industry over
the past 30 years. The proposed
regulations would facilitate evaluation
of the entirety of a crashworthiness
system—namely, the interaction of all
crashworthiness features—rather than
requiring an evaluation of discrete,
individual parameters. A system’s
ability to protect occupants can be better
understood by evaluating it as a
complete system, and using that greater
understanding to develop and
implement new technologies. Such an
evaluation could include analyses of
important survivability factors
identified by the NTSB, including
occupant restraints, survivable volume,
energy-absorbing seats, and seat
retention. These proposed
crashworthiness standards would not
necessarily prevent accidents, but
should improve survivability.
The NTSB produced a series of
reports in the 1980s that evaluated over
21,000 GA airplane crashes between
1972 and 1981. The NTSB General
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Aviation Crashworthiness Project 15
evaluated airplane orientation, impact
magnitudes, and survival rates and
factors to provide information
supporting changes in crashworthiness
design standards for GA seating and
restraint systems. The NTSB reports also
established conditions approximating
survivable accidents and identified
factors that would have the largest
impact on safety. Amendment 23–36 (53
FR 30802, August 15, 1988) to part 23
referenced these reports for dynamic
seats but did not adopt a systemsevaluation approach.
The NTSB reports identified several
factors that, working together as a
system, should result in a safer airplane.
The assessment also indicated, however,
that shoulder harnesses offer the most
immediate individual improvement for
safety. The FAA codified the shoulder
harnesses requirement in amendments
23–19 (42 FR 20601, June 16, 1977) and
23–32 (50 FR 46872, November 13,
1985) for newly manufactured airplanes.
The FAA also issued policy statement
ACE–00–23.561–01, Methods of
Approval of Retrofit Shoulder Harness
Installations in Small Airplanes,16 dated
September 19, 2000, to streamline the
process for retrofitting older airplanes.
Current part 23 requires occupant
restraints to maintain integrity, stay in
place on the occupant throughout an
event, properly distribute loads on the
occupant, and restrain the occupant by
mitigating interaction with other items
in the cabin. Newer technologies that
enhance or supplement the performance
of these restraints, such as airbags, are
now being considered for inclusion in
designs. The use of airbags has greatly
increased passenger safety in
automobiles, by offering protection in
much more severe impacts and in
impacts from multiple directions. The
proposed performance standards would
enable the use of these technologies.
Survivable volume is another critical
factor in crashworthiness. Survivable
volume is the ability of the airframe to
protect the occupants from external
intrusion, or the airplane cabin crushing
during and after an accident. There were
several observed accidents in the NTSB
study where conventional airplane
construction simply crushed an
otherwise restrained occupant.
Crashworthiness regulations have never
included survivable volume as a factor,
except in some instances in which an
airplane turns over. Airplane designs
should provide the space needed for the
15 See
www.regulations.gov (Docket # FAA–2015–
1621).
16 See www.regulations.gov (Docket # FAA–2015–
1621).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
protection and restraint of the
occupants. This is one of the first steps
in the analysis of airplane
crashworthiness.
Data from the NTSB General Aviation
Crashworthiness Project suggested that
energy-absorbing seats that protect the
occupant from vertical impact loads
could enhance occupant survivability
and prevent serious injury, thereby
enhancing odds for exiting the airplane
and preventing many debilitating longterm injuries. The FAA established
dynamic seat testing requirements in
amendment 23–36 for airplanes
certificated under part 23. Energy
absorbing seats have a smaller impact
than some other safety factors because
accident impacts with large vertical
components tend to have lower odds of
survival. Nevertheless, energy
attenuation from vertical forces, both
static and dynamic, has been important
to crashworthiness regulations for the
past 25 years. Seats may crush or
collapse, but must remain attached to
the body of the airplane. Coupling the
seat performance to the rest of the
airframe response is important to the
enhancement and understanding of
occupant survivability. The FAA
believes allowing designers to consider
airframe deformation would result in
more accurate floor impulses, which
relate to simulated crash impact, and
may allow for evaluation for crash
impulses in multiple directions.
The NTSB also identified seat
retention as another basic building
block for airplane crashworthiness. The
NTSB reports show more than a quarter
of otherwise-survivable accidents
included instances where the seats
broke free at the attachment to the
airplane, resulting in fatalities or serious
injuries. Dynamic seat testing
requirements address the ability of seat
assemblies to remain attached to the
floor, even when the floor shifts during
impact. Pitching and yawing of the seat
tracks during dynamic seat tests
demonstrates the gimbaling and
flexibility of the seat.
The FAA believes that, under this
proposal, all of these crashworthiness
factors could be incorporated into future
testing methodologies and thereby
increase the survivability of accidents in
part 23 certificated airplanes. This
proposed part 23 amendment would
authorize design approval applicants to
use these technologies and testing
methodologies to enhance occupant
safety.
E. Additional Requirements To Prevent
LOC
LOC continues to be the leading cause
of fatal GA accidents. The FAA
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13461
identified 74 accidents caused by stall
or LOC between January 2008 and
December 2013. These accidents, which
are listed in Appendix IV of the Part 23
Regulatory Evaluation,17 represent the
type of accidents that could be
prevented by the proposed new stall
and LOC requirements.
The FAA proposes to add
requirements in §§ 23.200 and 23.215 to
prevent LOC accidents. Inadvertent
stalls resulting in airplane LOC cause a
large number of small airplane fatal
accidents. These LOC accidents in the
traffic pattern or at low altitudes often
result in fatalities because the airplane
is too low to the ground for the pilot to
recover control. The FAA therefore
believes it can improve safety by
requiring applicants to use new
approaches to improve airplane stall
characteristics to prevent such
accidents.
Another type of low-speed LOC
accident that occurs in significant
numbers involves VMC in light twinengine airplanes. Virtually all twinengine airplanes have a VMC that allows
directional control to be maintained
after one engine fails. This speed is
typically above the stall speed of the
airplane. However, light twin-engine
airplanes also typically have limited
climb capability on one engine.
Moreover, after the failure of one
engine, pilots often instinctively tend to
try to maintain a climb or maintain
altitude, which slows the airplane
down. If the speed drops below VMC, the
pilot can lose control of the airplane.
Because pilots tend to be more aware of
the airplane’s stall speed, the FAA
proposes in § 23.200 that certification
levels 1 and 2 multiengine airplanes
would be required to have a VMC that
does not exceed the stall speed of the
airplane for each configuration. The
FAA believes this proposed requirement
would provide a higher level of safety
than current § 23.149. The FAA requests
comments on this proposal.
The FAA also proposes new
requirements in § 23.215 for airplane
stall characteristics and stall warning
that would result in airplane designs
more resistant to inadvertently stalling
and departing controlled flight. These
proposed requirements would increase
the level of safety over the current
requirements. At the same time, the
FAA proposes to eliminate the spin
recovery requirement in the current
rules for normal category airplanes. The
FAA believes the spin recovery
requirement is unnecessary for normal
category airplanes because the vast
17 See www.regulations.gov (Docket # FAA–2015–
1621).
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13462
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
majority of inadvertent stalls leading to
spin entry occur below a safe altitude
for spin recovery. However, airplanes
certificated for aerobatics would still
have to meet spin recovery
requirements.
The FAA also proposes to address
pilot stall awareness by requiring
warnings that are more effective and by
allowing new approaches to improve
pilot awareness of stall margins. These
warnings could be as simple as angle of
attack or energy awareness
presentations, or sophisticated envelope
protection systems that add a forward
force to the pilot’s controls as the
airplane speed and attitude approach
stall.
F. Additional Requirements for Flight in
Icing Conditions
The FAA proposes to implement the
Part 23 Icing ARC’s recommendations in
§§ 23.230, 23.940 and 23.1405, to allow
an applicant the option of certifying an
airplane to operate in SLD icing
conditions. To do so, an applicant
would be required to meet the same
safety standards in SLD icing conditions
as currently demonstrated for part 23
airplanes in the icing conditions defined
in appendix C to part 25.
Currently, the FAA does not certify
part 23 airplanes to operate in SLD icing
conditions, also known as freezing
drizzle and freezing rain. Instead,
current part 23 icing regulations require
airplane performance, flight
characteristics, systems, and engine
operation to be demonstrated in the
icing conditions defined in appendix C
to part 25, which does not contain SLD
icing conditions. In 2012, prior to the
Part 23 Reorganization ARC, the Part 23
Icing ARC recommended revising part
23 to include SLD icing requirements in
subparts B, E, and F (Flight, Powerplant,
and Equipment, respectively).
If an applicant chooses not to certify
an airplane in SLD icing conditions,
proposed § 23.230 would require the
applicant to demonstrate that SLD icing
conditions could be detected and safely
exited. A means of compliance for SLD
detection and exit may be found in FAA
Advisory Circular 23.1419–2D,
Certification of Part 23 Airplanes for
Flight in Icing Conditions.18 The service
history of airplanes certificated under
part 23 and certified to the latest icing
standards has shown that AC 23.1419–
2D provides an adequate level of safety
for detecting and safely exiting SLD
icing conditions. Industry has indicated
that these requirements would not
impose an additional burden because
many manufacturers have already
equipped recent airplanes to meet the
standards for detecting and exiting SLD
in accordance with current FAA
guidance. Proposed § 23.230, along with
proposed § 23.940, Powerplant ice
protection, and § 23.1405, Flight in icing
conditions, and their respective means
of compliance, address NTSB safety
recommendations A–96–54 and A–96–
56. The following table provides a
summary of the proposed icing
regulations.
PROPOSED ICING REGULATIONS
Part 23 type certificate limitations
Engine protection (§ 23.940)
Not certified for flight in icing conditions ............
Safe in part 25, App C conditions, ground ice
fog, and falling/blowing snow.
Certified for flight in icing conditions, but prohibited for flight in SLD.
Certified for flight in icing conditions and SLD ...
Safe in part 25, App C conditions, ground ice
fog, and falling/blowing snow.
Safe in part 25, App C conditions, ground ice
fog, and falling/blowing snow, and SLD.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
G. Production of Replacement and
Modification Articles
The Part 23 Reorganization ARC
recommended simplifying certification
requirements for non-required systems
and equipment, with an emphasis on
improvement in overall fleet safety from
the prevailing level. In the past, the
FAA has not established different
production requirements for required
and non-required equipment that may
enhance safety, or for articles whose
improper operation or failure would not
cause a hazard. The current
requirements for producing articles and
representing those articles as suitable
for installation on type-certificated
products are well suited for articles
manufactured in accordance with a
product’s TC or STC, as well as for TSO
and PMA parts. However, they may
unnecessarily constrain the production
of non-required, low risk articles.
Current standards for the production
approval of these articles can create a
barrier for their installation in the
existing fleet of aircraft. Examples of
such articles include carbon monoxide
detectors, weather display systems,
clocks, small hand-held fire
extinguishers, and flashlights. In many
cases, these articles are ‘‘off-the-shelf’’
products. It is frequently difficult for a
person to install these articles on a typecertificated aircraft because the level of
design and production details necessary
for these articles to meet the provisions
of current § 21.9, as expected for more
critical articles, are frequently
unavailable.
The FAA is therefore proposing to
revise § 21.9, Replacement and
Modification Articles, to provide
applicants with an alternative method to
obtain FAA approval to produce
replacement and modification articles.
This proposed change would allow a
Airframe and system protection, performance
and flight characteristics requirements
(§§ 23.230, 23.1300, and 23.1405)
None, except pitot heat required if airplane
certified for flight in instrument meteorological conditions (IMC).
Safe in part 25, App C conditions. Can detect
SLD and safely exit.
Safe in part 25, App C conditions and SLD.
production approval applicant to submit
production information for a specific
article, without requiring the producer
of the article to obtain approval of the
article’s design or approval of its quality
system. The FAA intends to use the
flexibility provided by this proposal to
streamline the approval process for nonrequired safety enhancing equipment
and other articles that pose little or no
risk to aircraft occupants and the public.
The FAA requests comments on this
proposal, and particularly is interested
in comments regarding whether the
proposed change would safely facilitate
retrofit of low risk articles and whether
there are alternative methods to address
the perceived retrofit barrier.
V. Key Terms and Concepts Used in
This Document
The proposal includes a number of
terms introduced into the regulations for
the first time. These terms may be used
18 See www.regulations.gov (Docket # FAA–2015–
1621).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
to replace existing prescriptive
requirements or may explain other
terms that have had longstanding use in
the aircraft certification process, but in
context of this rulemaking proposal, the
FAA wants to specify its meaning.
These terms are intended to set forth
and clarify the safety intent of the
proposed rules. Although certain terms
may differ from those currently in use,
these differences are not intended to
increase the regulatory burden on an
applicant unless specifically stated. The
FAA’s intent is that the proposed
requirements incorporating these new
terms not change the intent,
understanding, or implementation of the
original rule unless that requirement has
been specifically revised in the
proposal, such as is the case for
requirements governing stall
characteristics. To assist applicants in
understanding the intent of the
proposal, these terms are discussed
below:
Airplane Certification Level—A
division used for the certification of
airplanes that is associated directly with
the number of passengers on the
airplane. Airplane certification levels
would be established to implement the
agency’s concept of certificating
airplanes using a process that recognizes
a safety continuum.
Airplane Performance Level—
Maximum airspeed divisions that are
intended, along with airplane
certification levels, to replace current
weight and propulsion divisions used
for the certification of airplanes. Current
propulsion-based divisions assume that
piston engine airplanes are slower than
turbine-powered airplanes. Current
weight-based divisions assume that
heavier airplanes are more complex and
would be more likely to be used in
commercial passenger carriage than
lighter airplanes. These assumptions are
no longer valid. Airplane certification
based on performance levels would
apply regulatory standards appropriate
to airplane’s performance and
complexity.
Departure Resistant—For the
purposes of this NPRM, departure
resistant refers to stall characteristics
that make it very difficult for the
airplane to depart controlled flight.
Most fatal stall or spin accidents start
below 1000 feet above ground level and
do not actually spin, but start a yawing
and rolling maneuver to enter the spin
called a post stall gyration. In these lowaltitude accidents, the airplane typically
hits the ground before completing one
turn. Therefore, the important safety
criterion is preventing the airplane from
exhibiting stall characteristics that
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
could result in a departure from
controlled flight.
Entry-Level Airplane—A two or fourplace airplane typically used for
training, rental, and by flying clubs.
Historically, most of these airplanes
have four cylinder engines with less
than 200 horsepower. These airplanes
typically have fixed-gear and fixed-pitch
propellers, but may also have retractable
landing gear and constant speed
propellers. Entry-level airplanes
typically cannot be used to train pilots
to meet the requirements to operate a
complex aircraft, as that term is defined
for airman certification purposes.
Equivalent Level of Safety (ELOS)
Finding—A finding made by the
accountable aircraft certification
directorate when literal compliance
with a certification requirement cannot
be shown and compensating factors in
the design can be shown to provide a
level of safety equivalent to that
established by the applicable
airworthiness standard.
Fuel—Any source used by the
powerplant to generate its power.
Hazard—Any existing or potential
condition that can lead to injury, illness
or death; damage to or loss of a system,
equipment, or property; or damage to
the environment. A hazard is a
condition that is a prerequisite to an
accident or an incident. (Cf. Order VS
8000.367, Appendix A)
Issue Paper—A structured means for
describing and tracking the resolution of
significant technical, regulatory, and
administrative issues that occur during
a certification project. The issue paper
process constitutes a formal
communication vehicle for addressing
significant issues among an applicant,
the FAA, and if applicable, the
validating authority (VA) or certificating
authority (CA) for type validation
programs. An issue paper may also be
used to address novel or controversial
technical issues.
Means of Compliance—A
documented procedure used by an
applicant to demonstrate compliance to
a performance or outcome-based
standard. Similar to an Advisory
Circular (AC), a means of compliance is
one method, but not the only method,
to show compliance with a regulatory
requirement. Additionally, if a
procedure is used as a means of
compliance, it must be followed
completely to maintain the integrity of
the means of compliance.
Performance- or Outcome-Based
Standard—A standard that states
requirements in terms of required
results, but does not prescribe any
specific method for achieving the
required results. A performance-based
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13463
standard may define the functional
requirements for an item, operational
requirements, or interface and
interchangeability characteristics.
Pilot or Flightcrew—This is used
generically throughout the proposed
part 23 because part 23 has airplanes
approved for single pilot operations as
well as and two flightcrew members.
For most airplanes certificated under
part 23 that are single pilot, applicants
should consider pilot and flightcrew to
be interchangeable.
Prescriptive Design Standard—
Specifies a particular design
requirement, such as materials to be
used, how to perform a test, or how an
item is to be fabricated or constructed.
(Cf. OMB Circular A–119 Section 5.f.)
Safety Continuum—The concept that
one level of safety is not appropriate for
all aviation activities. Accordingly,
higher levels of risk, with corresponding
requirements for less rigorous safety
demonstrations for products, are
accepted as aircraft are utilized for more
personal forms of transportation.
Survivable Volume—The airplane
cabin’s ability to resist external
intrusion or structural collapse during
and after impact. The ability to resist is
usually represented as a stiffer design
around the cabin (not unlike a racecar
roll cage) that is generally stronger than
the surrounding structure. While the
airframe may deform or disintegrate and
attenuate impact energy, the cabin of the
airplane will still maintain its integrity
and protect the occupants restrained
within. During otherwise survivable
accident scenarios, including rollover,
this structure should maintain its shape
under static and dynamic loading
conditions.
VI. Discussion of the Proposed
Regulatory Amendments
A. Part 23, Airworthiness Standards
1. Subpart A—General
a. General Discussion
The FAA proposes eliminating the
utility, acrobatic, and commuter
categories for future airplanes
certificated under part 23. The FAA also
proposes to change from weight and
propulsion divisions to performance
and risk divisions. This would address
the wide range of airplanes to be
certificated under part 23 and enhance
application of the safety continuum
approach. Appendix 1 of this preamble
contains a cross-reference table detailing
how the current regulations are
addressed in the proposed part 23
regulations.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13464
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
b. Specific Discussion of Changes
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
i. Proposed § 23.1, Applicability and
Definition
Proposed § 23.1 would prescribe
airworthiness standards for the issuance
of type certificates, and changes to those
certificates, for airplanes in the normal
category. Current § 23.3, Airplane
categories, defines normal category as
airplanes that have a seating
configuration, excluding pilot seats, of
nine or less, a maximum certificated
takeoff weight of 12,500 pounds or less,
and intended for nonacrobatic
operation. Proposed § 23.1 would delete
references to utility, acrobatic, and
commuter category airplanes, and
paragraph (b) would not include the
current reference to procedural
requirements for showing compliance.
The reference to procedural
requirements for showing compliance is
redundant with the requirement in
§ 21.21, Issue of type certificate: Normal,
utility, acrobatic, commuter, and
transport category aircraft; manned free
balloons; special classes of aircraft;
aircraft engines; propellers, to show
compliance. Proposed § 23.1 would also
add three definitions specific to part 23:
(1) Continued safe flight and landing, (2)
designated fire zone, and (3) empty
weight.
ii. Proposed § 23.5, Certification of
Normal Category Airplanes
Proposed § 23.5 would apply
certification in the normal category to
airplanes with a passenger-seating
configuration of 19 or less and a
maximum certificated takeoff weight of
19,000 pounds or less. Proposed § 23.5
would also establish certification levels
based on the passenger seating
configuration and airplane performance
levels based on speed.
The diversity of airplanes certificated
under part 23 is large relative to
performance, numbers of passengers,
complexity, technology, and intended
use. Airplane certification requirements
under part 23 are currently determined
using a combination of weight, numbers
of passengers, and propulsion type.
These divisions historically were
appropriate because there was a clear
relationship between the propulsion
and weight of the airplane and its
associated performance and complexity.
Recent technological developments
have altered the dynamics of this
relationship. High-performance and
complex airplanes now exist within the
weight range that was typical for light
and simple airplanes. Furthermore,
current part 23 has evolved to meet the
additional regulatory requirements
resulting from the introduction of high-
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
performance airplanes. This has
resulted in the introduction of more
stringent and demanding requirements
in the lower weight airplanes such as
the use of 14 CFR part 25 based
requirements for simple, single-engine
turbine airplanes. The result is that
some of the current requirements have
become more demanding for simple and
low-performance airplanes.
The FAA proposes replacing the
current part 23 weight and propulsion
divisions because they were based on
assumptions that do not always fit the
large diversity of airplane performance,
complexity, technology, intended use,
and seating capacity encompassed in
today’s new airplane designs. Also, the
current divisions may not be
appropriate to address unforeseen
designs of the future. The commuter
category, originally intended for the
certification of airplanes over 12,500
pounds and up to 19 passengers, is
currently used for larger business jets
with less than ten passengers. The
proposed certification and performance
level approach, while different from the
current divisions, would capture the
safety intent of part 23 more
appropriately than the current
propulsion and weight divisions.
The FAA proposes replacing the
current divisions with specific technical
and operational capabilities by
addressing, for example, stall speed,
VFR/IFR operation, pressurization, etc.,
that represent the actual technical
drivers for current prescriptive
requirements. These types of design
specific technical and operational
criteria would be more appropriate for
a means of compliance document where
a complete range of airplane designs
could be addressed. The FAA proposes
that high-speed, multiengine airplanes
and multiengine airplanes over 12,500
pounds should continue meeting the
equivalent commuter category
performance-based requirements. The
proposed performance requirements
would be based on number of
passengers (certification level) and
airplane performance (performance
level); not weight or propulsion type.
The FAA proposes to eliminate
commuter, utility, and acrobatic
airplane categories in part 23, retaining
only normal category for all new part 23
type certificated airplane design
approvals. The FAA believes this action
would not affect the existing fleet of
small airplanes. For example, the
commuter category was originally
introduced into part 23 to apply to a 10
to 19 passenger, multiengine airplane,
operated in scheduled service under 14
CFR parts 121 and 135. However, new
airplanes certified under part 23 can no
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
longer be used in scheduled service
under part 121 because § 121.157,
Aircraft certification and equipment
requirements, paragraph (h), requires a
part 25 certification for newly type
certificated airplanes. The majority of
airplanes recently certified in the
commuter category are multiengine
business jets. Additionally, the
certification category of commuter can
be confused with the same term in the
operating rules because the term is
defined differently in the certification
and operation rules. The FAA
recognizes that moving away from
weight and propulsion divisions would
result in changes for the criteria used to
determine when to apply the existing
commuter category certification
requirements using the numbers of
passenger seats (excluding crewmember
seats), performance, and technical
divisions proposed in this NPRM. The
FAA proposes the following airplane
certification levels:
• Level 1—for airplanes with a maximum
seating configuration of 0 to 1 passengers.
• Level 2—for airplanes with a maximum
seating configuration of 2 to 6 passengers.
• Level 3—for airplanes with a maximum
seating configuration of 7 to 9 passengers.
• Level 4—for airplanes with a maximum
seating configuration of 10 to 19 passengers.
The differences between normal,
utility, and acrobatic categories are
currently very limited and primarily
affect airframe structure requirements.
Proposed part 23 would still allow a
normal category airplane to be approved
for aerobatics provided the airplane was
certified to address the factors affecting
safety for the defined limits for that kind
of operation. Currently, the utility
category provides airplanes additional
margin for the more stringent inertial
structural loads resulting from intended
spins and the additional maneuvers
stated in the requirements of the utility
category in § 23.3(b). The FAA proposes
that airplanes approved for spins be
certificated to aerobatic standards. An
airplane designed with traditional
handling qualities and designed to
allow spin training is more susceptible
to inadvertent departure from controlled
flight. The FAA believes that
maintaining the current utility category
for airplanes approved for spins and
limited aerobatic maneuvers would
negate the single largest safety gain
expected from this rulemaking action—
the significant reduction in inadvertent
stall-related departures from controlled
flight.
Proposed § 23.5(c) would categorize
the performance level of an airplane as
low speed or high speed. The
combination of certification levels and
performance levels is intended to
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
provide divisions that address the actual
safety concern of occupant numbers and
performance, for example, future
designs using novel propulsion
methods. The FAA proposes the
following airplane performance levels:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
• Low speed—for airplanes with a design
cruising speed (VC) or maximum operating
limit speed (VMO) ≤ 250 KCAS (or MMO ≤
0.6).
• High speed—for airplanes with a VC or
VMO > 250 KCAS (or MMO > 0.6).
Proposed § 23.5(d) would identify a
simple airplane as one with a
certification level 1, a VC or VMO ≤ 250
KCAS (and MMO ≤ 0.6), and a VSO ≤ 45
KCAS, and approved only for VFR
operations. The FAA proposes a simple
airplane as equivalent to airplanes
certificated under EASA’s current CS–
VLA. In most cases, EASA’s CS–VLA
requirements are identical to the
proposed corresponding part 23
requirements and have been proposed
in the requirements for certification
level 1 airplanes. The FAA considered
using the CS–VLA standards in
combination with the proposed part 23
certification standards for all
certification level 1, low-speed
airplanes. However, the FAA believes
that there are several requirements in
CS–VLA that are not appropriate for all
certification level 1, low-speed
airplanes, such as no requirement for a
type certified engine in CS–VLA.
Therefore, the FAA proposes creating a
limited certification and performance
level for simple airplanes. Simple
airplanes would be a subset of
certification level 1, low-speed airplanes
and would have a VSO ≤ 45 KCAS and
would only be approved for VFR
operations.
In accordance with the FAA’s
objective to remove weight and
propulsion divisions from the rules and
use performance and certification
divisions, the proposed requirements
applicable to the certification of simple
airplanes would not completely
conform to the criteria EASA uses to
certificate very light airplanes. The FAA
proposes that simple airplanes would
constitute a subset of certification level
1, low-speed airplanes that would be
required to have a low stall speed limit
and a VFR limitation in order to
maintain a level of safety appropriate for
these airplanes. The FAA believes that
creating the simple certification level
would encourage manufacturers of lightsport and experimental aircraft kits to
pursue type certificates for their
airplane designs without encountering
the administrative, procedural or
regulatory barriers existing in current
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
part 23, while allowing innovative
technology in those designs.
The FAA considered allowing
airplanes that meet the consensus
standards applicable to the certification
of special light-sport aircraft to be
included in proposed part 23. However,
the FAA decided that this would not be
in the best interest of the GA
community because it could result in
the elimination of the special light-sport
aircraft category. There are advantages
in the certification of special light-sport
aircraft, such as self-certification, that
would not be available if the aircraft
were type certificated under part 23.
This proposal would instead enable a
simpler path to part 23 certification for
airplanes that meet the definition of a
light-sport aircraft and wish to pursue a
type of certificate for business reasons.
The FAA expects simple airplanes to
be more basic than the proposed
certification level 1, low-speed
airplanes. A simple airplane is a
certification level 1, low-speed airplane
with a stall speed limit of 45 KCAS that
would be limited to VFR operations.
The FAA recognizes that a simple
airplane level would have
characteristics very similar to
certification level 1, low-speed
airplanes, and that creating this category
may be unnecessary. For this reason, the
FAA is specifically asking for comments
concerning the value of creating a
separate, simple airplane level.
iii. Proposed § 23.10, Accepted Means of
Compliance
Proposed § 23.10 would require an
applicant to show the FAA how it
would demonstrate compliance with
this part using a means of compliance,
which may include consensus
standards, accepted by the
Administrator. Proposed § 23.10 would
also require an applicant requesting
acceptance of a means of compliance to
provide the means of compliance to the
FAA in a form and manner specified by
the Administrator.
Proposed § 23.10 would create
flexibility for applicants in developing
means of compliance and also
specifically identify consensus
standards as a means of compliance the
Administratory may find acceptable.
The Part 23 Reorganization ARC
proposed using consensus standards for
the detailed means of compliance to the
fundamental safety requirements in
proposed part 23. As discussed in the
International Harmonization Efforts
section of this NPRM, the intent of this
proposal is to create a regulatory
architecture for part 23 that is agile
enough to keep up with innovation.
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13465
Allowing the use of consensus
standards would accomplish this goal.
The Part 23 Reorganization ARC
recommended creating this proposed
section to identify specifically the
means of compliance documents
developed by industry, users such as
large flight schools, the interested
public, and the FAA, that an applicant
could use in developing a certification
application. The ARC expressed two
concerns that led to the creation of the
proposed requirement. First, applicants
need to use a means of compliance
accepted by the Administrator when
showing compliance to part 23. Second,
while a consensus standards body (i.e.,
ASTM, SAE, RTCA, etc.) developed
means of compliance document may be
available, individuals or organizations
may also submit their own means of
compliance documentation to the
Administrator for consideration and
potential acceptance. Additionally, the
FAA wants to ensure applicants
understand that an applicant-developed
means of compliance document would
require FAA review and acceptance by
the Administrator.
The FAA anticipates that individuals
or organizations would develop
acceptable means for complying with
the proposed performance standards. A
standards organization such as ASTM,
for example, could generate a series of
consensus-based standards for review,
acceptance, and public notice of
acceptance by the FAA. The ASTM
standards could be one way, but not the
only way, to demonstrate compliance
with part 23. Other consensus standard
bodies such as RTCA and SAE are
currently focused on developing
standards for aircraft components and
appliances.
The proposed airworthiness standards
would allow airplanes to be certificated
at different airplane certification levels.
For example, software integrity levels
appropriate for a certification level 1
airplane may not be appropriate for a
certification level 4 airplane.
Additionally, the takeoff performance of
an airplane might be evaluated
differently for an airplane intended to
be certificated at different airplane
certification levels. An applicant
seeking certification of a certification
level 1 airplane with a takeoff distance
of 200 feet, for example, would not need
to establish the takeoff distance with the
same degree of accuracy as would an
applicant seeking certification of a
certification level 4 high-speed airplane
with a takeoff distance of 4,000 feet.
By using means of compliance
documents to show compliance with the
proposed performance-based rules, the
need for special conditions, ELOS
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
13466
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
findings, and exemptions to address
new technology advancements would
diminish. Once the Administrator
accepted a means of compliance, it may
be used for future applications for
certification unless formally rescinded.
Allowing the use of consensus
standards as a means of compliance to
performance-based regulations would
provide the FAA with the agility
necessary to more rapidly accept new
technology, leverage industry
expectations in the development of new
means of compliance documents, and
provide for the use of harmonized
means of compliance among the FAA,
industry, and foreign CAAs. While an
applicant would not be required to use
previously accepted means of
compliance documents, their use would
streamline the certification process by
eliminating the need to develop an issue
paper to address the certification of new
technology. Proposed AC 23.10,19
Accepted Means of Compliance, would
provide guidance for applicants on the
process applicants would follow to
submit proposed means of compliance
to the FAA for consideration by the
Administrator.
The Part 23 Reorganization ARC
expressed concerns that a consensus
standard could be biased in favor of a
few large manufacturers and would
create an unfair competitive advantage.
The FAA notes that any interested party
may participate in the ASTM
committees developing consensus
standards thereby, mitigating this
concern. The FAA expects that other
consensus standards bodies would
allow similar opportunities for
interested parties to participate in their
standards development work.
Additionally, any individual or
organization could develop its own
means of compliance and submit it to
the FAA for acceptance by the
Administrator. The other risk identified
by the Part 23 Reorganization ARC was
that specialists in the industry could
argue for complex means of compliance
when the FAA would accept a simpler
or more cost effective approach.
However, the FAA would continue to
allow applicants to propose their own
means of compliance when the larger
industry standard may be the
appropriate level of safety for one, but
not all certification levels. Lastly, the
FAA intends to continue to allow the
use of the current prescriptive means of
compliance contained in current part 23
requirements as one obvious alternative
to showing compliance with proposed
part 23. This would not apply to the
19 See www.regulations.gov (Docket # FAA–2015–
1621).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
proposed sections that contain new
requirements, such as §§ 23.200, 23.215,
and 23.230.
The Part 23 Reorganization ARC also
was aware the Administrator has
accepted various manufacturers’
internal standards in the past and
recommended having that option stated
in the proposal. Proposed § 23.10 would
allow applicants to submit their internal
standards as means of compliance for
consideration by the Administrator.
iv. Removal of Subpart A Current
Regulations
The FAA proposes removing current
§ 23.2, Special retroactive requirements,
from part 23 because the operational
rules currently address these
requirements. The current retroactive
rule is more appropriate in the operating
rules. The FAA proposes amending 14
CFR part 91, as discussed later in the
Discussion of the Proposed Regulatory
Amendments to ensure removing the
current § 23.2 requirement would not
affect the existing fleet.
2. Subpart B—Flight
a. General Discussion
The FAA proposes moving away from
the current stall characteristics and spin
testing approach to address the largest
cause of fatal accidents in small
airplanes. Proposed § 23.215 in subpart
B would omit the one turn/three second
spin requirement for normal category
airplanes, but it would increase the stall
handling characteristics and stall
warning requirements so the airplane
would be substantially more resistant to
stall-based departures than the current
rules require.
The FAA also proposes eliminating
the utility, acrobatic, and commuter
categories in part 23. Accordingly, a
new airplane would have to be
approved for aerobatic loads as the
normal category, even if an applicant
only wanted to spin the airplane.
Therefore, the FAA proposes to restrict
certification of new airplanes for dual
use, which can be done today using
both the normal and utility categories.
The FAA believes that if the airplane
can spin for spin training, then the
airplane can inadvertently stall and
depart into a spin during normal
operations. One of the FAA’s goals is to
prevent inadvertent stalls, so allowing
airplanes that are commonly used as
rental airplanes to spin would defeat the
goal. However, the FAA would consider
accepting a dual-purpose airplane if the
airplane manufacturer provided a
system that could be changed
mechanically or electronically from
normal to aerobatic as a maintenance
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
function rather than controlled by the
pilot.
The FAA proposes consolidating the
performance requirements for highspeed multiengine airplanes and
multiengine airplanes that weigh over
12,500 pounds. These airplanes are
currently required to meet a series of
one-engine-inoperative climb gradients.
These climb gradients were based on
part 25 requirements and intended for
commuter category airplanes used in
scheduled air service under parts 135
and 121. New airplanes certificated
under part 23 are not eligible for
operation in scheduled service under
part 121, diminishing the utility of the
commuter category for these airplanes.
More recently, part 23 multiengine
jets intended to be used under parts 91
or 135 have been certificated in the
commuter category, using part 25 based
climb gradient requirements. In the
spirit of the proposed rule change, the
FAA has decided that the one-engineinoperative climb requirements would
be independent of the number of
engines and some of the original
requirements would be consolidated
into a single requirement that would
require performance very close to what
is required today. This action intends to
maintain the performance capabilities
expected in 14 CFR part 135 operations.
The FAA proposes changes in the
flight characteristics rules to keep the
safety intent of the existing
requirements consistent with the other
proposed part 23 sections. The current
part 23 requirements are based on small
airplanes, designed with reversible
controls, which include some
accommodations for stability
augmentation and autopilots. The FAA
believes the proposed language would
capture the current requirements for
flight characteristics and allows for
varying degrees of automated flight
control systems in the future.
Finally, the FAA proposes adding a
requirement to require certification
levels 1 and 2 multiengine airplanes,
not capable of climbing after a critical
loss of thrust, to stall prior to reaching
the minimum directional control speed
(VMC).
b. Specific Discussion of Changes
i. Proposed § 23.100, Weight and Center
of Gravity
Proposed § 23.100 would require an
applicant to determine weights and
centers of gravity that provide limits for
the safe operation of the airplane.
Additionally, it would require an
applicant to show compliance with each
requirement of this subpart at each
combination of weight and center of
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
gravity within the airplane’s range of
loading conditions using tolerances
acceptable to the Administrator.
Proposed § 23.100 would also require
the condition of the airplane at the time
of determining its empty weight and
center of gravity to be well defined and
easily repeatable.
Proposed § 23.100 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.21, Proof of
compliance; 23.23, Load distribution
limits; 23.25, Weight limits; 23.29,
Empty weight and corresponding center
of gravity; and 23.31, Removable ballast.
This proposed section would ensure an
applicant considers the important
weight and balance configurations that
influence performance, stability, and
control when showing compliance with
the flight requirements. The main safety
requirements of current §§ 23.21–23.31
are located in current §§ 23.21 and
23.23. Current § 23.21 allows for a range
of loading conditions shown by test or
systematic investigation. The proposed
rule would still allow for this flexibility,
including the tolerances for flight test.
Sections 23.25–23.31 provide
definitions and directions for
determining weights and centers of
gravity and provides directions for
informing the pilot. For these reasons,
the information in these sections is
more appropriate as a means of
compliance.
ii. Proposed § 23.105, Performance
Proposed § 23.105 would require an
airplane to meet the performance
requirements of this subpart in various
conditions based on the airplane’s
certification and performance levels for
which certification is requested.
Proposed § 23.105 also would require an
applicant to develop the performance
data required by this subpart for various
conditions, while also accounting for
losses due to atmospheric conditions,
cooling needs, and other demands on
power sources. Finally, proposed
§ 23.105 would require the procedures
used for determining takeoff and
landing distances to be executed
consistently by pilots of average skill in
atmospheric conditions expected to be
encountered in service.
Proposed § 23.105 would capture the
safety intent of current § 23.45,
Performance—General. The safety intent
of § 23.45(a) is captured in proposed
§ 23.105(a) and is essentially unchanged
from the current rule, except to
incorporate the proposed certification
levels and speed divisions.
Proposed § 23.105(b) would capture
the safety intent of § 23.45(b) by
retaining § 23.45(b)(1) requirements and
combining § 23.45(b)(2) and (b)(3) and
allowing all airplanes to use the cooling
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
climb limits as their upper temperature.
The level of safety remains the same as
the current part 23 because part 23
airplane pilots only have the limitations
identified in the airplane flight manual,
including engine temperature limits.
Proposed § 23.105(c) would also
capture the safety intent of § 23.45(f).
The safety intent of the current rule is
to ensure an average pilot can
consistently get the same results as
published in the Airplane Flight Manual
(AFM). The FAA believes this
requirement would ensure applicants
either perform their performance tests in
a conservative manner or add margins
and procedures to the AFM performance
section so an average pilot can achieve
the same performance.
Proposed § 23.105(d) would require
performance data to account for losses
due to atmospheric conditions, cooling
needs, and other demands. The current
rule specifies the position of cowl flaps
or other means for controlling the
engine air supply. The proposed
language accounts for airplane
performance, if affected by the cooling
needs of the propulsion system, which
is the safety intent of § 23.45, but would
omit the details because they are more
appropriate as a means of compliance.
Proposed § 23.105(d) would also
capture the safety intent § 23.45(d) and
(e). The safety intent of the current rule
is to ensure the airplane performance
accounts for minimum power available
from the propulsion system, considering
atmospheric and cooling conditions and
accessories requiring power.
iii. Proposed § 23.110, Stall Speed
Proposed § 23.110 would require an
applicant to determine the airplane stall
speed or the minimum steady flight
speed for each flight configuration used
in normal operations, accounting for the
most adverse conditions for each flight
configuration, with power set at idle or
zero thrust.
Proposed § 23.110 would capture the
safety intent of current § 23.49, Stalling
speed. Stall speeds are necessary to
define operating and limiting speeds
used to determine airplane performance.
They also provide a basis for
determining kinetic energy in
emergency landing conditions.
Therefore, determining stall speeds is
required in the configurations used in
the operation of the airplane.
The FAA proposes removing the 61knot stall speed division for singleengine airplanes from the rules because
this speed has not been a limitation
since 1992 with the addition of the
options for stall speeds in excess of 61
knots in § 23.562, Emergency landing
dynamic conditions. Therefore, the 61-
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13467
knot stall speed is a technical division
rather than a limitation and would be
more appropriate as a means of
compliance.
The FAA is changing its approach to
crashworthiness. Instead of constraining
the connection between stall speed and
crashworthiness to a single fixed speed,
the FAA proposes allowing alternative
approaches to crashworthiness. The
intent is to encourage incorporation of
innovations from other industries to
provide more occupant protection in the
airframe. This approach would base
occupant protection on the actual stall
speed rather than a single mandated
stall speed.
iv. Proposed § 23.115, Takeoff
Performance
Proposed § 23.115 would require an
applicant to determine airplane takeoff
performance, which includes the
determination of ground roll and initial
climb distance to 50 feet, accounting for
stall speed safety margins, minimum
control speeds; and climb gradients.
Proposed § 23.115 would also require
the takeoff performance determination
to include accelerate-stop, ground roll
and initial climb to 50 feet, and net
takeoff flight path, after a sudden
critical loss of thrust for certification
levels 1, 2, and 3 high-speed
multiengine airplanes, multiengine
airplanes with a maximum takeoff
weight greater than 12,500 pounds, and
certification level 4 multiengine
airplanes.
Proposed § 23.115 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.51, Takeoff
speeds; and 23.61, Takeoff flight path.
Takeoff distance information and the
associated procedures for achieving
those distances are necessary for the
safe operation of all airplanes certified
under part 23. Proposed § 23.115 would
require applicants to determine,
develop, and publish distance and
procedure data for the pilot to use. The
effects of airplane weight, field
temperature and elevation, winds,
runway gradient, and runway surface
also need to be available to the pilot
because they affect airplane
performance. For proposed simple
entry-level airplanes, conservative
analysis may supplement flight test
while data for larger, higher
performance airplanes are expected to
provide the level of precision that is
accepted today.
Additionally, proposed § 23.115
would require applicants to determine
critical thrust loss cases for multiengine
airplanes. Today, the loss of one engine
on a two-engine airplane is the standard
model. The future possibilities for the
functions of engines, if different from
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
13468
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
thrust, and how the engines are
controlled, may determine critical thrust
loss. For example, a large number of
engines along the leading edge of a wing
could function as a high-lift device as
well as provide thrust.
Historically, limited propulsion
options and the need for inherent
stability from reversible, mechanical
control systems have restrained airplane
configurations. The FAA anticipates
that new propulsion systems and
affordable electronic flight control
systems will challenge these traditional
designs and need alternative means of
compliance. Speed multiples and
factors used in current part 23
prescriptive requirements are based on
traditional airplane configurations. Part
23 mandates these details of design for
compliance. The FAA believes
removing these details would provide
applicants with the agility and
flexibility to address these new airplane
configurations. The current factors will
still apply for traditional configurations,
but proposed performance-based
requirements should allow rapid
adoption of new means of compliance
for future airplane configurations.
The FAA proposes removing airplane
categories and weight and propulsion
certification divisions for multiengine
jets over 6,000 pounds and replacing
them with divisions based on risk and
performance. The commuter category,
originally intended for the certification
of airplanes over 12,500 pounds and up
to 19 passengers, is currently used for
larger business jets with less than ten
passengers. The FAA proposes that
high-speed, multiengine and
multiengine airplanes over 12,500
pounds should continue meeting the
equivalent commuter category
performance-based requirements. The
historical assumption applied to jets
was that they were fast, had high wing
loadings, and used significant runway
distances for takeoff and landing.
Therefore, all jets were required to have
guaranteed climb performance with one
engine inoperative. This requirement
does not currently apply to single
engine jets. The proposed performance
requirements would be based on
number of passengers (certification
level) and airplane performance
(performance level), not weight or
propulsion type. The proposed
certification and performance levels
approach would not offer a one-to-one
relationship with the current
requirements. A low-speed turbinepowered airplane may be more
appropriately addressed by regulations
currently applicable to piston-powered
airplanes, while a piston-powered or a
high-speed electric airplane may be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
more appropriately addressed by
regulations currently used for the
certification of turbine-powered
airplanes. The proposed certification
and performance level approach, while
different from the current divisions,
would capture the safety intent of part
23 more appropriately than the current
propulsion and weight divisions.
v. Proposed § 23.120, Climb
Requirements
Proposed § 23.120 would require an
applicant to demonstrate various
minimum climb performances out of
ground effect, depending on the
airplane’s certification level, engines,
and performance capability. This new
provision would capture the safety
intent of current §§ 23.65, Climb: All
engines operating; 23.67, Climb: One
engine inoperative; and 23.77, Balked
landing. Minimum climb performance
information is necessary so pilots can
determine if they have adequate
clearance from obstacles beyond the end
of the runway. New engine
technologies, especially electric, would
allow for alternative configurations that
would invalidate many of the detailed
test configuration and power
assumptions that are in the current
requirements.
Part 23 currently has a large matrix for
all the climb requirements that includes
category, weight, and number of
engines, resulting in over 20 different
climb gradient requirements. This
reflects the growth in the variety of
different airplane types that has
occurred since the certification
regulations were first adopted in CAR 3.
Because the FAA proposes simplifying
these divisions using certification levels
and airplane performance levels, it can
eliminate required climb gradients for
three and four engines. The FAA
proposes basing multiengine climb
gradients on critical loss for thrust and
using the gradient for the current twinengine airplanes because it has resulted
in a safe service history. The FAA
proposes replacing the term ‘‘failure of
the critical engine’’ (which addresses a
twin engine airplane) with ‘‘critical loss
of thrust’’ for airplanes certificated
under those provisions. The reason for
replacing this term is that with
configurations utilizing large numbers
of engines, the failure modes may not
follow the traditional failure modes as
with the loss of one engine on a twoengine airplane. Furthermore, the FAA
proposes retaining and consolidating
the climb gradients from current § 23.67
because these gradients are important
minimum performance requirements for
maintaining the current level of safety.
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Proposed § 23.120(a) would capture
the safety intent of current § 23.65. It
would retain the existing climb
gradients and atmospheric conditions
required for pilot planning.
Proposed § 23.120(b) would capture
the safety intent of current § 23.67, and
consolidates the weight and propulsion
divisions into all engines operating,
critical loss of thrust, and balked
landing groups. Furthermore, for highspeed airplanes, after a critical loss of
thrust, the FAA proposes reducing the
number of required climb conditions for
certification to one gradient at 400 feet
(122 meters) above the takeoff surface.
For the typical part 23 certified twinengine airplane, the required climb
gradient at 400 feet (122 meters) above
the takeoff surface is generally the most
challenging. Airplanes that have the
performance to meet this one
requirement typically can meet all the
current requirements. For certification
levels 3 and 4, high-speed multiengine
airplanes, the FAA proposes
consolidating the configurations
currently prescribed for the second
segment climb and a discontinued
approach. The climb gradient difference
between these segments is 0.1 percent
and uses the takeoff flap configuration
rather than the approach flap
configuration. Requiring only one climb
gradient at 400 feet (122 meters) above
the takeoff surface with the landing gear
retracted and flaps in the approach
position would maintain the current
level of safety while reducing the
requirements by eliminating initial,
final, and discontinued approach climb
tests. Because the proposed
requirements would reduce the amount
of climb testing for designs intended for
use under part 91, applicants would
also need to provide the traditional
operational performance data, as is
currently done, if the design is intended
to be used for commercial operations
under part 135 operating rules.
The FAA also proposes to normalize
the initial climb height to 50 feet (15
meters) above the takeoff surface. The
regulations for the certification of
commuter category airplanes essentially
adopted many of the part 25 climb
requirements, including an initial climb
height of 35 feet (11 meters) above the
takeoff surface. When the commuter
category was adopted, the expectation
was that these airplanes would be used
in part 121 service. This expectation
allowed the FAA to accept the part 25
assumption that takeoff distances would
be factored; thus, providing a safety
margin to offset the lower initial climb
height. Part 23 requirements provide
minimum safe operations for part 91,
which does not require factored takeoff
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
distances. Therefore, allowing a 35 foot
(11 meters) height above the takeoff
surface is a lower safety margin than
used for smaller airplanes and, for this
reason, the FAA proposes to make all
airplanes certificated under part 23 use
50 feet (15 meters) above the takeoff
surface.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
vi. Proposed § 23.125, Climb
Information
Proposed § 23.125 would require an
applicant to determine the climb
performance for—
• All single engine airplanes;
• Certification level 3 multiengine
airplanes after a critical loss of thrust on
takeoff in the initial climb
configuration; and
• All multiengine airplanes during
the enroute phase of flight with all
engines operating and after a critical
loss of thrust in the cruise configuration.
Proposed § 23.125 would also require
an applicant to determine the glide
performance of the airplane after a
complete loss of thrust for single engine
airplanes.
Proposed § 23.125 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.63, Climb:
General; 23.66, Takeoff climb: Oneengine inoperative; 23.69, Enroute
climb/descent; and 23.71, Glide: Singleengine airplanes. The intent of these
requirements is to provide pilots with
climb and glide performance data that is
important for safety, especially in
conditions near the performance limits
of the airplane. Sections 23.63, 23.66,
and 23.69 are not minimum
performance sections, but contain
information used in the development of
the AFM. Proposed § 23.125 would
require an applicant to determine climb
performance. The performance data
determination provides a good example
of how the use of certification levels can
allow simplified approaches to meet
applicable airworthiness requirements
for simple, and levels 1 and 2 airplanes.
vii. Proposed § 23.130, Landing
Proposed § 23.130 would require an
applicant to determine the landing
distance for standard temperatures at
each weight and altitude within the
operational limits for landing. The
landing distance determination would
start from a height of 50 feet (15 meters)
above the landing surface, require the
airplane to land and come to a stop (or
for water operations, reach a speed of 3
knots) using approach and landing
speeds, configurations, and procedures,
which allow a pilot of average skill to
meet the landing distance consistently
and without causing damage or injury.
Proposed § 23.130 would require these
determinations for standard
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
temperatures at each weight and
altitude within the operational limits for
landing.
Proposed § 23.130 would capture the
safety intent of current § 23.73,
Reference landing approach speed, and
§ 23.75, Landing Distance. Landing
distance information and the associated
procedures for achieving those distances
are necessary to prevent runway
overruns. Applicants would be required
to determine, develop, and publish
distance and procedures data for use in
pilot planning. Proposed § 23.130 would
combine the current requirements to
determine approach speed and landing
distance because a determination of
both is required for a landing distance
determination.
viii. Proposed § 23.200, Controllability
Proposed § 23.200 would require the
airplane to be controllable and
maneuverable, without requiring
exceptional piloting skill, alertness, or
strength, within the operating envelope,
at all loading conditions for which
certification is requested. This would
would include during low-speed
operations, including stalls, with any
probable flight control or propulsion
system failure, and during configuration
changes. Proposed § 23.200 would
require the airplane to be able to
complete a landing without causing
damage or serious injury, in the landing
configuration at a speed of VREF minus
5 knots using the approach gradient
equal to the steepest used in the landing
distance determination. Proposed
§ 23.200 would require VMC not to
exceed VS1 or VS0 for all practical
weights and configurations within the
operating envelope of the airplane for
certification levels 1 and 2 multiengine
airplanes that cannot climb after a
critical loss of thrust. Proposed § 23.200
would also require an applicant to
demonstrate those aerobatic maneuvers
for which certification is requested and
determine entry speeds.
Proposed § 23.200 would capture the
safety intent of §§ 23.141, Flight
Characteristics—General, 23.143,
Controllability and Maneuverability—
General; 23.145, Longitudinal control;
23.147 Directional and lateral control;
23.149, Minimum control speed; 23.151,
Acrobatic maneuvers; 23.153, Control
during landing; 23.155, Elevator control
force in maneuvers; 23.157, Rate of roll;
23.697(b) and (c), Wing flap controls.
Proposed § 23.200 would ensure the
maneuvering flight characteristics of the
airplane are safe and predictable
throughout the flight envelope and
result in repeatable, smooth transitions
between turns, climbs, descents, and
level flight. Configuration changes, such
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13469
as flap extension and retraction, landing
gear extension and retraction, and
spoiler extension and retraction, along
with probable failures resulting in
asymmetric thrust, would also have to
result in safe, controllable, and
predictable characteristics.
Proposed § 23.200(a) and (b) would
capture the safety intent of §§ 23.143,
Controllability and Maneuverability—
General; 23.145, Longitudinal control;
23.147, Directional and lateral control;
23.149, Minimum control speed; 23.151,
Acrobatic maneuvers; 23.153, Control
during landings; 23.155, Elevator
control force in maneuvers; and 23.157,
Rate of roll. The FAA proposes limiting
the requirements for practical loadings
and operating altitudes without the use
of exceptional piloting skill, alertness,
or strength.
Current part 23 provides prescriptive
and detailed test requirements based on
specific airplane configurations.
Additionally, the current rules include
flight test procedures that are based on
traditional reversible controls and
engine locations that are, in some cases,
derived from airplanes designed in the
1930’s. The FAA proposes performancebased requirements that would remain
applicable to traditionally designed
airplanes, but allow alternative
approaches to showing compliance
based on new configurations, flight
control systems, engine locations, and
number of engines.
Proposed § 23.200(c) would require
all certification levels 1 and 2
multiengine airplanes that lack the
performance to climb after a critical loss
of thrust to stall before loss of
directional control. This is a new
requirement and it targets the high
number of fatal accidents that occur
after an engine failure in this class of
airplane. Light multiengine airplanes
that lack the performance to climb after
the critical loss of thrust are especially
susceptible to this type of accident. The
Part 23 Reorganization ARC discussed
and several members proposed that all
multiengine airplanes have guaranteed
climb performance after a critical loss of
thrust. Ultimately, this approach was
rejected, as it could impose a significant
cost on the production of training
airplanes. Furthermore, several
members pointed out that the safety
concern was not that the airplane could
not climb on one engine, but rather that
the airplane would depart controlled
flight at low speeds above stall as a
result of asymmetric thrust. The FAA
agrees that loss of control caused by
asymmetric thrust is the critical safety
issue that should be addressed and the
FAA believes that the proposed rule
responds to this concern.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13470
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
The FAA recognizes concerns
regarding the proposed requirement—if
the airplane is allowed to stall, the
asymmetric thrust will still cause the
airplane to lose directional control and
likely depart controlled flight. The FAA
agrees, but believes that pilots are
typically more aware of their stall
speeds than minimum control speed,
especially during turns. Furthermore,
these airplanes would be required to
meet the proposed stall warning and
stall characteristic requirements, which
the FAA expects would provide
additional safety margins beyond
current requirements. Finally, the
system that provides stall warning could
also be designed to provide VMC
warning.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
ix. Proposed § 23.205, Trim
Proposed § 23.205 would require the
airplane to maintain longitudinal,
lateral, and directional trim under
various conditions, depending on the
airplane’s certification level, without
allowing residual forces to fatigue or
distract the pilot during likely
emergency operations, including a
critical loss of thrust on multiengine
airplanes.
Proposed § 23.205 would capture the
safety intent of current § 23.161, Trim.
Section 23.161(a) addresses the safety
intent while paragraphs (b), (c), (d), and
(e) provide prescriptive details on how
to do flight testing for traditionally
configured airplanes and are more
appropriate for inclusion in means of
compliance.
x. Proposed § 23.210, Stability
Proposed § 23.210 would require
airplanes not certified for aerobatics to
have static and dynamic longitudinal,
lateral, and directional stability in
normal operations, and provide stable
control force feedback throughout the
operating envelope. Proposed § 23.210
would also preclude any airplane from
exhibiting any divergent stability
characteristic so unstable as to increase
the pilot’s workload or otherwise
endanger the airplane and its occupants.
Proposed § 23.210 would capture the
safety intent of the current §§ 23.171,
Stability—General; 23.173, Static
longitudinal stability; 23.175,
demonstration of static longitudinal
stability; 23.177, Static directional and
lateral stability; 23.179, Instrumented
stick force measurements; and 23.181,
Dynamic stability. The current
requirements have their origins in
Aeronautics Bulletin 7, amendment 7a,
effective October 1, 1934, which
predates CAR 3. These airplane
handling quality and stability
requirements were based on the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
technology associated with simple
mechanical control systems and what
was considered acceptable on existing
airplanes of the time. Although many of
these requirements are still appropriate
for traditional flight control systems,
they do not take into account the
capabilities of new computer-based
flight control systems. The FAA
recognizes the availability of hybrid
reversible and automated flight control
systems and proposes performancebased language that would allow their
installation in part 23 certificated
airplanes without the use of special
conditions, while still maintaining
adequate requirements for reversible
controls. The intent is to facilitate the
use of systems that may enhance safety
while reducing pilot workload.
xi. Proposed § 23.215, Stall
Characteristics, Stall Warning, and
Spins
Proposed § 23.215 would require an
airplane to have controllable stall
characteristics in straight flight, turning
flight, and accelerated turning flight
with a clear and distinctive stall
warning that would provide sufficient
margin to prevent inadvertent stalling.
Proposed § 23.215 would allow for
alternative approaches to meeting this
requirement for certification levels 1
and 2 airplanes and certification level 3
single-engine airplanes, not certified for
aerobatics, in order to avoid a tendency
to inadvertently depart controlled flight.
Proposed § 23.215 would require
airplanes certified for aerobatics to have
controllable stall characteristics and the
ability to recover within one and onehalf additional turns after initiation of
the first control action from any point in
a spin. Additionally, the airplane would
not be allowed to exceed six turns or
any greater number of turns for which
certification is requested while
remaining within the operating
limitations of the airplane. Proposed
§ 23.215 would preclude airplanes
certified for aerobatics from having spin
characteristics that would result in
unrecoverable spins due to pilot
disorientation or incapacitation or any
use of the flight or engine power
controls.
Proposed § 23.215 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.201, Wings
level stall; 23.203, Turning flight and
accelerated turning stalls; 23.207, Stall
warning; and 23.221, Spinning.
Historically, the FAA focused its
requirements on the ability of the
airplane to recover from a one-turn or
three-second spin more than on the stall
characteristics of the airplane. From the
first fatal stall accident in the Wright
Flyer airplane to today’s fatal stall
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
accidents, the number one cause in
small airplanes is a departure from
controlled flight following an
inadvertent stall.
Except for accidental departures from
controlled flight during stall training,
most of these inadvertent departures
occur in close proximity to the ground,
and because of this, the current
requirement to recover from a one-turn
or three-second spin may not be the best
method to assess the safety of the
airplane. Even an experienced pilot may
not have enough altitude to recover
from the spin before impacting the
ground. For this reason, the FAA
proposes to delete the one-turn/threesecond spin recovery requirement for
normal category airplanes. Instead, the
FAA proposes to increase the stall
characteristics requirements by
requiring that all certification levels 1
and 2 airplanes and certification level 3
single-engine airplanes provide
substantial departure resistance to
prevent inadvertent stalls from resulting
in a departure from controlled flight and
becoming fatal accidents.
Accident studies show that even
hitting the ground as a result of a stall
can be survivable if the airplane is still
in controlled flight. Conversely,
impacting the ground out of control is
typically fatal. The FAA envisions
numerous alternative approaches to
meeting the proposed requirements,
ranging from one extreme of spin
resistance to the other extreme of a total
systems-based approach such as stick
pusher. Furthermore, there are envelope
protection systems and stall warning
concepts that could also be considered
when assessing departure resistance.
The possible approaches to meeting the
proposed requirements are so broad that
these alternatives would be better
addressed in means of compliance. This
level of protection may vary based on
the characteristics of the airplane, but
the FAA expects this change in design
philosophy would increase the level of
protection designed into airplanes
under this proposed rule. Certification
level 3 multiengine airplanes and
certification level 4 airplanes
historically have not had a large number
of departure-related accidents. While
the FAA encourages manufacturers to
consider designing departure resistance
into these airplanes, the FAA does not
propose adding a new requirement for
certification level 3 multiengine
airplanes and certification level 4
airplanes.
The FAA also proposes revising stall
warning requirements by removing
prescriptive speed based stall warning
requirements and requiring a clear and
distinctive warning with sufficient
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
warning margin for the pilot to prevent
a stall. Historically, stall warning
systems in part 23 airplanes have been
simple, mechanical vanes that may or
may not provide reasonable lead-time to
prevent a stall. These systems also can
provide false alerts when they are not
needed, creating a nuisance.
Furthermore, similar sounding warning
horns that alert the pilot of other
situations can result in the pilot either
becoming used to the warning sounds or
mistaking the stall warning for another
warning such as the autopilot
disconnect horn. The FAA believes
removing the current prescriptive speed
based stall warning from the rules
would encourage the installation of
better, more effective low speed
awareness systems that may use angle of
attack, a speed decay rate, or clear voice
commands to alert the pilot.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
xii. Proposed § 23.220, Ground and
Water Handling Characteristics
Proposed § 23.220 would require
airplanes intended for operation on land
or water to have controllable
longitudinal, and directional handling
characteristics during taxi, takeoff, and
landing operations. Proposed § 23.220
would also require an applicant to
establish a maximum wave height
shown to provide for controllable
longitudinal, and directional handling
characteristics and any necessary water
handling procedures for those airplanes
intended for operation on water.
Proposed § 23.220 would capture the
safety intent of §§ 23.231, Longitudinal
stability and control; 23.233, Directional
stability and control; 23.235, Operation
on unpaved surfaces; 23.237, Operation
on water; and 23.239, Spray
characteristics.
xiii. Proposed § 23.225, Vibration,
Buffeting, and High-Speed
Characteristics
Proposed § 23.225 would preclude
vibration and buffeting from interfering
with the control of the airplane or
causing fatigue to the flightcrew, for
operations up to VD/MD. Proposed
§ 23.225 would allow stall warning
buffet within these limits. Proposed
§ 23.225 would preclude perceptible
buffeting in cruise configuration at 1g
and at any speed up to VMO/MMO,
except stall buffeting for high-speed
airplanes and all airplanes with a
maximum operating altitude greater
than 25,000 feet (7,620 meters) pressure
altitude. Proposed § 23.225 would
require an applicant seeking
certification of a high-speed airplane to
determine the positive maneuvering
load factors at which the onset of
perceptible buffet occurs in the cruise
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
configuration within the operational
envelope and preclude likely
inadvertent excursions beyond this
boundary from resulting in structural
damage. Proposed § 23.225 would also
require high-speed airplanes to have
recovery characteristics that do not
result in structural damage or loss of
control, beginning at any likely speed
up to VMO/MMO, following an
inadvertent speed increase and a highspeed trim upset.
Proposed § 23.225 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.251,
Vibration and buffeting; 23.253, High
speed characteristics; and 23.255, Out of
trim characteristics. Proposed
§ 23.225(a), (b), and (c) would capture
the safety of current § 23.251(a), (b), and
(c). The current safety intent of
§§ 23.253 and 23.255 are incorporated
in proposed § 23.225(d).
Proposed § 23.225(d)(1) addresses the
current language in § 23.253, which
indirectly divides the airplanes by
engine type rather than performance.
These requirements have typically been
applied automatically to turbinepowered airplanes with the assumption
that all turbine-powered airplanes flew
fast and high. Piston or electric
airplanes were not required to meet
these requirements even if they were
faster than many turboprops, because of
propulsion assumptions in the past. For
this reason, the FAA is amending this
requirement to be based on performance
instead of propulsion type using the
same high-speed criteria from other
subpart B sections. The existing details
would be removed from the rules, as
they are more appropriate as means of
compliance because it would allow for
alternatives for non-traditional
airplanes, such as very fast piston
airplanes.
Proposed § 23.225(d)(2) would
address the current safety intent in
§ 23.255 by relying on performance and
design characteristics without
discriminating based on propulsion
type. The specific design details are
more appropriate as means of
compliance.
xiv. Proposed § 23.230, Performance and
Flight Characteristics Requirements for
Flight in Icing Conditions
Proposed § 23.230 would require an
applicant requesting certification for
flight in icing conditions to demonstrate
compliance with each requirement of
this subpart. Exceptions to this rule
would be those applicable to spins and
any requirement that would have to be
demonstrated at speeds in excess of 250
KCAS, VMO or MMO, or a speed that an
applicant demonstrates the airframe
would be free of ice accretion. Proposed
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13471
§ 23.230 would require the stall warning
for flight in icing conditions and nonicing conditions to be the same.
Proposed § 23.230 would require an
applicant requesting certification for
flight in icing conditions to provide a
means to detect any icing conditions for
which certification is not requested and
demonstrate the airplane’s ability to
avoid or exit those conditions. Proposed
§ 23.230 would also require an applicant
to develop an operating limitation to
prohibit intentional flight, including
takeoff and landing, into icing
conditions for which the airplane is not
certified to operate. Proposed § 23.230
would also increase safety by adding
optional icing conditions a
manufacturer may demonstrate its
airplane can either safely operate in,
detect and safely exit, or avoid.
Proposed § 23.230 would only apply to
applicants seeking certification for flight
in icing.
Proposed § 23.230 would capture the
safety intent of the performance and
flight characteristics requirements in
current § 23.1419(a) and along with
proposed §§ 23.940, Powerplant ice
protection, and 23.1405, Flight in icing
conditions, and their respective means
of compliance would address NTSB
safety recommendations A–96–54 and
A–96–56. Section 23.1419 specifies that
airplanes must be able to operate safely
in the icing conditions identified in
appendix C to part 25, which
encompass cloud size drops of less than
100 microns in diameter. Freezing
drizzle (i.e., drops up to 500 microns in
diameter) and freezing rain (i.e., drops
greater than 500 microns in diameter)
icing conditions, which can result in ice
accretion aft of leading edge ice
protection systems, are not included in
appendix C to part 25. Amendment 25–
140 (79 FR 65507, November 4, 2014)
added these icing conditions to
appendix O to part 25 and are not being
defined in proposed § 23.230. The FAA
believes that the definitions of these
optional icing conditions would be
more appropriate as a means of
compliance. The standards for ‘‘capable
of operating safely’’ in these conditions
would be the same as cloud icing with
additional icing conditions in the
takeoff phase.
If certification for flight in the
optional freezing drizzle or freezing rain
conditions is not sought, proposed
§ 23.230 would require these conditions
be avoided or detected and exited
safely. The means of compliance for the
latter, detect and exit the situation,
would be similar to current guidance in
AC 23.1419–2D, Certification of Part 23
Airplanes for Flight in Icing Conditions,
and is currently applied during part 23
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13472
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
airplane icing certifications. These
criteria are not as extensive as
recommended by the Part 23 Icing ARC,
but the FAA did not want to impose an
additional burden on industry because
the service history of airplanes certified
under part 23 and the latest icing
regulations at amendment 23–43 (58 FR
18958, April 9, 1993) show no SLD
related accidents. The FAA believes the
safety of the existing fleet can be greatly
increased by improving the freezing
drizzle and freezing rain capability of
automated surface weather observation
systems and pilot education and
training of the limits of icing
certification.
Proposed § 23.230(b) would provide
an option to avoid, in lieu of detecting
and exiting, the freezing drizzle or
freezing rain icing conditions for which
the airplane is not certified. This option
is not in current guidance and such
technology currently does not exist. The
rule would provide an option in the
event the technology is developed. The
FAA believes avoiding rather than
detecting and exiting would provide for
safer airplane operations and reduce
certification costs.
Proposed § 23.230(c) would require an
AFM limitation to prohibit flight in
icing conditions for which the airplane
is not certified. This reflects current
guidance in AC 23.1419–2D, which
most manufacturers of new part 23 icing
certified airplanes follow today. A
minority of new manufacturers are not
using AC 23.1419–2D guidance and
have inserted AFM limitation language
that reflects Airworthiness Directives
(AD) that were issued globally to
pneumatic boot-equipped airplanes
between 1996 and 1998. The ADs in the
below table require immediate exit from
severe icing and warn that freezing
drizzle and freezing rain may be
conducive to severe icing. The proposed
new limitation is intended to prohibit
flight in known icing conditions, not
forecast conditions.
Airplane model
Docket
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Aerostar Aircraft Corporation Models PA–60–600, PA–60–601, PA–60–601P, PA–60–602P, and PA–60–700P
Airplanes ..............................................................................................................................................................
Pilatus Britten-Norman Ltd., Models BN–2A, BN–2B, and BN–2T Airplanes .........................................................
Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., Models PC–12 and PC–12/45 Airplanes ................................................................................
Partenavia Costruzioni Aeronauticas, S.p.A. Model P68, AP68TP 300, AP68TP 600 Airplanes ..........................
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., MU–2B Series Airplanes ...................................................................................
Harbin Aircraft Manufacturing Corp., Model Y12 IV airplanes ................................................................................
Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. Airplanes. (Embraer) Models EMB–110P1 and EMB–110P2 Airplanes
Dornier Luftfahrt GmbH, 228 Series Airplanes .......................................................................................................
De Havilland, Inc., DHC–6 Series Airplanes ...........................................................................................................
The Cessna Aircraft Company, 208 Series .............................................................................................................
The Cessna Aircraft Company, Model T210R airplane ..........................................................................................
The Cessna Aircraft Company, Models T210, P210, P210R airplanes .................................................................
The Cessna Aircraft Company Models T303, 310R, T310R, 335, 340A, 402B, 402C, 404, F406, 414, 414A,
421B, 421C, 425, and 441 Airplanes ..................................................................................................................
Jetstream Aircraft Limited Models 3101 and 3201 Airplanes .................................................................................
The New Piper Aircraft PA–23, PA–30, PA–31, PA–34, PA–39, PA–40, and PA–42 Series Airplanes ...............
The New Piper Aircraft Corporation Models PA–46–310P and PA–46–350P Airplanes .......................................
Beech Aircraft Corporation Models 99, 99A, A99A, B99, C99, B200, B200C, 1900, 1900C, and 1900D Airplanes ...................................................................................................................................................................
Raytheon Aircraft Company 200 Series Airplanes ..................................................................................................
Raytheon Aircraft Company Models E55, E55A, 58, 58A, 58P, 58PA, 58TC, 58TCA Airplanes, and 60, 65–
B80, 65–B90, 90, F90, 100, 300, and B300 Series Airplanes ............................................................................
Raytheon Aircraft Company Model 2000 Airplanes ................................................................................................
AeroSpace Technologies Of Australia Pty Ltd., Models N22B and N24A .............................................................
SIAI Marchetti, S.r.1 Models SF600 and SF600A Airplanes ..................................................................................
SOCATA—Groupe AEROSPATIALE, Model TBM 700 Airplanes ..........................................................................
Twin Commander Aircraft Corporation Models 500, 500–A, 500–B, 500–S, 500–U, 520, 560, 560–A, 560–E,
560–F, 680, 680–E, 680FL(P), 680T, 680V, 680W, 681, 685, 690, 690A, 690B, 690C, 690D, 695, 695A,
695B, and 720 Airplanes .....................................................................................................................................
Fairchild Aircraft Corporation, SA226 and SA227 Series Airplanes .......................................................................
Recently, manufacturers of airplanes
certificated under part 23 have proposed
inhibiting, or optimizing, bleed air ice
protection systems above an altitude of
30,000 feet (9,144 meters) because the
icing conditions defined in the
appendix C to part 25 are limited to
below this altitude. The FAA believes
ice protection design at high altitude
should be addressed as a means of
compliance and not in the proposed
rule due to various acceptable design
solutions. An industry means of
compliance would negate the need for a
special condition or means of
compliance issue paper currently
required for these projects.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
xv. Current Subpart B Regulations
Relocated to Other Proposed Subparts
The FAA proposes addressing the
safety intent of § 23.33, Propeller speed
and pitch limits, in § 23.900(a) of the
propulsion rules. Additionally, the first
part of the current § 23.251(a) that
addresses structural damage has been
relocated and is now addressed under
‘‘flutter’’ in proposed subpart C to part
23.
The FAA proposes adopting the Part
23 Icing and Part 23 Reorganization
ARC’s recommendations to move
performance and flight characteristics
requirements in icing, currently in
§ 23.1419, to subpart B, so that proposed
§ 23.1405 only contains systems
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Final rule
97–CE–56–AD
97–CE–54–AD
97–CE–53–AD
97–CE–51–AD
96–CE–61–AD
97–CE–50–AD
96–CE–02–AD
96–CE–04–AD
96–CE–01–AD
96–CE–05–AD
98–CE–19–AD
97–CE–62–AD
98–04–23
98–04–21
98–20–28
98–04–20
96–25–02
98–04–19
96–09–12
96–09–14
96–09–11
96–09–15
98–20–33
98–05–14 R1
97–CE–63–AD
96–CE–07–AD
98–CE–77–AD
97–CE–60–AD
98–04–28
96–09–17
99–14–01
98–04–26
96–CE–03–AD
98–CE–17–AD
96–09–13
98–20–38
97–CE–58–AD
97–CE–59–AD
97–CE–49–AD
97–CE–64–AD
97–CE–55–AD
98–04–24
98–04–25
98–04–18
98–05–15
98–04–22
97–CE–57–AD
96–CE–06–AD
98–20–34
96–09–16
requirements. Proposed § 23.230(a)
would also include stall warning
requirements. Current guidance
contains these stall warning
recommendations (i.e., margin and type
of stall) and service history shows them
to be necessary for safe flight in icing
conditions. The exceptions for spin and
high-speed requirements are consistent
with the current rule and industry
practice that have shown to provide an
adequate level of safety in icing
conditions. The FAA determined that
the evaluations of ice contaminated
tailplane stall susceptibility, lateral
control in icing, and autopilot operation
in icing, which are included in current
guidance for part 23 icing certification,
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
are more appropriately addressed as a
means of compliance.
xvi. Removal of Subpart B Current
Regulations
The FAA proposes removing
§ 23.45(g) that requires takeoff and
landing distances be determined on a
smooth, dry, hard-surfaced runway. The
FAA believes that most performance
tests would be done on smooth, dry,
hard-surfaced runways because these
surfaces provide applicants with the
best results. Performance
determinations on surfaces other than
smooth, dry hard surfaces would
provide conservative results and be
acceptable as long as the surface was
specified in the AFM. Therefore, the
FAA believes retaining this requirement
is unnecessary.
The FAA proposes removing § 23.63,
Climb: General, which addresses the
general climb requirements, because the
safety intent contained in this section is
redundant with the safety intent
proposed in § 23.125 and the testing
procedures contained in § 23.63 are
more appropriate for inclusion in means
of compliance.
The FAA proposes removing current
§ 23.221(a) and (b), which address
spinning requirements for normal and
utility category airplanes, and would no
longer be necessary. The increased focus
on preventing stall-based departures
along with improved stall margin
awareness would provide a level of
safety higher than would be achieved
through spin testing.
The FAA proposes removing the
reference to appendix C to part 25, part
II, currently in § 23.1419, Ice protection,
paragraph (a), when relocating § 23.1419
to proposed § 23.230 and 23.1405. Part
II is a means of compliance for
determining critical ice accretions on
transport category airplanes and is not
applicable to airplanes certified under
part 23.
3. Subpart C—Structures
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
a. General Discussion
The FAA’s intent in proposed subpart
C is to provide a regulatory framework
that maintains the current level of safety
while (1) allowing for certification of
unique airplane configurations with
new technology and materials, and (2)
supporting new means of compliance,
testing, and analysis. To support new
technologies, the FAA proposes to
incorporate the safety intent of recent
special conditions for airplanes
equipped with systems that affect
structural performance, such as load
alleviation systems, in proposed
§ 23.305. To support new means of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
compliance, the FAA proposes in
§ 23.600 to emphasize a holistic
approach to occupant safety, which
would allow certain applicants to omit
current required dynamic seat testing.
It is not the FAA’s intent to reduce the
level of safety in the proposed subpart
C. The FAA based the prescriptive
requirements in current subparts C and
D on service history, historic test data,
and lessons learned. These requirements
have provided a level of safety where
structural failure is rare and most often
attributable to airplane upset or pilot
disorientation in instrument
meteorological conditions. A means of
compliance to proposed subpart C must
maintain the level of safety provided by
the current regulations. Applicants
would need to substantiate the level of
safety for proposed means of
compliance that deviate from the
prescriptive regulations.
Proposed subpart C would replace
current subpart C and include those
sections of current subpart D that are
applicable to the airframe. We have
arranged proposed subpart C into the
following five topics:
• General: Including § 23.300, Structural
design envelope; and § 23.305 Interaction of
systems and structures.
• Structural Loads: Including § 23.310,
Structural design loads; § 23.315, Flight load
conditions; § 23.320, Ground and water load
conditions; § 23.325, Component loading
conditions; and § 23.330, Limit and ultimate
loads.
• Structural performance: Including
§ 23.400, Structural strength; § 23.405,
Structural durability; and § 23.410,
Aeroelasticity.
• Design: Including § 23.500, Structural
design; § 23.505, Protection of structure;
§ 23.510, Materials and processes; and
§ 23.515, Special factors of safety.
• Structural occupant protection: Included
in § 23.600, Emergency conditions.
The FAA proposes removing the
content of current appendix A to part
23, Simplified design load criteria;
appendix C to part 23, Basic landing
conditions; appendix D to part 23,
Wheel spin-up and spring-back loads;
and appendix I to part 23, Seaplane
loads. The content of these current part
23 appendices is more appropriate for
inclusion in means of compliance. The
FAA also proposes removing appendix
B to part 23, Reserved, since the content
of this appendix was removed at
amendment 23–42 (56 FR 344, January
3, 1991). Refer to appendix 1 of this
preamble for a cross-reference table
detailing how the current regulations
are addressed in the proposed part 23
regulations.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13473
b. Specific Discussion of Changes
i. Proposed § 23.300, Structural Design
Envelope
Proposed § 23.300 would require an
applicant to determine the structural
design envelope, which describes the
range and limits of airplane design and
operational parameters for which an
applicant would show compliance with
the requirements of this subpart.
Proposed § 23.300 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.321,
Loads—General, paragraphs (b) and (c);
23.333, Flight envelope, paragraphs (a),
(b), and (d); 23.335, Design airspeeds;
23.337, Limit maneuvering load factors,
paragraphs (a) and (b); and 23.343,
Design fuel loads, paragraphs (a) and
(b).
Proposed § 23.300 would require the
applicant to determine and document
the range of airplane and operational
parameters for which the applicant will
show compliance with the requirements
of subpart C. These parameters would
include the design airspeeds and
maneuver load factors often depicted as
a V-n diagram. An applicant would be
required to determine design airspeeds,
including the design maneuvering speed
(VA), the design cruising speed (VC), the
design dive speed (VD), design flap and
landing gear speeds, and any other
speed used as a design limitation. For
certification of level 4 airplanes, an
applicant would be required to
determine a rough air penetration speed,
VB.
Additionally, applicants would have
to determine the design maneuver load
factors based on the intended usage of
the airplane and the values associated
with the level of safety experienced
with current designs. Applicants have
rarely used the relief for maneuvering
load factors based on airplane
capabilities in current § 23.337(c). The
FAA views this relief as an application
of physical principles, and believes that
this current requirement does not need
to be addressed in proposed § 23.300.
Design weights and inertia parameters
are also part of the structural design
envelope. Design weights include the
empty weight, maximum weight, takeoff
and landing weight, and maximum zero
fuel weight. The range of center of
gravity locations at these and other
weights is depicted as the weight center
of gravity envelope. An applicant would
have to determine the weight and center
of gravity of occupants, payload, and
fuel as well as any mass moments of
inertia required for loads or flutter
analysis. An applicant would also have
to specify any other parameters that
describe the structural design envelope.
These parameters include maximum
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13474
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
altitude limitations, Mach number
limitations, and control surface
deflections.
ii. Proposed § 23.305, Interaction of
Systems and Structures
Proposed § 23.305 would provide a
regulatory framework for the evaluation
of systems intended to modify an
airplane’s structural design envelope or
structural performance and other
systems whose normal operating state or
failed states may affect structural
performance. Compliance with
proposed § 23.305 would provide
acceptable mitigation of structural
hazards identified in the functional
hazard assessments required by
proposed § 23.1315.
Proposed § 23.305 would apply to
airplanes equipped with—
• Structural systems, including load
alleviation systems, where the intended
function is to modify structural
performance, to alleviate the impact of
subpart C requirements, or provide a
means of compliance to subpart C
requirements; and
• Systems where the intended
function is non-structural, but whose
normal operation or failure states affect
the structural design envelope or
structural performance, and would
include fuel management systems,
flight-envelope protection systems, and
active control systems.
Under the current regulations, an
applicant seeking certification of
airplanes incorporating structural and
non-structural systems must ensure that
failures of these systems will not result
in exceeding the structural design
envelope or the structural design loads,
or other structural performance
characteristics. An applicant has the
option of designing the structure to the
full subpart C and subpart D
requirements, including margins of
safety, with the system in its failed state.
This option may result in increased
structural weight and reduced airplane
performance and utility.
Proposed § 23.1315 in subpart F
would apply to both structural and nonstructural systems. Guidance material
for current § 23.1309, the corresponding
regulation to proposed § 23.1315, allows
for different acceptable values for
likelihood of failures based on the
severity of the hazard, airplane weight,
and method of propulsion. These
different values encourage the
incorporation of equipment that
improves pilot situational awareness
and other systems that promote the
overall airplane level of safety.
In most cases, means of compliance
with proposed § 23.305 would follow an
approach somewhat similar to that used
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
in the guidance material for current
§ 23.1309. Structural failures resulting
in fatalities are rare, occurring at a rate
of approximately 3 × 10¥8 per flight
hour for small airplanes. The reason for
incorporating structural systems is not,
in general, to improve safety, but rather
to reduce structural weight and thereby
improve airplane performance.
Proposed § 23.305 would require that
the level of safety must be the same for
airplanes equipped with systems that
affect the structure and airplanes
without such systems.
An existing acceptable means of
complying with proposed § 23.305 is
provided in several existing special
conditions that address the interaction
of systems and structures, for example,
FAA Special Condition 25–390–SC.20
Most of these special conditions address
load alleviation systems. Load
alleviation systems counteract the
effects of gust and maneuver loads and
allow an applicant to design a lighter
structure, thereby improving the
performance and utility of the airplane.
These special conditions require that an
applicant design the structure to the
required structural safety margins with
the load alleviation system its normal
functioning state. The special
conditions provide a means for an
applicant to maintain the required
structural safety margins with the
system in its failed state by adjusting the
required safety margins based on the
likelihood of system failure. Systems
that fail frequently require higher safety
margins than systems that rarely fail in
order to maintain the same level of
safety. The means of compliance
described in these special conditions
allow an applicant to utilize the benefits
of structural systems and potentially
eliminate weight and performance
penalties associated with structural
hazards due to system failures.
Applicants who use the means of
compliance described in the existing
special conditions would be able to use
data developed for compliance with
proposed § 23.1315. This data includes
identification of failure modes,
identification of hazards resulting from
the failure modes, and the likelihood of
the occurrence of the failure modes.
With or without the proposed § 23.305
requirements, an applicant would have
to account for structural performance
with the system in its normal operating
and failed states and evaluate the
system for compliance to the proposed
§ 23.1315. The FAA does not expect that
20 https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_
Library/rgSC.nsf/0/7B2D4B459E2784858625
7620006A6999?OpenDocument&Highlight=25-390sc
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
additional detailed structural analysis
would be required for compliance with
proposed § 23.305 other then the
application of optional lower safety
margins to the structural performance
analysis.
Proposed § 23.305 would allow an
applicant to realize the value of
structural and non-structural systems
and would potentially allow reduced
structural weight of the airplane. The
magnitude of the weight reduction
would depend on the functional
characteristics of the systems and the
likelihood of system failures. The FAA
believes proposed § 23.305 would
reduce the need for special conditions
that deal with interaction of systems
and structures, saving time and effort for
the FAA and the applicant.
iii. Proposed § 23.310, Structural Design
Loads
Proposed § 23.310 would require an
applicant to determine structural design
loads resulting from any externally or
internally applied pressure, force, or
moment, which may occur in flight,
ground and water operations, ground
and water handling, and while the
airplane is parked or moored. Proposed
§ 23.310 would require the applicant to
determine structural design loads at all
combinations of parameters on and
within the boundaries of the structural
design envelope which result in the
most severe loading conditions.
Proposed § 23.310 would also require
the magnitude and distribution of these
loads to be based on physical principles
and would be no less than service
history has shown can occur within the
structural design envelope.
Proposed § 23.310 would capture the
safety intent of §§ 23.301, Loads; 23.302,
Canard or tandem wing configurations;
23.321, Flight Loads—General,
paragraph (a); and 23.331, Symmetrical
flight conditions. Proposed § 23.310
would also capture the intent of several
current requirements for sound and
physics-based engineering evaluations.
An example is in current § 23.301(b),
which requires that the forces and
moments applied to the airplane must
balance in equilibrium, and the
distribution of loads on the airplane
must reasonably approximate actual
conditions. The part 23 regulations
should not need to prescribe basic
physical principles, sound engineering
judgment, and common sense. Proposed
§ 23.310 would place the burden on the
applicant to properly account for loads
acting on the structure.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
iv. Proposed § 23.315, Flight Load
Conditions
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Proposed § 23.315 would require an
applicant to determine the loads
resulting from vertical and horizontal
atmospheric gusts, symmetric and
asymmetric maneuvers, and, for
multiengine airplanes, failure of the
powerplant unit which results in the
most severe structural loads. Proposed
§ 23.315 would capture the safety intent
of current §§ 23.333, Flight envelope,
paragraph (c); 23.341, Gust loads factors;
23.347, Unsymmetrical flight
conditions; 23.349, Rolling conditions;
23.351, Yawing conditions; 23.367,
Unsymmetrical loads due to engine
failure; 23.421, Balancing loads; 23.423,
Maneuvering loads; 23.425, Gust loads;
23.427, Unsymmetrical loads; 23.441,
Maneuvering loads; 23.443, Gust loads;
and 23.445, Outboard fins or winglets,
paragraphs (b), (c), and (d).
These current part 23 sections
establish prescriptive requirements for
gust loads and symmetrical, rolling, and
yawing maneuvering loads, acting on
the wing, horizontal tail, vertical tail,
and other lifting surfaces. Portions of
the current sections, such as § 23.331(c),
are restatements of basic physical
principles. Proposed § 23.315 would
remove this language.
The FAA’s intent is not to lessen the
structural load requirements. The
current prescriptive flight load
requirements have established a level of
safety where structural failure due to
overloading is rare. When structural
failures do occur, the most common
cause is airplane upset or pilot
disorientation in instrument
meteorological conditions.
The FAA believes the prescriptive
content of the current regulations,
including the modified Pratt formula for
gust loads, the descriptions of
symmetrical maneuvers, checked and
unchecked maneuvers, rolling
maneuvers, and yawing maneuvers are
more appropriate for inclusion in means
of compliance. Applicants who wish to
propose alternate design loading
conditions should note that extensive
data collection, testing, and evaluation
may be necessary to substantiate their
proposal.
v. Proposed § 23.320, Ground and Water
Load Conditions
Proposed § 23.320 would require an
applicant to determine the loads
resulting from taxi, take-off, landing,
and ground handling conditions
occurring in normal and adverse
attitudes and configurations. Proposed
§ 23.320 would capture the safety intent
of current §§ 23.471, Ground Loads—
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
13475
General; 23.473, Ground load conditions
and assumptions; 23.477, Landing gear
arrangement; 23.479, Level landing
conditions; 23.481, Tail down landing
conditions; 23.483, One-wheel landing
conditions; 23.485, Side load
conditions; 23.493, Braked roll
conditions; 23.497, Supplementary
conditions for tail wheels; 23.499,
Supplementary conditions for nose
wheels; 23.505, Supplementary
conditions for skiplanes; 23.507, Jacking
loads; 23.509, Towing loads; 23.511,
Ground load; unsymmetrical loads on
multiple-wheel units; 23.521, Water
load conditions; 23.523, Design weights
and center of gravity positions; 23.525,
Application of loads; 23.527, Hull and
main float load factors; 23.529 Hull and
main float landing conditions; 23.531,
Hull and main float takeoff condition;
23.533, Hull and main float bottom
pressures; 23.535, Auxiliary float loads;
23.537, Seawing loads, and 23.753 Main
float design.
The current requirements set forth
prescriptive requirements for
determining takeoff and landing loads
for airplanes operated on land, loads
acting on floats and hulls for airplanes
operated on water, as well as ground
handling loads, including jacking and
towing conditions. The current
requirements also provide applicants
with descriptions of the normal and
adverse operating conditions and
configurations for which applicants
must determine ground and water loads.
The FAA believes that the
prescriptive descriptions of the loading
conditions, normal and adverse
conditions, and configurations are more
appropriate for inclusion in means of
compliance. Applicants who wish to
propose alternate design loading
conditions should note that extensive
data collection, testing, and evaluation
may be necessary to substantiate their
proposal.
tab effects; 23.409, Tabs; 23.415, Ground
gust conditions; 23.455, Ailerons; and
23.459, Special devices.
The current part 23 regulations
establish prescriptive requirements for
determining loads acting on pressurized
cabins, engine mounts and attachment
structure, control surfaces, high lift
surfaces, and speed control devices. The
FAA believes that these prescriptive
requirements in the current regulations
are more appropriate for inclusion in
means of compliance. However, in
proposed § 23.325, we have retained
some of the prescriptive requirements
for pressurized cabins, including
descriptions of combined loading
conditions and additional factors of
safety for determining limit load.
vi. Proposed § 23.325, Component
Loading Conditions
Proposed § 23.325 would require an
applicant to determine the loads acting
on each engine mount, flight control
and high lift surface, and the loads
acting on pressurized cabins. Proposed
§ 23.325 would capture the safety intent
of current §§ 23.345, High lift devices;
23.361, Engine torque; 23.363, Side load
on engine mount; 23.365, Pressurized
cabin loads; 23.371, Gyroscopic and
aerodynamic loads; 23.373, Speed
control devices; 23.391, Control surface
loads; 23.393, Loads parallel to hinge
line; 23.395, Control system loads;
23.397, Limit control forces and torques;
23.399, Dual control system; 23.405,
Secondary control system; 23.407, Trim
viii. Proposed § 23.400, Structural
Strength
Proposed § 23.400 would require an
applicant to demonstrate that the
structure will support limit and ultimate
loads. Proposed § 23.400 would capture
the safety intent of current §§ 23.305,
Strength and deformation; and 23.307,
Proof of structure.
These current sections provide
performance criteria for the structure
when subjected to limit and ultimate
loads. Proposed § 23.400 would retain
these performance criteria and would
require the applicant to demonstrate
that the structure will meet these
performance criteria. In this context,
‘‘demonstrate’’ means the applicant
must conduct structural tests to show
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
vii. Proposed § 23.330, Limit and
Ultimate Loads
Proposed § 23.330 would describe
how the applicant must determine the
limit and ultimate loads associated with
the structural design loads. Proposed
§ 23.330 would capture the safety intent
of current §§ 23.301, Loads, paragraph
(a); and 23.303, Factor of safety. These
current sections specify factors of safety
for determining limit and ultimate
loads.
Proposed § 23.330 retains the current
1.5 safety factor for ultimate loads. This
safety factor has resulted in a service
history where structural failures due to
applied static loads are rare. The FAA
believes the 1.5 factor of safety is critical
to maintaining the current level of
safety.
Proposed § 23.330 would allow for
additional special factors of safety to
account for material and manufacturing
variability. Proposed § 23.330 would
also allow alternate factors of safety
when showing compliance with
occupant protection loading conditions
and when showing compliance with
proposed § 23.305.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13476
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
compliance with the structural
performance requirements, unless the
applicant shows that a structural
analysis is reliable and applicable to the
structure. The FAA proposes not to
retain the ‘‘3 second’’ rule in proposed
§ 23.400. This prescriptive requirement
in current § 23.305(b) requires the
applicant to demonstrate that the
structure will support ultimate load for
at least three seconds. The FAA believes
this prescriptive requirement is a
statement of physical principles and
testing experience and is more
appropriate for inclusion in means of
compliance.
ix. Proposed § 23.405, Structural
Durability
Proposed § 23.405 would require an
applicant to develop and implement
procedures to prevent structural failures
due to foreseeable causes of strength
degradation, and to prevent rapid
decompression in airplanes with a
maximum operating altitude above
41,000 feet. Proposed § 23.405 would
also require an airplane to be reasonably
capable of continued safe flight and
landing with foreseeable structural
damage caused by high-energy
fragments from an uncontained engine
or rotating machinery failure. Proposed
§ 23.405 would capture the safety intent
of current §§ 23.365(e), Pressurized
cabin loads; 23.571, Metallic
pressurized cabin structures; 23.572,
Metallic wing, empennage, and
associated structures; 23.573, Damage
tolerance and fatigue evaluation of
structure; 23.574, Metallic damage
tolerance and fatigue evaluation of
commuter category airplanes; 23.575,
Inspections and other procedures; and
23.627, Fatigue strength.
Proposed § 23.405(a) would require an
applicant to develop and implement
procedures to prevent structural
failures. These procedures may include
the safe-life, damage tolerance, or failsafe design approaches described in the
current regulations. An applicant can
propose other means of compliance, but
these means must provide at least the
same level of safety as current means of
compliance. Any new means of
compliance must consider the airplane
design, manufacturing, operational, and
maintenance environments. The FAA
proposes implementing these
procedures by including them in the
airplane’s Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness.
The procedures must be able to
prevent structural failures due to
foreseeable causes of strength
degradation. Foreseeable causes include
fatigue and corrosion in metallic
structures, and fatigue, delaminations,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
disbonds, and impact damage in
composite structures. New material
systems or structural designs, such as
additive manufacturing, may introduce
new causes of strength degradation and
may require development of new and
unique procedures to prevent structural
failures.
The current part 23 regulations use
prevention of catastrophic failures as
the safety intent of the regulations. The
word ‘‘catastrophic’’ is used throughout
the current regulations, current policy,
and guidance material, especially in
context of system safety analysis. To
avoid any potential conflict over the
meaning of ‘‘catastrophic,’’ proposed
§ 23.405(a) would specify the
consequences we want to prevent.
These consequences include the
obvious performance criteria for
prevention of serious injuries, fatalities,
or hull loss of the airplane.
The FAA also wants to prevent
extended periods of operations with
reduced safety margins in those
structural components whose failure
could result in serious injuries,
fatalities, or hull loss. One situation that
can result in reduced safety margins is
fail-safe design. The FAA has identified
potential shortcomings in fail-safe
designs, including an applicant’s
difficulty to anticipate all possible
failure scenarios and ensure that all
structural failures would be
immediately obvious and corrected
before further flight. The concept of
failures being obvious and repaired
before further flight is basic to the
successful implementation of a fail-safe
design. This scenario could allow
operation for extended periods with a
passive structural failure and reduced
safety margins. If an applicant chooses
fail-safe design as a means of
compliance, an applicant would have to
ensure that the structure was not
operating for extended periods with
reduced safety margins. An applicant
may be able to apply safe-life or damage
tolerance principles to ensure that failsafe structure maintains the required
safety margins without extended
periods of operation with reduced safety
margins through life limits or damage
tolerance based inspections.
Proposed § 23.405(b) would capture
the safety intent of current § 23.365(e),
requiring the applicant to design the
structure for sudden loss of
pressurization after the failure of a door
or window in pressurized
compartments. Proposed § 23.405(c)
incorporates the safety intent of current
§ 23.571(d). Our intention is that the
damage tolerance methodology would
remain the accepted means of
compliance. The FAA views damage
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
tolerance as necessary since current
§ 23.571(d) and proposed § 23.405(c)
require the applicant to assume that
structural damage exists in the
pressurized cabin. However, proposed
§ 23.405(c) would allow for other means
of compliance as long as serious injuries
and fatalities will be prevented.
Examples of other means of compliance
might include requiring pilots and
occupants to use oxygen masks or wear
pressurized flight suits when operating
above 41,000 feet (12,497 meters). This
means of compliance could be
acceptable in certain airplane designs,
such as two-seat jet trainers.
Proposed § 23.405(d) would capture
the safety intent of current § 23.903(b)(1)
to minimize hazards to the airframe
resulting from turbine engine rotorburst.
The FAA would move the structural
portion of the rotorburst evaluation from
current § 23.903(b)(1) to proposed
§ 23.405(d) to ensure all structural
requirements are contained in subpart C
and to avoid potential confusion over
the structural rotorburst requirements in
part 23.
Proposed § 23.405(d) would require
an applicant to show that the design of
the structure would provide sufficient
structural capability to allow continued
safe flight and landing with foreseeable
structural damage caused by high
energy fragments from an uncontained
engine or rotating machinery failure.
The FAA recognizes that some highenergy fragment events may result in
catastrophic failures that may not be
avoidable and that complete elimination
of the hazards resulting from high
energy fragment events may not be
possible.
An applicant would be required to
address other sources of high energy
rotating machinery fragments in the
proposed structural rotorburst
requirements. Our intent is to ensure an
adequate regulatory framework for
applications of electrical propulsion
systems and other unique and novel
approaches to propulsion, which may
release high-energy fragments.
Applicants who have shown
compliance with current § 23.903(b)(1)
would be able to show compliance with
proposed § 23.405(d). Applicants should
note that previous certification
programs with turbine engine
installations have been able to show that
the airplane structure is capable of
continued safe flight and landing
following a rotorburst event. AC 23–
13A, Fatigue, Fail-Safe, and Damage
Tolerance Evaluation of Metallic
Structure for Normal, Utility, Acrobatic,
and Commuter Category airplanes,
provides guidance on the required
structural evaluation.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
x. Proposed § 23.410, Aeroelasticity
Proposed § 23.410 would require an
airplane to be free from flutter, control
reversal, and divergence at all speeds
within and sufficiently beyond the
structural design envelope, for any
configuration and condition of
operation, accounting for critical
degrees of freedom, and any critical
failures or malfunctions. Proposed
§ 23.410 would also require an applicant
to establish tolerances for all quantities
that affect flutter.
Proposed § 23.410 would capture the
safety intent of the current §§ 23.629,
Flutter; 23.677, Trim systems, paragraph
(c); and 23.687, Spring devices, in part.
Specifically, proposed § 23.410 would
address the safety intent of these rules
by requiring freedom from flutter,
control reversal, and divergence, while
accounting for all speeds,
configurations, modes, and failures, and
to establish tolerances on anything
affecting flutter. The current § 23.629(a)
states that freedom from flutter, control
reversal, and divergence must be shown
by the methods of § 23.629(b) and (c) or
(d). These paragraphs are prescriptive in
nature and some portions are applicable
only to very specific types of designs
and include speed limitations.
Therefore, these paragraphs are more
appropriate as means of compliance.
The current § 23.629(e) requires the
evaluation of whirl mode flutter. Since
this is another flutter mode, it must be
accounted for when an airplane is
determined to be free from flutter. The
current § 23.629(f), (g), (h), and (i)
provide instructions on how to evaluate
(1) certain airplane design types, (2)
designs employing certain methods
(fail-safe or damage tolerant), or (3)
airplanes incorporating design
modifications. The current § 23.677(c)
requires either that the tab be balanced
or that the tab controls be irreversible.
Additionally, it requires that irreversible
tab systems have adequate rigidity and
reliability. These are very specific
design solutions for ensuring freedom
from flutter. The current § 23.687
requires that the reliability of spring
devices used in control systems be
established by tests unless its failure
would not cause flutter. This is a
method of compliance to ensure
freedom from flutter. All of these
current requirements are more
appropriate as means of compliance
because they describe how to ensure
freedom from flutter, control reversal,
and divergence. They are not the safety
intent, but just one method to achieve
the safety intent. As such, they serve
only specific designs utilizing current
methods, and may or may not be
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
adequate for innovative designs or
accommodate new analytical methods
or testing techniques.
xi. Proposed § 23.500, Structural Design
Proposed § 23.500 would require an
applicant to design each part, article,
and assembly for the expected operating
conditions of the airplane. Proposed
§ 23.500 would require the design data
to adequately define the part, article, or
assembly configuration, its design
features, and any materials and
processes used. Proposed § 23.500
would require an applicant to determine
the suitability of each design detail and
part having an important bearing on
safety in operations. Proposed § 23.500
would also require the control system to
be free from—
• Jamming;
• Excessive friction, and
• Excessive deflection when the
control system and its supporting
structure are subjected to loads
corresponding to the limit airloads
when the primary controls are subjected
to the lesser of the limit airloads or limit
pilot forces and when the secondary
controls are subjected to loads not less
than those corresponding to maximum
pilot effort.
Proposed § 23.500 would capture the
safety intent of the current §§ 23.601,
Design and Construction—General;
23.603, Materials and workmanship,
paragraph (b); 23.671, Control
Systems—General, paragraph (a);
23.683, Operation tests; 23.685, Control
system details; 23.687, Spring devices,
in part; and 23.689, Cable systems.
These current requirements explain
methods and techniques to ensure an
adequate design. The proposed rule
would require an applicant to produce
an adequate design without specifying
how. The prescriptive language within
these current sections noted above, are
more appropriate for a means of
compliance.
xii. Proposed § 23.505, Protection of
Structure
Proposed § 23.505 would require an
applicant to protect each part of the
airplane, including small parts such as
fasteners, against deterioration or loss of
strength due to any cause likely to occur
in the expected operational
environment. Proposed § 23.505 would
require each part of the airplane to have
adequate provisions for ventilation and
drainage and would require an
applicant to incorporate a means into
the airplane design to allow for required
maintenance, preventive maintenance,
and servicing.
Proposed § 23.505 would capture the
safety intent of the current §§ 23.607,
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13477
Fasteners; 23.609, Protection of
structure; and 23.611, Accessibility.
These current requirements explain
methods and techniques to ensure an
adequate design. This proposed rule
would require the applicant to produce
an adequate design without specifying
how to accomplish it. The prescriptive
language within these current sections
is more appropriate as a means of
compliance.
xiii. Proposed § 23.510, Materials and
Processes
Proposed § 23.510 would require an
applicant to determine the suitability
and durability of materials used for
parts, articles, and assemblies, the
failure of which could prevent
continued safe flight and landing, while
accounting for the effects of likely
environmental conditions expected in
service. Proposed § 23.510 would
require the methods and processes of
fabrication and assembly used to
produce consistently sound structures
and, if a fabrication process requires
close control to reach this objective, an
applicant would have to perform the
process under an approved process
specification. Additionally, proposed
§ 23.510 would require an applicant to
justify the selected design values to
ensure material strength with
probabilities, account for—
• The criticality of the structural
element; and
• The structural failure due to
material variability, unless each
individual item is tested before use to
determine that the actual strength
properties of that particular item would
equal or exceed those used in the
design, or the design values are
accepted by the Administrator.
Proposed § 23.510 would require a
determination of required material
strength properties to be based on
sufficient tests of material meeting
specifications to establish design values
on a statistical basis. Proposed § 23.510
would also require an applicant to
determine the effects on allowable
stresses used for design if thermal
effects were significant on an essential
component or structure under normal
operating conditions.
Proposed § 23.510 would capture the
safety intent of the current §§ 23.605,
Fabrication methods and 23.613,
Material strength properties and design
values. These current requirements
explain methods and techniques to
ensure adequate materials and process
controls. This proposed rule would
require the applicant to ensure the
resulting materials and processes are
adequate without specifying how. The
prescriptive language within the current
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13478
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
sections is more appropriate as a means
of compliance.
xiv. Proposed § 23.515, Special Factors
of Safety
Proposed § 23.515 would require an
applicant to determine a special factor
of safety for any critical design value
that was uncertain, used for a part,
article, or assembly likely to deteriorate
in service before normal replacement, or
subject to appreciable variability
because of uncertainties in
manufacturing processes or inspection
methods. Proposed § 23.515 would
require an applicant to determine a
special factor of safety using quality
controls and specifications that
accounted for each structural
application, inspection method,
structural test requirement, sampling
percentage, and process and material
control. Proposed § 23.515 would
require an applicant to apply any
special factor of safety in the design for
each part of the structure by multiplying
each limit load and ultimate load by the
special factor of safety.
Proposed § 23.515 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.619,
Special factors; 23.621, Casting factors;
23.623, Bearing factors; 23.625, Fitting
factors; 23.657, Hinges; 23.681(b), Limit
load static test (in part); and 23.693,
Joints. These current requirements
explain methods and techniques to
ensure adequate special factors are used
and the proposed rule would simply
require the applicant to determine and
apply adequate special factors without
specifying what these are. The
prescriptive language within the current
sections is more appropriate as a means
of compliance.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
xv. Proposed § 23.600, Emergency
Conditions
Proposed § 23.600 would require the
airplane, even if damaged in emergency
landing conditions, to provide
protection to each occupant against
injury that would preclude egress.
Proposed § 23.600 would require the
airplane to have seating and restraints
for all occupants, consisting of a seat, a
method to restrain the occupant’s pelvis
and torso, and a single action restraint
release, which meets its intended
function and does not create a hazard
that could cause a secondary injury to
an occupant. Proposed § 23.600 would
require the airplane seating, restraints,
and cabin interior to account for likely
flight and emergency landing
conditions. Additionally, they could not
prevent occupant egress or interfere
with the operation of the airplane when
not in use.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
Proposed § 23.600 would require each
baggage and cargo compartment be
designed for its maximum weight of
contents and for the critical load
distributions at the maximum load
factors corresponding to the determined
flight and ground load conditions.
Proposed § 23.600 would also require
each baggage and cargo compartment to
have a means to prevent the contents of
the compartment from becoming a
hazard by impacting occupants or
shifting, and to protect any controls,
wiring, lines, equipment, or accessories
whose damage or failure would affect
operations.
Proposed § 23.600 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.561,
Emergency Landing Conditions—
General; 23.562, Emergency landing
dynamic conditions; 23.785, Seats,
berths, litters, safety belts, and shoulder
harnesses; and 23.787, Baggage and
cargo compartments. The prescriptive
language within these current sections
are more appropriate as a means of
compliance, and thus would allow
flexibility for new technology to be
available in new part 23 airplanes in a
timely manner.
Occupant safety for aviation has
progressed incrementally over the years.
This has resulted in rulemaking that has
enhanced safety for individual system
components, but not in an integrated
fashion. Modeling and analysis
techniques have matured to a point that
may allow evaluation of more crash
scenarios and crashworthiness
components as an integrated system.
The FAA has relied on many industry
studies to develop current occupant
safety rules. These studies evaluated
characteristics of actual accidents, fullscale aircraft drop testing, and dynamic
seat testing on a sled. When dynamic
seat testing began, determination of an
adequate generic floor impulse that
represented a survivable aircraft crash
was established. As an alternative to
current crashworthiness requirements,
the proposed rule would allow for
evaluation of the conditions of likely
impacts, assessment of vehicle response,
and ultimately, evaluation of occupant
reaction to vehicle impact and vehicle
response.
Technology used in aviation
crashworthiness, in a large part, has
come from the automotive industry. The
automotive industry has analyzed
crashworthiness components as a
system for many years. The automotive
industry generally has a more developed
crashworthiness analysis capability than
that used in the aviation industry. This
advanced crashworthiness analysis
capability has evolved primarily
because of the—
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
• Public expectation for automobile
safety;
• Higher general public likelihood
and exposure to automobile accidents;
and
• High automobile production rates
allow for multiple actual full-vehicle
crash tests that result in very accurate
crash impulse data from the outer
surface of the vehicle all the way to the
occupant.
Because of these facts, automotive
designers know accurate impulses and
the specific vehicle response for impact
conditions. Furthermore, this data can
be extrapolated to consider many more
accident scenarios. Automotive safety
requirements progressively add new
impact scenario requirements and
enhanced impulse magnitudes, thus
requiring more industry innovation.
This innovation has enabled rapid
advances in automotive occupant
protection systems.
Automotive safety begins at the
outside of the vehicle, evaluating the
entire system’s response. In contrast,
aircraft manufacturers have used
essentially the same generic designed
pulse imparted at the cabin floor for the
last 25 years. The same impulse applies
to all GA airplanes independent of the
structure below the cabin floor and the
aircraft’s stall speed, unless the stall
speed is greater than 61 knots.
Determining airplane crashworthiness is
a more complex process than
determining automotive
crashworthiness because of higher
impact speeds, lighter weight structures,
and the effect of the third dimension of
altitude on the aircraft. Dynamic seat
testing has improved crashworthiness in
aviation; however, the FAA believes
that newer means of evaluating the full
aircraft response to crash conditions via
modeling, newer materials, and new
technologies promise to offer improved
features, evaluation, and accuracy that
would facilitate consideration of more
crash scenarios and evaluation of more
variables that could improve
survivability.
The NTSB produced a series of
reports, called the General Aviation
Crashworthiness Project,21 in the 1980s
that evaluated over 21,000 GA airplane
crashes that occurred between 1972 and
1981. The NTSB evaluated airplane
orientation, impact magnitudes, and
survival rates and factors on many of
these accidents in order to provide
information to support changes in
crashworthiness design standards for
seating and restraint systems in GA
airplanes. These reports also established
21 See www.regulations.gov (Docket #FAA–2015–
1621).
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
conditions approximating survivable
accidents, and categorized factors that
would have the largest impact on safety.
These reports further illuminated the
various crashworthiness systems and
their respective impact to overall safety.
Amendment 23–36 (53 FR 30802,
August 15, 1988), to part 23 referenced
these reports for dynamic seats but did
not adopt a systems-approach to
evaluating crashworthiness of an
airplane design.
The NTSB reports identified several
factors that would enhance safety. All of
these factors working together as a
system should result in a safer airplane.
However, the assessment indicated that
shoulder harnesses offer the fastest
individual improvement for safety. The
FAA codified the shoulder harnesses
requirement in amendments 23–19 (42
FR 20601, June 16, 1977) and 23–32 (50
FR 46872, November 13, 1985), for
newly manufactured airplanes. The
FAA also issued policy statement ACE–
00–23.561–01,22 Methods of Approval
of Retrofit Shoulder Harness
Installations in Small Airplanes, to
streamline the process for retrofitting
older airplanes.
Survivable volume is another critical
factor to survival. Survivable volume is
the ability of the airframe to protect the
occupants from external intrusion or
cabin crushing during and after the
accident sequence. There were several
observed accidents in the NTSB study
where conventional aircraft
construction simply crushed an
otherwise restrained occupant.
Crashworthiness regulations have never
included survivable volume as a factor,
except for aircraft turnover. Airplane
designs should provide the space
needed for the protection and restraint
of the occupants. A compromised
survivable volume could cause
occupant impact with objects in the
cabin. This is one of the first steps in the
analysis of airplane crashworthiness.
Additional data from the NTSB
General Aviation Crashworthiness
Project suggested that energy-absorbing
seats that protect the occupant from
vertical loads could enhance occupant
survivability and work to prevent
serious injury, thereby enhancing odds
for egress and preventing many
debilitating long-term injuries. The FAA
established dynamic seat testing
requirements in amendment 23–36 for
airplanes certificated under part 23.
Energy absorbing seats benefit a smaller
portion of accident occupants because
accident impacts with larger vertical
components tend to reduce occupant
22 See www.regulations.gov (Docket #FAA–2015–
1621).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
survival odds. Energy attenuation from
vertical forces, both static and dynamic,
has been important to crashworthiness
regulations within the past 25 years.
Seat deformation throughout the
emergency landing sequence is
acceptable if the load path through
attachment, seat, and restraint remains
continuous. Coupling the seat
performance to the rest of the airframe
response is important to the
enhancement and understanding of
occupant survivability. The FAA
believes that allowing designers to
consider a particular airframe’s unique
deformation in a crash, the designers
can create a safer cabin for the
occupants. Using unique airframe
deformations would result in more
accurate accident floor impulses and
may allow evaluation of crash impulses
in multiple directions; instead of only
two directions considered in current
certification.
Occupant restraints must maintain
integrity, stay in place on the occupant
throughout the event, properly
distribute loads on the occupant, and
restrain the occupant by mitigating
interaction with other items in the
cabin. Restraints originally were
comprised of lap belts. Shoulder
harnesses were later required as
discussed above. Newer technology that
enhances or supplements the
performance of restraints, like airbags
and consideration of items in the cabin
that the occupant might impact, are now
being considered for inclusion in
designs. The use of airbags has greatly
increased passenger safety in
automobiles, which offer protection in
much more severe impacts and in
impacts from multiple directions, and
could be a viable option for airplanes as
well.
Seat retention in airplanes is a factor
identified as another basic building
block for crashworthiness. The NTSB
reports shows more than a quarter of
otherwise-survivable accidents included
instances where the seats broke free at
the attachment to the airplane, resulting
in fatalities or serious injuries. Dynamic
seat testing requirements address the
ability of seat assemblies to remain
attached to the floor, even when the
floor shifts during impact. Pitching and
yawing of the seat tracks during
dynamic seat tests demonstrates the
gimbaling and flexibility of the seat.
All of the aforementioned safety
considerations must work together to
enhance occupant safety and
survivability. The FAA believes that
evaluating occupant safety, as a whole
system, would allow for a better
understanding of vehicle performance
in an emergency landing, enabling the
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13479
incorporation of innovative technology.
The transportation industry has made
significant progress with energy
absorbing seats and restraint technology.
The FAA believes enhanced cabin
strength that improves survivable
volume, coupled with better restraint
technology and refined energy absorbing
seats, would be key factors in improving
expansion of the survivable accident
envelope. These factors and additional
considerations were included in the
Small Airplane Crashworthiness Design
Guide.23 This guide was prepared for
the Advanced General Aviation
Transports Experiments and the
National Aerospace and Space
Administration and addresses the
concept of designing crashworthiness
into an airplane design as a system.
In order to evaluate an accident from
an occupant’s perspective, the
emergency landing condition must first
be defined, starting with the conditions
external to the aircraft. In most
survivable accidents, the pilot is able to
maintain control of the aircraft prior to
impact. Accidents where the airplane
impacts the ground out of control are
typically much less survivable. Speed
and impact orientation are significant
factors in crash survivability. Therefore,
considerations for impact beyond a
controllable impact are beyond the
scope of these proposed regulations.
The slowest forward speed that any
fixed wing airplane can fly is its stall
speed. This stall speed can vary with
airplane configuration and weight, but
represents the most universal parameter
for impact speed and energy attenuation
at impact. For this reason, stall speed is
the starting point for consideration of
expected impact conditions.
Orientation of impact can vary with
pitch, yaw, terrain angle, and angle of
flight path and becomes dynamic as the
pilot loses control effectiveness at stall.
The result is the airplane impact angle
can result in a combination of
horizontal and vertical loads and
impulses that vary widely. Angle of
impact, the line of the center of mass
with respect to the angle of the impact
surface, can also affect the amount of
energy absorbed or transmitted to the
occupant.
An accident impulse is a dynamic
event that rapidly loads and unloads the
structure. Dynamic impacts accurately
represent the impact event, often
including load levels far surpassing the
static load requirements. Dynamic
testing is also subject to a wide variation
of results due to the unpredictable
dynamic responses of varying
23 See www.regulations.gov (Docket #FAA–2015–
1621).
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
13480
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
construction methods and materials,
resulting in complicated modeling and
analysis. This contrasts with static load
tests that load the structure slowly,
maintain that load at high levels, are
generally simpler, and often provide
adequate demonstration of part strength.
Static analysis is generally more reliable
with both testing and modeling;
however, it does not capture the nature
of rapid loading. Some combination of
dynamic and static testing allows for the
best understanding of airplane behavior
during an accident.
Compliance with the proposed rule
could be shown using conventional
means of compliance like dynamic
testing of seats, and static testing of
other components using the prescriptive
methods contained in the current part
23. Alternative compliance methods
could include analysis or modeling
supported by testing using an airframe
coupled with the airplane’s performance
envelope, viewing the entire interaction
of ground, airplane, and occupant, thus
using a more complete systemic
approach to achieve improved
protection.
Proposed § 23.600(a) is intended to
provide structural performance that
protects the occupant during an
emergency landing while accounting for
only static loads and assuming all safety
equipment is in use. The proposed
section would capture the safety intent
of the current § 23.561. As noted earlier,
static loads are generally lower than
peak dynamic loads; however, they may
offer a more-easily predictable loading
condition and are generally of longer
duration such that the structure can
fully react to the load. The landing
conditions should consider possible
accident sequence variables at impact,
including restraint of items of mass
within the cabin, directions of loading
along or about the three axes, and
airframe response with respect to the
occupants and effects of airframe
deflection during an emergency landing.
Effects of emergency landing on the
airplane should also be considered to
include the effect of airframe damage
and how static loads would affect egress
and survivable cabin volume. Items of
mass within the cabin and rear mounted
engines have also been traditionally
considered using even higher static
loads as an additional factor of safety to
ensure that these items of mass are
restrained and would be among the last
items to come free in an accident.
Proposed § 23.600(b) is intended to
provide boundary conditions for the
emergency landing sequence for both
static and dynamic load considerations.
The proposed section would capture the
safety intent of the current §§ 23.561
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
and 23.562. The airplane stall speed
limits the maximum forward impact
speed. The emergency landing
condition assumes the pilot maintains
airplane control at or near final impact,
thereby limiting impact velocity.
Proposed § 23.600(c) would capture
the survivability factors for the occupant
in the cabin during the emergency
landing sequence and would capture the
safety intent of current § 23.562. These
factors include proper use and loading
of seats and restraints, and the
interaction of the occupants with each
other and the cabin interior.
Survivability is determined upon the
occupant’s interaction with the interior,
seat, and restraints, and bounded by
established human injury criteria.
Proposed § 23.600(d) would provide
the framework for seats and occupant
restraints and would require simplified
seat and restraint requirements for all
occupants. This proposed section would
capture the safety intent of current
§ 23.785.
Proposed § 23.600(e) would establish
requirements for baggage and cargo
compartments and the restraint of
contents. The proposed section would
capture the safety intent of current
§ 23.787.
xvi. Current Subpart C Regulations
Relocated to Other Proposed Subparts
As discussed, the FAA proposes
removing current §§ 23.561, 23.562,
23.785, and 23.787. Also, this proposal
would consolidate the safety intent of
these crashworthiness regulations in
proposed § 23.600.
4. Subpart D—Design and Construction
a. General Discussion
The FAA proposes restructuring
current subpart D to retain the
requirements for flight control systems,
along with their attachment to the
structure and landing gear, and
occupant safety other than structural
requirements. The FAA proposes to
align structural requirements, found in
current §§ 23.601 through 23.659, to
proposed subpart C. Aspects that
directly affected the pilot’s interface
with the airplane, such as the throttle
shape, would be relocated to proposed
§ 23.1500, Flightcrew Interface.
The FAA also proposes, in those
sections where there are requirements
specific to the current commuter
category, to use certification level 4. In
those sections where there are current
requirements specific to multiengine
jets over 6,000 pounds, the FAA
proposes requirements for certification
level 3, high-speed multiengine
airplanes as discussed earlier in this
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
proposal. Refer to appendix 1 of this
preamble for a cross-reference table
detailing how the current regulations
are addressed in the proposed part 23
regulations.
The subpart D organization was more
complex than other subparts due to the
relocation and removal of many
requirements at the sub-paragraph level.
To reduce confusion, the specific
discussion of subpart D changes is
shown in a cross reference table at the
end of the specific discussion section
below rather than the Relocation and
Removal paragraphs in other subparts.
b. Specific Discussion of Changes
i. Proposed § 23.700, Flight Controls
Systems
Proposed § 23.700 would require an
applicant to design airplane flight
control systems to prevent major,
hazardous, and catastrophic hazards.
Proposed § 23.700 would require an
applicant to design trim systems to
prevent inadvertent, incorrect, or abrupt
trim operation. In addition, proposed
§ 23.700 would require an applicant to
design trim systems to provide a means
to indicate—
• The direction of trim control
movement relative to airplane motion;
• The trim position with respect to
the trim range;
• The neutral position for lateral and
directional trim; and
• For all airplanes except simple
airplanes, the range for takeoff for all
applicant requested center of gravity
ranges and configurations.
Proposed § 23.700 would also require
an applicant to design trim systems to
provide control for continued safe flight
and landing when any one connecting
or transmitting element in the primary
flight control system failed, except for
simple airplanes. Additionally,
proposed § 23.700 would require an
applicant to design trim systems to limit
the range of travel to allow safe flight
and landing, if an adjustable stabilizer is
used.
Furthermore, proposed § 23.700
would require the system for an airplane
equipped with an artificial stall barrier
system to prevent uncommanded
control or thrust action and provide for
a preflight check. The FAA also
proposes requiring an applicant seeking
certification of a certification level 3
high-speed or certification level 4
airplane to install a takeoff warning
system on the airplane, unless the
applicant demonstrates that the
airplane, for each configuration, could
takeoff at the limits of its trim and flap
ranges.
Proposed § 23.700(b)(3) would also
allow an exception for simple airplanes
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
from the requirement to provide control
for continued safe flight and landing
when any one connecting or
transmitting element in the primary
control system fails. This would provide
a level of safety equivalent to that
specified in EASA’s CS–VLA. Last,
proposed § 23.700(d) would maintain
the level of safety in the current
requirements for a takeoff warning
system.
Proposed § 23.700 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.677, Trim
systems, paragraphs (a), (b), and (d);
23.689, Cable systems, paragraphs (a)
and (f); 23.691, Artificial stall barrier
system, paragraphs (a), (b), (d), (e) and
(f); 23.697, Wing flap controls,
paragraphs (a); and 23.703, Takeoff
warning system, paragraphs (a) and (b).
This proposed section would apply to
the function, usability, and hazard
levels of all mechanical, electrical, or
electronic control systems. The
certification levels proposed in this
NPRM would be incorporated into the
mechanical, electrical, or electronic
control systems to maintain the
differences in airplanes certificated
under part 23 (i.e., weight and
powerplant.)
ii. Proposed § 23.705, Landing Gear
Systems
Proposed § 23.705 would require an
airplane’s landing gear and retracting
mechanism be able to withstand
operational and flight loads. Proposed
§ 23.705 would require an airplane with
retractable landing gear to have a
positive means to keep the landing gear
extended and a secondary means for
extending the landing gear that could
not be extended using the primary
means. Proposed § 23.705 would also
require a means to inform the pilot that
each landing gear is secured in the
extended and retracted positions.
Additionally, proposed § 23.705 would
require an airplane, except for airplanes
intended for operation on water, with
retractable landing gear to also have a
warning to the pilot if the thrust and
configuration is selected for landing and
yet the landing gear is not fully
extended and locked.
Furthermore, if the landing gear bayis
used as the location for equipment other
than the landing gear, proposed § 23.705
would require that equipment be
designed and installed to avoid damage
from tire burst and from items that may
enter the landing gear bay. Proposed
§ 23.705 would also require the design
of each landing gear wheel, tire, and ski
account for critical loads and would
require a reliable means of stopping the
airplane with kinetic energy absorption
within the airplane’s design
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
specifications for landing. For
certification level 3 high-speed
multiengine and certification level 4
multiengine airplanes, proposed
§ 23.705 would require the braking
system to provide kinetic energy
absorption within the design of the
airplane specifications for rejected
takeoff as the current rules do for
multiengine jets over 6,000 pounds and
commuter category airplanes.
Proposed § 23.705 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.729,
Landing gear extension and retraction
system, paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (e);
23.731, Wheels; 23.733, Tires, paragraph
(a); 23.735, Brakes, paragraphs (a), (b),
and (e); 23.737, Skis. The FAA proposes
to combine the fixed and retractable
landing gear systems into the proposed
section, which would apply to the
function, usability, and hazard levels of
all mechanical, electrical, or electronic
landing gear systems.
iii. Proposed § 23.710, Buoyancy for
Seaplanes and Amphibians
Proposed § 23.710 would require
airplanes intended for operations on
water to provide buoyancy of 80 percent
in excess of the buoyancy required to
support the maximum weight of the
airplane in fresh water. Proposed
§ 23.710 would also require airplanes
intended for operations on water to have
sufficient watertight compartments so
the airplane will stay afloat at rest in
calm water without capsizing if any two
compartments of any main float or hull
are flooded.
Proposed § 23.710 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.751(a),
Main float buoyancy; 23.755, Hulls; and
23.757, Auxiliary floats. The FAA
proposes combining the floats or hulls
landing gear systems into the proposed
section and having it apply to the
function, usability, and hazard levels of
hulls and floats. The existing rule
requires at least four watertight
compartments of approximately equal
volume, which the FAA proposes to
remove because they are specific design
requirements and are addressed in the
proposed performance-based
requirements.
To encourage the installation of
buoyancy systems with new safety
enhancing technology and streamlining
the certification process, the FAA
proposes removing most of the current
prescriptive requirements and the
detailed means of compliance for these
requirements from the current part 23
and replacing them with performancebased regulations. The FAA expects the
current means of compliance would
continue to be used for the traditional
airplane designs under part 23.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13481
iv. § 23.750, Means of Egress and
Emergency Exits
Proposed § 23.750 would require the
airplane cabin exit be designed to
provide for evacuation of the airplane
within 90 seconds in conditions likely
to occur, excluding ditching, following
an emergency landing. For ditching,
proposed § 23.750 would require the
cabin exit for all certification levels 3
and 4 multiengine airplanes be designed
to allow evacuation in 90 seconds.
Proposed § 23.750 would require each
exit to have a simple and obvious
means, marked inside and outside the
airplane, to be opened from both inside
and outside the airplane, when the
internal locking mechanism is in the
locked position.
Proposed § 23.750 would also require
airplane evacuation paths to protect
occupants from serious injury from the
propulsion system, and require that
doors, canopies, and exits be protected
from opening inadvertently in flight.
Proposed § 23.750 would preclude each
exit from being obstructed by a seat or
seat back, unless the seat or seat back
could be easily moved in one action to
clear the exit. Proposed § 23.750 would
also require airplanes certified for
aerobatics to have a means to exit the
airplane in flight.
Proposed § 23.750 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.783, Doors,
paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d); 23.791,
23.803, Emergency evacuation,
paragraph (a); 23.805, Flightcrew
emergency exits; 23.807, Emergency
exits except paragraphs (a)(3), (b)(1), (c),
(d)(1) and (d)(4); 23.811, Emergency exit
marking; 23.812, Emergency lighting;
23.813, Emergency exit access,
paragraph (a); and 23.815, Width of
aisle; and CS–VLA–783, Exits. This
proposed rule would incorporate the
requirements for all door and emergency
exits and remove specified design
solutions and means of compliances.
To encourage the installation of egress
and emergency exits with new safety
enhancing technology and streamline
the certification process, the FAA
proposes removing most of the current
prescriptive requirements and the
detailed means of compliance for these
requirements from the current part 23.
The FAA expects that the current
prescriptive means of compliance
would continue to be used for
traditional part 23 airplane designs.
The FAA would continue to accept an
airplane designed to meet these
prescriptive design constraints as means
of compliance to meet the proposed
performance standard. However, if an
airplane did not meet the prescriptive
design constraints, the applicant could
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13482
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
propose its own means of compliance to
show compliance with the proposed
performance standard. Historically, the
FAA has accepted an emergency
evacuation demonstration in less than
90 seconds as an ELOS for airplanes that
did not meet the prescriptive design
requirements in the current part 23
regulations. AC 20–118A, Emergency
Evacuation Demonstration, contains an
acceptable means of compliance for the
90-second requirement for emergency
evacuation.
v. Proposed § 23.755, Occupant Physical
Environment
Proposed § 23.755 would require an
applicant to design the airplane to allow
clear communication between the
flightcrew and passengers and provide a
clear, sufficiently undistorted external
view to enable the flightcrew to perform
any maneuvers within the operating
limitations of the airplane. Proposed
§ 23.755 would also require an applicant
to design the airplane to protect the
pilot from serious injury due to high
energy rotating failures in systems and
equipment, and protect the occupants
from serious injury due to damage to
windshields, windows, and canopies.
Additionally, proposed § 23.755
would require, for certification level 4
airplanes, each windshield and its
supporting structure directly in front of
the pilot to withstand the impact
equivalent of a two-pound bird at
maximum approach flap airspeed and
allow for continued safe flight and
landing after the loss of vision through
any one panel.
Furthermore, proposed § 23.755
would require any installed oxygen
system to include a means to determine
whether oxygen is being delivered and
a means for the flightcrew to turn on
and shut off the oxygen supply, and the
ability for the flightcrew to determine
the quantity of oxygen available.
Proposed § 23.755 would also require
any installed pressurization system to
include a pressurization system test and
a warning if an unsafe condition exists.
Proposed § 23.755 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.771, Pilot
compartment, paragraphs (b) and (c);
23.775, Windshields and windows,
paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), and (h);
23.831, Ventilation; 23.841, Pressurized
cabins, paragraphs (a), (b)(6), (c) and (d);
23.843, Pressurization tests; 23.1441,
Oxygen equipment and supply,
paragraphs (c), (d) and (e); 23.1443,
minimum mass flow of supplemental
oxygen, paragraphs (a), (b), and (c);
23.1445; Oxygen distribution system;
23.1447, Equipment standards for
oxygen dispensing units, paragraphs (a)
through (d) and (f); 23.1449, means of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
determining use of oxygen; and 23.1461,
Equipment containing high energy
rotors. Current part 23 regulations
contain prescriptive language and
means of compliance for the occupant
physical environment requirements.
The FAA proposes to remove the
specific requirements to allow an
applicant to specify the means of
compliance for the physical needs of the
occupants including temperature,
ventilation, pressurization,
supplemental oxygen, etc. For example,
current § 23.831(a) requires carbon
monoxide not exceeding one part in
20,000 parts of air. The FAA proposes
revising this by requiring breathable
atmosphere without hazardous
concentrations of gases and vapors.
vi. Proposed § 23.800, Fire Protection
Outside Designated Fire Zones
Proposed § 23.800 would require that
insulation on electrical wire and
electrical cable outside designated fire
zones be self-extinguishing. Proposed
§ 23.800 would require airplane cockpit
and cabin materials in certification
levels 1, 2, and 3 be flame-resistant.
Proposed § 23.800 would require
airplane cockpit and cabin materials in
certification level 4 airplanes be selfextinguishing. Proposed § 23.800 would
also require that airplane materials in
the baggage and cargo compartments,
which are inaccessible in flight and
outside designated fire zones, be selfextinguishing. Proposed § 23.800 would
require that any electrical cable
installation that would overheat in the
event of circuit overload or fault be
flame resistant. Additionally, proposed
§ 23.800 would preclude thermal
acoustic materials outside designated
fire zones from being a flame
propagation hazard. Proposed § 23.800
would also require sources of heat that
are capable of igniting adjacent objects
outside designated fire zones to be
shielded and insulated to prevent such
ignition.
Proposed § 23.800 would require
airplane baggage and cargo
compartments, outside designated fire
zones, to be located where a fire would
be visible to the pilots, or equipped with
a fire detection system and warning
system, and be accessible for the manual
extinguishing of a fire, have a built-in
fire extinguishing system, or be
constructed and sealed to contain any
fire within the compartment.
Proposed § 23.800 would require a
means to extinguish any fire in the
cabin, outside designated fire zones,
such that the pilot, while seated, could
easily access the fire extinguishing
means, and for certification levels 3 and
4 airplanes, passengers would have a
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
fire extinguishing means available
within the passenger compartment.
Where flammable fluids or vapors might
escape by leakage of a fluid system,
proposed § 23.800 would require each
area, outside designated fire zones, be
defined and have a means to make fluid
and vapor ignition, and the resultant
hazard, if ignition occurs, improbable.
Additionally, proposed § 23.800 would
also require combustion heater
installations outside designated fire
zones be protected from uncontained
fire.
Proposed § 23.800 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.851, Fire
extinguishers, paragraphs (a) and (b);
23.853, Passenger and crew
compartment interiors, Paragraphs (a),
(d)(3)(i), (d)(3)(iii) and (d)(3)(iv), (e), and
(f); 23.855, Cargo and baggage
compartment fire protection; 23.856,
Thermal/acoustic insulation materials;
23.859, Combustion heater fire
protection, paragraph (a); 23.863,
Flammable fluid fire protection,
paragraphs (a) and (d); 23.1359,
Electrical system fire protection,
paragraph (c); 23.1365, Electric cables
and equipment, paragraph (b); 23.1383,
Taxi and landing lights, paragraph (d);
23.1385, Position light system
installation, paragraph (d). It would also
capture the safety intent of CS–VLA–
853, Compartment interiors. Proposed
§ 23.800 would incorporate the
requirements for flammability of all
subpart D and F systems and equipment
outside designated fire zones needed for
continued safe flight and landing and
remove specified design solutions and
means of compliances.
vii. Proposed § 23.805, Fire Protection
in Designated Fire Zones
Proposed § 23.805 would require
flight controls, engine mounts, and
other flight structures within or adjacent
to designated fire zones be capable of
withstanding the effects of a fire.
Proposed § 23.805 would require
engines inside designated fire zones to
remain attached to the airplane in the
event of a fire or electrical arcing.
Proposed § 23.805 would also require
terminals, equipment, and electrical
cables, inside designated fire zones,
used during emergency procedures, be
fire-resistant.
Proposed § 23.805 would capture the
safety intent of current § 23.865, Fire
protection of flight controls, engine
mounts, and other flight structure and
§ 23.1359(b), Electrical system fire
protection. The intent of proposed
§ 23.805 is to protect flight controls,
engine mounts, and other flight
structure as well as electrical cables,
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
terminals and equipment from the
effects of fire in designated fire zones.
viii. Proposed § 23.810, Lightning
Protection of Structure
Proposed § 23.810 would preclude
primary structure failure caused by
exposure to the direct effects of
lightning, that could prevent continued
safe flight and landing for airplanes
approved for IFR. Proposed § 23.810
would require airplanes approved only
Current section
23.601
23.603
23.605
23.607
23.609
23.611
23.613
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
for VFR to achieve lightning protection
by following FAA accepted design
practices found in FAA issued advisory
circulars and in FAA accepted
consensus standards.
Proposed § 23.810 would capture the
safety intent of the current § 23.867(a)
and (c), Electrical bonding and
protection against lightning and static
electricity. The FAA proposes adopting
the structure requirements in part 23,
amendment 23–7 (34 FR 13078, August
Title
13, 1969), to limit the rule to protection
of primary structure from direct effects
of lightning.
ix. Reorganization of Subpart D
The FAA proposes relocating the
underlying safety. intent of various
subpart D sections with proposed
sections in subparts B, C, F, and G. The
following table shows where the FAA
proposes moving the current subpart D
sections in part 23.
Proposed section
Proposed title
23.673 ..................................
23.675 ..................................
23.677 ..................................
(a) ........................................
(b) ........................................
(c) .........................................
(d) ........................................
23.679 ..................................
23.681(a) .............................
23.681(b) .............................
23.683 ..................................
23.685(a), (b), (c) ................
23.685(d) .............................
23.687 ..................................
23.689 ..................................
General ....................................................
Materials and workmanship ....................
Fabrication methods ................................
Fasteners .................................................
Protection of Structure ............................
Accessibility .............................................
Material strength properties and design
values.
Special factors .........................................
Casting factors ........................................
Bearing factors ........................................
Fitting factors ...........................................
Fatigue strength ......................................
Flutter ......................................................
Proof of strength ......................................
Proof of strength ......................................
Installation ...............................................
Hinges .....................................................
Mass balance ..........................................
Control Surfaces—General.
..................................................................
..................................................................
Stability augmentation and automatic
and power-operated systems.
Primary flight controls ..............................
Stops .......................................................
Trim systems.
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
Control system locks ...............................
Limit load static tests ...............................
Limit load static tests ...............................
Operation tests ........................................
Control system details .............................
Control system details .............................
Spring devices .........................................
Cable systems .........................................
(a) ........................................
(b) ........................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
23.700 ................................
23.325(b), 23.500(d) ..........
(c) .........................................
..................................................................
23.325(b), 23.500(d) ..........
(d) ........................................
..................................................................
23.325(b), 23.500(d) ..........
(e) ........................................
..................................................................
23.325(b), 23.500(d) ..........
(f) .........................................
23.691 ..................................
(a) ........................................
(b) ........................................
(c) .........................................
(d) ........................................
(e) ........................................
(f) .........................................
(g) ........................................
23.693 ..................................
..................................................................
Artificial stall barrier system.
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
Joints .......................................................
23.700 ................................
Flight control systems.
Flight control systems.
Aeroelasticity.
Flight control systems.
Function and installation.
Component loading conditions.
Special factors of safety.
Structural design.
Structural design.
Function and installation.
Aeroelasticity and Structural design.
Component loading conditions, Structural design, and Equipment Systems
and Installations.
Flight control systems.
Component loading conditions, Structural design.
Component loading conditions, Structural design.
Component loading conditions, Structural design.
Component loading conditions, Structural design.
Flight control systems.
23.700 ................................
23.700 ................................
23.1305 ..............................
23.700 ................................
23.700 ................................
23.700 ................................
23.1315 ..............................
23.515 ................................
Flight control systems.
Flight control systems.
Function and installation.
Flight control systems.
Flight control systems.
Flight control systems.
Equipment, systems and Installations.
Special factors of safety.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
23.619 ..................................
23.621 ..................................
23.623. .................................
23.625 ..................................
23.627 ..................................
23.629 ..................................
23.641 ..................................
23.651 ..................................
23.655 ..................................
23.657 ..................................
23.659 ..................................
23.671 ..................................
(a) ........................................
(b) ........................................
23.672 ..................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
23.500
23.500
23.510
23.505
23.505
23.505
23.510
13483
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
................................
Structural design.
Structural design.
Materials and processes.
Protection of structure.
Protection of structure.
Protection of structure.
Materials and processes.
23.515 ................................
23.515 ................................
23.515 ................................
23.515 ................................
23.405 ................................
23.410 ................................
Means of Compliance.
Means of Compliance.
Means of Compliance.
23.515 ................................
23.315 ................................
Special factors of safety.
Special factors of safety.
Special factors of safety.
Special factors of safety.
Structural durability.
Aeroelasticity.
23.500 ................................
23.1305 ..............................
23.1305 ..............................
Structural design.
Function and installation.
Function and installation.
23.1305 ..............................
23.1305 ..............................
Function and installation.
Function and installation.
23.700 ................................
23.700 ................................
23.410 ................................
23.700 ................................
23.1305 ..............................
23.325(b) ...........................
23.515 ................................
23.500(d) ...........................
23.500(d) ...........................
23.1305 ..............................
23.410 and 23.500 ............
............................................
Sfmt 4702
Special factors of safety.
Flight load conditions.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13484
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Title
23.697 ..................................
(a) ........................................
(b) and (c) ............................
23.699 ..................................
23.701 ..................................
23.703 ..................................
(a) ........................................
(b) ........................................
(c) .........................................
23.721 ..................................
Wing flap controls.
..................................................................
..................................................................
Wing flap position indicator .....................
Flap interconnection ................................
Takeoff warning system.
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
General ....................................................
23.723. .................................
23.725 ..................................
23.726 ..................................
23.727 ..................................
23.729 ..................................
(a) ........................................
(b) ........................................
(c) .........................................
(d) ........................................
(e) ........................................
(f) .........................................
(g) ........................................
23.731 ..................................
23.733 ..................................
(a) ........................................
(b) ........................................
(c) .........................................
23.735 ..................................
(a) ........................................
(1) ........................................
(2) ........................................
(b) ........................................
(c) .........................................
(d) ........................................
(e) ........................................
(1) ........................................
(2) ........................................
23.737 ..................................
23.745 ..................................
23.751 ..................................
(a) ........................................
Shock absorption tests ............................
Limit drop tests ........................................
Ground load dynamic tests .....................
Reserve energy absorption drop tests ....
Landing gear extension and retraction
system.
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
Wheels .....................................................
Tires.
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
Brakes .....................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
Skis ..........................................................
Nose/Tail wheel steering .........................
Main float buoyancy.
..................................................................
(b) ........................................
23.753 ..................................
23.755 ..................................
..................................................................
Main float design. ....................................
Hulls .........................................................
Means of Compliance.
23.320 ................................
23.710 ................................
23.757 ..................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Current section
Auxiliary floats .........................................
23.710 ................................
23.771 ..................................
(a) ........................................
(b) ........................................
(c ) .......................................
23.773 ..................................
(a) ........................................
(b) ........................................
23.775 ..................................
(a), (b), (c), (d) .....................
(e) ........................................
(f) .........................................
(g) ........................................
(h) ........................................
23.777 ..................................
23.779 ..................................
23.781 ..................................
23.783 ..................................
(a), (b), (c), (d) .....................
(e), (f), (g) ............................
23.785 ..................................
Pilot compartment.
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
Pilot compartment view.
..................................................................
..................................................................
Windshields and windows.
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
Cockpit controls .......................................
Motion and effect of cockpit controls ......
Cockpit control knob shape .....................
Doors.
..................................................................
..................................................................
Seats, berths, litters, safety belts, and
shoulder harnesses.
Baggage and cargo compartments .........
Passenger information signs ...................
Emergency evacuation.
23.787 ..................................
23.791 ..................................
23.803 ..................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Proposed section
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Proposed title
23.700 ................................
23.200 ................................
23.1500 ..............................
Means of Compliance.
Flight control systems.
Controllability.
Flightcrew interface.
23.700 ................................
23.700 ................................
Definition.
23.910 ................................
Flight control systems.
Flight control systems.
Means
Means
Means
Means
of
of
of
of
Powerplant installation hazard assessment.
Compliance.
Compliance.
Compliance.
Compliance.
23.705 ................................
23.705 ................................
23.705 ................................
Means of Compliance.
23.705 ................................
23.1315 ..............................
Means of Compliance.
23.705 ................................
Landing gear systems.
Landing gear systems.
Landing gear systems.
23.705 ................................
Means of Compliance.
Means of Compliance.
23.705.
23.705 ................................
Means of Compliance.
Means of Compliance.
23.705 ................................
Means of Compliance.
23.1315 ..............................
23.705 ................................
Means of Compliance.
Means of Compliance.
23.705 ................................
23.1500 ..............................
Landing gear systems.
710 .....................................
Landing gear systems.
Equipment, systems and installation.
Landing gear systems.
Landing gear systems.
Landing gear systems.
Equipment, systems and installation.
Landing gear systems.
Landing gear systems.
Flightcrew interface.
Buoyancy for seaplanes and amphibians.
Ground and water load conditions.
Buoyancy for seaplanes and amphibians.
Buoyancy for seaplanes and amphibians.
23.1500 ..............................
23.755 ................................
23.755 ................................
Flightcrew interface.
Occupant physical environment.
Occupant physical environment.
23.1500 ..............................
23.755 ................................
Flightcrew interface.
Occupant physical environment.
23.755 ................................
Means of Compliance.
23.1405 ..............................
Means of Compliance.
23.755 ................................
23.1500 ..............................
23.1500 ..............................
23.1500 ..............................
Occupant physical environment.
23.750 ................................
Means of Compliance.
23.600 and 23.515 ............
Means of egress and emergency exits.
23.600(e) ...........................
23.755 ................................
Sfmt 4702
Flight in icing conditions.
Occupant physical environment.
Flightcrew interface.
Flightcrew interface.
Flightcrew interface.
Special factors of safety, Emergency
landing conditions.
Emergency landing conditions.
Occupant physical environment.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
13485
Current section
Title
Proposed section
(a) ........................................
(b) ........................................
23.805 ..................................
23.807 ..................................
(a)(3 ), (b)(1), (c), (d)(1),
(d)(4).
Balance of 23.807 ...............
23.811 ..................................
23.812 ..................................
23.813 ..................................
(a) ........................................
(b) ........................................
CS–VLA 853 ........................
23.815 ..................................
23.831 ..................................
23.841(a), (b)(6), (c), (d) .....
(b)(1) through (5) and (7) ....
23.843 ..................................
23.851 ..................................
(a) and (b) ............................
..................................................................
..................................................................
Flightcrew emergency exits .....................
Emergency exits.
..................................................................
23.750 ................................
Means of Compliance.
23.750 ................................
..................................................................
Emergency exit marking ..........................
Emergency lighting ..................................
Emergency exit access.
..................................................................
..................................................................
..................................................................
Width of aisle ...........................................
Ventilation ................................................
Pressurized cabins ..................................
..................................................................
Pressurization tests .................................
Fire extinguishers.
..................................................................
23.750 ................................
23.750 ................................
23.750 ................................
Means of egress and emergency exits.
Means of egress and emergency exits.
Means of egress and emergency exits.
23.750 ................................
Means of Compliance.
23.750 ................................
23.750 ................................
23.755 ................................
23.755 ................................
Means of Compliance.
23.755 ................................
Means of egress and emergency exits.
(c) .........................................
23.853 ..................................
Means of Compliance.
(a) ........................................
..................................................................
Passenger and crew compartment interiors.
..................................................................
(b)(c) and (d)(1)(2) ...............
(d)(3)(i), (d)(3)(iii), (d)(3)(iv)
..................................................................
..................................................................
Means of Compliance.
23.800 ................................
(e) ........................................
..................................................................
23.800 ................................
(f) .........................................
..................................................................
23.800 ................................
23.855 ..................................
23.800 ................................
23.856 ..................................
Cargo and baggage compartment fire
protection.
Thermal/acoustic insulation materials .....
23.800 ................................
23.859 ..................................
(a) ........................................
Combustion heater fire protection.
..................................................................
23.800 ................................
(b) thru (i) .............................
23.863 ..................................
(a) and (d) ............................
..................................................................
Flammable fluid fire protection.
..................................................................
23.800 ................................
(b) and (c) ............................
..................................................................
Means of Compliance .......
23.865 ..................................
23.805 ................................
(a), (c) ..................................
(b) ........................................
Fire protection of flight controls, engine
mounts, and other flight structure.
Electrical bonding and protection against
lightning and static electricity.
..................................................................
..................................................................
23.810 ................................
23.1320 ..............................
23.871 ..................................
Leveling means .......................................
Means of Compliance.
23.867 ..................................
23.800 ................................
23.800 ................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
a. General Discussion
i. Proposed § 23.900, Powerplant
Installation
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
Proposed § 23.900 would clarify, for
the purpose of this subpart, that the
airplane powerplant installation must
include each component necessary for
propulsion, affects propulsion safety, or
provides auxiliary power to the
airplane. Proposed § 23.900 would
require the applicant to construct and
arrange each powerplant installation to
account for likely hazards in operation
and maintenance and, except for simple
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Means of egress and emergency exits.
Means of egress and emergency exits.
Means of egress and emergency exits.
Occupant physical environment.
Occupant physical environment.
Occupant physical environment.
Fire protection outside designated fire
zones.
Fire protection outside designated fire
zones.
Fire protection
zones.
Fire protection
zones.
Fire protection
zones.
Fire protection
zones.
Fire protection
zones.
outside designated fire
outside designated fire
outside designated fire
outside designated fire
outside designated fire
Fire protection outside designated fire
zones.
Means of Compliance.
b. Specific Discussion of Changes
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Means of egress and emergency exits.
Means of Compliance.
5. Subpart E—Powerplant
The FAA proposes substantial
changes to subpart E based on two
considerations. First, many of the
current regulations could be combined
to provide fewer regulations that
accomplish the same safety intent.
Second, part 23 overlaps with the
requirements in parts 33 and 35. Refer
to appendix 1 of this preamble for a
cross-reference table detailing how the
current regulations are addressed in the
proposed part 23 regulations.
Proposed title
Sfmt 4702
Fire protection outside designated fire
zones.
Fire protection outside designated fire
zones.
Fire protection in designated fire zones.
Lightning protection of structure.
Electrical and electronic system lightning
protection.
airplanes,24 each aircraft engine would
have to be type certificated.
Proposed § 23.900 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.901,
Installation, paragraphs (a), (b), and (f);
23.903, Engines, paragraph (a); 23.905,
Propellers, paragraph (a), 23.909,
Turbocharger systems, paragraphs (a)
and (c); and 23.925, Propeller clearance.
Proposed § 23.900 would combine the
installation requirements that are
scattered throughout the subpart into a
24 Refer to Section III, Discussion of Proposal,
paragraphs A and B of this NPRM for definition and
discussion of a simple airplane.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13486
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
general requirement for installation, and
remove any duplication with part 33.
The following table illustrates the
duplication between the current part 23
regulations and part 33 requirements:
Part 23
Part 33
§ 23.901(d), Installation ............................................................................
§ 23.901(e), Installation ............................................................................
§ 23.934, Turbojet and turbofan engine thrust reverser systems tests ...
§ 23.939, Powerplant operating characteristics ........................................
§ 23.1011, Oil System—General ..............................................................
§ 23.1013(a) and (d), Oil tanks .................................................................
§ 23.1015, Oil tank tests ...........................................................................
§ 23.1023, Oil radiators ............................................................................
§ 23.1041, Cooling—General ...................................................................
§ 23.1043, Cooling tests ...........................................................................
§ 23.1045, Cooling test procedures for turbine engine powered airplanes.
§ 23.1047, Cooling test procedures for reciprocating engine powered
airplanes.
§ 23.1061, Liquid Cooling—Installation ....................................................
§ 23.1063, Coolant tank tests ...................................................................
§ 23.1093, Induction system icing protection ...........................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 23.1099, Carburetor deicing fluid system detail design ........................
Additionally, proposed § 23.900
would identify the scope of the
powerplant installation in the same
manner as the current requirements.
However, the FAA would redefine
several terms to allow for alternate
sources of propulsion, such as electric
motors. The FAA considers the term
powerplant to include all equipment
used by the airplane that provides
propulsion or auxiliary power. The
word engine would be replaced with the
term power unit and would include
other power sources driven by fuel such
as liquid fuel, electrical, or other power
sources not yet envisioned. This
proposal also predicates that each
airplane power unit or propeller receive
a type certificate as a prerequisite for
installation, with the exception of
simple airplanes. The current part 33
airworthiness standards did not
envision providing certification
requirements for types of engines
outside of those that operate on fossil
fuels. As such, the ability of an
applicant to obtain the required engine
type certificate for an alternate fuel type
may be impractical. For those power
units, the FAA proposes to include
them in the airplane certification, which
could include the use of an ELOS to part
23. The FAA would expect an applicant
to utilize all the requirements listed in
part 33 as a baseline matrix to find
compliance for an alternate powerplant
type and for those requirements that
could not be met. Also, § 21.16, Special
conditions, may apply. It should be
noted that additional requirements
might also be necessary due to an
absence of a corresponding part 33
requirement. This matrix would become
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
§ 33.33, Vibration.
§ 33.1, Applicability.
§ 33.97, Thrust reversers.
§§ 33.61 thru 33.79.
§§ 33.39 and 33.71, Lubrication system.
§§ 33.39, and 33.71, Lubrication system.
§ 33.33, Vibration.
§ 33.33, Vibration.
§ 33.1, Applicability.
§§ 33.41 and 33.81, Applicability—Block Tests.
§ 33.81, Applicability—Block Tests.
§ 33.35, Fuel and induction system.
§ 33.21, Engine cooling.
§ 33.41 and 33.81, Applicability—Block Tests.
§§ 33.35(b), Fuel and induction system and 33.68, Induction system
icing.
§ 33.35, Fuel and induction system.
part of the certification baseline and
recorded in an issue paper as an ELOS,
exemption, or special condition. Also,
simple airplanes will follow the
precedence set for CS–VLA and will
maintain the exception to the
requirement to be type certificated.
ii. Proposed § 23.905, Propeller
Installation
Proposed § 23.905 would retain the
requirement that each propeller be type
certificated, except for simple airplanes.
Proposed § 23.905 would retain the
requirement that each pusher propeller
be marked so that it is conspicuous
under daylight conditions. All the other
requirements of the current section
either duplicate part 35 standards, or
would condense into the other
requirements proposed in §§ 23.900,
Powerplant installation; 23.910,
Powerplant installation hazard
assessment; and 23.940, Powerplant ice
protection.
iii. Proposed § 23.910, Powerplant
Installation Hazard Assessment
Proposed § 23.910 would require an
applicant to assess each powerplant
separately and in relation to other
airplane systems and installations to
show that a failure of any powerplant
system component or accessory will
not—
• Prevent continued safe flight and
landing;
• Cause serious injury; and
• Require immediate action by
crewmembers for continued operation
of any remaining powerplant system.
Proposed § 23.910 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.721,
Landing gear—General; 23.903, Engines,
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
paragraph (c); 23.905, Propellers,
paragraph (h); 23.909, Turbocharger
systems, paragraph (b), (c), and (e);
23.933 Reversing systems, paragraph (b);
23.937, Turbopropeller-drag limiting
systems, paragraph (a); 23.959,
Unusable fuel supply; 23.979, Pressure
fueling systems, paragraphs (c) and (d);
23.991, Fuel pumps, paragraph (d);
23.994, Fuel system components;
23.1001, Fuel jettisoning system,
paragraph (h); 23.1027, Propeller
feathering system; 23.1111, Turbine
engine, paragraph (a) and (c); 23.1123,
Exhaust system; 23.1125 Exhaust heat
exchangers, paragraph (a); 23.1142,
Auxiliary power unit controls,
paragraphs (d) and (e); 23.1155, Turbine
engine reverse thrust and propeller
pitch settings below the flight regime;
23.1163, Powerplant accessories,
paragraphs (b) and (d); 23.1191,
Firewalls, paragraph (f); 23.1193,
Cowling and nacelle, paragraphs (f) and
(g); 23.1201, Fire extinguishing systems
materials, paragraph (a); and 23.1203,
Fire detector system, paragraphs (b) and
(c).
The proposed standard would reduce
the repetitive requirements found
throughout the subpart and create one
general powerplant requirement to
analyze and mitigate hazards associated
with the powerplant installation. For
example, current § 23.903(b)(1) requires
that design precautions be taken to
minimize the hazards to the airplane in
the event of an engine rotor failure or a
fire originating inside the engine that
could burn though the engine case.
These are very specific failure
conditions, but are actually only two
small categories of many engine failure
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
conditions an applicant must assess.
Section 23.903(c) requires that multiple
engines must be isolated from one
another so a malfunction of one engine
does not affect the operation of the
other. This is a general analysis
technique frequently called common
mode analysis that should apply to all
powerplant components and include
other critical airplane systems that are
not powerplant related, but could be
affected by a powerplant failure.
Hazards the FAA proposes to remove
from other regulations and which would
be addressed in this proposed section
include, but are not limited to, fire, ice,
rain and bird ingestion, rotorburst,
engine case burn through, and
flammable leakage.
iv. Proposed § 23.915, Automatic Power
Control Systems
Proposed § 23.915 would require a
power or thrust augmentation system
that automatically controls the power or
thrust on the operating powerplant to
provide an indication to the flightcrew
when the system is operating; provide a
means for the pilot to deactivate the
automatic functions; and prevent
inadvertent deactivation.
Proposed § 23.915 would capture the
safety intent of current § 23.904,
Automatic power reserve system and
appendix H to part 23—Installation of
An Automatic Power Reserve (APR)
System. To foster the growth and
approval of technological advances, the
FAA believes that the detailed and
prescriptive language of appendix H is
more appropriate as means of
compliance. We would also include
requirements for thrust augmenting
systems into this proposed section since
there seems to be a trend in general
aviation to provide thrust management
systems more sophisticated than
historical automatic power reserve
systems.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
v. Proposed § 23.920, Reversing Systems
Proposed § 23.920 would require an
airplane to be capable of continued safe
flight and landing under any available
reversing system setting, and would
capture the safety intent of current
§ 23.933(a) and (b). The current rule
includes a separate requirement for a
propeller reversing system that would
be covered in the more general language
of the proposed section and applied to
any type of reverser system. Current
§ 23.933 also requires an analysis of the
system for a failure condition. Those
provisions would be addressed in the
general analysis requirements of
proposed § 23.910.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
vi. Proposed § 23.925, Powerplant
Operational Characteristics
Proposed § 23.925 would require the
powerplant to operate at any negative
acceleration that could occur during
normal and emergency operation within
the airplane operating limitations.
Proposed § 23.925 would require the
pilot to have the capability to stop and
restart the powerplant in flight.
Proposed § 23.925 would require the
airplane to have an independent power
source for restarting each powerplant
following an in-flight shutdown.
Proposed § 23.925 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.903,
Engines, paragraph (d), (e), (f), and (g);
23.939, Powerplant operating
characteristics; and 23.943, Negative
acceleration. Current § 23.939 addresses
powerplant operating characteristics
and clearly requires an analysis that
would be required by proposed § 23.910
and the existing requirements of part 33.
Current § 23.943 would be included in
this proposed rule because it is another
analysis requirement, and one that
provides an environment where
powerplant systems are required to
operate.
vii. Proposed § 23.930, Fuel Systems
Proposed § 23.930 would require that
each fuel system provide an
independent fuel supply to each
powerplant in at least one configuration
and prevent ignition from an unknown
source. This section would require that
each fuel system provide the fuel
required to achieve maximum power or
thrust plus a margin for likely variables
in all temperature conditions within the
operating envelope of the airplane and
provide a means to remove the fuel from
the airplane. Proposed § 23.930 would
require each fuel system to be capable
of retaining fuel when subject to inertia
loads under expected operating
conditions and prevent hazardous
contamination of the fuel supply.
Proposed § 23.930 would require each
fuel storage system to withstand the
loads and pressures under expected
operating conditions and provide a
means to prevent loss of fuel during any
maneuver under operating conditions
for which certification is requested.
Also, proposed § 23.930 would require
each fuel storage system to prevent
discharge when transferring fuel,
provide fuel for at least one-half hour of
operation at maximum continuous
power or thrust, and be capable of
jettisoning fuel, if required for landing.
Proposed § 23.930 would require
installed pressure refueling systems to
have a means to prevent the escape of
hazardous quantities of fuel,
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13487
automatically shut-off before exceeding
the maximum fuel quantity of the
airplane, and provide an indication of a
failure at the fueling station. Proposed
§ 23.930 would capture the safety intent
of current §§ 23.951, Fuel System—
General, paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d);
23.953, Fuel System; 23.954, Fuel
system lightning protection; 23.955,
Fuel flow; 23.957, Flow between
interconnected tanks, paragraph (a);
23.961, Fuel system hot weather
operation; 23.963, Fuel tanks: General,
paragraphs (a), (d), and (e); 23.977, Fuel
tank outlet; 23.979, Pressure fueling
systems, paragraphs (a) and (b); 23.991,
Fuel pumps, paragraphs (a), (b), and (c);
23.997, Fuel strainer or filter,
paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d); 23.999,
Fuel system drains; and 23.1001, Fuel
jettisoning system, paragraph (a).
The FAA believes that the regulations
for the design of fuel systems may be
overly prescriptive and exceed what is
necessary to design a safe system.
Accordingly, a more general set of
requirements could include the intent of
many current rules. More importantly,
this proposed rule would allow for other
types of energy sources to power
propulsion systems such as electrical
motors and future energy sources.
viii. Proposed § 23.935, Powerplant
Induction and Exhaust Systems
Proposed § 23.935 would require the
air induction system to supply the air
required for each power unit and its
accessories under expected operating
conditions, and provide a means to
discharge potential harmful material.
Proposed § 23.935 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.1091, Air
induction system, paragraph (a);
23.1101, Induction air preheater design,
paragraph (a); 23.1103, Induction
system ducts; 23.1107, Induction system
filters; and 23.1121, Exhaust System—
General, paragraphs (a) through (g). This
proposed rule would combine induction
and exhaust systems into a single rule
because of the commonality with issues
associated with moving air. The
prescriptive language of the regulations
identified above in this paragraph drove
the development of this proposed
section. For example, § 23.1091(b)
mandates a certain number of intake
sources and specifies particular
requirements for a primary and alternate
intakes. Current § 23.1101 requires
inspection access of critical parts, and
current § 23.1103 is considered a part of
a proper safety analysis that would be
required by proposed § 23.910.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
13488
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
ix. Proposed § 23.940, Powerplant Ice
Protection
Proposed § 23.940 would require the
airplane design, including the engine
induction system, to prevent foreseeable
accumulation of ice or snow that would
adversely affect powerplant operation.
Proposed § 23.940 would also require
the applicant design the powerplant to
prevent any accumulation of ice or
snow that would adversely affect
powerplant operation, in those icing
conditions for which certification is
requested. Proposed § 23.940 would
capture the safety intent of current
§§ 23.905, Propellers, paragraph (e);
23.929, Engine installation ice
protection; 23.975, Fuel tank vents and
carburetor vapor vents, paragraph (a)(1);
23.1093, Induction system icing
protection; 23.1095, Carburetor deicing
fluid flow rate; 23.1097, Carburetor
deicing fluid system capacity; and
23.1099, Carburetor deicing fluid system
detail design.
Proposed § 23.940(a) would reflect the
requirements in current § 23.1093,
which applies to all airplanes,
regardless if flight in icing certification
is sought. We are proposing to remove
the type of powerplant to accommodate
for new powerplant technologies. In
addition, we propose to define other
foreseeable icing in the means of
compliance, which would include
conditions conducive to induction icing
of reciprocating engines. Foreseeable
icing in the means of compliance would
also include the cloud icing conditions
of appendix C to part 25, currently
defined in § 23.1093(b)(1)(i), falling and
blowing snow currently defined in
§ 23.1093(b)(1)(ii), and ground ice fog
conditions currently defined in
§ 23.1093(b)(2). The FAA proposes to
remove the prescriptive requirements of
the current §§ 23.1093(a), 23.1095,
23.1097, and 23.1099 as these are more
appropriately considered as means of
compliance. The FAA would expect the
means of compliance to expand the
ground ice fog conditions to colder
ambient temperatures to harmonize
with EASA. The FAA would also expect
the means of compliance to include
optional ground and flight freezing
drizzle and freezing rain conditions,
similar to appendix O of part 25, for
those airplanes that seek certification to
operate in those conditions. The Part 23
Icing ARC had recommended specific
pass/fail criteria for the effect of ice
accretion on engine operation. The FAA
would expect this criterion to be
defined in a means of compliance.
Proposed paragraph (a) would require
an airplane design to prevent
‘‘foreseeable’’ ice or snow accumulation,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
including accumulation in inadvertent
icing encounters, described in appendix
C to part 25, on airplanes not certified
for icing, which may pose a shed hazard
to the powerplant.
Airplane design in proposed
§ 23.940(a) refers to the engine
induction system and airframe
components on which accumulated ice
may shed into the powerplant.
Powerplant design in proposed
§ 23.940(b) refers to the engine,
propeller, and other powerplant
components such as cooling inlets.
Proposed § 23.940(b) would apply
only to airplanes certified for flight in
icing and would require compliance to
the icing requirements in part 33, which
currently only apply to turbine engines.
Part 33, amendment 33–34 (79 FR
65507, November 4, 2014) and effective
January 5, 2015, added SLD and ice
crystal requirements to § 33.68 and
amended the engine ice ingestion
requirements in § 33.77. Proposed
§ 23.940(b) would require installation of
an engine(s) certified to § 33.68
amendment 33–34, or later, if the
airplane will be certified for flight in
freezing drizzle and freezing rain.
Proposed § 23.940(b) would allow an
airplane manufacturer to install an
engine, type certified at an earlier
amendment, in an airplane not certified
for flight in freezing drizzle or freezing
rain, as long as no ADs have been
applied that relate to engine operation
in inadvertent SLD or ice crystal
conditions. Airplanes certified under
part 23 have not had ADs related to SLD
or ice crystals. Certain part 23 turbojet
engines have experienced thrust
rollback due to ice crystals blocking the
heated inlet temperature probe. The
FAA would expect the means of
compliance to address this in a similar
manner to what is accomplished on
current certification projects. The
engine ice ingestion requirements of the
current § 23.903(a)(2) would be moved
to proposed § 23.940(b).
x. Proposed § 23.1000, Powerplant Fire
Protection
Proposed § 23.1000 would require
that a powerplant only be installed in a
designated fire zone and would require
an applicant to install a fire detection
system in each designated fire zone for
certification levels 3 and 4 airplanes.
This rulemaking effort is maintaining
the current level of safety for fire
protection. While not a perfect one-toone relationship, airplanes equivalent to
certification levels 1 and 2 airplanes are
not required to have a fire detection
system today and therefore, should not
be required to have them in this
proposed rule. This would increase the
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
cost of certification. Each fire detection
system would be required to provide a
means to alert the flightcrew in the
event of a detection of fire or failure of
the system and a means to check the fire
detection system in flight. Proposed
§ 23.1000 would also require an
applicant to install a fire extinguishing
system for certification levels 2, 3, and
4 airplanes with a powerplant located
outside the pilot’s view that uses
combustible fuel.
Additionally, proposed § 23.1000
would require each component, line,
and fitting carrying flammable fluids,
gases, or air subject to fire conditions to
be fire resistant, except components
storing concentrated flammable material
would have to be fireproof or enclosed
by a fireproof shield. Proposed
§ 23.1000 would also require an
applicant to provide a means to shut off
fuel or flammable material for each
powerplant, while not restricting fuel to
remaining units, and prevent
inadvertent operation. Proposed
§ 23.1000 would capture the safety
intent of current §§ 23.1181, Designated
fire zones: Regions included; 23.1182,
Nacelle areas behind firewalls; 23.1183,
Lines, fittings, and components;
23.1189, Shutoff means; 23.1191,
Firewalls; 23.1192 Engine accessory
compartment diaphragm; 23.1193,
Cowling and nacelle; 23.1195, Fire
extinguishing systems; 23.1197, Fire
extinguishing agents; 23.1199,
Extinguishing agent containers; 23.1201,
Fire extinguishing system materials; and
23.1203, Fire detector system.
Regulations for fuel may have become
too detailed and prescriptive. A more
general set of requirements should
capture the intent of these many rules.
More importantly, this new proposed
rule would allow other types of energy
sources to power propulsion systems
such as electrical motors and future
energy sources.
xi. Current Subpart E Regulations
Relocated to Other Proposed Subparts
The requirements of current
§ 23.903(b)(1) would be moved to
subpart C, § 23.405, Structural
durability, paragraph (d). Section
23.903(b)(1) requires design precautions
for turbine engine installations to be
taken to minimize hazards to the
airplane in the event of an engine rotor
failure or of a fire originating inside the
engine which burns through the engine
case.
Additionally, the requirements of
current § 23.929 would be moved to
proposed § 23.940(b) and would only
apply to airplanes certified for flight in
icing. The means of compliance for
§ 23.940(b) should address propeller ice
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
protection system design and analysis.
However, the means of compliance for
climb performance for proposed
§ 23.230 should address ice accretion
effects on propeller performance on
airplanes certified for flight in icing.
xii. Removal of Subpart E Current
Regulations
The following current regulations are
considered duplicative of part 35 and
would be removed from subpart E:
§ 23.905(b)—duplicative of § 35.5,
Propeller ratings and operation
limitations; § 23.905(c)—duplicative of
§ 35.22, Feathering propellers;
§ 23.905(d)—duplicative of §§ 35.21,
35.23, 35.42 and 35.43; and
§ 23.905(e)(g) and (h)—duplicative of
§ 35.7, Features and characteristics.
6. Subpart F—Equipment
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
a. General Discussion
The proposed changes to subpart F
would consolidate the current rules into
new performance-based standards and
allow for use of new technologies once
consensus standards are developed that
could be used as a means of
compliance.The FAA believes the
proposed part 23 requirements would
maintain the current level of safety
while staying relevant for new future
technologies. The prescriptive design
solutions in the current rules are often
not relevant to new technology
requiring special conditions,
exemptions, and ELOS findings. The
rate of new technology development
and adoption has increased dramatically
in the last decade. As a result, airplane
systems with new features and
capabilities are rapidly becoming
available. The FAA believes that
removing the prescriptive design
solutions, which are based on outdated
or existing technology, while focusing
on the safety intent of the rule and
maintaining design solutions as a
documented means of compliance
would enable the adoption of newer
technologies.
The FAA also believes the current
part 23 regulatory prescriptive structure
does not effectively address the safety
continuum, particularly the low
performance end of the continuum.
Recent part 23 amendments have
increasingly focused on highperformance, complex airplanes. These
stricter requirements have also been
applied to the low-performance
airplanes even though their risk in the
safety continuum is lower. This has
created an unintended barrier to new
safety enhancing technology in lowperformance airplanes.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
b. Specific Discussion of Changes
i. Proposed § 23.1300, Airplane Level
Systems Requirements
Proposed § 23.1300 would require
equipment and systems that are
required for an airplane to operate
safely, be designed and installed to meet
the level of safety applicable to the
certification and performance levels of
the airplane, and to perform their
intended function throughout the
operating and environmental limits
specified by an applicant. Proposed
§ 23.1300 would mandate that
non-required airplane equipment and
systems, considered separately and in
relation to other systems, be designed
and installed so their operation or
failure would not have an adverse effect
on the airplane or its occupants.
Proposed § 23.1300 would capture the
safety intent found in portions of
current §§ 23.1301, Function and
installation; 23.1303, Flight and
navigation instruments; 23.1305,
Powerplant instruments; 23.1307,
Miscellaneous equipment; 23.1309,
Equipment, systems, and installations;
23.1311, Electronic display instrument
systems; 23.1321, Arrangement and
visibility; 23.1323, Airspeed indicating
system, 23.1325, Static pressure system;
23.1327, Magnetic direction indicator;
23.1329, Automatic pilot system;
23.1335, Flight director systems;
23.1337, Powerplant instruments
installation; 23.1351, Electrical Systems
and Equipment—General; 23.1353,
Storage battery design and installation;
and 23.1361, Master switch
arrangement.
The current requirements can be
traced back to CAR 3, specifically CAR
3.651, 3.652, 3.655, 3.661, 3.662, 3.663,
3.665, 3.666, 3.667, 3.669, 3.670, 3.671,
3.672, 3.673, 3.674, 3.681, 3.682, 3.686,
3.687, and 3.683. These requirements,
including § 23.1311, which does not
have a corresponding rule in CAR 3,
were based on the technology and
design solutions available at the time of
their adoption. Although these
requirements are appropriate for
traditional systems found in airplanes
designed to these assumptions, they
lack the flexibility to adopt current and
anticipated technologies and design
capabilities. The FAA wants to facilitate
the use of systems in new airplanes that
reduce pilot workload and enhance
safety. The FAA proposes the use of
performance-based language that
maintains the level of safety achieved
with the current requirements for
traditionally designed airplanes but also
allows for alternative system designs in
the future.
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13489
Proposed § 23.1300(a) would address
equipment and systems required to
operate safely. Required equipment may
be defined by other parts such as part
91 or part 135, by other sections of this
part such as equipment necessary for
flight into known icing, or other
requirements placed on the Type
Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS) such as a
working autopilot for single pilot
operations. The FAA proposes in
§ 23.1300(b) that non-required
equipment may be installed because it
offers some benefit and its failure or use
would not result in a reduction in safety
of the airplane or for its occupants from
the base aircraft if the system was not
installed. This proposed section would
contain general requirements for the
environmental qualifications of
installed equipment, and would require
installed equipment to perform its
intended function over its defined
environmental range. This would mean
that the equipment should have the
same environmental qualification as
requested for the useful range of the
airplane.
Proposed § 23.1300(b) would not
mandate that non-required equipment
and systems function properly during
all airplane operations once in service,
provided all potential failure conditions
do not effect safe operation of the
airplane. The equipment or system
would have to function in the manner
expected by the manufacturer’s
operating manual for the equipment or
system. An applicant’s statement of
intended function would have to be
sufficiently specific and detailed so that
the FAA could evaluate whether the
system was appropriate for the intended
function.
ii. Proposed § 23.1305, Function and
Installation
Proposed § 23.1305 would require
that each item of installed equipment
perform its intended function, be
installed according to limitations
specified for that equipment, and the
equipment be labeled, if applicable, due
to size, location, or lack of clarity as to
its intended function, as to its
identification, function or operating
limitations, or any combination of these
factors. Proposed § 23.1305 would
require a discernable means of
providing system operating parameters
required to operate the airplane,
including warnings, cautions, and
normal indications to the responsible
crewmember. Proposed § 23.1305 would
require information concerning an
unsafe system operating condition be
provided in a clear and timely manner
to the crewmember responsible for
taking corrective action.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
13490
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Proposed § 23.1305 would capture the
safety intent found in portions of the
current §§ 23.671, Control systemsGeneral; 23.672, Stability augmentation
and automatic and power-operated
systems; 23.673, Primary flight controls;
23.675, Stops; 23.679, Control system
locks; 23.685(d), Control system details;
23.691(c), Artificial stall barrier system;
23.1361, Master switch arrangement;
and 23.1365(a) and (b), Electric cables
and equipment; 23.1301, Function and
installation; 23.1303, Flight and
navigation instruments; 23.1305,
Powerplant instruments; 23.1309,
Equipment, systems, and installations;
23.1322, Warning, caution, and advisory
lights; 23.1323, Airspeed indicating
system; 23.1326, Pitot heat indication
systems; 23.1327, Magnetic direction
indicator; 23.1329, Automatic pilot
system; 23.1331, Instruments using a
power source; 23.1335, Flight director
systems; 23.1337, Powerplant
instruments installation; 23.1351,
Electrical Systems and Equipment—
General; 23.1353, Storage battery design
and installation; 23.1365, Electric cables
and equipment; 23.1367, Switches;
23.1416, Pneumatic de-icer boot system.
The current requirements can be traced
to CAR 3, specifically, CAR 3.651,
3.652, 3.655, 3.663, 3.666, 3.667, 3.668,
3.669, 3.670, 3.671, 3.672, 3.673, 3.674,
3.675, 3.681, 3.682, 3.683, 3.686, 3.687,
3.693, 3.694, 3.696, 3.697, 3.700, 3.712,
and 3.726. These requirements,
including §§ 23.1322, 23.1326, and
23.1441, which did not have
corresponding rules in CAR 3, were
based on the technology and design
solutions available at the time of their
adoption. Although these requirements
are appropriate for traditional systems
and designs found in airplanes designed
to these assumptions, they lack the
flexibility to adopt current and
anticipated technologies and design
capabilities. The FAA wants to facilitate
the use of systems in new airplanes that
reduce pilot workload and enhance
safety. The FAA proposes the use of
performance-based language that
maintains the safety requirements for
traditionally designed airplanes, but
also allows for alternative system
designs.
The equipment or system would have
to function in the manner expected by
the manufacturer’s operating manual for
the equipment or system. An applicant’s
statement of intended function would
have to be sufficiently specific and
detailed so that the FAA could evaluate
whether the system was appropriate for
the intended function. The equipment
should function when installed as
intended by the manufacturer’s
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
instructions. The intent is for an
applicant to define proper functionality
and to propose an acceptable means of
compliance.
Proposed § 23.1305(a) would require
that equipment be installed under
prescribed limitations. Therefore, if an
equipment manufacturer specified any
allowable installation requirements, the
installer would stay within the
limitations or substantiate the new
limits. The proposed requirement that
the equipment be labeled as to its
identification, function or operating
limitations, or any combination of these
factors, if applicable, would apply to the
manufacturer of the equipment, not to
the installer.
Proposed § 23.1305 would require
that information concerning an unsafe
system operating condition be provided
to the flightcrew. Microprocessing units
that monitor parameters and warn of
system problems have already been
incorporated in some airplanes and are
used by other industries, including the
automobile and nuclear energy fields.
Pilots may not monitor gauges as they
used to; instead, they could rely on
warnings and alerts. The FAA does not
propose to allow simple on-off failure
lights to replace critical trend displays.
Warning systems would need to be
sophisticated enough to read transients
and trends, when appropriate, and give
useful warning to the flightcrew.
iii. Proposed § 23.1310, Flight,
Navigation, and Powerplant Instruments
Proposed § 23.1310 would require
installed systems to provide the
flightcrew member who sets or monitors
flight parameters for the flight,
navigation, and powerplant information
necessary to do so during each phase of
flight. Proposed § 23.1310 would require
this information include parameters and
trends, as needed for normal, abnormal,
and emergency operation, and
limitations, unless an applicant showed
the limitation would not be exceeded in
all intended operations. Proposed
§ 23.1310 would prohibit indication
systems that integrate the display of
flight or powerplant parameters to
operate the airplane or are required by
the operating rules of this chapter, from
inhibiting the primary display of flight
or powerplant parameters needed by
any flightcrew member in any normal
mode of operation. Proposed § 23.1310
would require these indication systems
be designed and installed so
information essential for continued safe
flight and landing would be available to
the flightcrew in a timely manner after
any single failure or probable
combination of failures.
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Proposed § 23.1310 would capture the
safety intent of current §§ 23.1303,
Flight and navigation instruments;
23.1305, Powerplant instruments;
23.1307, Miscellaneous equipment;
23.1311, Electronic display instrument
systems; 23.1321, Arrangement and
visibility; 23.1323, Airspeed indicating
system; 23.1331, Instruments using a
power source; and 23.1337, Powerplant
instruments installation. The current
requirements can be traced to CAR 3,
specifically, CAR 3.655, 3.661, 3.662,
3.675, 3.663, 3.668, 3.670, 3.671, 3.672,
3.673, and 3.674. These requirements,
including § 23.1311, which did not have
a corresponding rule in CAR 3, were
based on the technology and design
solutions available at the time of their
adoption. Although these requirements
are appropriate for traditional systems
and designs found in airplanes designed
to these assumptions, they lack the
flexibility to adopt current and
anticipated technologies and design
capabilities. Furthermore, the FAA
proposes to remove prescriptive
requirements from the rule that
historically provided standardization for
primary flight instruments and controls.
The FAA still believes this
standardization is important for
traditionally designed airplane
instrumentation. Accordingly, to reduce
the potential for pilot error, the reliance
on standards accepted by the
Administrator would maintain
standardization for traditional systems.
The proposed regulations would
require applicants to use a means of
compliance based on consensus
standards or other means accepted by
the Administrator. However, new
technology is already being approved
that does not meet the traditional
installation requirements and guidance.
At the same time, this technology is
proving equivalent or better than the
traditional technology.25 Furthermore,
the FAA believes that new systems,
displays, and controls have the potential
to reduce pilot workload with a direct
safety benefit. By removing prescriptive
requirements for the rules and allowing
alternatives, the industry would be able
to develop and certify safety-enhancing
technology faster.
Proposed § 23.1310 would not require
limitations that could not be exceeded
due to system design or physical
properties to be shown because they
would be useless information and result
in clutter of the displays. Additionally,
the FAA proposes removing the
25 See Accident and GA Safety reports from
NTSB, AOPA Safety Foundation, and the General
Aviation Joint Steering Committee (GA–JSC) over
the past 10 years.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
prescriptive design requirement in
current § 23.1311 for the installation of
secondary indicators. The safety intent
is that a single failure or likely multiple
failures would not result in the lack of
all critical flight data. The design and
installation of flight critical information
should be such that the pilot could still
fly partial panel after probable failures.
The prescriptive redundancy
requirements for installed secondary
indicators have been too restrictive for
airplanes limited to VFR operations.
This has caused several applicants to
request an ELOS finding from current
§ 23.1311(a)(5).
The safety intent of § 23.1311 is to
provide crewmembers the ability to
obtain the information necessary to
operate the airplane safely in flight.
Traditionally, the minimum was
prescribed as airspeed, altimeter, and
magnetic direction. The corresponding
CAR 3 rule is 3.655. The regulation is
redundant with the operating rules,
specifically, §§ 91.205 and 135.149, as
well as providing prescriptive design
solutions that were assumed to achieve
an acceptable level of safety. The
prescriptive solutions precluded finding
more effective or more economical paths
to providing acceptable safety. Proposed
§ 23.1310 would maintain the safety
intent of the current rule.
The FAA proposes consolidating the
safety intent of current § 23.1305,
Powerplant instruments, into proposed
§ 23.1310, Flight, Navigation, and
Powerplant Instruments. The safety
intent of § 23.1305 is to provide
crewmembers the ability to obtain the
information necessary to operate the
airplane and powerplant safely in flight.
Traditionally, the minimum was
prescribed, such as oil pressure, oil
temperature, and oil quantity for all
airplanes. The corresponding rules in
CAR 3 are 3.655 and 3.675. Some of the
regulation was redundant with the
operating rules as well as providing
prescriptive design solutions that were
assumed to achieve an acceptable level
of safety based on an assumption of
powerplant types. The prescriptive
solutions precluded finding more
effective or more economical paths to
providing acceptable safety.
Additionally, they do not facilitate
adoption of new technologies such as
electric powered airplanes. The
proposed § 23.1310, Flight, Navigation,
and Powerplant Instruments, would
maintain the safety intent of the current
rule.
iv. Proposed § 23.1315, Equipment,
Systems, and Installation
Proposed § 23.1315 would require an
applicant to examine the design and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
installation of airplane systems and
equipment, separately and in relation to
other airplane systems and equipment,
for any airplane system or equipment
whose failure or abnormal operation has
not been specifically addressed by
another requirement in this part.
Proposed § 23.1315 would require an
applicant to determine if a failure of
these systems and equipment would
prevent continued safe flight and
landing and if any other failure would
significantly reduce the capability of the
airplane or the ability of the flightcrew
to cope with adverse operating
conditions. Proposed § 23.1315 would
require an applicant to design and
install these systems and equipment,
examined separately and in relation to
other airplane systems and equipment,
such that each catastrophic failure
condition is extremely improbable, each
hazardous failure condition is extremely
remote, and each major failure
condition was remote. Proposed
§ 23.1315 would capture the safety
intent found in portions of current
§§ 23.691(g), Artificial stall barrier
system; 23.729(f), Landing gear
extension and retraction system;
23.735(d), Brakes; 23.1309, Equipment,
systems, and installations; 23.1323,
Airspeed indicating system; 23.1325,
Static pressure system; 23.1329,
Automatic pilot system; 23.1331,
Instruments using a power source;
23.1337, Powerplant instruments
installation; 23.1335, Flight director
systems; 23.1353, Storage battery design
and installation, 23.1357, Circuit
protective devices; 23.1431, Electronic
equipment; 23.1441(b), Oxygen
equipment and supply; 23.1450(b),
Chemical oxygen generators; 23.1451,
Fire protection for oxygen equipment;
and 23.1453, Protection of oxygen
equipment from rupture. The current
requirements can be traced to CAR 3,
specifically, 3.652, 3.663, 3.665, 3.667,
3.668, 3.670, 3.671, 3.672, 3.673, 3.674,
and 3.683. The foundation of the current
§ 23.1309 was derived from CAR 3.652,
which stated that ‘‘each item of
equipment, which is essential to the safe
operation of the airplane, shall be found
by the Administrator to perform
adequately the functions for which it is
to be used . . .’’. At that time, the
airworthiness requirements were based
on single-fault or fail-safe concepts. Due
to the increased use of airplanes
certificated under part 23 in the 1970s
for all-weather operation, and a pilot’s
increased reliance on installed avionic
systems and equipment, § 23.1309,
amendment 23–14 (38 FR 31816,
November 19, 1973), was issued to
provide an acceptable level of safety for
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13491
such equipment, systems, and
installations. Section 23.1309
introduced two main concepts: multiple
failure combinations as well as a single
failure had to be considered and there
must be an inverse relationship between
the likelihood of occurrence and the
severity of consequences. The premise
was that more severe consequences
should happen less often.
In addition to specific part 23 design
requirements, proposed § 23.1315
requirements would apply to any
equipment or system installed in the
airplane. This proposed section
addresses general requirements and is
not intended to supersede any specific
requirements contained in other part 23
sections. Proposed § 23.1315 would not
apply to the performance or flight
characteristics requirements of subpart
B, and structural loads and strength
requirements of subpart C and D.
However, it would apply to systems that
complied with subpart B, C, D, and E
requirements. As an example, proposed
§ 23.1315 would not apply to an
airplane’s inherent stall characteristics,
but would apply to a stick pusher
system installed to attain stall
compliance. Both current § 23.1309 and
proposed § 23.1315 rules are not
intended to add requirements to specific
rules in part 23, but to account for the
added complexity of integration and
new technologies.
This proposed regulation would
require an engineering safety analysis to
identify possible failures, interactions,
and consequences, and would require
an inverse relationship between the
probability of failures and the severity
of consequences. This would be
accomplished by requiring all of the
airplane’s systems to be reviewed to
determine if the airplane was dependent
upon a system function for continued
safe flight and landing and if a failure
of any system on the airplane would
significantly reduce the ability of the
flightcrew to cope with the adverse
operating condition. If the design of the
airplane included systems that
performed such functions, the systems
would be required to meet standards
that establish that maximum allowable
probability of that failure. Section
23.1315 would impose qualitative,
rather than quantitative probabilities of
occurrence. As the FAA determined
which quantitative values satisfied the
proposed performance standards, it
would share that information in FAA
guidance or documented means of
compliance appropriate to the
certification levels of proposed § 23.5.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13492
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
v. Proposed § 23.1320, Electrical and
Electronic System Lightning Protection
Proposed § 23.1320 would require, for
an airplane approved for IFR operations,
that each electrical or electronic system
that performed a function, the failure of
which would prevent the continued safe
flight and landing of the airplane, be
designed and installed such that the
airplane level function continues to
perform during and after the time the
airplane is exposed to lightning.
Proposed § 23.1320 would also require
these systems automatically recover
normal operation of that function in a
timely manner after the airplane is
exposed to lightning, unless the
system’s recovery conflicts with other
operational or functional requirements
of the system.
Proposed § 23.1320 would require
each electrical and electronic system
that performed a function, the failure of
which would reduce the capability of
the airplane or the ability of the
flightcrew to respond to an adverse
operating condition, be designed and
installed such that the function recovers
normal operation in a timely manner
after the airplane is exposed to
lightning.
Proposed § 23.1320 would capture the
safety intent of current § 23.1306,
Electrical and electronic system
lightning protection. The original
adoption of the rule, first introduced as
part of § 23.1309, was justified because
there was an increased use of small
airplanes in all-weather operations with
an increasing reliance on complex
systems and equipment in the modern,
complex, high-performance airplanes.
The FAA wants to facilitate the use of
systems in new airplanes that reduce
pilot workload and enhance safety. The
current requirement that all aircraft
regardless of their design or operational
limitations meet the same requirements
for lightning regardless of the potential
threat has been burdensome for the
traditional VFR-only airplane designs.
Proposed § 23.1320 would cover the
airplanes with the greatest threat of
lightning. In addition, the proposed
language clarifies that the failure
consequence of interest is at the
airplane system level, which allows
credit for design and installation
architecture.
vi. Proposed § 23.1325, High-Intensity
Radiated Fields (HIRF) Protection
Proposed § 23.1325 would require
that electrical and electronic systems
that perform a function whose failure
would prevent the continued safe flight
and landing of the airplane, be designed
and installed such that the airplane
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
level function is not adversely affected
during and after the time the airplane is
exposed to the HIRF environment.
Proposed § 23.1325 would also require
that these systems automatically recover
normal operation of that function in a
timely manner after the airplane is
exposed to the HIRF environment,
unless the system’s recovery conflicts
with other operational or functional
requirements of the system. Proposed
§ 23.1325, High-Intensity Radiated
Fields (HIRF) protection, would
incorporate the safety intent of current
§ 23.1308, High-intensity Radiated
Fields (HIRF) protection.
Before § 23.1308, amendment 23–57
(72 FR 44016, August 6, 2007), the
requirements for HIRF protection were
found in § 23.1309. The adoption of
§ 23.1308 was justified because there
was an increased use of complex
systems and equipment, including
engine and flight controls, in small
airplanes. These systems are more
susceptible to the adverse effects of
operation in the HIRF environment.
The electromagnetic HIRF
environment results from the
transmission of electromagnetic energy
from radar, radio, television, and other
ground-based, ship-borne, or airborne
radio frequency transmitters. The HIRF
environment changes as the number and
types of transmitters change. During the
1990’s, extensive studies were
conducted to define the environment
that then existed. The FAA codified this
environment in amendment 23–57 in
appendix J to part 23—HIRF
Environments and Equipment HIRF Test
Levels.
Proposed § 23.1325 would require the
applicant to address the HIRF
environment expected in service instead
of solely relying on the HIRF
environment codified in appendix J.
The current appendix J to part 23 would
become a means of compliance as the
accepted expected HIRF environment,
until other levels were accepted by the
Administrator. This would allow the
test levels to match the current threat as
the environment changes over time.
Additionally, the proposed language
would clarify that the failure
consequence of interest is at the
airplane level, which allows credit for
design and installation architecture.
vii. Proposed § 23.1330, System Power
Generation, Storage, and Distribution
Proposed § 23.1330(a) would require
that the power generation, storage, and
distribution for any system be designed
and installed to supply the power
required for operation of connected
loads during all likely operating
conditions. Also, proposed § 23.1330(b)
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
would require the design installation
ensure no single failure or malfunction
would prevent the system from
supplying the essential loads required
for continued safe flight and landing.
Proposed § 23.1330 would also require
the design and installation have enough
capacity to supply essential loads,
should the primary power source fail,
for at least 30 minutes for airplanes
certificated with a maximum altitude of
25,000 feet or less, and at least 60
minutes for airplanes certificated with a
maximum altitude over 25,000 feet.
Proposed § 23.1330 would capture the
safety intent of the current §§ 23.1310,
Power source capacity and distribution;
23.1351, General; 23.1353, Storage
battery design and installation; and
23.1357, Circuit protective devices. The
intent is to ensure airplane power
generation and the related distribution
systems are designed for adequate
capacity and safe operation under
anticipated use and in the event of a
failure or malfunction.
viii. Proposed § 23.1335, External and
Cockpit Lighting
Proposed § 23.1335 would require an
applicant to design and install all lights
to prevent adverse effects on the
performance of flightcrew duties.
Proposed § 23.1335 would require
position and anti-collision lights, if
installed, to have the intensities, flash
rate, colors, fields of coverage, and other
characteristics to provide sufficient time
for another aircraft to avoid a collision.
Proposed § 23.1335 would require
position lights, if installed, to include a
red light on the left side of the airplane,
a green light on the right side of the
airplane, spaced laterally as far apart as
practicable, and a white light facing aft,
located on an aft portion of the airplane
or on the wing tips.
Proposed § 23.1335 would require
that an applicant design and install any
taxi and landing lights, if required by
operational rules, so they provide
sufficient light for night operations. For
seaplanes or amphibian airplanes, this
section would also require riding lights
to provide a white light visible in clear
atmospheric conditions. Airplanes
moored or maneuvering on water are by
mairtime law considered watercraft;
therefore, riding lights are required for
seaplanes and amphibians during water
operations.
To encourage the installation of
internal and external lighting systems
with new safety enhancing technology
and streamline the certification process,
the FAA proposes removing most of the
current prescriptive requirements and
the detailed means of compliance for
these requirements from current part 23.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
The current prescriptive requirements
would be replaced with performancebased requirements. The FAA expects
that current means of compliance would
continue to be used for the traditional
airplane designs under part 23.
Required lighting for the operation
requested by an applicant would have to
be installed and approved as part of the
type design. The current rule requires
that interior and exterior lighting
function as intended without causing
any safety hazard in normal operation.
The proposed rule would require
external lighting to make each airplane
visible at night at a distance allowing
each pilot to maneuver in sufficient
time to avoid collision. The current rule
specifies a specific amount of light
illumination accounting for airframe
obstructions. The FAA proposes
removing this specified location and
amount of illumination because it is
more appropriate as means of
compliance. The FAA does not consider
small obstructions caused by airplane
structure to be a safety issue.
This section would capture the safety
intent of current §§ 23.1381, Instrument
lights, paragraph (c); 23.1383, Taxi and
landing lights, paragraphs (a), (b) and
(c); 23.1385, Position light system
installation, paragraphs (a), (b) and (c);
23.1387, Position light dihedral angles;
23.1389, position light distribution and
intensities; 23.1391, Minimum
intensities in the horizontal plane of
position lights; 23.1393, Minimum
intensities in any vertical plane of
position lights; 23.1395, Maximum
intensities in overlapping beams of
position lights; 23.1397, color
specifications; 23.1399, Riding light;
and 23.1401, Anticollision light system,
paragraphs (a), (a)(1), (b), (c), (d), (e),
and (f).
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
ix. Proposed § 23.1400, Safety
Equipment
Proposed § 23.1400 would require
safety and survival equipment, required
by the operating rules of this chapter, to
be reliable, readily accessible, easily
identifiable, and clearly marked to
identify its method of operation.
The FAA proposes requirements for
safety equipment needed for emergency
landings and ditching when required by
operational rules, and removal of the
duplicative rules that are found in
current part 23. Required safety
equipment would have to be installed,
located, and accessible for use in an
emergency, and secured against
emergency landing accelerations. The
proposed rule would require safety,
ditching, and survival equipment, be
reachable, plainly marked for operation,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
and not be damaged in survivable
emergency landings.
This section would capture the safety
intent of current §§ 23.1411, Safety
equipment—General, paragraphs (a) and
(b)(1); and 23.1415; Ditching equipment,
paragraphs (a), (c), and (d).
x. Proposed § 23.1405, Flight in Icing
Conditions
Proposed § 23.1405 would require an
applicant to demonstrate its ice
protection system would provide for
safe operation, if certification for flight
in icing conditions is requested.
Proposed § 23.1405 would also require
these airplanes to be protected from
stalling when the autopilot is operating
in a vertical mode. Proposed § 23.1405
would require this demonstration be
conducted in atmospheric icing
conditions specified in part 1 of
appendix C to part 25 of this chapter,
and any additional icing conditions for
which certification is requested.
Proposed § 23.1405 would capture the
safety intent of current § 23.775(a)
Windshields and windows, and
§ 23.1419, Ice protection. Proposed
§ 23.1405 would also increase safety by
adding icing conditions beyond those
specified in the current § 23.1419. The
proposed § 23.1405 would only apply to
airplanes seeking certification for flight
in icing. The current § 23.1419 only
applies to airplanes seeking certification
for flight in icing; however, ice
protection systems can be certified
without certification for flight in icing.
The current ice protection system
requirements in § 23.1419(a) would be
captured in proposed § 23.1405(a)(1).
The proposed rule would require an
applicant to show systems are adequate
in the icing conditions for which
certification is requested. As in the
current rule, ice protection systems
would have to be shown to be adequate
in the icing conditions of appendix C to
part 25. Freezing drizzle and freezing
rain icing conditions are optional icing
conditions in which the airplane may be
certificated to operate. These icing
conditions, which the FAA added to
appendix O to part 25 in amendment
25–140, are not being defined in
proposed § 23.230. The FAA determined
that the definition of these optional
icing conditions is more appropriate as
a means of compliance. Ice crystal
conditions are added to this proposal for
certain air data probes to harmonize
with EASA requirements.
The Part 23 Icing ARC
recommendations on activation and
operation of ice protection systems
would be used as a means of
compliance to proposed § 23.1405(a)(1).
This proposal would satisfy the intent of
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13493
NTSB Safety Recommendations A–07–
14 and A–07–15.
Proposed § 23.1405(a)(2) is the Part 23
Icing ARC recommendation for
airplanes certified under part 23 in icing
and is based on NTSB safety
recommendation A–10–12. The target
for this proposed rule is older airplanes
adding an autopilot for first time,
modifying certain autopilots on
airplanes with a negative service history
in icing, or significant changes that
affect performance or flight
characteristics. Proposed § 23.1405
would require, under the changed
product rule, to add proposed
§ 23.1405(a)(2) to the certification basis
without requiring the remainder of
§ 23.1405 for certain autopilot
modifications. For new airplanes, a stall
warning system that complies with
proposed § 23.230 would comply with
proposed § 23.1405(a)(2). The vertical
mode is a prescriptive requirement to
limit the applicability. Simple
autopilots such as a wing leveler would
not be affected by this requirement.
Numerous icing accidents have shown
that unrecognized airspeed loss can
occur with autopilots in altitude hold
mode or vertical speed mode.
Demonstration, as a means of
compliance, may include design and/or
analysis and does not mean natural
icing flight tests are required.
xi. Proposed § 23.1410, Pressurized
System Elements
Proposed § 23.1410 would require the
minimum burst pressure of—
• Hydraulic systems be at least 2.5
times the design operating pressure with
the proof pressure at least 1.5 times the
maximum operating pressure;
• Pressurization system elements be
at least 2.0 times, and proof pressure be
at least 1.5 times, the maximum normal
operating pressure; and
• Pneumatic system elements be at
least 3.0 times, and proof pressure be at
least 1.5 times, the maximum normal
operating pressure.
Additionally, this proposed section
would also require that other
pressurized system elements have
pressure margins that take into account
system design and operating conditions.
This section would capture the safety
intent of current §§ 23.1435, Hydraulic
system, paragraphs (a)(4) and (b);
23.1437, Accessories for multiengine
airplanes; and 23.1438, Pressurization
and pneumatic systems, paragraphs (a)
and (b).
xii. Proposed § 23.1457, Cockpit Voice
Recorders
The FAA is not proposing to revise
current § 23.1457 because amendment
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13494
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
23–58 (73 FR 12542, March 7, 2008) and
corrected on July 9, 2009 (74 FR 32799),
was written to standardize the cockpit
voice recorder rules to address the
NTSB’s recommendations (70 FR 9752,
February 28, 2005). The FAA agrees
with NTSB recommendation numbers
A–96–89, A–96–171, A–99–18, and
parts of A–99–16 and A–99–17 and
believes changing the current rule to
remove prescriptive requirements could
hinder the conduct of future accident
investigations and be detrimental to
aviation accident investigations.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
xiii. Proposed § 23.1459, Flight Data
Recorders
The FAA is not making any
substantive changes to the current
§ 23.1459 because amendment 23–58
(73 FR 12541, March 7, 2008) was
written to standardize the flight data
recorder rules to address the NTSB’s
recommendations. The FAA agrees with
NTSB recommendation numbers A–96–
89, A–96–171, A–99–18, and parts of
numbers A–99–16 and A–99–17 and
believes changing the current rule to
remove prescriptive requirements could
hinder the conduct of future accident
investigations and be detrimental to
aviation safety. Proposed
§ 23.1459(a)(1), however, is amended to
revise current references to §§ 23.1323,
Airspeed indicating system; 23.1325,
Static pressure system; and 23.1327,
Magnetic direction indicator, as those
sections are not contained in this
NPRM.
xiv. Current Subpart F Regulations
Relocated to Other Proposed Subparts
The requirement currently in
§ 23.1419(a) to comply with subpart B
requirements to show safe operating
capability is moved to proposed
§ 23.230 as recommended by the Part 23
Icing ARC and Part 23 Reorganization
ARC.
Ice protection of engine inlets would
move to proposed § 23.940, Powerplant
ice protection. The Part 23
Reorganization ARC had proposed that
§ 23.1405 include these requirements, as
well as heated pitot probe requirements
for IFR airplanes. The FAA decided to
separate them since compliance with
proposed §§ 23.940 and 23.1300 would
be required for all airplanes, whereas
compliance with § 23.1405 would be
optional. The FAA wants to avoid
potential confusion on TCDS
interpretation as to whether an airplane
is certified for flight in icing.
The requirements currently in
§ 23.1381, Instrument lights, paragraphs
(a) and (b) would be relocated to
proposed § 23.1500, Flightcrew
Interface. The requirements currently in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
§ 23.1411, Safety equipment—General,
paragraph (b)(2) would be relocated to
proposed § 23.600, Emergency
conditions.
xv. Removal of Subpart F of the Current
Regulations
When the FAA evaluated the current
regulations, it determined that the
prescriptive icing requirements in
§§ 23.1323, Airspeed indicating system,
and 23.1325, Static pressure system,
would be means of compliance to
proposed § 23.1405(a)(1). The current
requirement for a heated pitot probe or
an equivalent means on an IFR certified
and a flight in icing conditions airplane
in current § 23.1323(d) would become a
means of compliance for proposed
§ 23.1300.
The part 23 re-write ARC had
recommended that proposed § 23.1405
include the requirement for a heated
pitot probe on an IFR certified airplane,
but the FAA determined this would be
better addressed on a performance
standard under proposed § 23.1300,
because proposed § 23.1405 would only
apply to icing certified airplanes. High
altitude mixed phase and ice crystal
conditions for certain high-performance
airplanes, and ice protection
requirements for stall warning and angle
of attack would be means of
compliance. The proposed standard
would harmonize with EASA
requirements.
Current § 23.1416 would be removed
since the requirements for proper
inflation and annunciation of operation
of pneumatic boots would be covered on
a performance basis in proposed
§§ 23.1300 and 23.1305. This would
reflect that all types of ice protection
systems have annunciation
requirements, and would eliminate
unnecessary annunciations. The Part 23
Icing ARC recommended this approach.
The analysis required in the current
§ 23.1419(a), and all the requirements in
the current § 23.1419(b) and (c), would
become means of compliance to
proposed 1405(a) and would be
removed.
Current § 23.1419(d) requires a means
to detect critical ice accretions,
including night lighting. The Part 23
Icing ARC had proposed a new
§ 23.1403 to replace these ice detection
requirements, which would also address
the SLD detection required by proposed
§ 23.230. These ice detection
requirements are more appropriately
addressed as a means of compliance to
accommodate new technology. For
example, visual ice accretion detection
as a means to activate ice protection
systems is no longer necessary on some
designs, examples being primary ice
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
detection systems and icing conditions
detection systems. However, there
would remain a requirement for pilots
to detect severe ice accretions, and this
would be addressed in proposed
§ 23.230(b).
When the FAA evaluated the current
regulations, it determined that the
prescriptive requirements in §§ 23.1323,
Airspeed indicating system; 23.1325,
Static pressure system; 23.1327,
Magnetic direction indicator; 23.1329,
Automatic pilot system; 23.1335, Flight
director systems; 23.1337, Powerplant
instruments installation; 23.1353,
Storage battery design and installation;
and 23.1357, Circuit protective devices,
would be covered on a performance
basis by proposed §§ 23.1300; 23.1305;
23.1310; and 23.1315.
Current § 23.1401, Anticollision light
system, paragraph (a)(2) would be
removed as introductory material.
Current § 23.1415, ditching equipment,
paragraph (b) would be removed but
could serve as a means of compliance.
The current §§ 23.1435, Hydraulic
systems, paragraphs, (a), (a)(1), (a)(2),
(a)(3), and (c); 23.1438, Pressurization
and pneumatic systems, paragraph (c),
would be removed as prescriptive
design and means of compliance.
Current § 23.1443, Minimum mass flow
of supplemental oxygen, paragraph (d)
would be removed as a definition.
Current § 23.1445, paragraph (e) would
be removed as redundant to current
§ 91.211, paragraph (a)(3).
7. Subpart G—Flightcrew Interface and
Other Information
a. General Discussion
The FAA proposes to expand subpart
G to address not only current operating
limitations and information, but also the
concept of flightcrew interface. Based
on current technologies, the FAA
anticipates that new airplanes will
heavily rely on automation and systems
that require new and novel pilot or
flightcrew interface. The FAA is
proposing to address the pilot interface
issues found in subparts D and F with
proposed § 23.1500. Otherwise, subpart
G retains the safety requirements from
the current rules without change. Refer
to appendix 1 of this preamble for a
cross-reference table detailing how the
current regulations are addressed in the
proposed part 23 regulations.
b. Specific Discussion of Changes
i. Proposed § 23.1500, Flightcrew
Interface
Proposed § 23.1500 would require the
pilot compartment and its equipment to
allow the pilot(s) to perform their
duties, including taxi, takeoff, climb,
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
cruise, descent, approach, and landing;
and perform any maneuvers within the
operating envelope of the airplane,
without excessive concentration, skill,
alertness, or fatigue. Proposed § 23.1500
would also require an applicant to
install flight, navigation, surveillance,
and powerplant controls and displays so
qualified flightcrew could monitor and
perform all tasks associated with the
intended functions of systems and
equipment in order to make the
possibility that a flightcrew error could
result in a catastrophic event highly
unlikely. Proposed § 23.1500 would
capture the safety intent of current part
23 rules that are directly related to the
pilot or flightcrew interface with the
airplane. Interfaces include controls,
displays, and visibility requirements.
Current and anticipated technologies
that affect how the pilot interfaces with
the airplane are expected to expand
faster than other technologies. The FAA
believes that significant safety
improvements can result from the
evolution of how the pilot interfaces
with the airplane. Pilot workload is a
major factor in causing accidents, but it
is almost impossible to connect
workload-related mistakes to an
accident after the accident has
happened. Evidence from large airplane
accidents, where we have recorded data
as well as research, points to the
importance of the pilot interface and
associated mistakes as causal factors in
aircraft accidents. The smart use of
automation and phase-of-flight-based
displays could reduce pilot workload
and increase pilot awareness.
The converse is also true. Equipment
is becoming available faster than
manufacturers and the FAA can
evaluate it. Determining the safety risks
and recognizing the safety benefits of
new technology available to the pilot is
important. For this reason, the proposed
language addresses the safety issues of
the current §§ 23.699, Wing flap
position indicator; 23.745 Nose/Tail
wheel steering, 23.1303, Flight and
navigation instruments, paragraph
(g)(3); 23.1321, Arrangement and
visibility, paragraphs (a),(b),(d), and (e);
23.1311, Electronic display instrument
systems, paragraphs (a)(6) and (7);
23.771, Pilot compartment, paragraph
(a), 23.773(a) Pilot compartment view,
23.777, Cockpit controls; 23.779, Motion
and effect of cockpit controls; and
23.781, Cockpit control knob shape; are
addressed in proposed § 23.1500(a) and
(b). The proposed language would allow
the FAA to rapidly evaluate new
equipment for concentration, skill,
alertness, and fatigue against pilot
workload as is current practice. More
importantly, the FAA would remove the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
prescriptive requirements from the
current rules to allow for alternative
approaches to pilot interface that would
reduce pilot workload or increase safety.
ii. Proposed § 23.1505, Instrument
Markings, Control Markings, and
Placards
Proposed § 23.1505 would require
each airplane to display in a
conspicuous manner any placard and
instrument marking necessary for
operation. Proposed § 23.1505 would
also require an applicant to clearly mark
each cockpit control, other than primary
flight controls, as to its function and
method of operation and include
instrument marking and placard
information in the AFM. The
consolidation of these sections appears
large, but many of these sections contain
one prescriptive requirement that, in
many cases, is based on traditional
airplanes, instruments, and equipment.
iii. Proposed § 23.1510, Airplane Flight
Manual
Proposed § 23.1510 would require an
applicant to furnish an AFM with each
airplane that contains the operating
limitations and procedures,
performance information, loading
information, and any other information
necessary for the operation of the
airplane.
The proposed rules capture the
prescriptive list of information that is
considered necessary for the operation
of the traditional airplanes. The current
rules contain very prescriptive and
detailed information. Furthermore, that
level of detail assumes a traditional
airplane configuration and operation.
The FAA proposes to remove this detail
from the rule because it is more
appropriate as means of compliance.
Currently, the majority of airplanes
certificated under part 23 already use an
industry standard to develop their
AFMs—General Aviation Manufactures
Association Specification 1,
Specification for Pilot’s Operating
Handbook.26 The FAA already accepts
this industry standard for many
airplanes certificated under part 23
because it includes the information that
is currently required in part 23. The
FAA believes that allowing alternative
approaches to information would
facilitate new technology integration
into airplanes certified under part 23.
The proposed § 23.1510(d) would
capture the safety intent of the current
§§ 23.1505, Airspeed limitations, thru
23.1527, Maximum operating altitude,
specific to operating limitations and
26 See www.regulations.gov (Docket #FAA–2015–
1621).
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13495
other limitations and information
necessary for safe operation.
iv. Proposed § 23.1515, Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness
Proposed § 23.1515 would require an
applicant to prepare Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness in accordance
with proposed appendix A to this part,
that are acceptable to the Administrator,
prior to the delivery of the first airplane
or issuance of a standard certification of
airworthiness, whichever occurs later.
This proposed section would capture
the current § 23.1529 without change.
The FAA proposes renaming Appendix
G to Part 23—Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness, to Appendix A to Part
23—Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness.
8. Appendices to Part 23
a. General Discussion
Many of the appendices to part 23
contain information that the FAA
believes would be more appropriate as
a means of compliance, with the
exception of Appendix G to Part 23–
Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness. Appendices A, B, C, D,
E, F, H, and J would be removed and
appendix G would be renamed
Appendix A—Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness.
b. Specific Discussion of Changes
i. Proposed Appendix A to Part 23—
Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness
The FAA proposes renaming
Appendix G to Part 23—Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness, as Appendix
A to Part 23—Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness.
ii. Removal of Appendices to Part 23
Appendix A to Part 23—Simplified
Design Load Criteria. The FAA proposes
to remove this appendix because the
content is more appropriate for
inclusion in methods of compliance.
Appendix B to Part 23—[Reserved].
The FAA proposes to remove this
appendix because it has been reserved
since amendment 23–42. There is no
reason to include this appendix in the
proposed revision to part 23.
Appendix C to Part 23—Basic
Landing Conditions. The FAA proposes
to remove this appendix because the
content is more appropriate for
inclusion in methods of compliance.
Appendix D to Part 23—Wheel SpinUp and Spring-Back Loads. The FAA
proposes to remove this appendix
because the content is more appropriate
for inclusion in methods of compliance.
Appendix E to Part 23—[Reserved].
The FAA proposes to remove this
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13496
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
appendix because the current appendix
is reserved and contains no information.
Appendix F to Part 23—Test
Procedure. The FAA proposes to remove
this appendix because this is purely a
means of showing compliance for
materials that must comply with selfextinguishing flammability
requirements.
Appendix H to Part 23—Installation
of an Automatic Power Reserve (APR)
System. The FAA proposes to remove
this appendix because the FAA believes
that the detailed and prescriptive
language of appendix H is more
appropriate as means of compliance.
Appendix I to Part 23—Seaplane
Loads. The FAA proposes to remove
this appendix because the content is
more appropriate for inclusion in
methods of compliance.
Appendix J to Part 23—HIRF
Environments and Equipment HIRF Test
Levels. The accepted HIRF environment
is codified as appendix J to part 23—
HIRF Environments and Equipment
HIRF Test Levels. The proposed
language in § 23.1325 would revise this
to the expected HIRF environment. The
current appendix J to part 23 would
remain an accepted expected HIRF
environment until the Administrator
accepted other levels. Any new
expected HIRF environment would be
found in FAA guidance material or
other standards accepted by the
Administrator. This would allow the
certification requirement to match the
current threat agreed to over time.
Additionally, the proposed language
would clarify that the failure
consequence of interest is at the
airplane level, which allows credit for
design and installation architecture.
quality system. Accordingly, approval to
produce a modification or replacement
article under proposed § 21.9(a)(7)
would not constitute a production
approval as defined in § 21.1(b)(6). The
FAA intends to limit use of this
procedure to articles whose improper
operation or failure would not cause a
hazard. Approval would be granted to
the applicant on a case-by-case basis,
specific to the installation proposed,
accounting for potential risk and
considering the safety continuum.
B. Miscellaneous Amendments (§§ 21.9,
21.17, 21.24, 21.35, 21.50, 21.101, 35.1,
35.37, 91.205, 91.313, 91.323, 91.531,
121.310, 135.169, and Appendix E to
Part 43)
The FAA proposes amending § 21.35
by revising paragraph (b)(2) to delete the
reference to reciprocating engines and
expanding the exempted airplanes to
include all low-speed part 23 airplanes
6,000 pounds or less. This proposed
change would align the requirements for
function and reliability testing with the
proposed changes in part 23 that do not
distinguish between propulsion types.
This change would allow the FAA
flexibility to address new propulsion
types based on the changes to part 23.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
1. Production of Replacement and
Modification Articles (§ 21.9)
The FAA proposes amending § 21.9
by adding paragraph (a)(7) to provide
applicants with an alternative method to
obtain FAA approval to produce
replacement and modification articles
that are reasonably likely to be installed
on type certificated aircraft. We also
propose to revise paragraphs (b) and (c)
to specify these articles would be
suitable for use in a type certificated
product. These proposed changes would
allow an applicant to submit production
information for a specific article, but
would not require the producer of the
article to apply for approval of the
article’s design or obtain approval of its
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
2. Designation of Applicable
Regulations (§ 21.17)
The FAA proposes amending § 21.17,
by removing the reference to § 23.2,
because this section would be deleted.
The requirements in § 23.2 are currently
addressed in the operational rules.
Since § 23.2 is a retroactive rule, it is
appropriate for the requirement to be in
the operating rules. As a result, the FAA
also proposes amending § 91.205 by
revising paragraphs (b)(13) and (b)(14)
to ensure removing this requirement
would not have any effect on the
existing fleet.
3. Issuance of Type Certificate: Primary
Category Aircraft (§ 21.24)
6. Designation of Applicable
Regulations (§ 21.101)
The FAA proposes amending § 21.101
by removing the reference to § 23.2 as
this section is proposed to be deleted
and is addressed in the operating rules,
and to refer to the proposed part 23
certification levels in paragraph (c). The
current 6,000-pound reference would be
augmented by the inclusion of simple
airplanes, certification level 1 low-speed
airplanes, and certification level 2 lowspeed airplanes, in order to align the
current rules with the proposed part 23
certification levels.
Additionally, the FAA recognizes that
it may be impractical for airplanes
certified under part 23, amendment 23–
62, or prior amendments, to move up to
the latest amendment for modifications.
Section 21.101 would not be revised to
address this circumstance, as this
section allows for certification at a
lower amendment level if meeting the
current amendment is impractical. This
current provision would allow for
compliance to the certification
requirements at amendment 23–62 or
earlier when compliance to the latest
amendment of part 23 was determined
by the FAA to be impractical.
The FAA proposes amending § 21.24
by revising paragraph (a)(1)(i) to modify
the phrase as defined by § 23.49 to
include reference to amendment 23–62
(76 FR 75736, December 2,2011),
effective on January 31, 2012. This
revision is necessary to maintain a
complete definition of stall speed in this
section, as the current § 23.49 would be
removed from the proposed rule.
7. Applicability (§ 35.1)
4. Flight Tests (§ 21.35)
9. Altimeter System Test and Inspection
(Appendix E to Part 43)
5. Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness and Manufacturer’s
Maintenance Manuals Having
Airworthiness Limitations Sections
(§ 21.50)
The FAA proposes amending
§ 21.50(b) to reference § 23.1515 rather
than § 23.1529. This change is editorial
and would align with the proposed part
23 numbering convention.
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
The FAA proposes amending § 35.1
by replacing the reference to § 23.907
with proposed § 23.905(c).
8. Fatigue Limits and Evaluation
(§ 35.37)
The FAA proposes amending § 35.37
by replacing the reference to § 23.907
with proposed § 23.905(c).
The FAA proposes amending
appendix E to part 43 by revising
paragraph (a)(2) to conform with
proposed part 23 changes. This
proposed change would affect owners
and operators of part 23 certificated
airplanes in controlled airspace under
instrument flight rules who must
comply with § 91.411. Concurrent with
this rule change, AC 43–6, Altitude
Reporting Equipment and Transponder
System Maintenance and Inspection
Practices, would be revised to include a
static pressure system proof test
acceptable to the Administrator.
Additionally, while reviewing appendix
E to part 43, paragraph (a)(2), we noted
that it remains silent on parts 27 and 29
rotorcraft and Civil Air Regulations
certificated aircraft. The static pressure
system proof test in AC 43–6 ensures
the accuracy needed to meet § 91.411
requirements.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
10. Powered Civil Aircraft With
Standard Category U.S. Airworthiness
Certificates: Instrument and Equipment
Requirements (§ 91.205)
The FAA proposes amending § 91.205
by revising paragraphs (b)(13) and
(b)(14) to include the potential for
allowing other approved restraint
systems. Additionally, paragraph (b)(14)
refers to § 23.561(b)(2), which would be
retitled in the proposed revision for
structural strength limits and would be
addressed in the means of compliance.
Section 91.205(b)(16) would be deleted
and incorporated into (b)(14) with no
additional requirements. The part 23
proposal would delete references to
utility and acrobatic categories, as they
would be incorporated into the normal
categories that would be redefined into
performance-based standards.
11. Restricted Category Civil Aircraft:
Operating Limitations (§ 91.313)
The FAA proposes amending
§ 91.313(g) to include the potential for
allowing other approved restraint
systems. Additionally, paragraph (g)
includes a regulatory reference to
§ 23.561(b)(2), which would be retitled
in the proposed revision as § 23.600,
which would be accompanied by
accepted means of compliance.
Approval for a shoulder harness or
restraint system, therefore, would
require withstanding the static inertia
loads specified in § 23.600 during
emergency conditions.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
12. Increased Maximum Certification
Weights for Certain Airplanes Operated
in Alaska (§ 91.323)
The FAA proposes amending § 91.323
by removing reference to § 23.337
because this section would be revised
and consolidated with other structural
requirements. The relevant prescriptive
requirement(s) maneuvering load factors
found in § 23.337 would be added to the
regulation in § 91.323(b)(3).
13. Second in Command Requirements
(§ 91.531)
The FAA proposes amending
§ 91.531(1) and (3) to incorporate the
new risk and performance levels
proposed in this NPRM. The FAA
proposes deleting the reference to
utility, acrobatic, and commuter
categories in part 23. Other divisions
would be used to define levels of
certification for normal category
airplanes. This proposed amendment
would ensure airplanes certificated in
the commuter category in the past and
airplanes certificated in the future under
the proposed part 23 airworthiness and
performance levels would be addressed
in this rule.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
14. Additional Emergency Equipment
(§ 121.310)
The FAA proposes amending
§ 121.310(b)(2)(iii) to reflect the
reference to § 23.811(b), effective June
16, 1994. This would be an update to
the reference for conformity only. This
amendment would make no change to
the requirements of the rule.
15. Additional Airworthiness
Requirements (§ 135.169)
The FAA proposes amending
§ 135.169(b) by deleting the terms,
‘‘reciprocating-engine or turbopropellerpowered’’. The current rule limits
operation under this part to
reciprocating-engine or turbopropellerpowered small airplanes. By amending
the paragraph as proposed, other small
airplanes, regardless of propulsion type
and including turbojet-powered, would
potentially be considered for
certification under this part.
The FAA also proposes to allow a
small airplane in normal category, in
§ 135.169(b)(8), to operate within the
rules governing commuter and on
demand operations. This action would
be necessary as a result of the proposed
part 23 rules which would sunset the
commuter category for newly type
certificated airplanes and create a
normal category, certification level 4
airplane as equivalent to the commuter
category by applying to 10–19
passengers. This proposed amendment
would allow for the consideration of the
new category airplane and to ensure a
continued higher level of safety for
commercial operations. Because of the
ground-breaking nature of the part 23
proposals, the associated adjustment to
performance-based airworthiness
standards in future airplane designs and
manufacturing, and the myriad of
potential possibilities for attaining a
means of compliance for airplane type
certification, the FAA proposes to
require the new normal category
certification level 4 airplanes to meet
the current airworthiness and
performance standards of the commuter
category found in part 23 thru
amendment 23–62. These standards are
envisioned to remain as requirements
for the new normal category
certification level 4 airplanes into the
near-term future, but not the long-term.
It is intended that once the new part 23
requirements have proven successful
with the new normal category
certification levels 1, 2, and 3 airplanes,
the FAA would reconsider normal
category certification level 4 airplanes
for part 135 commercial operations.
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13497
VII. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
A. Regulatory Evaluation Summary
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 (Pub. L. 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, this 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 proposed rule.
We suggest readers seeking greater
detail read the full regulatory
evaluation, a copy of which we have
placed in the docket for this rulemaking.
In conducting these analyses, FAA
has determined that this proposed rule:
(1) Would have benefits that justify its
costs, (2) would not be an an
economically ‘‘significant regulatory
action’’ as defined in section 3(f) of
Executive Order 12866, (3) would be
‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s
Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (4)
would have a significant positive
economic impact on small entities; (5)
would not create unnecessary obstacles
to the foreign commerce of the United
States; and (6) would not impose an
unfunded mandate on state, local, or
tribal governments, or on the private
sector by exceeding the threshold
identified above. These analyses are
summarized below.
1. Total Benefits and Costs of This Rule
The following table shows the
estimated benefits and costs of the
proposed rule. The major factors driving
the expected costs of this proposal are
the additional training tasks, database
development, and documentation to
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13498
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
FAA and industry part 23 certification
engineers. Benefits consist of safety
benefits from preventing stall and spin
accidents and savings from reducing the
number of special conditions,
exemptions, and equivalent levels of
safety. If the proposed rule saves only
one human life by improving stall
characteristics and stall warnings, that
alone would result in benefits
outweighing the costs.
ESTIMATED BENEFITS AND COSTS FROM 2017 TO 2036
[2014 $ Millions]
Costs
Total ............................................................................................
Present value ..............................................................................
2. Who is potentially affected by this
rule?
The proposal would affect U.S.
manufacturers and operators of new part
23 type certificated airplanes.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
3. Assumptions
The benefit and cost analysis for the
regulatory evaluation is based on the
following factors/assumptions:
• The analysis is conducted in constant
dollars with 2014 as the base year.
• The final rule would be effective in 2017.
• The primary analysis period for costs
and benefits extends for 20 years, from 2017
through 2036. This period was selected
because annual costs and benefits will have
reached a steady state by 2036.
• Future part 23 type certifications and
deliveries are estimated from historical part
23 type certifications and deliveries.
• Costs for the new part 23 type
certifications forecasted in the ‘‘Fleet
Discussion’’ section of the regulatory
evaluation would occur in year 1 of the
analysis interval.
• Airplane deliveries from the forecasted
part 23 type certificates would start in year
5 of the analysis interval.
• The FAA uses a seven percent discount
rate for the benefits and costs as prescribed
by OMB in Circular A–4.
• The baseline for estimating the costs and
benefits of the proposed rule would be part
23, through amendment 62.
• The FAA estimates 335 FAA part 23
certification engineers would require
additional training as a result of this
proposal. The FAA assumes that the same
number of industry part 23 certification
engineers would also require additional
training as a result of this proposal.
• The FAA estimates that this proposal
would add 16 hours of training to FAA and
industry part 23 certification engineers.
• Since this training program would be online, we estimate no travel costs for the
engineers.
• FAA pay-band tables and the Bureau of
Labor Statistics (BLS) determine the hourly
wages used to estimate the costs to the FAA
and applicants.
• Using the U.S. Department of
Transportation guidance, the wage multiplier
for employee benefits is 1.17.27
27 On January 30, 2014, the DOT published a
memo on ‘‘Estimating Total Costs of Compensation
Based on Wage Rates or Salaries.’’ The memo
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
Safety benefits + cost savings = total benefits
$3.9
$3.9
$19.6 + $12.6 = $32.2.
$6.2 + $5.8 = $12.0.
4. Benefits of This Rule
The major safety benefit of this
proposed rule is to add stall
characteristics and stall warnings that
would result in airplane designs that are
more resistant to depart controlled flight
inadvertently. The largest number of
accidents for small airplanes is a stall or
departure-based LOC in flight. This
proposal would also have cost savings
by streamlining the certification process
and encouraging new and innovative
technology. Streamlining the
certification process would reduce the
issuance of special conditions,
exemptions, and equivalent level of
safety findings.
TOTAL COST SUMMARY BY
CATEGORY—Continued
Type of cost
Total costs
(2014$) and
P.V.
Total Costs ....................
3,920,106
* These numbers are subject to rounding
error.
B. Initial Regulatory Flexibility
Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980
(Pub. L. 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
5. Costs of This Rule
informational requirements to the scale
of the businesses, organizations, and
The proposed rules major costs are
governmental jurisdictions subject to
the engineer training costs and the
regulation. To achieve this principle,
certification database creation costs.
Additional costs would also accrue from agencies are required to solicit and
consider flexible regulatory proposals
the proposed controllability and stall
sections that would increase scope over and to explain the rationale for their
actions to assure that such proposals are
current requirements and manual
given serious consideration.’’ The RFA
upgrade costs.
covers a wide-range of small entities,
In the following table, we summarize
including small businesses, not-forthe total estimated compliance costs by
profit organizations, and small
category. The FAA notes that since we
governmental jurisdictions.
assumed that all costs occurred in Year
Agencies must perform a review to
1 of the analysis interval, the 2014determine whether a rule will have a
dollar costs equal the present value
significant economic impact on a
costs.
substantial number of small entities. If
TOTAL COST SUMMARY BY CATEGORY the agency determines that it will, the
agency must prepare a regulatory
flexibility analysis as described in the
Total costs
RFA.
Type of cost
(2014$) and
P.V.
The FAA believes that this proposed
rule could have a significant economic
§ 23.200 Controllability .........
$276,939
impact on a substantial number of
§ 23.215 Stall characteristics,
stall warning, and spins ....
500,000 entities because we believe that this rule
Engineer Training Costs .......
1,149,418 could enable the creation of new part 23
Certification Database Costs
1,293,750 type certificates and new manufacturers.
Manual Upgrade Costs .........
700,000 The FAA has been working with U.S.
and foreign small aircraft manufacturers
since 2007 to review the life cycle of
part 23 airplanes and determine what
directs the FAA that when a rule requires
needed improvement.
incremental hours per existing employee, the wage/
salary multiplier is of smaller magnitude because
The purpose of this analysis is to
not all categories of employer provided benefits
provide the reasoning underlying the
increase with additional hours worked by an
FAA determination.
individual employee.
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13499
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Under Section 603(b) of the RFA, the
initial analysis must address:
• Description of reasons the agency is
considering the action;
• Statement of the legal basis and
objectives for the proposed rule;
• Description of the record keeping and
other compliance requirements of the
proposed rule;
• All federal rules that may duplicate,
overlap, or conflict with the proposed rule;
• Description and an estimated number of
small entities to which the proposed rule will
apply; and
• Describe alternatives considered.
1. Reasons Why the Rule Is Being
Proposed
The FAA proposes this action to
amend the airworthiness standards for
new part 23 type certificated airplanes
to reflect the current needs of the small
airplane industry, accommodate future
trends, address emerging technologies,
and enable the creation of new part 23
manufacturers and new type certificated
airplanes. The proposed changes to part
23 are necessary to eliminate the current
workload of exemptions, special
conditions, and equivalent levels of
safety findings necessary to certificate
new part 23 airplanes. These proposed
part 23 changes would also promote
safety by enacting new regulations for
controllability and stall standards and
promote new technologies in part 23
airplanes.
2. Statement of the Legal Basis and
Objectives
The FAMRA required the
Administrator, in consultation with the
aviation industry, to assess the aircraft
certification and approval process. In
addition, the SARA directs the FAA to
create performance-based regulations for
small airplanes and provide for the use
of industry developed consensus
standards to allow flexibility in the
certification of new technology.
Accordingly, this proposed rule
would amend Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations to revise the
airworthiness standards for small
airplanes by removing current
prescriptive design requirements and
replacing those requirements with risk
and performance-based airworthiness
standards.
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. Under
that section, the FAA is charged with
promoting safe flight of civil airplanes
in air commerce by prescribing
minimum standards required in the
interest of safety for the design and
performance of airplanes. This
regulation is within the scope of that
authority because it prescribes new
performance-based safety standards for
the design of normal category airplanes.
3. Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping
and Other Requirements
The FAA expects no more than
minimal new reporting and
recordkeeping compliant requirements
would result from this proposed rule
because the prescriptive nature of part
23 would be in other FAA approved
documents where future technology can
readily be adopted into the regulatory
framework. The FAA requests comment
regarding the anticipated reduction in
paperwork and recordkeeping burdens
that may result from this revision.
4. Overlapping, Duplicative, or
Conflicting Federal Rules
The proposed rule would not overlap,
duplicate, or conflict with existing
federal rules.
5. Estimated Number of Small Firms
Potentially Impacted
Under the RFA, the FAA must
determine whether a proposed or final
rule significantly affects a substantial
number of small entities. This
determination is typically based on
small entity size and cost thresholds
that vary depending on the affected
industry. Using the size standards from
the Small Business Administration for
Air Transportation and Aircraft
Manufacturing, we defined companies
as small entities if they have fewer than
1,500 employees.28
There are seven U.S. owned aircraft
manufacturers who delivered part 23
airplanes in the 1998–2013 analysis
interval. These manufacturers are
Adam, American Champion, Cessna,
Hawker Beechcraft, Maule, Quest, and
Sino-Swearingen.
Using information provided by the
Internet filings and news reports,
manufacturers that are subsidiary
businesses of larger businesses,
manufacturers that are foreign owned,
and businesses with more than 1,500
employees were eliminated from the list
of small entities. Cessna and Hawker
Beechcraft are businesses with more
than 1,500 employees. For the
remaining businesses, we obtained
company revenue and employment from
the above sources.
The base year for the final rule is
2014. Although the FAA forecasts traffic
and air carrier fleets, we cannot
determine either the number of new
entrants or who will be in the part 23
airplane manufacturing business in the
future. Therefore, we use current U.S.
part 23 airplane manufacturers’ revenue
and employment in order to determine
the number of small entities this
proposed rule would affect.
The methodology discussed above
resulted in the following list of five U.S.
part 23 airplane manufacturers, with
less than 1,500 employees.
Number of
employees
Manufacturer
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Part
Part
Part
Part
Part
23
23
23
23
23
Manufacturer
Manufacturer
Manufacturer
Manufacturer
Manufacturer
1
2
3
4
5
............................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................
............................................................................................................................................
From this list of small entity U.S.
airplane manufacturers, there are three
manufacturers currently producing part
23 reciprocating engine airplanes; only
one manufacturer producing turboprops
and only one producing turbojets. The
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
$110,000
7,000,000
35,000,000
34,000,000
97,000
single manufacturer producing a part 23
turbojet has not delivered an airplane
since 2009 and is still working on
28 13 CFR 121.201, Size Standards Used to Define
Small Business Concerns, Sector 48–49
Transportation, Subsector 481 Air Transportation.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
2
65
75
175
2
Annual
revenue
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13500
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
acquiring the means to start up its
production line again. One of the
manufacturers producing a part 23
reciprocating engine airplane has not
delivered an airplane since 2007 and is
working on acquiring the means to start
up their production line again. The FAA
is not aware that either of these
manufacturers is considering a new
airplane for part 23 type certification in
the future and therefore this proposed
rulemaking would most likely not add
costs to these two manufacturers
because the proposed rule only affects
new part 23 type certificates.
For the remaining two reciprocating
engine part 23 airplane manufacturers,
their last type certificates were issued in
1961 and 1970. The 1961 type certificate
was issued for the only airplane this
manufacturer produces and the
manufacturer with the 1970 type
certificate produces one other airplane
that was type certificated in 1941. The
last small entity manufacturer produces
only turboprop airplanes and it started
delivering airplanes in 2007. Again, the
FAA is not aware that any of these
manufacturers is considering a new
airplane for part 23 type certification in
the future and therefore this proposed
rulemaking would most likely not add
costs for it.
While this rulemaking may enable the
creation of new manufacturers, the FAA
is not aware of any new small entity
part 23 manufacturers who want a type
certification in the future for a new part
23 airplane. However, by simplifying
and lowering the costs for certification
of new small airplanes, barriers to entry
may be lowered and thus new
manufacturers may emerge.
6. Cost and Affordability for Small
Entities
In 2009, a joint FAA/industry team
finalized the Part 23 CPS. This proposed
rulemaking resulted from this study by
the recommendation to use consensus
standards to supplement the regulatory
language. Since then, the FAA and the
part 23 industry have worked together
to develop common part 23 airplane
certification requirements for this
rulemaking. In 2011, with the Part 23
CPS as a foundation, the FAA formed
the Part 23 Reorganization ARC. The
ARC consisted of large and small entity
domestic and international businesses.
We contacted the part 23 airplane
manufacturers, the ARC, and GAMA for
specific cost estimates for each section
change for the rule and they all believe
that this proposed rule would have a
minimal cost impact on their operations
and in many cases, would have
significant cost savings by streamlining
the part 23 type certification process.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
Many of the ARC members collaborated
and provided a joint cost estimate for
the proposed rule.
The ARC has informed us that the
proposed rule would save the
manufacturers design time for the
certification of part 23 airplanes by
reducing the number of exemptions,
equivalent level of safety findings and
special conditions required to
incorporate new and future technology
into their new airplane certifications.
The proposed rule would also require
manuals to be updated and database
development. We expect these updates
to be minimal and request commen on
these anticipated costs and overall
reduction in paperwork burden.
The ARC has also informed us that
every other section of this proposed rule
would be cost-neutral since the majority
of the prescriptive requirements in part
23 would be moved from part 23. The
FAA expects that these current
requirements would form the basis for
consensus standards that would be used
as a means of compliance to the
proposed performance based
regulations.
The FAA expects this proposed rule
could have a positive economic impact
to small entities because it would enable
new businesses to produce new part 23
type certificated airplanes while
maintaining a safe operating
environment in the NAS. This proposal
is based on the ARC’s recommendations
and would allow for the use of
consensus standards that have been
developed in partnership with industry.
Therefore, the FAA believes that this
proposed rule could have a positive
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of entities.
7. Alternative Analysis
a. Alternative 1
The FAA would continue to issue
special conditions, exemptions, and
equivalent level of safety findings to
certificate part 23 airplanes. As this
approach would not follow
congressional direction, we choose not
to continue with the status quo.
b. Alternative 2
The FAA would continue to enforce
the current regulations that affect stall
and controllability. The FAA rejected
this alternative because the accident rate
for part 23 airplanes identified a safety
issue that had to be addressed.
c. Alternative 3
The FAA notes that a multi-engine
part 23 aircraft manufacturer could
decide it wants to comply with
§ 23.200(b) by making the airplane
capable of climbing after a critical loss
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
by installing larger engines. But this is
a very expensive alternative that would
raise certification costs and operating
costs and we believe that part 23 aircraft
manufacturers would not make the
airplane capable of climbing after a
critical loss by installing larger engines.
The FAA solicits comments regarding
this determination.
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 as
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 proposed rule
and determined that the standards are
necessary for aviation safety and would
not create unnecessary obstacles to the
foreign commerce of the United States.
D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates
Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 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
$155.0 million in lieu of $100 million.
This proposed 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
information requirements for aircraft
certification are covered by existing
OMB No. 2120–0018. Burdens
associated with special conditions,
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13501
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
ELOS, and exemptions are not
quantified in this collection because the
need to seek relief under one of these
options is dependent on each applicant
and is difficult to quantify. It is
expected that this rulemaking would
reduce the number of special
conditions, ELOS, and exemptions filed,
thus reducing paperwork and
processing time for both the FAA and
industry. It would also maintain the
fundamental safety requirements from
the current part 23 regulations but allow
more flexibility in airplane designs,
faster adoption of safety enhancing
technology, and reduce the regulatory
cost burden. To estimate savings driven
by this change, the FAA counted the
special conditions, ELOS, and
exemption applications submitted to the
FAA for part 23 aircraft between 2012
and 2013 and divided the number by
two years for an average of 47
applications per year.29 The ARC report
offered a similar average of 37
applications per year.30 Additionally,
the FAA counted the number of pages
per application for all 47 applications to
obtain an average number of pages per
application. For special conditions,
there were approximately 21 pages, 16
pages for an exemption, and 15 pages
per ELOS application. The FAA
assumes that the applicant and each
FAA office that reviews the application
spend 8 hours on research,
coordination, and review per page. The
ARC also noted ‘‘an ELOS finding or
exemption can take the FAA between 4
to 12 months to develop and approve.
The applicant spends roughly the same
amount of time as the FAA in proposing
what they need and responding to FAA
questions for SC, exemption, or
ELOS.’’ 31
The number of applications is
multiplied by the number of pages and
by the hourly wage for the applicant and
different FAA offices to account for the
cost to the FAA and the applicant. The
estimated hourly wage is $74.10 for a
Small Airplane Directorate employee,32
$50.75 for an Aircraft Certificate Office
employee,33 and $60.58 for an
engineer 34 employed by the applicant.
Annual cost equals the sum of the
associated costs of special conditions,
exemptions, plus equivalent level of
safety. Yearly cost totals roughly
$502,469 for the Small Airplane
Directorate, $344,172 for Aircraft
Certificate Offices, and $410,823 for the
applicants. Tables 1, 2, and 3 show cost
by office and applicant as well as by
special condition, exemption, and
ELOS.
TABLE 1—SAVINGS FROM SPECIAL CONDITIONS (SC) *
Part 23 Section
Average
number of SC
(2012–2013)
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
143 ...............................
171 ...............................
173 ...............................
175 ...............................
177 ...............................
251 ...............................
361 ...............................
562 ...............................
572 ...............................
573 ...............................
574 ...............................
613 ...............................
627 ...............................
629 ...............................
901 ...............................
939 ...............................
951 ...............................
961 ...............................
973 ...............................
977 ...............................
1141 .............................
1301 .............................
1305 .............................
1308 .............................
1309 .............................
1329 .............................
1337 .............................
1521 .............................
1557 .............................
3Pt Restraint with Airbag ............................
Inflatable Restraint .......
Electronic Engine Controls ...........................
Average
number of
pages
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Man-hours
FAA ACO
Savings
Man-hours
Applicant
Savings
Man-hours
Savings
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
1
1
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.5
1
0.5
1
1
1
1.5
0.5
0.5
1
0.5
1
0.5
0.5
1
1
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
20.8
83
83
83
83
83
83
166
166
83
83
83
83
83
250
166
83
166
166
166
250
83
83
166
83
166
83
83
166
166
$6,165
6,165
6,165
6,165
6,165
6,165
12,330
12,330
6,165
6,165
6,165
6,165
6,165
18,495
12,330
6,165
12,330
12,330
12,330
18,495
6,165
6,165
12,330
6,165
12,330
6,165
6,165
12,330
12,330
83
83
83
83
83
83
166
166
83
83
83
83
83
250
166
83
166
166
166
250
83
83
166
83
166
83
83
166
166
$4,223
4,223
4,223
4,223
4,223
4,223
8,445
8,445
4,223
4,223
4,223
4,223
4,223
12,668
8,445
4,223
8,445
8,445
8,445
12,668
4,223
4,223
8,445
4,223
8,445
4,223
4,223
8,445
8,445
83
83
83
83
83
83
166
166
83
83
83
83
83
250
166
83
166
166
166
250
83
83
166
83
166
83
83
166
166
$5,040
5,040
5,040
5,040
5,040
5,040
10,081
10,081
5,040
5,040
5,040
5,040
5,040
15,121
10,081
5,040
10,081
10,081
10,081
15,121
5,040
5,040
10,081
5,040
10,081
5,040
5,040
10,081
10,081
0.5
0.5
20.8
20.8
83
83
6,165
6,165
83
83
4,223
4,223
83
83
5,040
5,040
0.5
20.8
83
6,165
83
4,223
83
5,040
29 https://my.faa.gov/org/linebusiness/avs/offices/
air/tools/cert.html.
30 A report from the 14 CFR part 23
Reorganization Aviation Rulemaking Committee to
the Federal Aviation Administration;
Recommendation for increasing the safety of small
general aviation airplanes certificated to 14 CFR
part 23, June 5, 2013, Table 7.1—Special
Conditions, Exemptions, Equivalent Safety
Findings, Page 55.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
FAA SAD
Jkt 238001
31 Ibid.,
54.
FAA Bay Band, Average K Band Salary
(Rest of the U.S.) plus wage multiplier for benefits
https://employees.faa.gov/org/staffoffices/ahr/
program_policies/policy_guidance/hr_policies/
hrpm/comp/comp_ref/2014payadjustment/.
33 2014 FAA Bay Band, Average I Band Salary
(Rest of the U.S.) plus wage multiplier for benefits
https://employees.faa.gov/org/staffoffices/ahr/
32 2014
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
program_policies/policy_guidance/hr_policies/
hrpm/comp/comp_ref/2014payadjustment/.
34 National Occupational Employment and Wage
Estimates United States, May 2014; Aerospace
Engineer mean hourly wage, NAIC code 17–2011
plus wage multiplier for benefits https://
www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#17-0000. A
more detailed discussion is provided in the ‘‘Costs’’
section below.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13502
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
TABLE 1—SAVINGS FROM SPECIAL CONDITIONS (SC) *—Continued
Part 23 Section
Average
number of SC
(2012–2013)
Average
number of
pages
FAA SAD
Man-hours
FAA ACO
Savings
Man-hours
Applicant
Savings
Man-hours
Savings
Fuel Jettisoning ............
Load Alleviation System
Side Facing Seat with
Airbag .......................
0.5
0.5
20.8
20.8
83
83
6,165
6,165
83
83
4,223
4,223
83
83
5,040
5,040
0.5
20.8
83
6,165
83
4,223
83
5,040
Totals ....................
24.5
728
4077
302,080
4077
206,914
4077
246,983
* These numbers are subject to rounding error.
TABLE 2—SAVINGS FROM EXEMPTIONS *
Part 23 Section
Average
number
exemptions
(2012–2013)
Average
number of
pages
FAA SAD
Man-hours
FAA ACO
Savings
Man-hours
Applicant
Savings
Man-hours
Savings
1359 .............................
1549 .............................
177 ...............................
49 .................................
562 ...............................
1419 .............................
0.5
0.5
0.5
1
1
0.5
15.6
15.6
15.6
15.6
15.6
15.6
62.4
62.4
62.4
124.8
124.8
62.4
$4,624
4,624
4,624
9,247
9,247
4,624
62
62
62
125
125
62
$3,167
3,167
3,167
6,334
6,334
3,167
62
62
62
125
125
62
$3,780
3,780
3,780
7,561
7,561
3,780
Totals ....................
4
94
499
36,989
499
25,336
499
30,243
* These numbers are subject to rounding error.
TABLE 3—SAVINGS FROM EQUIVALENT LEVEL OF SAFETY (ELOS) *
Part 23 Section
Average
number ELOS
(2012–2013)
Average
number of
pages
FAA SAD
Man-hours
FAA ACO
Savings
Man-hours
Applicant
Savings
Savings
Man-hours
145 ...............................
207 ...............................
672 ...............................
777 ...............................
779 ...............................
781 ...............................
807 ...............................
815 ...............................
841 ...............................
973 ...............................
1092 .............................
1145 .............................
1305 .............................
1311 .............................
1353 .............................
1357 .............................
1397 .............................
1401 .............................
1419 .............................
1443 .............................
1505 .............................
1545 .............................
1549 .............................
1
1
0.5
1.5
0.5
1.5
0.5
0.5
1
0.5
0.5
1
1.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
2.5
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
14.9
119.2
119.2
59.6
178.8
59.6
178.8
59.6
59.6
119.2
59.6
59.6
119.2
178.8
59.6
59.6
59.6
59.6
59.6
59.6
59.6
59.6
59.6
298
$8,832
8,832
4,416
13,249
4,416
13,249
4,416
4,416
8,832
4,416
4,416
8,832
13,249
4,416
4,416
4,416
4,416
4,416
4,416
4,416
4,416
4,416
22,081
119
119
60
179
60
179
60
60
119
60
60
119
179
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
298
$6,050
6,050
3,025
9,075
3,025
9,075
3,025
3,025
6,050
3,025
3,025
6,050
9,075
3,025
3,025
3,025
3,025
3,025
3,025
3,025
3,025
3,025
15,125
119
119
60
179
60
179
60
60
119
60
60
119
179
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
298
$7,221
7,221
3,611
10,832
3,611
10,832
3,611
3,611
7,221
3,611
3,611
7,221
10,832
3,611
3,611
3,611
3,611
3,611
3,611
3,611
3,611
3,611
18,054
Totals ....................
19
343
2205
163,400
2205
111,923
2205
133,597
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
* These numbers are subject to rounding error.
Using these yearly cost estimates, over
20 years $25.1 million in man-hours
would be spent on applying for and
processing special conditions,
exemptions, and ELOS. However under
the proposed rule, the FAA believes that
the need to demonstrate compliance
through special conditions, exemptions,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
or ELOS would largely be eliminated.
Instead new products will simply need
to demonstrate compliance by following
consensus standards acceptable to the
Administrator, or by submitting their
own novel demonstrations of
compliance. As a conservative estimate,
the FAA estimates that special
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
conditions, exemptions, and ELOS
would be reduced by half for a savings
to the FAA and applicant of roughly
$12.6 million ($5.8 million present
value). Savings by year is shown in the
chart below. The FAA asks for comment
regarding the amount of reduction in the
alternative means of compliance.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
In addition to this savings, there
would also be additional paperwork
burden associated with proposed
§ 23.200. As proposed, this provision
could result in a change to a limitation
or a performance number in the flight
manual, which would reqire an update
to the training courseware or flight
manual. Industry believes that this
proposed change could cost from
$100,000 to $150,000. Therefore, the
FAA uses $125,000 (($100,000 +
$150,000)/2) as an average cost for this
proposed change.
There would also be additional
paperwork associated with this
requirement that is not part of the costs
discussed above. The FAA estimates the
paperwork costs for these proposed
provisions by multiplying the number of
hours the FAA estimates for each page
of paperwork, by the number of pages
for the training courseware, or flight
manual, by the hourly rate of the person
responsible for the update. The Small
Aircraft Directorate of the FAA provided
average hourly times and the number of
additional pages of paperwork the
proposal would add. The FAA estimates
that this section would add a total of
four pages to the training courseware
and flight manual. The FAA also
estimates that it would take a part 23
certification engineer eight hours to
complete the one page required for each
new type certification. The eight hours
to complete a page includes the
research, coordination, and review each
document requires. Therefore, the FAA
estimates the total paperwork costs for
proposed controllability section would
be about $1,939 (8 hours * 4 pages *
$60.58 per hour) in 2014 dollars.
The FAA is expecting part 23 airplane
manufacturers to update their
engineering procedures manuals to
reflect the changes from this proposed
rulemaking. However, most of the
engineering procedures manuals are not
written around the requirements of part
23, but around the requirements of part
21. Since the part 23 changes would
have minimal impact on the part 21
requirements, there should be little
change in the engineering procedures
manuals. Conversations with industry
indicate that there may need to be some
changes to the engineering manuals to
describe how the accepted means of
compliance must be related to the
13503
regulations. Depending on the
complexity of each company’s manual,
industry estimates that these changes
could run from about $50,000 up to
$200,000. This would be a one-time cost
per new type certification.
Since the FAA is unable to determine
the complexity of each company’s
manual, we assume that the
manufacturers of the two new part 23
reciprocating engine airplane type
certifications, discussed in the ‘‘Fleet
Discussion’’ section of the regulatory
impact analysis, would spend $50,000
to make the changes to the engineering
manual. We also assume that the one
new part 23 turboprop airplane
certification and the two new part 23
turbojet airplane certifications,
discussed in the ‘‘Fleet Discussion’’
section, would use the more complex
and costly approach of $200,000.
The FAA notes that either the simple
approach or the more complex approach
to updating the manuals could also
either take place in-house or could be
contracted out to a consultant.
Table 4 shows the total costs for the
proposed changes to the controllability
section.
TABLE 4—ESTIMATE COSTS FOR UPDATING ENGINEERING MANUALS
[2014 $]
Number of
estimated
new type
certificates
Airplane
Simple
approach
Complex
approach
Total
Recip ................................................................................................................................
Turboprop ........................................................................................................................
Turbojet ............................................................................................................................
2
1
2
$50,000
0
0
$0
200,000
200,000
$100,000
200,000
400,000
Total ..........................................................................................................................
....................
....................
....................
700,000
* These numbers are subject to rounding error.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
F. International Compatibility and
Cooperation
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 the following
differences with these proposed
regulations. The ICAO Standards for
small airplanes use weight and
propulsion to differentiate between
some requirements. The proposed
regulations use certification levels and
performance to differentiate between
some requirements. Furthermore, part
23 will still allow the certification of
airplanes up to 19,000 pounds. If this
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
proposal is adopted, the FAA intends to
file these differences with ICAO.
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
CAAs by aligning the revised part 23
standards with the new CS–23
standards that are being developed
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
concurrently by EASA. Several other
CAAs are participating in this effort and
intend to either adopt the new part 23
or CS–23 regulations or revise their
airworthiness standards to align with
these new regulations.
The Part 23 Reorganization ARC
included participants from several
foreign CAAs and international
members from almost every GA
manufacturer of both airplanes and
avionics. It also included several LightSport Aircraft manufacturers who are
interested in certificating their products
using the airworthiness standards
contained in part 23. The rulemaking
and means of compliance documents
are international efforts. Authorities
from Europe, Canada, Brazil, China, and
New Zealand all are working to produce
similar rules. These rules, while not
identical, are intended to allow the use
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13504
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
of the same set of industry developed
means of compliance. Industry has told
that FAA that it is very costly to address
the differences that some contrived
means of compliance imposes. If there
is substantial agreement between the
major CAAs to use the same industry
means of compliance document, then
U.S. manufactures expect a significant
saving for exporting their products.
Furthermore, this project is a
harmonization project between the FAA
and EASA.
EASA has worked a parallel
rulemaking program for CS–23. The
FAA provided comments to the EASA
A–NPA The EASA and other authorities
will have an opportunity to comment on
this NPRM when it is published. These
efforts will allow the FAA, EASA and
other authorities to work toward a
harmonized set of regulations when the
final rules are published.
G. Environmental Analysis
FAA Order 1050.1F 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 5–6.6 and involves no
extraordinary circumstances.
H. Regulations Affecting Intrastate
Aviation in Alaska
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Section 1205 of the FAA
Reauthorization Act of 1996 (110 Stat.
3213) requires the Administrator, when
modifying 14 CFR regulations in a
manner affecting intrastate aviation in
Alaska, to consider the extent to which
Alaska is not served by transportation
modes other than aviation, and to
establish appropriate regulatory
distinctions. Because this proposed rule
would apply to GA airworthiness
standards, it could, if adopted, affect
intrastate aviation in Alaska. The FAA,
therefore, specifically requests
comments on whether there is
justification for applying the proposed
rule differently in intrastate operations
in Alaska.
VIII. Executive Order Determination
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this proposed
rule under the principles and criteria of
Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
agency has determined that this action
would 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, would not have Federalism
implications.
B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations
That Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use
The FAA analyzed this proposed 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 would not
be a ‘‘significant energy’’ action under
the executive order and would not be
likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy.
IX. Additional Information
A. Comments Invited
The FAA invites interested persons to
participate in this rulemaking by
submitting written comments, data, or
views. The agency also invites
comments relating to the economic,
environmental, energy, or federalism
impacts that might result from adopting
the proposals in this document. The
most helpful comments reference a
specific portion of the proposal, explain
the reason for any recommended
change, and include supporting data. To
ensure the docket does not contain
duplicate comments, commenters
should send only one copy of written
comments, or if comments are filed
electronically, commenters should
submit only one time.
The FAA will file in the docket all
comments it receives, as well as a report
summarizing each substantive public
contact with FAA personnel concerning
this proposed rulemaking. Before acting
on this proposal, the FAA will consider
all comments it receives on or before the
closing date for comments. The FAA
will consider comments filed after the
comment period has closed if it is
possible to do so without incurring
expense or delay. The agency may
change this proposal in light of the
comments it receives.
Proprietary or Confidential Business
Information: Commenters should not
file proprietary or confidential business
information in the docket. Such
information must be sent or delivered
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
directly to the person identified in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section of this document, and marked as
proprietary or confidential. If submitting
information on a disk or CD–ROM, mark
the outside of the disk or CD–ROM, and
identify electronically within the disk or
CD–ROM the specific information that
is proprietary or confidential.
Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), if the FAA is
aware of proprietary information filed
with a comment, the agency does not
place it in the docket. It is held in a
separate file to which the public does
not have access, and the FAA places a
note in the docket that it has received
it. If the FAA receives a request to
examine or copy this information, it
treats it as any other request under the
Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C.
552). The FAA processes such a request
under Department of Transportation
procedures found in 49 CFR part 7.
B. Availability of Rulemaking
Documents
An electronic copy of rulemaking
documents may be obtained from the
Internet by—
1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking
Portal (https://www.regulations.gov);
2. Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and
Policies Web page at https://
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies or
3. Accessing the Government Printing
Office’s Web page at https://
www.gpo.gov/fdsys/.
Copies may also be obtained by
sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of
Rulemaking, ARM–1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or
by calling (202) 267–9680. Commenters
must identify the docket or notice
number of this rulemaking.
All documents the FAA considered in
developing this proposed rule,
including economic analyses and
technical reports, may be accessed from
the Internet through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal referenced in item
(1) above.
Appendix 1 to the Preamble—Current
to Proposed Regulations CrossReference Table
The below cross-reference table is
intended to permit easy access from
proposed to current regulations. The
preamble is organized topical, sectionby-section, proposed to current
regulations. This table should assist the
reader in following the section
discussions contained in the preamble.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13505
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Current section
Title
Proposed section
Proposed title
Subpart A—General
23.1 .....................
23.2 .....................
23.3 .....................
Applicability ..................................................
Special retroactive requirements .................
Airplane categories ......................................
......................................................................
23.1 ............................................
....................................................
23.5 ............................................
23.10 ..........................................
Applicability.
—Deleted—
Certification of normal category airplanes.
Accepted means of compliance.
Subpart B—Flight
23.21
23.23
23.25
23.29
...................
...................
...................
...................
23.31 ...................
23.33 ...................
23.45 ...................
23.49 ...................
23.51 ...................
23.53 ...................
23.55 ...................
23.57 ...................
23.59 ...................
23.61 ...................
23.63 ...................
23.65 ...................
23.66 ...................
23.67 ...................
23.69 ...................
23.71 ...................
23.73 ...................
23.75 ...................
23.77 ...................
23.141 .................
23.143 .................
23.145
23.147
23.149
23.151
23.153
23.155
23.157
23.161
23.171
23.173
23.175
23.177
23.179
23.181
23.201
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
23.100
23.100
23.100
23.100
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
Weight
Weight
Weight
Weight
23.100
23.900
23.105
23.110
23.115
23.115
23.115
23.115
23.115
23.115
23.120
23.120
23.125
23.120
23.125
23.125
23.130
23.130
23.120
23.200
23.200
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
Weight and center of gravity.
Powerplant installation.
Performance.
Stall Speed.
Takeoff performance.
Takeoff performance.
Takeoff performance.
Takeoff performance.
Takeoff performance.
Takeoff performance.
Climb.
Climb.
Climb.
Climb.
Climb.
Climb.
Landing.
Landing.
Climb.
Controllability.
Controllability.
23.200
23.200
23.200
23.200
23.200
23.200
23.200
23.205
23.210
23.210
23.210
23.210
23.210
23.210
23.215
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
Controllability.
Controllability.
Controllability.
Controllability.
Controllability.
Controllability.
Controllability.
Trim.
Stability.
Stability.
Stability.
Stability.
Stability.
Stability.
Stall characteristics, stall warning, and
spins.
Stall characteristics, stall warning, and
spins.
Stall characteristics, stall warning, and
spins.
Stall characteristics, stall warning, and
spins.
Ground handling.
Ground handling.
Ground handling.
Ground handling.
Ground handling.
Vibration, buffeting, and high-speed characteristics.
Vibration, buffeting, and high-speed characteristics.
Vibration, buffeting, and high-speed characteristics.
Performance and flight characteristics requirements for flight in icing conditions.
23.207 .................
Turning Flight and accelerated turning
stalls.
Stall Warning ...............................................
23.215 ........................................
23.221 .................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
23.203 .................
Proof of compliance ....................................
Load distribution limits .................................
Weight limits ................................................
Empty weight and corresponding center of
gravity.
Removable ballast .......................................
Propeller speed and pitch limits ..................
Performance—General ................................
Stalling speed ..............................................
Takeoff speeds ............................................
Takeoff performance ...................................
Accelerate-stop distance .............................
Takeoff path ................................................
Takeoff distance and takeoff run ................
Takeoff flight path ........................................
Climb: General ............................................
Climb: All engines operating .......................
Takeoff climb: one engine inoperative ........
Climb: One engine inoperative ....................
Enroute climb/descent .................................
Glide: single engine airplanes .....................
Reference landing approach speed ............
Landing distance .........................................
Balked landing .............................................
Flight Characteristics—General ..................
Controllability and Maneuverability—General.
Longitudinal control .....................................
Directional and lateral control .....................
Minimum control speed ...............................
Acrobatic maneuvers ...................................
Control during landings ...............................
Elevator control force in maneuvers ...........
Rate of roll ...................................................
Trim .............................................................
Stability—General ........................................
Static longitudinal stability ...........................
Demonstration of static longitudinal stability
Static directional and lateral stability ...........
Instrument stick force measurements .........
Dynamic stability .........................................
Wings level stall ..........................................
23.215 ........................................
Spinning .......................................................
23.215 ........................................
23.231
23.233
23.235
23.237
23.239
23.251
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
Longitudinal stability and control .................
Directional stability and control ...................
Operation on unpaved surfaces ..................
Operation on water ......................................
Spray characteristics ...................................
Vibration and buffeting ................................
23.220
23.220
23.220
23.220
23.220
23.225
23.253 .................
High speed characteristics ..........................
23.225 ........................................
23.255 .................
Out of trim characteristics ...........................
23.225 ........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
23.230 ........................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
and
and
and
and
14MRP2
center
center
center
center
of
of
of
of
gravity.
gravity.
gravity.
gravity.
13506
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Current section
Title
Proposed section
Proposed title
Subpart C—Structure
Loads ...........................................................
23.310, 23.330 ...........................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
(c) ........................
(d) ........................
23.302 .................
23.303 .................
23.305 .................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
23.301 .................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Canard or tandem wing configurations .......
Factors of safety ..........................................
Strength and deformation ............................
23.307 .................
23.321 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
(c) ........................
23.331 .................
23.333 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
(c) ........................
(d) ........................
23.335 .................
23.337 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
(c) ........................
23.341 .................
23.343 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
(c) ........................
23.345 .................
23.347 .................
23.349 .................
23.351 .................
23.361 .................
23.363 .................
23.365 .................
(e) ........................
23.367 .................
23.369 .................
23.371 .................
23.373 .................
23.391 .................
23.393 .................
23.395 .................
23.397 .................
23.399 .................
23.405 .................
23.407 .................
23.409 .................
23.415 .................
23.421 .................
23.423 .................
23.425 .................
23.427 .................
23.441 .................
23.443 .................
23.445 .................
23.455 .................
23.459 .................
23.471 .................
23.473 .................
23.477 .................
23.479 .................
23.481 .................
23.483 .................
23.485 .................
23.493 .................
23.497 .................
23.499 .................
23.505 .................
Proof of structure .........................................
Flight Loads—General ................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Symmetrical flight conditions .......................
Flight envelope ............................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Design airspeeds .........................................
Limit maneuvering load factors ...................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Gust load factors .........................................
Design fuel loads .........................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
High lift devices ...........................................
Unsymmetrical flight loads ..........................
Rolling conditions ........................................
Yawing conditions .......................................
Engine torque ..............................................
Side load on engine mount .........................
Pressurized cabin loads ..............................
......................................................................
Unsymmetrical loads due to engine failure
Rear lift truss ...............................................
Gyroscopic and aerodynamic loads ............
Speed control devices .................................
Control surface loads ..................................
Loads parallel to hinge line .........................
Control system loads ...................................
Limit control forces and torques ..................
Dual control system .....................................
Secondary control system ...........................
Trim tab effects ...........................................
Tabs .............................................................
Ground gust conditions ...............................
Balancing loads ...........................................
Maneuvering loads ......................................
Gust loads ...................................................
Unsymmetrical loads due to engine failure
Maneuvering loads ......................................
Gust loads ...................................................
Outboard fins or winglets ............................
Ailerons ........................................................
Special devices ...........................................
Ground Loads—General .............................
Ground load conditions and assumptions ...
Landing gear arrangement ..........................
Level landing conditions ..............................
Tail down landing conditions .......................
One-wheel landing conditions .....................
Side load conditions ....................................
Braked roll conditions ..................................
Supplementary conditions for tail wheels ...
Supplementary conditions for nose wheels
Supplementary conditions for skiplanes .....
23.330 ........................................
23.310 ........................................
23.310 ........................................
23.310 ........................................
23.310 ........................................
23.330 ........................................
23.400 ........................................
23.305 ........................................
23.400 ........................................
23.310 ........................................
23.310 ........................................
23.300 ........................................
23.300 ........................................
23.310 ........................................
23.300 ........................................
23.300 ........................................
23.300 ........................................
23.315 ........................................
23.300 ........................................
23.300 ........................................
23.300 ........................................
23.300 ........................................
23.300 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
23.315 ........................................
23.300 ........................................
23.300 ........................................
23.300 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
23.325 ........................................
23.315 ........................................
23.315 ........................................
23.315 ........................................
23.325 ........................................
23.325 ........................................
23.325 ........................................
23.405 ........................................
23.315 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
23.325 ........................................
23.325 ........................................
23.325 ........................................
23.325 ........................................
23.325 ........................................
23.325 ........................................
23.325 ........................................
23.325 ........................................
23.325 ........................................
23.325 ........................................
23.325 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
23.315 ........................................
23.315 ........................................
23.315 ........................................
23.315 ........................................
23.315 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
23.325 ........................................
23.325 ........................................
23.320 ........................................
23.320 ........................................
23.320 ........................................
23.320 ........................................
23.320 ........................................
23.320 ........................................
23.320 ........................................
23.320 ........................................
23.320 ........................................
23.320 ........................................
23.320 ........................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Structural design loads, Limit and ultimate
loads.
Limit and ultimate loads.
Structural design loads.
Structural design loads.
Structural design loads.
Structural design loads.
Limit and ultimate loads.
Structural strength.
Interaction of systems and structures.
Structure strength.
Structural design loads.
Structural design loads.
Structural design envelope.
Structural design envelope.
Structural design loads.
Structural design envelope.
Structural design envelope.
Structural design envelope.
Flight load conditions.
Structural design envelope.
Structural design envelope.
Flight load conditions.
Structural design envelope.
Structural design envelope.
Flight load conditions.
Structural design envelope.
Structural design envelope.
Structural design envelope.
Component loading conditions.
Flight load conditions.
Flight load conditions.
Flight load conditions.
Component loading conditions.
Component loading conditions.
Flight load conditions.
Structural durability.
Flight load conditions.
Component
Component
Component
Component
Component
Component
Component
Component
Component
Component
Component
Flight
Flight
Flight
Flight
Flight
load
load
load
load
load
loading
loading
loading
loading
loading
loading
loading
loading
loading
loading
loading
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
Component loading conditions.
Component loading conditions.
Ground and water load conditions.
Ground and water load conditions.
Ground and water load conditions.
Ground and water load conditions.
Ground and water load conditions.
Ground and water load conditions.
Ground and water load conditions.
Ground and water load conditions.
Ground and water load conditions.
Ground and water load conditions.
Ground and water load conditions.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13507
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Current section
Title
Proposed section
23.507 .................
23.509 .................
23.511 .................
Jacking loads ...............................................
Towing loads ...............................................
Ground load: unsymmetrical loads on multiple-wheel units.
Water load conditions ..................................
Design weights and center of gravity positions.
Application of loads .....................................
Hull and main float load factors ..................
Hull and main float landing conditions ........
Hull and main float takeoff conditions .........
Hull and main float bottom pressures .........
Auxiliary float loads .....................................
Seawing loads .............................................
Emergency Landing Conditions—General ..
Emergency landing dynamic conditions ......
Metallic pressurized cabin structures ..........
Metallic wing, empennage, and associated
structures.
Damage tolerance and fatigue evaluation
of structure.
Metallic damage tolerance and fatigue
evaluation of commuter category airplanes.
Inspections and other procedures ...............
23.320 ........................................
23.320 ........................................
23.320 ........................................
Ground and water load conditions.
Ground and water load conditions.
Ground and water load conditions.
23.320 ........................................
23.320 ........................................
Ground and water load conditions.
Ground and water load conditions.
23.320
23.320
23.320
23.320
23.320
23.320
23.320
23.600
23.600
23.405
23.405
Ground and water load
Ground and water load
Ground and water load
Ground and water load
Ground and water load
Ground and water load
Ground and water load
Emergency conditions.
Emergency conditions.
Structural durability.
Structural durability.
23.521 .................
23.523 .................
23.525
23.527
23.529
23.531
23.533
23.535
23.537
23.561
23.562
23.571
23.572
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
23.573 .................
23.574 .................
23.575 .................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
Proposed title
23.405 ........................................
Structural durability.
23.405 ........................................
Structural durability.
23.405 ........................................
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
conditions.
Structural durability.
Subpart D—Design and Construction
23.601
23.603
23.605
23.607
23.609
23.611
23.613
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
23.673 .................
23.675 .................
23.677 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
(c) ........................
(d) ........................
23.679 .................
23.681(a) .............
23.681(b) .............
23.683 .................
23.685(a), (b), (c)
23.685(d) .............
23.687 .................
23.689 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
General ........................................................
Materials and workmanship ........................
Fabrication methods ....................................
Fasteners .....................................................
Protection of Structure ................................
Accessibility .................................................
Material strength properties and design values.
Special factors .............................................
Casting factors ............................................
Bearing factors ............................................
Fitting factors ...............................................
Fatigue strength ..........................................
Flutter ..........................................................
Proof of strength ..........................................
Proof of strength ..........................................
Installation ...................................................
Hinges .........................................................
Mass balance ..............................................
Control Surfaces—General.
......................................................................
......................................................................
Stability augmentation and automatic and
power-operated systems.
Primary flight controls ..................................
Stops ...........................................................
Trim systems.
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Control system locks ...................................
Limit load static tests ...................................
Limit load static tests ...................................
Operation tests ............................................
Control system details .................................
Control system details .................................
Spring devices .............................................
Cable systems.
......................................................................
......................................................................
(c) ........................
......................................................................
23.325(b), 23.500(d) ..................
(d) ........................
......................................................................
23.325(b), 23.500(d) ..................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
23.619 .................
23.621 .................
23.623 .................
23.625 .................
23.627 .................
23.629 .................
23.641 .................
23.651 .................
23.655 .................
23.657 .................
23.659 .................
23.671 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
23.672 .................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00057
23.500
23.500
23.510
23.505
23.505
23.505
23.510
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
Structural design.
Structural design.
Materials and processes.
Protection of structure.
Protection of structure.
Protection of structure.
Materials and processes.
23.515 ........................................
23.515 ........................................
23.515 ........................................
23.515 ........................................
23.405 ........................................
23.410 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
Means of Compliance.
Means of Compliance.
23.515 ........................................
23.315 ........................................
Special factors of safety.
Special factors of safety.
Special factors of safety.
Special factors of safety.
Structural durability.
Aeroelasticity.
23.500 ........................................
23.1305 ......................................
23.1305 ......................................
Structural design.
Function and installation.
Function and installation.
23.1305 ......................................
23.1305 ......................................
Function and installation.
Function and installation.
23.700 ........................................
23.700 ........................................
23.410 ........................................
23.700 ........................................
23.1305 ......................................
23.325(b) ....................................
23.515 ........................................
23.500(d) ....................................
23.500(d) ....................................
23.1305 ......................................
23.410 and 23.500 .....................
Flight control systems.
Flight control systems.
Aeroelasticity.
Flight control systems.
Function and installation.
Component loading conditions.
Special factors of safety.
Structural design.
Structural design.
Function and installation.
Aeroelasticity and Structural design.
23.700 ........................................
23.325(b), 23.500(d) ..................
Flight control systems.
Component loading conditions, Structural
design.
Component loading conditions, Structural
design.
Component loading conditions, Structural
design.
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Special factors of safety.
Flight load conditions.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13508
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Title
Proposed section
Proposed title
(e) ........................
......................................................................
23.325(b), 23.500(d) ..................
(f) .........................
23.691 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
(c) ........................
(d) ........................
(e) ........................
(f) .........................
(g) ........................
23.693 .................
23.697 .................
(a) ........................
(b) and (c) ...........
23.699 .................
23.701 .................
23.703 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
(c) ........................
23.721 .................
23.723 .................
23.725 .................
23.726 .................
23.727 .................
23.729 .................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Current section
......................................................................
Artificial stall barrier system.
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Joints ...........................................................
Wing flap controls.
......................................................................
......................................................................
Wing flap position indicator .........................
Flap interconnection ....................................
Takeoff warning system.
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
General ........................................................
Shock absorption tests ................................
Limit drop tests ............................................
Ground load dynamic tests .........................
Reserve energy absorption drop tests ........
Landing gear extension and retraction system.
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Wheels .........................................................
Tires.
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Brakes .........................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Skis ..............................................................
Nose/Tail wheel steering .............................
Main float buoyancy.
......................................................................
......................................................................
Main float design .........................................
Hulls .............................................................
Auxiliary floats .............................................
Pilot compartment.
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Pilot compartment view.
......................................................................
......................................................................
Windshields and windows.
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Cockpit controls ...........................................
Motion and effect of cockpit controls ..........
Cockpit control knob shape .........................
23.700 ........................................
Component loading conditions, Structural
design.
Flight control systems.
23.700 ........................................
23.700 ........................................
23.1305 ......................................
23.700 ........................................
23.700 ........................................
23.700 ........................................
23.1315 ......................................
23.515 ........................................
Flight control systems.
Flight control systems.
Function and installation.
Flight control systems.
Flight control systems.
Flight control systems.
Equipment, systems and Installations.
Special factors of safety.
23.700 ........................................
23.200 ........................................
23.1500 ......................................
Means of Compliance.
Flight control systems.
Controllability.
Flightcrew interface.
23.700 ........................................
23.700 ........................................
Definition.
23.910 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
Means of Compliance.
Means of Compliance.
Means of Compliance.
Flight control systems.
Flight control systems.
23.705 ........................................
23.705 ........................................
23.705 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
23.705 ........................................
23.1315 ......................................
Means of Compliance.
23.705 ........................................
Landing gear systems.
Landing gear systems.
Landing gear systems.
23.705 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
Means of Compliance.
23.705.
23.705 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
Means of Compliance.
23.705 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
1315 ...........................................
705 .............................................
Means of Compliance.
Means of Compliance.
23.705 ........................................
23.1500 ......................................
Landing gear systems.
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
(c) ........................
(d) ........................
(e) ........................
(f) .........................
(g) ........................
23.731 .................
23.733 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
(c) ........................
23.735 .................
(a) ........................
(1) ........................
(2) ........................
(b) ........................
(c) ........................
(d) ........................
(e) ........................
(1) ........................
(2) ........................
23.737 .................
23.745 .................
23.751 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
23.753 .................
23.755 .................
23.757 .................
23.771 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
(c) ........................
23.773 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
23.775 .................
(a), (b), (c), (d) ....
(e) ........................
(f) .........................
(g) ........................
(h) ........................
23.777 .................
23.779 .................
23.781 .................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Powerplant installation hazard assessment.
Landing gear systems.
Equipment, systems and installation.
Landing gear systems.
Landing gear systems.
Landing gear systems.
Equipment, systems and installation.
Landing gear systems.
Landing gear systems.
Flightcrew interface.
710 .............................................
Means of Compliance.
23.320 ........................................
23.710 ........................................
23.710 ........................................
Ground and water load conditions.
Buoyancy for seaplanes and amphibians.
Buoyancy for seaplanes and amphibians.
23.1500 ......................................
755 .............................................
755 .............................................
Flightcrew interface.
Occupant physical environment.
Occupant physical environment.
1500 ...........................................
23.755 ........................................
Flightcrew interface.
Occupant physical environment.
23.755 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
23.1405 ......................................
Means of Compliance.
23.755 ........................................
23.1500 ......................................
23.1500 ......................................
23.1500 ......................................
Occupant physical environment.
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Buoyancy for seaplanes and amphibians.
Flight in icing conditions.
Occupant physical environment.
Flightcrew interface.
Flightcrew interface.
Flightcrew interface.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Current section
Title
23.783 .................
(a), (b), (c), (d) ....
(e), (f), (g) ............
23.785 .................
Doors.
......................................................................
......................................................................
Seats, berths, litters, safety belts, and
shoulder harnesses.
Baggage and cargo compartments .............
Passenger information signs .......................
Emergency evacuation.
......................................................................
......................................................................
Flightcrew emergency exits .........................
Emergency exits.
......................................................................
23.787 .................
23.791 .................
23.803 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
23.805 .................
23.807 .................
(a)(3), (b)(1), (c),
(d)(1), (d)(4).
Balance of 23.807
23.811 .................
23.812 .................
23.813 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
CS–VLA 853 .......
23.815 .................
23.831 .................
23.841(a), (b)(6),
(c) ,(d).
(b)(1) through (5)
and (7).
23.843 .................
23.851 .................
(a) and (b) ...........
Proposed section
23.750 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
23.515 and 23.600 .....................
23.600(e) ....................................
23.755 ........................................
23.750 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
23.750 ........................................
Proposed title
Means of egress and emergency exits.
Special factors of safety, Emergency landing conditions.
Emergency landing conditions.
Occupant physical environment.
Means of egress and emergency exits.
Means of egress and emergency exits.
Means of Compliance.
......................................................................
Emergency exit marking ..............................
Emergency lighting ......................................
Emergency exit access.
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Width of aisle ...............................................
Ventilation ....................................................
Pressurized cabins ......................................
23.750 ........................................
23.750 ........................................
23.750 ........................................
Means of egress and emergency exits.
Means of egress and emergency exits.
Means of egress and emergency exits.
23.750 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
23.750 ........................................
23.750 ........................................
23.755 ........................................
23.755 ........................................
Means of egress and emergency exits.
......................................................................
Means of Compliance.
Pressurization tests .....................................
Fire extinguishers.
......................................................................
23.755 ........................................
Occupant physical environment.
23.800 ........................................
Fire protection outside designated fire
zones.
(c) ........................
23.853 .................
(a) ........................
......................................................................
Passenger and crew compartment interiors.
......................................................................
......................................................................
Means of Compliance.
......................................................................
23.800 ........................................
......................................................................
23.800 ........................................
(f) .........................
......................................................................
23.800 ........................................
23.855 .................
23.800 ........................................
23.856 .................
Cargo and baggage compartment fire protection.
Thermal/acoustic insulation materials .........
23.800 ........................................
23.859 .................
(a) ........................
Combustion heater fire protection.
......................................................................
23.800 ........................................
(b) thru (i) ............
23.863 .................
(a) and (d) ...........
......................................................................
Flammable fluid fire protection.
......................................................................
Means of Compliance.
(b) and (c) ...........
......................................................................
Means of Compliance ................
23.865 .................
23.805 ........................................
(a) and (c) ...........
(b) ........................
Fire protection of flight controls, engine
mounts, and other flight structure.
Electrical bonding and protection against
lightning and static electricity.
......................................................................
......................................................................
23.810 ........................................
23.1320 ......................................
23.871 .................
Leveling means ...........................................
Means of egress and emergency exits.
Means of egress and emergency exits.
Occupant physical environment.
Occupant physical environment.
Means of Compliance.
(b)(c) and
(d)(1)(2).
(d)(3)(i), (d)(3)(iii),
(d)(3)(iv).
(e) ........................
Means of Compliance.
23.867 .................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
13509
23.800 ........................................
23.800 ........................................
Fire protection outside designated fire
zones.
Fire protection
zones.
Fire protection
zones.
Fire protection
zones.
Fire protection
zones.
Fire protection
zones.
outside designated fire
outside designated fire
outside designated fire
outside designated fire
outside designated fire
Fire protection outside designated fire
zones.
Fire protection outside designated fire
zones.
Fire protection outside designated fire
zones.
Fire protection in designated fire zones.
Lightning protection of structure.
Electrical and electronic system lightning
protection.
Subpart E—Powerplant
23.901 .................
(a), (b), (f) ............
(c) ........................
(d) and (e) ...........
Installation ...................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
23.903 .................
Engines.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00059
23.900(c) ....................................
23.900(b).
23.900(b).
23.900(b) ....................................
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Powerplant Installation.
Note: In addition to 900(b) these rules are
covered under Part 33.63, 76, 77 and
78.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13510
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Title
Proposed section
(a) ........................
(a)(2) ...................
(b)(c) ....................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
23.900(c).
23.940(b) ....................................
23.910 and 23.920 .....................
(b)(1) ...................
(d) thru (g) ...........
23.904 .................
23.905 .................
(a) ........................
(b), (d), (g) ...........
(c) ........................
(e) ........................
(f) .........................
(h) ........................
23.907 .................
23.909 .................
(a) and (c) ...........
(b), (d), (e) ...........
23.925 .................
23.929 .................
23.933 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
23.934 .................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Automatic power reserve system ................
Propellers.
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Propeller vibration and fatigue ....................
Turbocharger systems.
......................................................................
......................................................................
Propeller clearance .....................................
Engine installation ice protection ................
Reversing systems ......................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Turbojet and turbofan engine thrust reverser systems tests.
Turbopropeller-drag limiting systems ..........
......................................................................
......................................................................
Powerplant operating characteristics ..........
23.405(d) ....................................
23.925 ........................................
23.915 ........................................
Powerplant ice protection.
Powerplant installation hazard assessment;
Reversing systems.
Structural durability.
Powerplant operational characteristics.
Automatic power control systems.
23.910(a) ....................................
....................................................
23.905 ........................................
23.940 ........................................
23.905 ........................................
23.910 ........................................
....................................................
Powerplant installation hazard assessment.
Note: Intent covered under part 35.
Propeller installation.
Powerplant ice protection.
Propeller installation.
Powerplant installation hazard assessment.
Note: Intent covered under part 35.
23.900 ........................................
23.910 ........................................
23.905(c) ....................................
23.940 ........................................
23.920.
23.920 ........................................
23.920 ........................................
23.920 ........................................
Powerplant installation.
Powerplant installation hazard assessment.
Installation.
Powerplant ice protection.
23.937 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
23.939 .................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Current section
23.943 .................
23.951 .................
(a) and (b) ...........
(c) ........................
(d) ........................
23.953 .................
23.954 .................
23.955 .................
23.957 .................
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
23.959 .................
23.961 .................
23.963 .................
(a), (d), (e) ...........
(b) and (c) ...........
23.965 .................
23.967 .................
23.969 .................
23.971 .................
23.973 .................
23.975 .................
(a)(1) ...................
23.977 .................
23.979 .................
(a) and (b) ...........
(c) and (d) ...........
23.991 .................
(a), (b), (c) ...........
(d) ........................
23.993 .................
23.994 .................
23.995 .................
(a) ........................
(b) thru (g) ...........
23.997 .................
(a) thru (d) ...........
(e) ........................
23.999 .................
23.1001 ...............
(a) ........................
(b) thru (g) ...........
(h) ........................
23.1011 ...............
Negative acceleration ..................................
Fuel System—General ................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Fuel system independence .........................
Fuel system lightning protection .................
Fuel flow ......................................................
Flow between interconnected tanks ............
......................................................................
......................................................................
Unusable fuel supply ...................................
Fuel system hot weather operation .............
Fuel tank: general.
......................................................................
......................................................................
Fuel tank tests .............................................
Fuel tank installation ...................................
Fuel tank expansion space .........................
Fuel tank sump ............................................
Fuel tank filler connection ...........................
Fuel tank vents and carburetor vapor vents
......................................................................
Fuel tank outlet ............................................
Pressure fueling systems ............................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Fuel pumps ..................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Fuel system lines and fittings ......................
Fuel system components ............................
Fuel valves and controls .............................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Fuel strainer or filter ....................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Fuel system drains ......................................
Fuel jettisoning system ................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
General ........................................................
23.925 ........................................
23.930(a)(3).
23.930(a)(3) ...............................
23.930(a)(3).
23.930(a)(3) ...............................
23.930 ........................................
23.930 ........................................
23.930 ........................................
23.930(a)(7) ...............................
23.930(a)(7).
23.930(a)(7).
23.930(c) ....................................
23.930(a)(3) ...............................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00060
23.920.
23.920 ........................................
23.920 ........................................
23.925 ........................................
23.930(b)(4) ...............................
23.930(b)(6).
23.930(b)(1).
23.930(b)(6).
23.930(b)(6).
23.930(b)(6).
23.930(b)(6).
23.930(b)(6).
23.940 ........................................
23.930(b)(6) ...............................
23.930(d).
23.930(d) ....................................
23.930(d) ....................................
23.930(a)(8).
23.930(a)(8) ...............................
23.910 ........................................
23.930.
23.930(a)(7) ...............................
23.930(d).
23.930(d) ....................................
23.930(d).
23.930(a).
23.930(a)(6) ...............................
23.950 ........................................
23.930(a)(4) ...............................
23.930(b)(5).
23.930(b)(5) ...............................
23.930(b)(5).
23.910 ........................................
23.935 ........................................
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Proposed title
Reversing systems.
Reversing systems.
Note: In addition to § 23.920, this rule is
covered under § 33.97.
Reversing systems.
Reversing systems.
In addition to 925 this rule is covered under
Part 33, subpart D and F—Block Tests.
Operational characteristics.
Fuel systems.
Intent covered under Part 34.
Fuel systems.
Fuel systems.
Fuel systems.
Fuel systems.
Hazard assessment.
Fuel systems.
Fuel systems.
Powerplant ice protection.
Fuel systems.
Fuel systems.
Hazard assessment.
Fuel systems.
Powerplant installation hazard assessment.
Hazard assessment.
Powerplant installation.
Fuel systems.
Powerplant ice protection.
Fuel systems.
Fuel systems.
Powerplant installation hazard assessment.
Intent covered under Part 33.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13511
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Current section
23.1013
23.1015
23.1017
23.1019
23.1021
23.1023
23.1027
23.1041
23.1043
23.1045
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
23.1047 ...............
23.1061
23.1063
23.1091
23.1093
23.1095
23.1097
23.1099
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
...............
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
23.1101 ...............
(a) ........................
(b) and (c) ...........
23.1103 ...............
23.1105 ...............
23.1107 ...............
23.1109 ...............
23.1111 ...............
(a) and (c) ...........
(b) ........................
23.1121 ...............
(a) thru (g) ...........
(h) ........................
23.1123 ...............
23.1125 ...............
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
23.1141 ...............
.............................
23.1142 ...............
23.1143 ...............
23.1145 ...............
23.1147 ...............
23.1149 ...............
23.1153 ...............
23.1155 ...............
23.1157 ...............
23.1163 ...............
(a), (c), (e) ...........
(b) and (d) ...........
23.1165 ...............
23.1181 ...............
23.1182 ...............
23.1183 ...............
23.1189 ...............
23.1191 ...............
(a) thru (e), (g),
(h).
(f) .........................
23.1192 ...............
23.1193 ...............
(a) thru (e) ...........
(f) and (g) ............
23.1195 ...............
23.1197 ...............
23.1199 ...............
23.1201 ...............
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
23.1203 ...............
(a), (d), (e) ...........
(b) and (c) ...........
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Title
Proposed section
Oil tanks ......................................................
Oil tank tests ...............................................
Oil lines and fittings .....................................
Oil strainer or filter .......................................
Oil system drains .........................................
Oil radiators .................................................
Propeller feathering system ........................
Cooling—General ........................................
Cooling tests ................................................
Cooling test procedures for turbine engine
powered airplanes.
Cooling test procedures for reciprocating
engine powered airplanes.
Installation ...................................................
Coolant tank tests .......................................
Air induction system ....................................
Induction system icing protection ................
Carburetor deicing fluid flow rate ................
Carburetor deicing fluid system capacity ....
Carburetor deicing fluid system detail design.
Induction air preheater design ....................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Induction system ducts ................................
Induction system screens ............................
Induction system filters ................................
Turbocharger bleed air system ...................
Turbine engine bleed air system .................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Exhaust System—General ..........................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Exhaust system ...........................................
Exhaust heat exchangers ............................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Powerplant controls: general (a)(c)(g) ........
(b)(d)(e) and (f) ............................................
Auxiliary power unit controls .......................
Engine controls ............................................
Ignition switches ..........................................
Mixture controls ...........................................
Propeller speed and pitch controls .............
Propeller feathering controls .......................
Turbine engine reverse thrust and propeller
pitch settings below the flight regime.
Carburetor air temperature controls ............
Powerplant accessories ..............................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Engine ignition systems ..............................
Designated fire zones: regions included .....
Nacelle areas behind firewalls ....................
Lines, fittings, and components ..................
Shutoff means .............................................
Firewalls ......................................................
......................................................................
23.935(b)(1) ...............................
23.935(b)(1) ...............................
23.935(b)(1) ...............................
23.935(b)(2) ...............................
23.935(b)(2) ...............................
23.935(b)(1) ...............................
23.935(b)(2) ...............................
23.940(a) ....................................
23.940(a) ....................................
23.940(a) ....................................
Intent covered under
Intent covered under
Intent covered under
Intent covered under
Intent covered under
Intent covered under
Hazard assessment.
Intent covered under
Intent covered under
Intent covered under
23.940(a) ....................................
Intent covered under Part 33.
23.940(b) ....................................
23.940(b) ....................................
23.945(a) ....................................
23.940 ........................................
23.940 ........................................
23.940 ........................................
23.940 ........................................
Intent covered under Part 33.
Intent covered under Part 33.
Intent covered under Part 33.
Powerplant ice protection.
Powerplant ice protection.
Powerplant ice protection.
Powerplant ice protection.
23.1500(b).
23.910(a) ....................................
23.910(a).
23.910(a).
Means of Compliance.
23.1000(a) ..................................
23.1000(b).
23.1000(b).
23.1000(c).
23.1000(d).
23.1000(d).
......................................................................
Engine accessory compartment diaphragm
Cowling and nacelle ....................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Fire extinguishing systems ..........................
Fire extinguishing agents ............................
Extinguishing agent containers ...................
Fire extinguishing system materials ............
......................................................................
......................................................................
Fire detector system ....................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
23.910 ........................................
23.1000(d).
23.1000(d).
23.1000(d).
23.1000(d) ..................................
23.1000(e).
23.1000(e).
23.1000(e).
23.1000(e).
23.1000(e) ..................................
23.1000(e).
23.1000(f).
23.1000(f).
23.1000(f) ...................................
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00061
23.935.
23.935 ........................................
23.935.
23.935 ........................................
23.935.
23.935 ........................................
23.910.
23.910.
23.910 ........................................
23.910.
23.935.
23.935 ........................................
23.910 ........................................
23.910 ........................................
23.910.
23.910 ........................................
23.910.
23.1505(b).
23.910 ........................................
23.1500(b).
23.1500(b).
23.1500(b).
23.1500(b).
23.1500(b).
23.1500(b).
23.910 and 23.1500(b) ..............
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Proposed title
Part
Part
Part
Part
Part
Part
33.
33.
33.
33.
33.
33.
Part 33.
Part 33.
Part 33.
Powerplant induction and exhaust systems.
Powerplant induction and exhaust systems.
Powerplant induction and exhaust systems.
Hazard assessment.
Powerplant induction and exhaust systems.
Hazard assessment.
Hazard assessment.
Hazard assessment.
Powerplant installation hazard assessment.
Hazard assessment.
Powerplant installation hazard assessment.
Powerplant fire protection.
Powerplant installation hazard assessment.
Hazard assessment.
Hazard assessment.
Hazard assessment.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13512
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Current section
Title
Proposed section
Proposed title
Subpart F—Equipment
23.1301 ...............
(a) ........................
Function and installation.
......................................................................
(b) ........................
(c) ........................
23.1303 ...............
......................................................................
......................................................................
Flight and navigation instruments ...............
23.1305(a)(3) .............................
23.1305(a)(2) .............................
23.1300, 23.1310, 23.1305(b)
and (c), and 23.1330(c).
23.1305 ...............
Powerplant instruments ...............................
23.1300,
23.1310
23.1305(c).
23.1306 ...............
Electrical and electronic system lightning
protection.
Miscellaneous equipment ............................
23.1320 ......................................
23.1307 ...............
and
23.1300 and 23.1310 .................
23.1309 ...............
(a)(1) ...................
(a)(2) ...................
(b) ........................
(c) ........................
(b) ........................
23.1310 ...............
High-Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF) protection.
Equipment, systems, and installations ........
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Power source capacity and distribution ......
23.1315 ......................................
23.1300(a) ..................................
23.1300(b) ..................................
....................................................
23.1315(b) ..................................
23.1305(c) ..................................
23.1330 ......................................
23.1311 ...............
Electronic display instrument systems ........
23.1300 and 23.1310 .................
23.1321 ...............
Arrangement and visibility ...........................
23.1300 and 23.1310 .................
23.1322 ...............
Warning, caution, and advisory lights .........
23.1305(b) and (c) .....................
23.1323 ...............
Airspeed indicating system .........................
23.1300, 23.1305, 23.1310, and
1315.
(d) ........................
23.1325 ...............
......................................................................
Static pressure system ................................
23.1405 ......................................
23.1300, 23.1310, and 23.1315
(b)(3) and (g) .......
23.1326 ...............
23.1327 ...............
......................................................................
Pitot heat indication systems ......................
Magnetic direction indicator ........................
1405 ...........................................
23.1305 ......................................
23.1300, 23.1305 and 23.1310 ..
23.1329 ...............
Automatic pilot system ................................
23.1300, 23.1305 and 23.1315 ..
(a) ........................
......................................................................
23.1300 and 23.1315 .................
(b) ........................
(c) ........................
(d) ........................
(e), (f), (g) ............
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
23.700 and 23.1500 ...................
23.1305 ......................................
23.700 and 23.1500 ...................
23.1300 and 23.1315 .................
(h) ........................
23.1331 ...............
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
23.1308 ...............
23.1300(a) and 23.1305(a) ........
......................................................................
Instruments using a power source.
......................................................................
......................................................................
23.1305 ......................................
(c) ........................
......................................................................
23.1310(b) ..................................
23.1335 ...............
Flight director systems ................................
23.1300, 23.1305, 23.1315, and
23.1500.
23.1337 ...............
(a) ........................
Powerplant instruments installation.
......................................................................
23.800(g) ....................................
(b) ........................
......................................................................
23.930 ........................................
23.1305(c) and (d) .....................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00062
23.1325 ......................................
23.1305(c) ..................................
23.1315(b) and 23.1330(b) ........
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Airplane level systems requirements; Function and installation.
Function and installation.
Function and installation.
Airplane level systems requirements; Flight,
navigation, and powerplant instruments;
Function and installation; System power
generation, storage, and distribution.
Airplane level systems requirements; Flight,
navigation, and powerplant instruments;
Function and installation.
Electrical and electronic system lightning
protection.
Airplane level systems requirements; Flight,
navigation, and powerplant instruments.
High-intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF) protection.
Equipment, systems, and installations.
Airplane level systems requirements.
Airplane level systems requirements.
—Deleted—.
Equipment, systems, and installations.
Function and installation.
System power generation, storage, and
distribution.
Airplane level systems requirements; Flight,
navigation, and powerplant instruments.
Airplane level systems requirements; Flight,
navigation, and powerplant instruments.
Flight, navigation, and powerplant instruments.
Airplane level systems requirements; Function and installation; Flight, navigation,
and powerplant instruments; and Equipment, systems, and installations.
Flight in icing conditions.
Airplane level systems requirements; Flight,
navigation, and powerplant instruments;
and Equipment, systems, and installations.
Flight in icing conditions.
Function and installation.
Airplane level systems requirements; Function and installation; Flight, navigation,
and powerplant instruments.
Airplane level systems requirements; Function and installation; Equipment, systems, and installations.
Airplane level systems requirements;
Equipment, systems, and installations.
Flight control systems; Flightcrew interface.
Function and installation.
Flight control systems; Flightcrew interface.
Airplane level systems requirements;
Equipment, systems, and installations.
Function and installation.
Function and installation.
Equipment, systems, and installations; System power generation, storage, and distribution.
Flight, navigation, and powerplant instruments.
Airplane level systems; Function and installation; Equipment systems and installations; and Flightcrew interface.
Fire protection outside designated fire
zones.
Fuel systems.
Function and installation.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Current section
Title
13513
Proposed section
Proposed title
23.1310(a) ..................................
Flight, navigation, and powerplant instruments.
Equipment, systems, and installations.
Equipment, systems, and installations.
Function and installation.
Flight, navigation, and powerplant instruments.
Airplane level systems requirements.
Function and installation.
Equipment, systems, and installations.
System power generation, storage, and
distribution.
Airplane level systems requirements.
Function and installation.
Equipment, systems, and installations.
System power generation, storage, and
distribution.
Airplane level systems requirements.
Function and installation.
Equipment, systems, and installations.
System power generation, storage, and
distribution.
23.1315(b)
23.1315(b)
23.1305(c)
23.1310(a)
..................................
..................................
..................................
..................................
(c) ........................
(d) ........................
......................................................................
......................................................................
23.1351 ...............
Electrical Systems—General .......................
23.1300
23.1305
23.1315
23.1330
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
23.1353 ...............
Storage battery design and installation .......
23.1300
23.1305
23.1315
23.1330
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
23.1357 ...............
Circuit protective devices ............................
23.1300
23.1305
23.1315
23.1330
......................................
......................................
......................................
......................................
23.1359 ...............
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
(c) ........................
Electrical system fire protection.
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Means of Compliance.
805 .............................................
800 .............................................
23.1361 ...............
Master switch arrangement .........................
23.1300 and 23.1305 .................
23.1365 ...............
(b) ........................
(a), (c) thru (f) .....
23.1367 ...............
(a) and (b) ...........
(c) and (d) ...........
23.1381 ...............
(a) and (b) ...........
(c) ........................
23.1383(a), (b),
(c).
(d) ........................
Electrical cables and equipment .................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Switches.
......................................................................
......................................................................
Instrument lights.
......................................................................
......................................................................
Taxi and landing lights ................................
23.1305 ......................................
23.805 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
Flammability in designated fire zones.
Fire protection outside designated fire
zones.
Airplane level systems requirements; Function and installation.
Function and installation.
Flammability in designated fire zones.
23.1305 ......................................
23.1500 ......................................
Function and installation.
Flightcrew interface.
23.1500 ......................................
23.1335 ......................................
23.1335 ......................................
Flightcrew interface.
External and cockpit lighting.
External and cockpit lighting.
Taxi and landing lights ................................
23.800 ........................................
23.1385(a), (b),
(c).
(d) ........................
Position light system installation .................
23.1335 ......................................
Fire protection outside designated fire
zones.
External and cockpit lighting.
Position light system installation .................
23.800 ........................................
23.1387 ...............
23.1389 ...............
23.1391 ...............
23.1335 ......................................
23.1335 ......................................
23.1335 ......................................
23.1335 ......................................
External and cockpit lighting.
23.1335 ......................................
External and cockpit lighting.
23.1397 ...............
23.1399 ...............
23.1401 ...............
(a), (a)(1) .............
(a)(2) ...................
(b) thru (f) ............
23.1411 ...............
(a), (b)(1) .............
(b)(2) ...................
23.1415 ...............
(a), (c), (d) ...........
(b) ........................
23.1416 ...............
.............................
23.1419 ...............
Position light system dihedral angles ..........
Position light distribution and intensities .....
Minimum intensities in the horizontal plane
of position lights.
Minimum intensities in any vertical plane of
position lights.
Maximum intensities in overlapping beams
of position lights.
Color specifications .....................................
Riding light ...................................................
Anticollision light system.
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Safety Equipment-General.
......................................................................
......................................................................
Ditching equipment ......................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Pneumatic de-icer boot system ...................
......................................................................
Ice protection ...............................................
Fire protection outside designated fire
zones.
External and cockpit lighting.
External and cockpit lighting.
External and cockpit lighting.
23.1335 ......................................
23.1335 ......................................
External and cockpit lighting.
External and cockpit lighting.
23.1335 ......................................
Means of Compliance.
23.1335 ......................................
External and cockpit lighting.
23.1400 ......................................
23.600 ........................................
23.1400 ......................................
23.1400 ......................................
Means of Compliance.
23.1300 ......................................
23.1305 ......................................
23.230 ........................................
23.1405 ......................................
Safety equipment.
Emergency conditions.
Safety equipment.
Safety equipment.
23.1431 ...............
23.1435 ...............
(a)(4) and (b) .......
Electronic equipment ...................................
Hydraulic systems.
......................................................................
23.1393 ...............
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
23.1395 ...............
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00063
External and cockpit lighting.
23.1315 ......................................
Airplane level systems requirements.
Function and installation.
Flight in icing conditions.
Performance and flight characteristics requirements for flight in icing conditions.
Equipment, systems and installations.
23.1410 ......................................
Pressurized system elements.
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13514
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Current section
Title
(a), (a)(1) through
(3), (c).
23.1437 ...............
23.1438 ...............
(a), (b) .................
(c) ........................
......................................................................
Means of Compliance.
Accessories for multiengine airplanes ........
Pressurization and pneumatic systems.
......................................................................
......................................................................
23.1410 ......................................
Pressurized system elements.
23.1410 ......................................
Means of Compliance.
23.1410(e) ..................................
Pressurized system elements.
23.1441 ...............
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
(c), (d), (e) ...........
23.1443(a), (b),
(c).
(d) ........................
23.1445 ...............
23.1447 ...............
(a), (b), (c), (d), (f)
(e) ........................
23.1449 ...............
23.1450 ...............
(a) ........................
(b) ........................
(c) ........................
23.1451 ...............
23.1453 ...............
23.1457 ...............
23.1459 ...............
(a)(1) ...................
(a)(2) thru (d) ......
23.1461 ...............
Proposed section
Oxygen equipment and supply.
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Minimum mass flow of supplemental oxygen.
......................................................................
Oxygen distribution system .........................
Equipment standards for oxygen dispensing units.
......................................................................
......................................................................
Means for determining use of oxygen ........
Chemical oxygen generators.
......................................................................
......................................................................
......................................................................
Fire protection for oxygen equipment .........
Protection of oxygen equipment from rupture.
Cockpit voice recorders ...............................
Flight recorders.
......................................................................
......................................................................
Equipment containing high energy rotors ...
Proposed title
Pressurized system elements.
Means of Compliance.
23.1315 ......................................
23.755 ........................................
23.755 ........................................
Equipment, systems and installation.
Occupant physical environment.
Occupant physical environment.
Definition.
23.755 ........................................
Occupant physical environment.
23.755 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
23.755 ........................................
Means of Compliance.
23.1315 ......................................
23.1505 ......................................
Occupant physical environment.
Occupant physical environment.
23.1315 ......................................
23.1315 ......................................
Equipment, systems and installation.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Equipment, systems and installation.
Equipment, systems and installation.
23.1457 ......................................
No Change.
23.1459 ......................................
23.1459 ......................................
23.755 ........................................
Flight data recorders.
No Change.
Occupant physical environment.
Subpart G—Operating Limitations and Information
General ........................................................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1505 ...............
Airspeed limitations .....................................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1507 ...............
Operating maneuvering speed ....................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1511 ...............
Flap extended speed ...................................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1513 ...............
Minimum control speed ...............................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1519 ...............
Weight and center of gravity .......................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1521 ...............
Powerplant limitations .................................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1522 ...............
Auxiliary power unit limitations ....................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1523 ...............
Minimum flight crew ....................................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1524 ...............
Maximum passenger seating configuration
23.1505 ......................................
23.1525 ...............
Kinds of operation .......................................
23.1300 ......................................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1527 ...............
Maximum operating altitude ........................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1529 ...............
23.1541 ...............
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
23.1501 ...............
Instructions for continued airworthiness ......
Marking and Placards—General .................
23.1515 ......................................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1543 ...............
Instrument marking: general .......................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1545 ...............
Airspeed indicator ........................................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1547 ...............
Magnetic direction indicator ........................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1549 ...............
Powerplant and auxiliary power unit instruments.
Oil quantity indicator ....................................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1551 ...............
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00064
23.1505 ......................................
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Airplane level system requirements.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Instructions for continued airworthiness.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
Instrument markings, control markings, and
placards.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
Current section
Title
Proposed section
23.1553 ...............
Fuel quantity indicator .................................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1555 ...............
Control markings .........................................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1557 ...............
Miscellaneous marking and placards ..........
23.1505 ......................................
23.1559 ...............
Operating limitations placard .......................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1561 ...............
Safety equipment ........................................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1563 ...............
Airspeed placards ........................................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1567 ...............
Flight maneuver placard ..............................
23.1505 ......................................
23.1581 ...............
Airplane Flight Manual and Approved Manual Material—General.
Operating limitations ....................................
Operating procedures ..................................
Performance information .............................
Loading information .....................................
Simplified Design Load Criteria ...................
[Reserved] ...................................................
Basic Landing Conditions ............................
Wheel Spin-Up and Spring-Back Loads .....
[Reserved] ...................................................
Test Procedure ............................................
Instructions for Continued Airworthiness ....
Installation of An Automatic Power Reserve
(APR) System.
Seaplane Loads ..........................................
HIRF Environments and Equipment HIRF
Test Levels.
23.1510 ......................................
23.1583 ...............
23.1585 ...............
23.1587 ...............
23.1589 ...............
Appendix A ..........
Appendix B ..........
Appendix C .........
Appendix D .........
Appendix E ..........
Appendix F ..........
Appendix G .........
Appendix H .........
Appendix I ...........
Appendix J ..........
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
Appendix 2 to the Preamble—
Abbreviations and Acronyms
Frequently Used in This Document
AD Airworthiness Directive
AFM Airplane Flight Manual
ARC Aviation Rulemaking Committee
ASTM ASTM International
CAA Civil Aviation Authority
CAR Civil Aviation Regulations
Cf Confer (to identify a source or a
usage citation for a word or phrase)
CPS Certification Process Study
CS Certification Specification
CS–VLA Certification Specification—
Very Light Aeroplanes
EASA European Aviation Safety
Agency
ELOS Equivalent Level of Safety
FR Federal Register
GA General Aviation
HIRF High-Intensity Radiated Field
IFR Instrument Flight Rules
KCAS Knots Calibrated Airspeeds
LOC Loss of Control
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTSB National Transportation Safety
Board
OMB Office of Management and
Budget
SAE SAE International
SLD Supercooled Large Droplet
TCDS Type Certificate Data Sheet
VA Design Maneuvering Speed
VC Design Cruising Speed
VD Design Dive Speed
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
13515
Proposed title
23.1510 ......................................
23.1510 ......................................
23.1510 ......................................
23.1510 ......................................
Means of Compliance.
....................................................
Means of Compliance.
Means of Compliance.
....................................................
Means of Compliance.
Appendix A .................................
Means of Compliance.
Instrument markings, control
placards.
Instrument markings, control
placards.
Instrument markings, control
placards.
Instrument markings, control
placards.
Instrument markings, control
placards.
Instrument markings, control
placards.
Instrument markings, control
placards.
Airplane flight manual.
Airplane
Airplane
Airplane
Airplane
flight
flight
flight
flight
markings, and
markings, and
markings, and
markings, and
markings, and
markings, and
markings, and
manual.
manual.
manual.
manual.
—Deleted—
—Deleted—
Instructions for Continued Airworthiness.
Means of Compliance.
Means of Compliance.
VMC Minimum Control Speed
VMO/MMO Maximum Operating Limit
Speed
VFR Visual Flight Rules
VSO Stalling speed or the minimum
steady flight speed in the landing
configuration
List of Subjects
14 CFR Part 21
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Recording
and recordkeeping requirements.
14 CFR Part 23
14 CFR Part 135
Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
The Proposed Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the
Federal Aviation Administration
proposes to amend chapter I of title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 21—CERTIFICATION
PROCEDURES FOR PRODUCTS AND
ARTICLES
1. The authority citation for part 21 is
revised to read as follows:
Aircraft, Aviation Safety, Signs and
symbols.
■
14 CFR Part 35
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7572; 49 U.S.C. 106(f),
106(g), 40105, 40113, 44701–44702, 44704,
44707, 44709, 44711, 44713, 44715, 45303.
Aircraft, Aviation safety.
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting
and recordkeeping requirements.
14 CFR Part 91
Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen,
Airports, Aviation safety, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements.
14 CFR Part 121
Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
PO 00000
Frm 00065
Fmt 4701
2. In § 21.9, revise paragraphs (a)(5),
(a)(6), (b), and (c) introductory text, and
add paragraph (a)(7) to read as follows:
■
14 CFR Part 43
Sfmt 4702
§ 21.9 Replacement and modification
articles.
(a) * * *
(5) Produced by an owner or operator
for maintaining or altering that owner or
operator’s product;
(6) Fabricated by an appropriately
rated certificate holder with a quality
system, and consumed in the repair or
alteration of a product or article in
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13516
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
accordance with part 43 of this chapter;
or
(7) Produced in any other manner
approved by the FAA.
(b) Except as provided in paragraphs
(a)(1), (a)(2) and (a)(7) of this section, a
person who produces a replacement or
modification article for sale may not
represent that part as suitable for
installation on a type-certificated
product.
(c) Except as provided in paragraphs
(a)(1), (a)(2) and (a)(7) of this section, a
person may not sell or represent an
article as suitable for installation on an
aircraft type-certificated under
§ 21.25(a)(2) or § 21.27 unless that
article—
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. In § 21.17, revise paragraph (a)
introductory text to read as follows:
§ 21.17 Designation of applicable
regulations.
(a) Except as provided in §§ 25.2,
27.2, 29.2, and in parts 26, 34, and 36
of this subchapter, an applicant for a
type certificate must show that the
aircraft, aircraft engine, or propeller
concerned meets—
*
*
*
*
*
■ 4. In § 21.24, revise paragraph (a)(1)(i)
to read as follows:
§ 21.24 Issuance of type certificate:
primary category aircraft.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Is unpowered; is an airplane
powered by a single, naturally aspirated
engine with a 61-knot or less Vso stall
speed as defined in § 23.49 of this
chapter, at amendment 23–62, effective
on Jan 31, 2012; or is a rotorcraft with
a 6-pound per square foot main rotor
disc loading limitation, under sea level
standard day conditions;
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. In § 21.35, revise paragraph (b)(2) to
read as follows:
§ 21.35
Flight tests.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) For aircraft to be certificated under
this subchapter, except gliders, and
except for low-speed airplanes, as
defined in part 23 of this chapter, of
6,000 pounds or less maximum weight
that are to be certificated under part 23
of this chapter, to determine whether
there is reasonable assurance that the
aircraft, its components, and its
equipment are reliable and function
properly.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 6. In § 21.50, revise paragraph (b) to
read as follows:
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
*
*
*
*
*
(b) The holder of a design approval,
including either a type certificate or
supplemental type certificate for an
aircraft, aircraft engine, or propeller for
which application was made after
January 28, 1981, must furnish at least
one set of complete Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness to the owner
of each type aircraft, aircraft engine, or
propeller upon its delivery, or upon
issuance of the first standard
airworthiness certificate for the affected
aircraft, whichever occurs later. The
Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness must be prepared in
accordance with §§ 23.1515, 25.1529,
25.1729, 27.1529, 29.1529, 31.82, 33.4,
35.4, or part 26 of this subchapter, or as
specified in the applicable
airworthiness criteria for special classes
of aircraft defined in § 21.17(b), as
applicable. If the holder of a design
approval chooses to designate parts as
commercial, it must include in the
Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness a list of commercial parts
submitted in accordance with the
provisions of paragraph (c) of this
section. Thereafter, the holder of a
design approval must make those
instructions available to any other
person required by this chapter to
comply with any of the terms of those
instructions. In addition, changes to the
Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness shall be made available
to any person required by this chapter
to comply with any of those
instructions.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 7. In § 21.101 revise paragraphs (b)
introductory text, and (c) to read as
follows:
§ 21.101 Designation of applicable
regulations.
*
*
VerDate Sep<11>2014
§ 21.50 Instructions for continued
airworthiness and manufacturer’s
maintenance manuals having airworthiness
limitations sections.
Jkt 238001
*
*
*
*
(b) Except as provided in paragraph
(g) of this section, if paragraphs (b)(1),
(2), or (3) of this section apply, an
applicant may show that the change and
areas affected by the change comply
with an earlier amendment of a
regulation required by paragraph (a) of
this section, and of any other regulation
the FAA finds is directly related.
However, the earlier amended
regulation may not precede either the
corresponding regulation incorporated
by reference in the type certificate, or
any regulation in §§ 25.2, 27.2, or § 29.2
of this chapter that is related to the
change. The applicant may show
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
compliance with an earlier amendment
of a regulation for any of the following:
*
*
*
*
*
(c) An applicant for a change to an
aircraft (other than a rotorcraft) of 6,000
pounds or less maximum weight, to a
non-turbine rotorcraft of 3,000 pounds
or less maximum weight, to a simple, to
a level 1 low speed, or to a level 2 low
speed airplane may show that the
change and areas affected by the change
comply with the regulations
incorporated by reference in the type
certificate. However, if the FAA finds
that the change is significant in an area,
the FAA may designate compliance
with an amendment to the regulation
incorporated by reference in the type
certificate that applies to the change and
any regulation that the FAA finds is
directly related, unless the FAA also
finds that compliance with that
amendment or regulation would not
contribute materially to the level of
safety of the product or would be
impractical.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 8. Revise part 23 to read as follows:
PART 23—AIRWORTHINESS
STANDARDS: NORMAL CATEGORY
AIRPLANES
Sec.
Subpart A—General
23.1 Applicability and definitions.
23.5 Certification of normal category
airplanes.
23.10 Accepted means of compliance.
Subpart B—Flight
Performance
23.100 Weight and center of gravity.
23.105 Performance data.
23.110 Stall speed.
23.115 Takeoff performance.
23.120 Climb requirements.
23.125 Climb information.
23.130 Landing.
Flight Characteristics
23.200 Controllability.
23.205 Trim.
23.210 Stability.
23.215 Stall characteristics, stall warning,
and spins.
23.220 Ground and water handling
characteristics.
23.225 Vibration, buffeting, and high-speed
characteristics.
23.230 Performance and flight
characteristics requirements for flight in
icing conditions.
Subpart C—Structures
23.300 Structural design envelope.
23.305 Interaction of systems and
structures.
Structural Loads
23.310 Structural design loads.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
23.315
23.320
23.325
23.330
Flight load conditions.
Ground and water load conditions.
Component loading conditions.
Limit and ultimate loads.
Structural Performance
23.400 Structural strength.
23.405 Structural durability.
23.410 Aeroelasticity.
Design
23.500
23.505
23.510
23.515
Appendix A to Part 23—Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113,
44701–44702, 44704, Pub. L. 113–53, 127
Stat. 584 (49 U.S.C. 44704) note.
Subpart A—General
Structural design.
Protection of structure.
Materials and processes.
Special factors of safety.
§ 23.1
Structural Occupant Protection
23.600 Emergency conditions.
Subpart D—Design and Construction
23.700 Flight control systems.
23.705 Landing gear systems.
23.710 Buoyancy for seaplanes and
amphibians.
Occupant System Design Protection
23.750 Means of egress and emergency
exits.
23.755 Occupant physical environment.
Fire and High Energy Protection
23.800 Fire protection outside designated
fire zones.
23.805 Fire protection in designated fire
zones.
23.810 Lightning protection of structure.
Subpart E—Powerplant
23.900 Powerplant installation.
23.905 Propeller installation.
23.910 Powerplant installation hazard
assessment.
23.915 Automatic power control systems.
23.920 Reversing systems.
23.925 Powerplant operational
characteristics.
23.930 Fuel system.
23.935 Powerplant induction and exhaust
systems.
23.940 Powerplant ice protection.
23.1000 Powerplant fire protection.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
23.1510 Airplane flight manual.
23.1515 Instructions for continued
airworthiness.
Subpart F—Equipment
23.1300 Airplane level systems
requirements.
23.1305 Function and installation.
23.1310 Flight, navigation, and powerplant
instruments.
23.1315 Equipment, systems, and
installations.
23.1320 Electrical and electronic system
lightning protection.
23.1325 High-intensity Radiated Fields
(HIRF) protection.
23.1330 System power generation, storage,
and distribution.
23.1335 External and cockpit lighting.
23.1400 Safety equipment.
23.1405 Flight in icing conditions.
23.1410 Pressurized system elements.
23.1457 Cockpit voice recorders.
23.1459 Flight data recorders.
Subpart G—Flightcrew Interface and Other
Information
23.1500 Flightcrew interface.
23.1505 Instrument markings, control
markings and placards.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
Applicability and definitions.
(a) This part prescribes airworthiness
standards for the issuance of type
certificates, and changes to those
certificates, for airplanes in the normal
category.
(b) For the purposes of this part, the
following definitions apply:
(1) Continued safe flight and landing
means an airplane is capable of
continued controlled flight and landing,
possibly using emergency procedures,
without requiring exceptional pilot skill
or strength. Upon landing, some
airplane damage may occur as a result
of a failure condition.
(2) Designated fire zone means a zone
where catastrophic consequences from
fire in that zone must be mitigated by
containing the fire in that zone.
(3) Empty weight means the weight of
the airplane with fixed ballast, unusable
fuel, full operating fluids, and other
fluids required for normal operation of
airplane systems.
§ 23.5 Certification of normal category
airplanes.
(a) Certification in the normal
category applies to airplanes with a
passenger-seating configuration of 19 or
less and a maximum certificated takeoff
weight of 19,000 pounds or less.
(b) Airplane certification levels are:
(1) Level 1—for airplanes with a
maximum seating configuration of 0 to
1 passengers.
(2) Level 2—for airplanes with a
maximum seating configuration of 2 to
6 passengers.
(3) Level 3—for airplanes with a
maximum seating configuration of 7 to
9 passengers.
(4) Level 4—for airplanes with a
maximum seating configuration of 10 to
19 passengers.
(c) Airplane performance levels are:
(1) Low speed—for airplanes with a
VC or VMO ≤ 250 Knots Calibrated
Airspeed (KCAS) (and MMO ≤ 0.6).
(2) High speed—for airplanes with a
VC or VMO > 250 KCAS (or MMO > 0.6).
(d) Simple—Simple is defined as a
level 1 airplane with a VC or VMO ≤ 250
KCAS (and MMO ≤ 0.6), a VSO ≤ 45
KCAS and approved only for VFR
operations.
(e) Airplanes not certified for
aerobatics may be used to perform any
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13517
maneuver incident to normal flying,
including—
(1) Stalls (except whip stalls); and
(2) Lazy eights, chandelles, and steep
turns, in which the angle of bank is not
more than 60 degrees.
(f) Airplanes certified for aerobatics
may be used to perform maneuvers
without limitations, other than those
limitations necessary to avoid damage
or injury.
§ 23.10
Accepted means of compliance.
(a) An applicant must show the FAA
how it will demonstrate compliance
with this part using a means of
compliance, which may include
consensus standards, accepted by the
Administrator.
(b) A person requesting acceptance of
a means of compliance must provide the
means of compliance to the FAA in a
form and manner specified by the
Administrator.
Subpart B—Flight
Performance
§ 23.100
Weight and center of gravity.
(a) The applicant must determine
weights and centers of gravity that
provide limits for the safe operation of
the airplane.
(b) The applicant must show
compliance with each requirement of
this subpart at each combination of
weight and center of gravity within the
airplane’s range of loading conditions
using tolerances acceptable to the
Administrator.
(c) The condition of the airplane at
the time of determining its empty
weight and center of gravity must be
well defined and easily repeatable.
§ 23.105
Performance data.
(a) Unless otherwise prescribed, an
airplane must meet the performance
requirements of this subpart in—
(1) Still air and standard atmospheric
conditions at sea level for all airplanes;
and
(2) Ambient atmospheric conditions
within the operating envelope for—
(i) Level 1 high-speed and level 2
high-speed airplanes; and
(ii) Levels 3 and 4 airplanes.
(b) Unless otherwise prescribed, the
applicant must develop the performance
data required by this subpart for the
following conditions:
(1) Airport altitudes from sea level to
10,000 feet (3,048 meters); and
(2) Temperatures from standard to 30°
Celsius above standard or the maximum
ambient atmospheric temperature at
which compliance with propulsion
cooling requirements in climb is shown,
if lower.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13518
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
(c) The procedures used for
determining takeoff and landing
distances must be executable
consistently by pilots of average skill in
atmospheric conditions expected to be
encountered in service.
(d) Performance data determined in
accordance with paragraph (b) of this
section must account for losses due to
atmospheric conditions, cooling needs,
and other demands on power sources.
§ 23.110
Stall speed.
The applicant must determine the
airplane stall speed or the minimum
steady flight speed for each flight
configuration used in normal
operations, including takeoff, climb,
cruise, descent, approach, and landing.
Each determination must account for
the most adverse conditions for each
flight configuration with power set at
idle or zero thrust.
§ 23.115
Takeoff performance.
(a) The applicant must determine
airplane takeoff performance accounting
for—
(1) Stall speed safety margins;
(2) Minimum control speeds; and
(3) Climb gradients.
(b) For all airplanes, takeoff
performance includes the determination
of ground roll and initial climb distance
to 50 feet (15 meters) above the takeoff
surface.
(c) For levels 1, 2, and 3 high-speed
multiengine airplanes, multiengine
airplanes with a maximum takeoff
weight greater than 12,500 pounds and
level 4 multiengine airplanes, takeoff
performance includes a determination
the following distances after a sudden
critical loss of thrust:
(1) Accelerate-stop;
(2) Ground roll and initial climb to 50
feet (15 meters) above the takeoff
surface; and
(3) Net takeoff flight path.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 23.120
Climb requirements.
The applicant must demonstrate the
following minimum climb performance
out of ground effect:
(a) With all engines operating and in
the initial climb configuration—
(1) For levels 1 and 2 low speed
airplanes, a climb gradient at sea level
of 8.3 percent for landplanes and 6.7
percent for seaplanes and amphibians;
and
(2) For levels 1 and 2 high-speed
airplanes and all level 3 airplanes, a
climb gradient at takeoff of 4 percent.
(b) After a critical loss of thrust on
multiengine airplanes—
(1) For levels 1and 2 low-speed
airplanes that do not meet single engine
crashworthiness requirements, a 1.5
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
percent climb gradient at a pressure
altitude of 5,000 feet (1,524 meters) in
the cruise configuration;
(2) For levels 1 and 2 high-speed
airplanes, and level 3 low-speed
airplanes, a 1 percent climb gradient at
400 feet (122 meters) above the takeoff
surface with the landing gear retracted
and flaps in the takeoff configuration;
(3) For level 3 high-speed airplanes
and all level 4 airplanes, a 2 percent
climb gradient at 400 feet (122 meters)
above the takeoff surface with the
landing gear retracted and flaps in the
approach configuration;
(4) At sea level for level 1 and level
2 low-speed airplanes; and
(5) At the landing surface for all other
airplanes.
(c) For a balked landing, a climb
gradient of 3 percent with—
(1) Takeoff power on each engine;
(2) Landing gear extended; and
(3) Flaps in the landing configuration.
(3) With any probable flight control or
propulsion system failure; and
(4) During configuration changes.
(b) The airplane must be able to
complete a landing without causing
damage or serious injury, in the landing
configuration at a speed of VREF minus
5 knots using the approach gradient
equal to the steepest used in the landing
distance determination.
(c) For levels 1 and 2 multiengine
airplanes that cannot climb after a
critical loss of thrust, VMC must not
exceed VS1 or VS0 for all practical
weights and configurations within the
operating envelope of the airplane.
(d) If the applicant requests
certification of an airplane for
aerobatics, the applicant must
demonstrate those aerobatic maneuvers
for which certification is requested and
determine entry speeds.
§ 23.125
(a) The airplane must maintain
longitudinal, lateral, and directional
trim under the following conditions:
(1) For levels 1, 2, and 3 airplanes, in
cruise, without further force upon, or
movement of, the primary flight controls
or corresponding trim controls by the
pilot, or the flight control system.
(2) For level 4 airplanes in normal
operations, without further force upon,
or movement of, the primary flight
controls or corresponding trim controls
by the pilot, or the flight control system.
(b) The airplane must maintain
longitudinal trim under the following
conditions:
(1) Climb.
(2) Level flight.
(3) Descent.
(4) Approach.
(c) Residual forces must not fatigue or
distract the pilot during likely
emergency operations, including a
critical loss of thrust on multiengine
airplanes.
Climb information.
(a) The applicant must determine
climb performance—
(1) For all single engine airplanes;
(2) For level 3 multiengine airplanes,
following a critical loss of thrust on
takeoff in the initial climb
configuration; and
(3) For all multiengine airplanes,
during the enroute phase of flight with
all engines operating and after a critical
loss of thrust in the cruise configuration.
(b) For single engine airplanes, the
applicant must determine the glide
performance of the airplane after a
complete loss of thrust.
§ 23.130
Landing.
The applicant must determine the
following, for standard temperatures at
each weight and altitude within the
operational limits for landing:
(a) The distance, starting from a
height of 50 feet (15 meters) above the
landing surface, required to land and
come to a stop, or for water operations,
reach a speed of 3 knots.
(b) The approach and landing speeds,
configurations, and procedures, which
allow a pilot of average skill to meet the
landing distance consistently and
without causing damage or injury.
Flight Characteristics
§ 23.200
Controllability.
(a) The airplane must be controllable
and maneuverable, without requiring
exceptional piloting skill, alertness, or
strength, within the operating
envelope—
(1) At all loading conditions for which
certification is requested;
(2) During low-speed operations,
including stalls;
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
§ 23.205
§ 23.210
Trim.
Stability.
(a) Airplanes not certified for
aerobatics must—
(1) Have static longitudinal, lateral,
and directional stability in normal
operations;
(2) Have dynamic short period and
combined lateral-directional stability in
normal operations; and
(3) Provide stable control force
feedback throughout the operating
envelope.
(b) No airplane may exhibit any
divergent longitudinal stability
characteristic so unstable as to increase
the pilot’s workload or otherwise
endanger the airplane and its occupants.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
§ 23.215 Stall characteristics, stall
warning, and spins.
(a) The airplane must have
controllable stall characteristics in
straight flight, turning flight, and
accelerated turning flight with a clear
and distinctive stall warning that
provides sufficient margin to prevent
inadvertent stalling.
(b) Levels 1 and 2 airplanes and level
3 single-engine airplanes, not certified
for aerobatics, must not have a tendency
to inadvertently depart controlled flight.
(c) Airplanes certified for aerobatics
must have controllable stall
characteristics and the ability to recover
within one and one-half additional
turns after initiation of the first control
action from any point in a spin, not
exceeding six turns or any greater
number of turns for which certification
is requested, while remaining within the
operating limitations of the airplane.
(d) Spin characteristics in airplanes
certified for aerobatics must not result
in unrecoverable spins—
(1) With any use of the flight or
engine power controls; or
(2) Due to pilot disorientation or
incapacitation.
§ 23.220 Ground and water handling
characteristics.
(a) For airplanes intended for
operation on land or water, the airplane
must have controllable longitudinal and
directional handling characteristics
during taxi, takeoff, and landing
operations.
(b) For airplanes intended for
operation on water, the following must
be established and included in the
Airplane Flight Manual (AFM):
(1) The maximum wave height at
which the aircraft demonstrates
compliance to paragraph (a) of this
section. This wave height does not
constitute an operating limitation.
(2) Any necessary water handling
procedures.
onset of perceptible buffet occurs in the
cruise configuration within the
operational envelope. Likely inadvertent
excursions beyond this boundary must
not result in structural damage.
(d) High-speed airplanes must have
recovery characteristics that do not
result in structural damage or loss of
control, beginning at any likely speed
up to VMO/MMO, following—
(1) An inadvertent speed increase;
and
(2) A high-speed trim upset.
§ 23.230 Performance and flight
characteristics requirements for flight in
icing conditions.
(a) If an applicant requests
certification for flight in icing
conditions as specified in part 1 of
appendix C to part 25 of this chapter
and any additional atmospheric icing
conditions for which an applicant
requests certification, the applicant
must demonstrate the following:
(1) Compliance with each requirement
of this subpart, except those applicable
to spins and any that must be
demonstrated at speeds in excess of—
(i) 250 knots CAS;
(ii) VMO or MMO; or
(iii) A speed at which the applicant
demonstrates the airframe will be free of
ice accretion.
(2) The stall warning for flight in icing
conditions and non-icing conditions is
the same.
(b) If an applicant requests
certification for flight in icing
conditions, the applicant must provide
a means to detect any icing conditions
for which certification is not requested
and demonstrate the aircraft’s ability to
avoid or exit those conditions.
(c) The applicant must develop an
operating limitation to prohibit
intentional flight, including takeoff and
landing, into icing conditions for which
the airplane is not certified to operate.
Subpart C—Structures
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 23.225 Vibration, buffeting, and highspeed characteristics.
§ 23.300
(a) Vibration and buffeting, for
operations up to VD/MD, must not
interfere with the control of the airplane
or cause fatigue to the flightcrew. Stall
warning buffet within these limits is
allowable.
(b) For high-speed airplanes and all
airplanes with a maximum operating
altitude greater than 25,000 feet (7,620
meters) pressure altitude, there must be
no perceptible buffeting in cruise
configuration at 1g and at any speed up
to VMO/MMO, except stall buffeting.
(c) For high-speed airplanes, the
applicant must determine the positive
maneuvering load factors at which the
The applicant must determine the
structural design envelope, which
describes the range and limits of
airplane design and operational
parameters for which the applicant will
show compliance with the requirements
of this subpart. The applicant must
account for all airplane design and
operational parameters that affect
structural loads, strength, durability,
and aeroelasticity, including:
(a) Structural design airspeeds and
Mach numbers, including—
(1) The design maneuvering airspeed,
VA, which may be no less than the
airspeed at which the airplane will stall
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Structural design envelope.
Frm 00069
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13519
at the maximum design maneuvering
load factor;
(2) The design cruising airspeed, VC
or MC, which may be no less than the
maximum speed expected in normal
operations;
(3) The design dive airspeed, VD or
MD, which is the airspeed that will not
be exceeded by inadvertent airspeed
increases when operating at VC or MC;
(4) Any other design airspeed
limitations required for the operation of
high lift devices, landing gear, and other
equipment or devices; and
(5) For level 4 airplanes, a rough air
penetration speed, VB.
(b) Design maneuvering load factors
not less than those, which service
history shows, may occur within the
structural design envelope.
(c) Inertial properties including
weight, center of gravity, and mass
moments of inertia, accounting for—
(1) All weights from the airplane
empty weight to the maximum weight;
and
(2) The weight and distribution of
occupants, payload, and fuel.
(d) Range of motion for control
surfaces, high lift devices, or other
moveable surfaces, including tolerances.
(e) All altitudes up to the maximum
altitude.
§ 23.305 Interaction of systems and
structures.
For airplanes equipped with systems
that affect structural performance, either
directly or as a result of failure or
malfunction, the applicant must account
for the influence and failure conditions
of these systems when showing
compliance with the requirements of
this subpart.
Structural Loads
§ 23.310
Structural design loads.
The applicant must:
(a) Determine structural design loads
resulting from any externally or
internally applied pressure, force, or
moment which may occur in flight,
ground and water operations, ground
and water handling, and while the
airplane is parked or moored.
(b) Determine the loads required by
paragraph (a) of this section at all
critical combinations of parameters, on
and within the boundaries of the
structural design envelope.
(c) The magnitude and distribution of
these loads must be based on physical
principles and may be no less than
service history shows will occur within
the structural design envelope.
§ 23.315
Flight load conditions.
The applicant must determine the
structural design loads resulting from
the following flight conditions:
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13520
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
(a) Vertical and horizontal
atmospheric gusts where the magnitude
and gradient of these gusts are based on
measured gust statistics.
(b) Symmetric and asymmetric
maneuvers.
(c) For canted lifting surfaces, vertical
and horizontal loads acting
simultaneously resulting from gust and
maneuver conditions.
(d) For multiengine airplanes, failure
of the powerplant unit which results in
the most severe structural loads.
§ 23.320 Ground and water load
conditions.
The applicant must determine the
structural design loads resulting from
the following ground and water
operations:
(a) For airplanes intended for
operation on land—taxi, takeoff,
landing, and ground handling
conditions occurring in normal and
adverse attitudes and configurations.
(b) For airplanes intended for
operation on water—taxi, takeoff,
landing, and water handling conditions
occurring in normal and adverse
attitudes and configurations in the most
severe sea conditions expected in
operation.
(c) Jacking and towing conditions.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 23.325
Component loading conditions.
The applicant must determine the
structural design loads acting on:
(a) Each engine mount and its
supporting structure resulting from
engine operation combined with gusts
and maneuvers.
(b) Each flight control and high lift
surface, their associated system and
supporting structure resulting from—
(1) The inertia of each surface and
mass balance attachment;
(2) Gusts and maneuvers;
(3) Pilot or automated system inputs;
(4) System induced conditions,
including jamming and friction; and
(5) Ground operations, including
downwind taxi and ground gusts.
(c) A pressurized cabin resulting from
the pressurization differential—
(1) From zero up to the maximum
relief valve setting combined with gust
and maneuver loads;
(2) From zero up to the maximum
relief valve setting combined with
ground and water loads if the airplane
may land with the cabin pressurized;
and
(3) At the maximum relief valve
setting multiplied by 1.33, omitting all
other loads.
§ 23.330
Limit and ultimate loads.
Unless special or other factors of
safety are necessary to meet the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
requirements of this subpart, the
applicant must determine—
(a) The limit loads, which are equal to
the structural design loads; and
(b) The ultimate loads, which are
equal to the limit loads multiplied by a
1.5 factor of safety.
Structural Performance
§ 23.400
Structural strength.
The applicant must demonstrate that
the structure will support:
(a) Limit loads without—
(1) Interference with the operation of
the airplane; and
(2) Detrimental permanent
deformation.
(b) Ultimate loads.
§ 23.405
Structural durability.
(a) The applicant must develop and
implement procedures to prevent
structural failures due to foreseeable
causes of strength degradation, which
could result in serious or fatal injuries,
loss of the airplane, or extended periods
of operation with reduced safety
margins. The Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness must include procedures
developed under this section.
(b) If a pressurized cabin has two or
more compartments separated by
bulkheads or a floor, the applicant must
design the structure for a sudden release
of pressure in any compartment that has
a door or window, considering failure of
the largest door or window opening in
the compartment.
(c) For airplanes with maximum
operating altitude greater than 41,000
feet, the procedures developed for
compliance to paragraph (a) of this
section must be capable of detecting
damage to the pressurized cabin
structure before the damage could result
in rapid decompression that would
result in serious or fatal injuries.
(d) The airplane must be capable of
continued safe flight and landing with
structural damage caused by highenergy fragments from an uncontained
engine or rotating machinery failure.
§ 23.410
Aeroelasticity.
(a) The airplane must be free from
flutter, control reversal, and
divergence—
(1) At all speeds within and
sufficiently beyond the structural design
envelope;
(2) For any configuration and
condition of operation;
(3) Accounting for critical degrees of
freedom; and
(4) Accounting for any critical failures
or malfunctions.
(b) The applicant must establish and
account for tolerances for all quantities
that affect flutter.
PO 00000
Frm 00070
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Design
§ 23.500
Structural design.
(a) The applicant must design each
part, article, and assembly for the
expected operating conditions of the
airplane.
(b) Design data must adequately
define the part, article, or assembly
configuration, its design features, and
any materials and processes used.
(c) The applicant must determine the
suitability of each design detail and part
having an important bearing on safety in
operations.
(d) The control system must be free
from jamming, excessive friction, and
excessive deflection when—
(1) The control system and its
supporting structure are subjected to
loads corresponding to the limit
airloads;
(2) The primary controls are subjected
to the lesser of the limit airloads or limit
pilot forces; and
(3) The secondary controls are
subjected to loads not less than those
corresponding to maximum pilot effort.
§ 23.505
Protection of structure.
(a) The applicant must protect each
part of the airplane, including small
parts such as fasteners, against
deterioration or loss of strength due to
any cause likely to occur in the
expected operational environment.
(b) Each part of the airplane must
have adequate provisions for ventilation
and drainage.
(c) For each part that requires
maintenance, preventive maintenance,
or servicing, the applicant must
incorporate a means into the aircraft
design to allow such actions to be
accomplished.
§ 23.510
Materials and processes.
(a) The applicant must determine the
suitability and durability of materials
used for parts, articles, and assemblies,
the failure of which could prevent
continued safe flight and landing. The
applicant must account for the effects of
likely environmental conditions
expected in service.
(b) The methods and processes of
fabrication and assembly used must
produce consistently sound structures.
If a fabrication process requires close
control to reach this objective, the
applicant must perform the process
under an approved process
specification.
(c) Except as provided in paragraphs
(f) and (g) of this section, the applicant
must select design values that ensure
material strength with probabilities that
account for the criticality of the
structural element. Design values must
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
account for the probability of structural
failure due to material variability.
(d) If material strength properties are
required, a determination of those
properties must be based on sufficient
tests of material meeting specifications
to establish design values on a statistical
basis.
(e) If thermal effects are significant on
an essential component or structure
under normal operating conditions, the
applicant must determine those effects
on allowable stresses used for design.
(f) Design values, greater than the
minimums specified by this section,
may be used, where only guaranteed
minimum values are normally allowed,
if a specimen of each individual item is
tested before use to determine that the
actual strength properties of that
particular item will equal or exceed
those used in the design.
(g) An applicant may use other
material design values if approved by
the Administrator.
§ 23.515
Special factors of safety.
(a) The applicant must determine a
special factor of safety for any critical
design value that is—
(1) Uncertain;
(2) Used for a part, article, or
assembly that is likely to deteriorate in
service before normal replacement; or
(3) Subject to appreciable variability
because of uncertainties in
manufacturing processes or inspection
methods.
(b) The applicant must determine a
special factor of safety using quality
controls and specifications that account
for each—
(1) Structural application;
(2) Inspection method;
(3) Structural test requirement;
(4) Sampling percentage; and
(5) Process and material control.
(c) The applicant must apply any
special factor of safety in the design for
each part of the structure by multiplying
each limit load and ultimate load by the
special factor of safety.
Structural Occupant Protection
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 23.600
(a) The airplane, even when damaged
in an emergency landing, must protect
each occupant against injury that would
preclude egress when—
(1) Properly using safety equipment
and features provided for in the design;
(2) The occupant experiences ultimate
static inertia loads likely to occur in an
emergency landing; and
(3) Items of mass, including engines
or auxiliary power units (APUs), within
or aft of the cabin, that could injure an
occupant, experience ultimate static
inertia loads likely to occur in an
emergency landing.
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
Subpart D—Design and Construction
§ 23.700
Emergency conditions.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
(b) The emergency landing conditions
specified in paragraph (a) of this
section, must—
(1) Include dynamic conditions that
are likely to occur with an impact at
stall speed, accounting for variations in
aircraft mass, flight path angle, flight
pitch angle, yaw, and airplane
configuration, including likely failure
conditions at impact; and
(2) Not exceed established human
injury criteria for human tolerance due
to restraint or contact with objects in the
airplane.
(c) The airplane must have seating
and restraints for all occupants. The
airplane seating, restraints, and cabin
interior must account for likely flight
and emergency landing conditions.
(d) Each occupant restraint system
must consist of a seat, a method to
restrain the occupant’s pelvis and torso,
and a single action restraint release. For
all flight and ground loads during
normal operation and any emergency
landing conditions, the restraint system
must perform its intended function and
not create a hazard that could cause a
secondary injury to an occupant. The
restraint system must not prevent
occupant egress or interfere with the
operation of the airplane when not in
use.
(e) Each baggage and cargo
compartment must—
(1) Be designed for its maximum
weight of contents and for the critical
load distributions at the maximum load
factors corresponding to the flight and
ground load conditions determined
under this part;
(2) Have a means to prevent the
contents of the compartment from
becoming a hazard by impacting
occupants or shifting; and
(3) Protect any controls, wiring, lines,
equipment, or accessories whose
damage or failure would affect
operations.
Flight control systems.
(a) The applicant must design
airplane flight control systems to:
(1) Prevent major, hazardous, and
catastrophic hazards, including—
(i) Failure;
(ii) Operational hazards;
(iii) Flutter;
(iv) Asymmetry; and
(v) Misconfiguration.
(2) Operate easily, smoothly, and
positively enough to allow normal
operation.
(b) The applicant must design trim
systems to:
(1) Prevent inadvertent, incorrect, or
abrupt trim operation.
PO 00000
Frm 00071
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13521
(2) Provide a means to indicate—
(i) The direction of trim control
movement relative to airplane motion;
(ii) The trim position with respect to
the trim range;
(iii) The neutral position for lateral
and directional trim; and
(iv) For all airplanes, except simple
airplanes, the range for takeoff for all
applicant requested center of gravity
ranges and configurations.
(3) Except for simple airplanes,
provide control for continued safe flight
and landing when any one connecting
or transmitting element in the primary
flight control system fails.
(4) Limit the range of travel to allow
safe flight and landing, if an adjustable
stabilizer is used.
(c) For an airplane equipped with an
artificial stall barrier system, the system
must—
(1) Prevent uncommanded control or
thrust action; and
(2) Provide for a preflight check.
(d) For level 3 high-speed and all
level 4 airplanes, an applicant must
install a takeoff warning system on the
airplane unless the applicant
demonstrates the airplane, for each
configuration, can takeoff at the limits of
the trim and flap ranges.
§ 23.705
Landing gear systems.
(a) For airplanes with retractable
landing gear:
(1) The landing gear and retracting
mechanism, including the wheel well
doors, must be able to withstand
operational and flight loads.
(2) The airplane must have—
(i) A positive means to keep the
landing gear extended;
(ii) A secondary means of extension
for landing gear that cannot be extended
using the primary means;
(iii) A means to inform the pilot that
each landing gear is secured in the
extended and retracted positions; and
(iv) Except for airplanes intended for
operation on water, a warning to the
pilot if the thrust and configuration is
selected for landing and the landing
gear is not fully extended and locked.
(3) If the landing gear bay is used as
the location for equipment other than
the landing gear, that equipment must
be designed and installed to avoid
damage from tire burst and from items
that may enter the landing gear bay.
(b) The design of each landing gear
wheel, tire, and ski must account for
critical loads, including those
experienced during landing and rejected
takeoff.
(c) A reliable means of stopping the
airplane must provide kinetic energy
absorption within the airplane’s design
specifications for landing.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13522
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
(d) For levels 3 and 4 multiengine
airplanes, the braking system must
provide kinetic energy absorption
within the airplane’s design
specifications for rejected takeoff.
§ 23.710 Buoyancy for seaplanes and
amphibians.
Airplanes intended for operations on
water, must—
(a) Provide buoyancy of 80 percent in
excess of the buoyancy required to
support the maximum weight of the
airplane in fresh water; and
(b) Have sufficient watertight
compartments so the airplane will stay
afloat at rest in calm water without
capsizing if any two compartments of
any main float or hull are flooded.
Occupant System Design Protection
§ 23.750
exits.
Means of egress and emergency
(a) The airplane cabin exit design
must provide for evacuation of the
airplane within 90 seconds in
conditions likely to occur following an
emergency landing. Likely conditions
exclude ditching for all but levels 3 and
4 multiengine airplanes.
(b) Each exit must have a means to be
opened from both inside and outside the
airplane, when the internal locking
mechanism is in the locked and
unlocked position. The means of
opening must be simple, obvious, and
marked inside and outside the airplane.
(c) Airplane evacuation paths must
protect occupants from serious injury
from the propulsion system.
(d) Each exit must not be obstructed
by a seat or seat back, unless the seat or
seat back can be easily moved in one
action to clear the exit.
(e) Airplanes certified for aerobatics
must have a means to egress the
airplane in flight.
(f) Doors, canopies, and exits must be
protected from opening inadvertently in
flight.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 23.755
Occupant physical environment.
(a) The applicant must design the
airplane to—
(1) Allow clear communication
between the flightcrew and passengers;
(2) Provide a clear, sufficiently
undistorted external view to enable the
flightcrew to perform any maneuvers
within the operating limitations of the
airplane;
(3) Protect the pilot from serious
injury due to high energy rotating
failures in systems and equipment; and
(4) Protect the occupants from serious
injury due to damage to windshields,
windows, and canopies.
(b) For level 4 airplanes, each
windshield and its supporting structure
directly in front of the pilot must—
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
(1) Withstand, without penetration,
the impact equivalent to a two-pound
bird when the velocity of the airplane is
equal to the airplane’s maximum
approach flap speed; and
(2) Allow for continued safe flight and
landing after the loss of vision through
any one panel.
(c) The airplane must provide each
occupant with air at a breathable
pressure, free of hazardous
concentrations of gases and vapors,
during normal operations and likely
failures.
(d) If an oxygen system is installed in
the airplane, it must include—
(1) A means to allow the flightcrew to
determine the quantity of oxygen
available in each source of supply on
the ground and in flight;
(2) A means to determine whether
oxygen is being delivered; and
(3) A means to permit the flightcrew
to turn on and shut off the oxygen
supply at any high-pressure source in
flight.
(e) If a pressurization system is
installed in the airplane, it must
include—
(1) A warning if an unsafe condition
exists; and
(2) A pressurization system test.
Fire and High Energy Protection
§ 23.800 Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
Outside designated fire zones:
(a) The following materials must be
self-extinguishing—
(1) Insulation on electrical wire and
electrical cable;
(2) For levels 1, 2, and 3 airplanes,
materials in the baggage and cargo
compartments inaccessible in flight; and
(3) For level 4 airplanes, materials in
the cockpit, cabin, baggage, and cargo
compartments.
(b) The following materials must be
flame resistant—
(1) For levels 1, 2 and 3 airplanes,
materials in each compartment
accessible in flight; and
(2) Any electrical cable installation
that would overheat in the event of
circuit overload or fault.
(c) Thermal acoustic materials, if
installed, must not be a flame
propagation hazard.
(d) Sources of heat that are capable of
igniting adjacent objects must be
shielded and insulated to prevent such
ignition.
(e) For level 4 airplanes, each baggage
and cargo compartment must—
(1) Be located where a fire would be
visible to the pilots, or equipped with a
fire detection system and warning
system; and
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(2) Be accessible for the manual
extinguishing of a fire, have a built-in
fire extinguishing system, or be
constructed and sealed to contain any
fire within the compartment.
(f) There must be a means to
extinguish any fire in the cabin such
that—
(1) The pilot, while seated, can easily
access the fire extinguishing means; and
(2) For levels 3 and 4 airplanes,
passengers have a fire extinguishing
means available within the passenger
compartment.
(g) Each area where flammable fluids
or vapors might escape by leakage of a
fluid system must—
(1) Be defined; and
(2) Have a means to make fluid and
vapor ignition, and the resultant hazard,
if ignition occurs, improbable.
(h) Combustion heater installations
must be protected from uncontained
fire.
§ 23.805
zones.
Fire protection in designated fire
Inside designated fire zones:
(a) Flight controls, engine mounts,
and other flight structures within or
adjacent to those zones must be capable
of withstanding the effects of a fire.
(b) Engines must remain attached to
the airplane in the event of a fire or
electrical arcing.
(c) Terminals, equipment, and
electrical cables used during emergency
procedures must be fire-resistant.
§ 23.810
Lightning protection of structure.
(a) For airplanes approved for
instrument flight rules, no structural
failure preventing continued safe flight
and landing may occur from exposure to
the direct effects of lightning.
(b) Airplanes approved only for visual
flight rules must achieve lightning
protection by following FAA accepted
design practices.
Subpart E—Powerplant
§ 23.900
Powerplant installation.
(a) For the purpose of this subpart, the
airplane powerplant installation must
include each component necessary for
propulsion, affects propulsion safety, or
provides auxiliary power to the
airplane.
(b) The applicant must construct and
arrange each powerplant installation to
account for likely hazards in operation
and maintenance.
(c) Except for simple airplanes, each
aircraft power unit must be type
certificated.
§ 23.905
Propeller installation.
(a) Except for simple airplanes, each
propeller must be type certificated.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
(b) Each pusher propeller must be
marked so that it is conspicuous under
daylight conditions.
(c) Each propeller installation must
account for vibration and fatigue.
§ 23.910 Powerplant installation hazard
assessment.
The applicant must assess each
powerplant separately and in relation to
other airplane systems and installations
to show that a failure of any powerplant
system component or accessory will
not—
(a) Prevent continued safe flight and
landing;
(b) Cause serious injury that may be
avoided; and
(c) Require immediate action by
crewmembers for continued operation
of any remaining powerplant system.
§ 23.915 Automatic power control
systems.
A power or thrust augmentation
system that automatically controls the
power or thrust on the operating
powerplant, must—
(a) Provide indication to the
flightcrew when the system is operating;
(b) Provide a means for the pilot to
deactivate the automatic function; and
(c) Prevent inadvertent deactivation.
§ 23.920
Reversing systems.
The airplane must be capable of
continued safe flight and landing under
any available reversing system setting.
§ 23.925 Powerplant operational
characteristics.
(a) The powerplant must operate at
any negative acceleration that may
occur during normal and emergency
operation, within the airplane operating
limitations.
(b) The pilot must have the capability
to stop and restart the powerplant in
flight.
(c) The airplane must have an
independent power source for restarting
each powerplant following an in-flight
shutdown.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 23.930
Fuel system
(a) Each fuel system must—
(1) Provide an independent fuel
supply to each powerplant in at least
one configuration;
(2) Avoid ignition from unplanned
sources;
(3) Provide the fuel required to
achieve maximum power or thrust plus
a margin for likely variables, in all
temperature and altitude conditions
within the airplane operating envelope;
(4) Provide a means to remove the fuel
from the airplane;
(5) Be capable of retaining fuel when
subject to inertia loads under expected
operating conditions; and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
(6) Prevent hazardous contamination
of the fuel supply.
(b) Each fuel storage system must—
(1) Withstand the loads and pressures
under expected operating conditions;
(2) Provide a means to prevent loss of
fuel during any maneuver under
operating conditions for which
certification is requested;
(3) Prevent discharge when
transferring fuel;
(4) Provide fuel for at least one-half
hour of operation at maximum
continuous power or thrust; and
(5) Be capable of jettisoning fuel if
required for landing.
(c) If a pressure refueling system is
installed, it must have a means to—
(1) Prevent the escape of hazardous
quantities of fuel;
(2) Automatically shut-off before
exceeding the maximum fuel quantity of
the airplane; and
(3) Provide an indication of a failure
at the fueling station.
§ 23.935 Powerplant induction and
exhaust systems.
The air induction system for each
power unit and its accessories must—
(a) Supply the air required by that
power unit and its accessories under
expected operating conditions; and
(b) Provide a means to discharge
potential harmful material.
§ 23.940
Powerplant ice protection.
(a) The airplane design must prevent
foreseeable accumulation of ice or snow
that adversely affects powerplant
operation.
(b) The powerplant design must
prevent any accumulation of ice or
snow that adversely affects powerplant
operation, in those icing conditions for
which certification is requested.
§ 23.1000
Powerplant fire protection.
(a) A powerplant may only be
installed in a designated fire zone.
(b) Each component, line, and fitting
carrying flammable fluids, gases, or air
subject to fire conditions must be fire
resistant, except components storing
concentrated flammable material must
be fireproof or enclosed by a fireproof
shield.
(c) The applicant must provide a
means to shut off fuel or flammable
material for each powerplant that
must—
(1) Not restrict fuel to remaining
units; and
(2) Prevent inadvertent operation.
(d) For levels 3 and 4 airplanes with
a powerplant located outside the pilot’s
view that uses combustible fuel, the
applicant must install a fire
extinguishing system.
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13523
(e) For levels 3 and 4 airplanes, the
applicant must install a fire detection
system in each designated fire zone.
(f) Each fire detection system must
provide a means to alert the flightcrew
in the event of a detection of fire or
failure of the system.
(g) There must be a means to check
the fire detection system in flight.
Subpart F—Equipment
§ 23.1300 Airplane level systems
requirements.
(a) The equipment and systems
required for an airplane to operate safely
in the kinds of operations for which
certification is requested (Day VFR,
Night VFR, IFR) must be designed and
installed to—
(1) Meet the level of safety applicable
to the certification and performance
level of the airplane; and
(2) Perform their intended function
throughout the operating and
environmental limits specified by the
applicant.
(b) Non-required airplane equipment
and systems, considered separately and
in relation to other systems, must be
designed and installed so their
operation or failure does not have an
adverse effect on the airplane or its
occupants.
§ 23.1305
Function and installation.
(a) Each item of installed equipment
must—
(1) Perform its intended function;
(2) Be installed according to
limitations specified for that equipment;
and
(3) Be labeled, if applicable, as to its
identification, function or operating
limitations, or any combination of these
factors.
(b) There must be a discernable means
of providing system operating
parameters required to operate the
airplane, including warnings, cautions,
and normal indications to the
responsible crewmember.
(c) Information concerning an unsafe
system operating condition must be
provided in a timely manner to the
crewmember responsible for taking
corrective action. Presentation of this
information must be clear enough to
avoid likely crewmember errors.
§ 23.1310 Flight, navigation, and
powerplant instruments.
(a) Installed systems must provide the
flightcrew member who sets or monitors
flight parameters for the flight,
navigation, and powerplant the
information necessary to do so during
each phase of flight. This information
must include—
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13524
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
(1) Parameters and trends, as needed
for normal, abnormal, and emergency
operation; and
(2) Limitations, unless the applicant
shows each limitation will not be
exceeded in all intended operations.
(b) Indication systems that integrate
the display of flight or powerplant
parameters to operate the airplane or are
required by the operating rules of this
chapter must—
(1) Not inhibit the primary display of
flight or powerplant parameters needed
by any flightcrew member in any
normal mode of operation; and
(2) In combination with other
systems, be designed and installed so
information essential for continued safe
flight and landing will be available to
the flightcrew in a timely manner after
any single failure or probable
combination of failures.
§ 23.1315 Equipment, systems, and
installations.
For any airplane system or equipment
whose failure or abnormal operation has
not been specifically addressed by
another requirement in this part, the
applicant must:
(a) Examine the design and
installation of airplane systems and
equipment, separately and in relation to
other airplane systems and equipment
to determine—
(1) If a failure would prevent
continued safe flight and landing; and
(2) If any other failure would
significantly reduce the capability of the
airplane or the ability of the flightcrew
to cope with adverse operating
conditions.
(b) Design and install each system and
equipment, examined separately and in
relation to other airplane systems and
equipment, such that—
(1) Each catastrophic failure condition
is extremely improbable;
(2) Each hazardous failure condition
is extremely remote; and
(3) Each major failure condition is
remote.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 23.1320 Electrical and electronic system
lightning protection.
For an airplane approved for IFR
operations:
(a) Each electrical or electronic system
that performs a function, the failure of
which would prevent the continued safe
flight and landing of the airplane, must
be designed and installed such that—
(1) The airplane system level function
continues to perform during and after
the time the airplane is exposed to
lightning; and
(2) The system automatically recovers
normal operation of that function in a
timely manner after the airplane is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
exposed to lightning unless the system’s
recovery conflicts with other
operational or functional requirements
of the system.
(b) Each electrical and electronic
system that performs a function, the
failure of which would reduce the
capability of the airplane or the ability
of the flightcrew to respond to an
adverse operating condition, must be
designed and installed such that the
function recovers normal operation in a
timely manner after the airplane is
exposed to lightning.
§ 23.1325 High-intensity Radiated Fields
(HIRF) protection.
(a) Electrical and electronic systems
that perform a function, the failure of
which would prevent the continued safe
flight and landing of the airplane, must
be designed and installed such that—
(1) The airplane system level function
is not adversely affected during and
after the time the airplane is exposed to
the HIRF environment; and
(2) The system automatically recovers
normal operation of that function in a
timely manner after the airplane is
exposed to the HIRF environment,
unless the system’s recovery conflicts
with other operational or functional
requirements of the system.
(b) For airplanes approved for IFR
operations, the applicant must design
and install each electrical and electronic
system that performs a function, the
failure of which would reduce the
capability of the airplane or the ability
of the flightcrew to respond to an
adverse operating condition, so the
function recovers normal operation in a
timely manner after the airplane is
exposed to the HIRF environment.
§ 23.1330 System power generation,
storage, and distribution.
The power generation, storage, and
distribution for any system must be
designed and installed to—
(a) Supply the power required for
operation of connected loads during all
likely operating conditions;
(b) Ensure no single failure or
malfunction will prevent the system
from supplying the essential loads
required for continued safe flight and
landing; and
(c) Have enough capacity, if the
primary source fails, to supply essential
loads, including non-continuous
essential loads for the time needed to
complete the function, for—
(1) At least 30 minutes for airplanes
certificated with a maximum altitude of
25,000 feet (7,620 meters) or less; and
(2) At least 60 minutes for airplanes
certificated with a maximum altitude
over 25,000 feet (7,620 meters).
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
§ 23.1335
External and cockpit lighting.
(a) The applicant must design and
install all lights to prevent adverse
effects on the performance of flightcrew
duties.
(b) Any position and anti-collision
lights, if required by part 91 of this
chapter, must have the intensities, flash
rate, colors, fields of coverage, and other
characteristics to provide sufficient time
for another aircraft to avoid a collision.
(c) Any position lights, if required by
part 91 of this chapter, must include a
red light on the left side of the airplane,
a green light on the right side of the
airplane, spaced laterally as far apart as
space allows, and a white light facing
aft, located on an aft portion of the
airplane or on the wing tips.
(d) The applicant must design and
install taxi and landing lights so they
provide sufficient light for night
operations.
(e) For seaplanes or amphibian
airplanes, riding lights must provide a
white light visible in clear atmospheric
conditions.
§ 23.1400
Safety equipment.
Safety and survival equipment,
required by the operating rules of this
chapter, must be reliable, readily
accessible, easily identifiable, and
clearly marked to identify its method of
operation.
§ 23.1405
Flight in icing conditions.
(a) If an applicant requests
certification for flight in icing
conditions, the applicant must
demonstrate that—
(1) The ice protection system provides
for safe operation; and
(2) The airplane is protected from
stalling when the autopilot is operating
in a vertical mode.
(b) The demonstration specified in
paragraph (a) of this section, must be
conducted in atmospheric icing
conditions specified in part 1 of
appendix C to part 25 of this chapter,
and any additional icing conditions for
which certification is requested.
§ 23.1410
Pressurized systems elements.
(a) The minimum burst pressure of
hydraulic systems must be at least 2.5
times the design operating pressure. The
proof pressure must be at least 1.5 times
the maximum operating pressure.
(b) On multiengine airplanes, engine
driven accessories essential to safe
operation must be distributed among
multiple engines.
(c) The minimum burst pressure of
cabin pressurization system elements
must be at least 2.0 times, and proof
pressure must be at least 1.5 times, the
maximum normal operating pressure.
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
(d) The minimum burst pressure of
pneumatic system elements must be at
least 3.0 times, and proof pressure must
be at least 1.5 times, the maximum
normal operating pressure.
(e) Other pressurized system elements
must have pressure margins that take
into account system design and
operating conditions.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
§ 23.1457
Cockpit voice recorders.
(a) Each cockpit voice recorder
required by the operating rules of this
chapter must be approved and must be
installed so that it will record the
following:
(1) Voice communications transmitted
from or received in the airplane by
radio.
(2) Voice communications of
flightcrew members on the flight deck.
(3) Voice communications of
flightcrew members on the flight deck,
using the airplane’s interphone system.
(4) Voice or audio signals identifying
navigation or approach aids introduced
into a headset or speaker.
(5) Voice communications of
flightcrew members using the passenger
loudspeaker system, if there is such a
system and if the fourth channel is
available in accordance with the
requirements of paragraph (c)(4)(ii) of
this section.
(6) If datalink communication
equipment is installed, all datalink
communications, using an approved
data message set. Datalink messages
must be recorded as the output signal
from the communications unit that
translates the signal into usable data.
(b) The recording requirements of
paragraph (a)(2) of this section must be
met by installing a cockpit-mounted
area microphone, located in the best
position for recording voice
communications originating at the first
and second pilot stations and voice
communications of other crewmembers
on the flight deck when directed to
those stations. The microphone must be
so located and, if necessary, the
preamplifiers and filters of the recorder
must be so adjusted or supplemented, so
that the intelligibility of the recorded
communications is as high as
practicable when recorded under flight
cockpit noise conditions and played
back. Repeated aural or visual playback
of the record may be used in evaluating
intelligibility.
(c) Each cockpit voice recorder must
be installed so that the part of the
communication or audio signals
specified in paragraph (a) of this section
obtained from each of the following
sources is recorded on a separate
channel:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
(1) For the first channel, from each
boom, mask, or handheld microphone,
headset, or speaker used at the first pilot
station.
(2) For the second channel from each
boom, mask, or handheld microphone,
headset, or speaker used at the second
pilot station.
(3) For the third channel—from the
cockpit-mounted area microphone.
(4) For the fourth channel from:
(i) Each boom, mask, or handheld
microphone, headset, or speaker used at
the station for the third and fourth
crewmembers.
(ii) If the stations specified in
paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this section are not
required or if the signal at such a station
is picked up by another channel, each
microphone on the flight deck that is
used with the passenger loudspeaker
system, if its signals are not picked up
by another channel.
(5) And that as far as is practicable all
sounds received by the microphone
listed in paragraphs (c)(1), (2), and (4) of
this section must be recorded without
interruption irrespective of the position
of the interphone-transmitter key
switch. The design shall ensure that
sidetone for the flightcrew is produced
only when the interphone, public
address system, or radio transmitters are
in use.
(d) Each cockpit voice recorder must
be installed so that:
(1) (i) It receives its electrical power
from the bus that provides the
maximum reliability for operation of the
cockpit voice recorder without
jeopardizing service to essential or
emergency loads.
(ii) It remains powered for as long as
possible without jeopardizing
emergency operation of the airplane.
(2) There is an automatic means to
simultaneously stop the recorder and
prevent each erasure feature from
functioning, within 10 minutes after
crash impact.
(3) There is an aural or visual means
for preflight checking of the recorder for
proper operation.
(4) Any single electrical failure
external to the recorder does not disable
both the cockpit voice recorder and the
flight data recorder.
(5) It has an independent power
source—
(i) That provides 10±1 minutes of
electrical power to operate both the
cockpit voice recorder and cockpitmounted area microphone;
(ii) That is located as close as
practicable to the cockpit voice
recorder; and
(iii) To which the cockpit voice
recorder and cockpit-mounted area
microphone are switched automatically
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13525
in the event that all other power to the
cockpit voice recorder is interrupted
either by normal shutdown or by any
other loss of power to the electrical
power bus.
(6) It is in a separate container from
the flight data recorder when both are
required. If used to comply with only
the cockpit voice recorder requirements,
a combination unit may be installed.
(e) The recorder container must be
located and mounted to minimize the
probability of rupture of the container as
a result of crash impact and consequent
heat damage to the recorder from fire.
(1) Except as provided in paragraph
(e)(2) of this section, the recorder
container must be located as far aft as
practicable, but need not be outside of
the pressurized compartment, and may
not be located where aft-mounted
engines may crush the container during
impact.
(2) If two separate combination digital
flight data recorder and cockpit voice
recorder units are installed instead of
one cockpit voice recorder and one
digital flight data recorder, the
combination unit that is installed to
comply with the cockpit voice recorder
requirements may be located near the
cockpit.
(f) If the cockpit voice recorder has a
bulk erasure device, the installation
must be designed to minimize the
probability of inadvertent operation and
actuation of the device during crash
impact.
(g) Each recorder container must—
(1) Be either bright orange or bright
yellow;
(2) Have reflective tape affixed to its
external surface to facilitate its location
under water; and
(3) Have an underwater locating
device, when required by the operating
rules of this chapter, on or adjacent to
the container, which is secured in such
manner that they are not likely to be
separated during crash impact.
§ 23.1459
Flight data recorders.
(a) Each flight recorder required by
the operating rules of this chapter must
be installed so that—
(1) It is supplied with airspeed,
altitude, and directional data obtained
from sources that meet the aircraft level
system requirements of § 23.1300 and
the functionality specified in § 23.1305;
(2) The vertical acceleration sensor is
rigidly attached, and located
longitudinally either within the
approved center of gravity limits of the
airplane, or at a distance forward or aft
of these limits that does not exceed 25
percent of the airplane’s mean
aerodynamic chord;
(3)(i) It receives its electrical power
from the bus that provides the
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
13526
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
maximum reliability for operation of the
flight data recorder without jeopardizing
service to essential or emergency loads;
(ii) It remains powered for as long as
possible without jeopardizing
emergency operation of the airplane;
(4) There is an aural or visual means
for preflight checking of the recorder for
proper recording of data in the storage
medium;
(5) Except for recorders powered
solely by the engine-driven electrical
generator system, there is an automatic
means to simultaneously stop a recorder
that has a data erasure feature and
prevent each erasure feature from
functioning, within 10 minutes after
crash impact;
(6) Any single electrical failure
external to the recorder does not disable
both the cockpit voice recorder and the
flight data recorder; and
(7) It is in a separate container from
the cockpit voice recorder when both
are required. If used to comply with
only the flight data recorder
requirements, a combination unit may
be installed. If a combination unit is
installed as a cockpit voice recorder to
comply with § 23.1457(e)(2), a
combination unit must be used to
comply with this flight data recorder
requirement.
(b) Each non-ejectable record
container must be located and mounted
so as to minimize the probability of
container rupture resulting from crash
impact and subsequent damage to the
record from fire. In meeting this
requirement, the record container must
be located as far aft as practicable, but
need not be aft of the pressurized
compartment, and may not be where aftmounted engines may crush the
container upon impact.
(c) A correlation must be established
between the flight recorder readings of
airspeed, altitude, and heading and the
corresponding readings (taking into
account correction factors) of the first
pilot’s instruments. The correlation
must cover the airspeed range over
which the airplane is to be operated, the
range of altitude to which the airplane
is limited, and 360 degrees of heading.
Correlation may be established on the
ground as appropriate.
(d) Each recorder container must—
(1) Be either bright orange or bright
yellow;
(2) Have reflective tape affixed to its
external surface to facilitate its location
under water; and
(3) Have an underwater locating
device, when required by the operating
rules of this chapter, on or adjacent to
the container, which is secured in such
a manner that they are not likely to be
separated during crash impact.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
(e) Any novel or unique design or
operational characteristics of the aircraft
shall be evaluated to determine if any
dedicated parameters must be recorded
on flight recorders in addition to or in
place of existing requirements.
Subpart G—Flightcrew Interface and
Other Information
§ 23.1500
Flightcrew interface.
(a) The pilot compartment and its
equipment must allow each pilot to
perform his or her duties, including
taxi, takeoff, climb, cruise, descent,
approach, landing, and perform any
maneuvers within the operating
envelope of the airplane, without
excessive concentration, skill, alertness,
or fatigue.
(b) The applicant must install flight,
navigation, surveillance, and
powerplant controls and displays so
qualified flightcrew can monitor and
perform all tasks associated with the
intended functions of systems and
equipment. The system and equipment
design must make the possibility that a
flightcrew error could result in a
catastrophic event highly unlikely.
§ 23.1505 Instrument markings, control
markings, and placards.
(a) Each airplane must display in a
conspicuous manner any placard and
instrument marking necessary for
operation.
(b) The applicant must clearly mark
each cockpit control, other than primary
flight controls, as to its function and
method of operation.
(c) The applicant must include
instrument marking and placard
information in the Airplane Flight
Manual.
§ 23.1510
Airplane flight manual.
The applicant must provide an
Airplane Flight Manual that must be
delivered with each airplane that
contains the following information—
(a) Operating limitations and
procedures;
(b) Performance information;
(c) Loading information; and
(d) Any other information necessary
for the operation of the airplane.
§ 23.1515 Instructions for continued
airworthiness.
The applicant must prepare
Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness, in accordance with
appendix A of this part, that are
acceptable to the Administrator prior to
the delivery of the first airplane or
issuance of a standard certification of
airworthiness, whichever occurs later.
PO 00000
Frm 00076
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Appendix A to Part 23—Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness
A23.1 General
(a) This appendix specifies
requirements for the preparation of
Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness as required by this part.
(b) The Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness for each airplane must
include the Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness for each engine and
propeller (hereinafter designated
‘‘products’’), for each appliance required
by this chapter, and any required
information relating to the interface of
those appliances and products with the
airplane. If Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness are not supplied by the
manufacturer of an appliance or product
installed in the airplane, the
Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness for the airplane must
include the information essential to the
continued airworthiness of the airplane.
(c) The applicant must submit to the
FAA a program to show how changes to
the Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness made by the applicant or
by the manufacturers of products and
appliances installed in the airplane will
be distributed.
A23.2
Format
(a) The Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness must be in the form of a
manual or manuals as appropriate for
the quantity of data to be provided.
(b) The format of the manual or
manuals must provide for a practical
arrangement.
A23.3
Content
The contents of the manual or
manuals must be prepared in the
English language. The Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness must contain
the following manuals or sections and
information:
(a) Airplane maintenance manual or
section.
(1) Introduction information that
includes an explanation of the
airplane’s features and data to the extent
necessary for maintenance or preventive
maintenance.
(2) A description of the airplane and
its systems and installations including
its engines, propellers, and appliances.
(3) Basic control and operation
information describing how the airplane
components and systems are controlled
and how they operate, including any
special procedures and limitations that
apply.
(4) Servicing information that covers
details regarding servicing points,
capacities of tanks, reservoirs, types of
fluids to be used, pressures applicable
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
to the various systems, location of
access panels for inspection and
servicing, locations of lubrication
points, lubricants to be used, equipment
required for servicing, tow instructions
and limitations, mooring, jacking, and
leveling information.
(b) Maintenance Instructions
(1) Scheduling information for each
part of the airplane and its engines,
auxiliary power units, propellers,
accessories, instruments, and equipment
that provides the recommended periods
at which they should be cleaned,
inspected, adjusted, tested, and
lubricated, and the degree of inspection,
the applicable wear tolerances, and
work recommended at these periods.
However, the applicant may refer to an
accessory, instrument, or equipment
manufacturer as the source of this
information if the applicant shows that
the item has an exceptionally high
degree of complexity requiring
specialized maintenance techniques,
test equipment, or expertise. The
recommended overhaul periods and
necessary cross reference to the
Airworthiness Limitations section of the
manual must also be included. In
addition, the applicant must include an
inspection program that includes the
frequency and extent of the inspections
necessary to provide for the continued
airworthiness of the airplane.
(2) Troubleshooting information
describing probable malfunctions, how
to recognize those malfunctions, and the
remedial action for those malfunctions.
(3) Information describing the order
and method of removing and replacing
products and parts with any necessary
precautions to be taken.
(4) Other general procedural
instructions including procedures for
system testing during ground running,
symmetry checks, weighing and
determining the center of gravity, lifting
and shoring, and storage limitations.
(c) Diagrams of structural access
plates and information needed to gain
access for inspections when access
plates are not provided.
(d) Details for the application of
special inspection techniques including
radiographic and ultrasonic testing
where such processes are specified by
the applicant.
(e) Information needed to apply
protective treatments to the structure
after inspection.
(f) All data relative to structural
fasteners such as identification, discard
recommendations, and torque values.
(g) A list of special tools needed.
(h) In addition, for level 4 airplanes,
the following information must be
furnished—
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
(1) Electrical loads applicable to the
various systems;
(2) Methods of balancing control
surfaces;
(3) Identification of primary and
secondary structures; and
(4) Special repair methods applicable
to the airplane.
A23.4 Airworthiness limitations
section
The Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness must contain a section
titled Airworthiness Limitations that is
segregated and clearly distinguishable
from the rest of the document. This
section must set forth each mandatory
replacement time, structural inspection
interval, and related structural
inspection procedure required for type
certification. If the Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness consist of
multiple documents, the section
required by this paragraph must be
included in the principal manual. This
section must contain a legible statement
in a prominent location that reads ‘‘The
Airworthiness Limitations section is
FAA approved and specifies
maintenance required under §§ 43.16
and 91.403 of Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations unless an
alternative program has been FAA
approved.’’
PART 35—AIRWORTHINESS
STANDARDS: PROPELLERS
9. The authority citation for part 35 is
revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113,
44701–44702, 44704.
10. In § 35.1, revise paragraph (c) to
read as follows:
■
§ 35.1
Applicability.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) An applicant is eligible for a
propeller type certificate and changes to
those certificates after demonstrating
compliance with subparts A, B, and C
of this part. However, the propeller may
not be installed on an airplane unless
the applicant has shown compliance
with either § 23.905(c) or § 25.907 of
this chapter, as applicable, or
compliance is not required for
installation on that airplane.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 11. In § 35.37, revise paragraph (c)(1)
to read as follows:
§ 35.37
Fatigue limits and evaluation.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) * * *
(1) The intended airplane by
complying with § 23.905(c) or § 25.907
of this chapter, as applicable; or
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
13527
PART 43—MAINTENANCE,
PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE,
REBUILDING, AND ALTERATION
12. The authority citation for part 43
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7572; 49 U.S.C. 106(f),
106(g), 40105, 40113, 44701–44702, 44704,
44707, 44709, 44711, 44713, 44715, 45303.
13. In part 43, appendix E, revise the
introductory text and paragraph (a)(2) to
read as follows:
■
Appendix E to Part 43—Altimeter
System Test and Inspection
Each person performing the altimeter
system tests and inspections required by
§ 91.411 must comply with the
following:
(a) * * *
(2) Perform a proof test to demonstrate
the integrity of the static pressure
system in a manner acceptable to the
Administrator. For airplanes certificated
under part 25 of this chapter, determine
that leakage is within the tolerances
established by § 25.1325.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND
FLIGHT RULES
14. The authority citation for part 91
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 1155,
40101, 40103, 40105, 40113, 40120, 44101,
44111, 44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712,
44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315,
46316, 46504, 46506–46507, 47122, 47508,
47528–47531, 47534, articles 12 and 29 of the
Convention on International Civil Aviation
(61 Stat. 1180), (126 Stat. 11).
15. In § 91.205, revise paragraphs
(b)(13) and (b)(14), and remove
paragraph (b)(16) to read as follows:
■
§ 91.205 Powered civil aircraft with
standard category U.S. airworthiness
certificates: Instrument and equipment
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(13) An approved safety belt with an
approved metal-to-metal latching
device, or other approved restraint
system for each occupant 2 years of age
or older.
(14) For small civil airplanes
manufactured after July 18, 1978, an
approved shoulder harness or restraint
system for each front seat. For small
civil airplanes manufactured after
December 12, 1986, an approved
shoulder harness or restraint system for
all seats. Shoulder harnesses installed at
flightcrew stations must permit the
flightcrew member, when seated and
with the safety belt and shoulder
harness fastened, to perform all
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
13528
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 / Proposed Rules
functions necessary for flight
operations. For purposes of this
paragraph—
(i) The date of manufacture of an
airplane is the date the inspection
acceptance records reflect that the
airplane is complete and meets the
FAA-approved type design data; and
(ii) A front seat is a seat located at a
flightcrew member station or any seat
located alongside such a seat.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 16. In § 91.313, revise paragraph (g)
introductory text to read as follows:
§ 91.313 Restricted category civil aircraft:
Operating limitations.
*
*
*
*
*
(g) No person may operate a small
restricted-category civil airplane
manufactured after July 18, 1978, unless
an approved shoulder harness or
restraint system is installed for each
front seat. The shoulder harness or
restraint system installation at each
flightcrew station must permit the
flightcrew member, when seated and
with the safety belt and shoulder
harness fastened or the restraint system
engaged, to perform all functions
necessary for flight operation. For
purposes of this paragraph—
*
*
*
*
*
■ 17. In § 91.323, revise paragraph (b)(3)
to read as follows:
(1) A large airplane or normal
category level 4 airplane, except that a
person may operate an airplane
certificated under SFAR 41 without a
pilot who is designated as second in
command if that airplane is certificated
for operation with one pilot.
* * *
(3) A commuter category airplane or
normal category level 3 airplane, except
that a person may operate those
airplanes notwithstanding paragraph
(a)(1) of this section, that have a
passenger seating configuration,
excluding pilot seats, of nine or less
without a pilot who is designated as
second in command if that airplane is
type certificated for operations with one
pilot.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 121—OPERATING
REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG,
AND SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATIONS
19. The authority citation for part 121
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103,
40113, 40119, 41706, 42301 preceding note
added by Pub. L. 112–95, Sec. 412, 126 Stat.
89, 44101, 44701–44702, 44705, 44709–
44711, 44713, 44716–44717, 44722, 44729,
44732; 46105; Pub. L. 111–216, 124 Stat.
2348 (49 U.S.C. 44701 note); Pub. L. 112–95,
126 Stat. 62 (49 U.S.C. 44732 note).
§ 91.323 Increased maximum certificated
weights for certain airplanes operated in
Alaska.
■
*
§ 121.310 Additional emergency
equipment.
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(3) The weight at which the airplane
meets the positive maneuvering load
factor n, where n = 2.1 + (24,000/(W +
10,000)) and W = design maximum
takeoff weight, except that n need not be
more than 3.8; or
*
*
*
*
*
■ 18. In § 91.531, revise paragraphs
(a)(1) and (a)(3) to read as follows:
§ 91.531 Second in command
requirements.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2
(a) * * *
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:17 Mar 11, 2016
Jkt 238001
20. In § 121.310, revise paragraph
(b)(2)(iii) to read as follows:
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) For a nontransport category
turbopropeller powered airplane type
certificated after December 31, 1964,
each passenger emergency exit marking
and each locating sign must be
manufactured to meet the requirements
of § 23.811(b) of this chapter in effect on
June 16, 1994. On these airplanes, no
sign may continue to be used if its
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
luminescence (brightness) decreases to
below 100 microlamberts.
*
*
*
*
*
PART 135—OPERATING
REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND
ON DEMAND OPERATIONS AND
RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON
BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT
21. The authority citation for part 135
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 41706,
40113, 44701–44702, 44705, 44709, 44711–
44713, 44715–44717, 44722, 44730, 45101–
45105; Pub. L. 112–95, 126 Stat. 58 (49 U.S.C.
44730).
22. In § 135.169, revise paragraphs (b)
introductory text, (b)(6), and (b)(7), and
add paragraph (b)(8) to read as follows:
■
§ 135.169 Additional airworthiness
requirements.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) No person may operate a small
airplane that has a passenger seating
configuration, excluding pilot seats, of
10 seats or more unless it is type
certificated—
*
*
*
*
*
(6) In the normal category and
complies with section 1.(b) of Special
Federal Aviation Regulation No. 41;
(7) In the commuter category; or
(8) In the normal category, using a
means of compliance accepted by the
Administrator equivalent to the
airworthiness standards applicable to
the certification of airplanes in the
commuter category found in part 23 of
this chapter through amendment 23–62,
effective January 31, 2012.
*
*
*
*
*
Issued under authority provided by 49
U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a), 44703 and Pub. L.
113–53 (127 Stat. 584; 49 U.S.C. 44704 note)
in Washington, DC, on March 7, 2016.
Dorenda D. Baker,
Director, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–05493 Filed 3–9–16; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
E:\FR\FM\14MRP2.SGM
14MRP2
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 49 (Monday, March 14, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 13451-13528]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-05493]
[[Page 13451]]
Vol. 81
Monday,
No. 49
March 14, 2016
Part II
Department of Transportation
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Aviation Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
14 CFR Parts 21, 23, 35, et al.
Revision of Airworthiness Standards for Normal, Utility, Acrobatic,
and Commuter Category Airplanes; Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 81 , No. 49 / Monday, March 14, 2016 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 13452]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 21, 23, 35, 43, 91, 121, and 135
[Docket No.: FAA-2015-1621; Notice No. 16-01]
RIN 2120-AK65
Revision of Airworthiness Standards for Normal, Utility,
Acrobatic, and Commuter Category Airplanes
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA proposes to amend its airworthiness standards for
normal, utility, acrobatic, and commuter category airplanes by removing
current prescriptive design requirements and replacing them with
performance-based airworthiness standards. The proposed standards would
also replace the current weight and propulsion divisions in small
airplane regulations with performance- and risk-based divisions for
airplanes with a maximum seating capacity of 19 passengers or less and
a maximum takeoff weight of 19,000 pounds or less. The proposed
airworthiness standards are based on, and would maintain, the level of
safety of the current small airplane regulations. Finally, the FAA
proposes to adopt additional airworthiness standards to address
certification for flight in icing conditions, enhanced stall
characteristics, and minimum control speed to prevent departure from
controlled flight for multiengine airplanes. This notice of proposed
rulemaking addresses the Congressional mandate set forth in the Small
Airplane Revitalization Act of 2013.
DATES: Send comments on or before May 13, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2015-1621
using any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking 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 9 a.m. and 5 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at 202-493-2251.
Privacy: In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT posts
these comments, without edit, including any personal information the
commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the system
of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at https://www.dot.gov/privacy.
Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
https://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For technical questions concerning
this action, contact Lowell Foster, Regulations and Policy, ACE-111,
Federal Aviation Administration, 901 Locust St., Kansas City, MO 64106;
telephone (816) 329-4125; email lowell.foster@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Later in this preamble, under the Additional
Information section, we discuss how you can comment on this proposal
and how we will handle your comments. This discussion includes related
information about the docket, privacy, and the handling of proprietary
or confidential business information. We also discuss how you can get a
copy of this proposal and related rulemaking documents.
All sections of part 23 would contain proposed revisions, except
the FAA would not make any substantive changes to the following
sections: Sec. Sec. 23.1457, Cockpit Voice Recorders, and 23.1459,
Flight Data Recorders. The only proposed changes to Sec. 23.1459 would
be for the purpose of aligning part 23 references. These sections are
nevertheless included in this proposed revision for context.
Table of Contents
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose and History of the Proposed Performance-Based
Standards
B. Summary of Major Provisions
1. Performance Standards and Airplane Crashworthiness
2. Loss of Control
3. Icing Certification Standards
C. Cost and Benefits
II. Authority for This Rulemaking
III. Background
A. Part 23 History
B. New Safety Requirements
C. Benefits for the Existing Fleet
D. Conforming Amendments and Other Minor Amendments
E. Public Policy Implementation
1. Regulatory Planning and Review
2. Consensus Standards
3. International Cooperation Efforts for Reorganizing Part 23
F. Means of Compliance
G. FAA Strategic Initiatives
IV. Discussion of Proposal
A. Reorganization of Airworthiness Standards Based on Risk and
Performance
B. Introduction of Simple Airplanes
C. Establishing Performance-Based Standards and the Use of Means
of Compliance
D. Crashworthiness as an Illustration of the Benefits of
Performance-Based Regulations
E. Additional Requirements To Prevent Loss of Control
F. Additional Requirements for Flight in Icing Conditions
G. Production of Replacement and Modification Articles
V. Key Terms and Concepts Used in This Document
VI. Discussion of the Proposed Regulatory Amendments
A. Part 23, Airworthiness Standards
1. Subpart A--General
2. Subpart B--Flight
3. Subpart C--Structures
4. Subpart D--Design and Construction
5. Subpart E--Powerplant
6. Subpart F--Equipment
7. Subpart G--Flightcrew Interface and Other Information
8. Appendices to Part 23
B. Miscellaneous Amendments
1. Production of Replacement and Modification Articles (Sec.
21.9)
2. Designation of Applicable Regulations (Sec. 21.17)
3. Issuance of Type Certificate: Primary Category Aircraft
(Sec. 21.24)
4. Flight Tests (Sec. 21.35)
5. Instructions for Continued Airworthiness and Manufacturer's
Maintenance Manuals Having Airworthiness Limitations Sections (Sec.
21.50)
6. Designation of Applicable Regulations (Sec. 21.101)
7. Applicability (Sec. 35.1)
8. Fatigue Limits and Evaluation (Sec. 35.37)
9. Altimeter System Test and Inspection (Appendix E to Part 43)
10. Powered Civil Aircraft With Standard Category U.S.
Airworthiness Certificates: Instrument and Equipment Requirements
(Sec. 91.205)
11. Restricted Category Civil Aircraft: Operating Limitations
(Sec. 91.313)
12. Increased Maximum Certification Weights for Certain
Airplanes Operated in Alaska (Sec. 91.323)
13. Second In Command Requirements (Sec. 91.531)
14. Additional Emergency Equipment (Sec. 121.310)
15. Additional Airworthiness Requirements (Sec. 135.169)
[[Page 13453]]
VII. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
A. Regulatory Evaluation Summary
B. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Determination
C. International Trade Impact Assessment
D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
E. Paperwork Reduction Act
F. International Compatibility and Cooperation
G. Environmental Analysis
H. Regulations Affecting Intrastate Aviation in Alaska
VIII. Executive Order Determination
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
IX. Additional Information
A. Comments Invited
B. Availability of Rulemaking Documents
Appendix 1 to the Preamble--Current to Proposed Regulations Cross-
Reference Table
Appendix 2 to the Preamble--Abbreviations and Acronyms Frequently
Used In This Document
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose and History of the Proposed Performance-Based Standards
Part 23 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
prescribes airworthiness standards for issuance and amendment of type
certificates for airplanes with a passenger-seating configuration of 19
or less and a maximum certificated takeoff weight of 19,000 pounds or
less. Airplanes certificated under part 23 are typically used for
recreation, training, personal travel, and limited commercial
applications.
The current part 23 airworthiness standards are largely
prescriptive, meaning that they describe detailed design requirements,
and are based on airplane designs from the 1950's and 1960's. As a
result of this prescriptive framework, the FAA often requires a design
approval applicant seeking to incorporate new or innovative technology
to provide additional documentation that typically results in the FAA's
issuance of special conditions, exemptions, or equivalent level of
safety (ELOS) findings.\1\ The FAA recognizes that these additional
procedures and requirements are costly to the FAA and industry, act as
barriers to certification, and discourage innovation. Therefore, to
encourage the installation of new safety-enhancing technology and
streamline the certification process, the FAA proposes replacing the
prescriptive requirements found in the current part 23 with
performance-based standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Special conditions give the manufacturer permission to build
the aircraft, engine or propeller with additional capabilities not
addressed in the regulations. A petition for exemption is a request
to the FAA by an individual or entity asking for relief from the
requirements of a regulation. Equivalent level of safety findings
are made when literal compliance with a certification regulation
cannot be shown and compensating factors exist which can be shown to
provide an equivalent level of safety. 14 CFR parts 11 and 21
provides information on special conditions and exemptions. FAA Order
8110-112A provides standard procedures for issue paper and
equivalent level of safety memoranda.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA believes this proposed rulemaking would maintain the level
of safety associated with current part 23, while providing greater
flexibility to applicants seeking certification of their airplane
designs. By doing so, this proposed rulemaking would hasten the
adoption of safety enhancing technology in type-certificated products
while reducing regulatory time and cost burdens for the aviation
industry and FAA. This proposed rulemaking would also reflect the FAA's
safety continuum philosophy,\2\ which balances the need for an
acceptable level of safety with the societal burden of achieving that
level safety, across the broad range of airplane types certificated
under part 23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The FAA's safety continuum philosophy is that one level of
safety may not be appropriate for all aviation. The FAA accepts
higher levels of risk, with correspondingly fewer requirements for
the demonstration of compliance, when aircraft are used for personal
transportation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposed rulemaking is the result of an effort the FAA began
in 2008 to re-evaluate the way it sets standards for different types of
airplanes. Through this effort, a joint FAA and industry team produced
the Part 23 Certification Process Study \3\ (CPS), which reviewed the
life cycle of part 23 airplanes to evaluate certification processes and
develop recommendations. Two key recommendations were to (1) reorganize
part 23 based on airplane performance and complexity rather than the
existing weight and propulsion divisions, and (2) permit the use of
consensus standards as a means to keep pace with rapidly increasing
design complexity in the aviation industry.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ See www.regulations.gov (Docket # FAA-2015-1621).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2010, with the CPS as a foundation, the FAA conducted a Part 23
Regulatory Review and held meetings with the public and industry to
gain input on revising part 23. These meetings confirmed strong public
and industry support for the CPS recommendations to revise part 23.
In 2011, the FAA formed the Part 23 Reorganization ARC to consider
further the CPS recommendation to reorganize part 23 based on airplane
performance and complexity and to investigate the use of consensus
standards. The ARC recommendations,\4\ published in 2013, echo the CPS
recommendations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See www.regulations.gov (Docket # FAA-2015-1621).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 7, 2013, Congress passed the Federal Aviation
Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 \5\ (Public Law 112-95; 49 U.S.C.
40101 note) (FAMRA), which requires the Administrator, in consultation
with the aviation industry, to assess the aircraft certification and
approval process. Based on the ARC recommendations and in response to
FAMRA, the FAA began work on this proposed rulemaking on September 24,
2013. Subsequently, on November 27, 2013, Congress passed the Small
Airplane Revitalization Act of 2013 (Public Law 113-53, 49 U.S.C. 44704
note) (SARA), which requires the FAA to issue a final rule revising the
certification requirements for small airplanes by--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CRPT-112hrpt381/pdf/CRPT-112hrpt381.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Creating a regulatory regime that will improve safety and
decrease certification costs;
Setting safety objectives that will spur innovation and
technology adoption;
Replacing prescriptive rules with performance-based
regulations; and
Using consensus standards to clarify how safety objectives
may be met by specific designs and technologies.
The FAA believes that the performance-based-standards component of
this proposal complies with the FAMRA and the SARA because it would
improve safety, reduce regulatory compliance costs, and spur innovation
and the adoption of new technology. This proposal would replace the
weight-and propulsion-based prescriptive airworthiness standards in
part 23 with performance- and risk-based airworthiness standards for
airplanes with a maximum seating capacity of 19 passengers or less and
a maximum takeoff weight of 19,000 pounds or less. The proposed
standards would maintain the level of safety associated with the
current part 23, while also facilitating the adoption of new and
innovative technology in general aviation (GA) airplanes.
B. Summary of Major Provisions
This proposal to revise part 23 has two principal components:
Establishing a performance-based regulatory regime and adding new
certification standards for loss of control (LOC) and icing. Where the
FAA proposes to establish new certification requirements, these
requirements would be adopted within the same performance-based
framework proposed for part 23 as a whole.
[[Page 13454]]
1. Performance Standards and Airplane Crashworthiness
Airplane crashworthiness and occupant safety is an example of how
moving towards performance-based standards and providing greater
flexibility to industry would increase aviation safety. Although the
FAA has over the years incrementally amended part 23 to enhance
occupant safety, these amendments have focused on individual system
components, rather than the safety of the system as a whole. By
building greater flexibility into FAA regulations governing crash
testing, this proposal would allow the aviation industry to develop and
implement novel solutions.
2. Loss of Control
One proposed revision to part 23 would improve general aviation
safety by creating additional certification standards to reduce LOC
accidents. Inadvertent stalls resulting in airplane LOC are the most
common cause of small airplane fatal accidents. These LOC accidents
frequently occur in the traffic pattern or at low altitudes, where the
airplane is too low for a pilot to recover control before impacting the
ground. The proposed revisions would require applicants to use new
design approaches and technologies to improve airplane stall
characteristics and pilot situational awareness to prevent such
accidents.
3. Icing Certification Standards
Another proposed revision to part 23 would improve GA safety by
addressing severe icing conditions. In the 1990s, the FAA became aware
of the need to expand the icing conditions considered during the
certification of airplanes and turbine aircraft engines. In particular,
the FAA determined that revised icing certification standards should
include Supercooled Large Drops (SLD),\6\ mixed phase, and ice
crystals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ SLD conditions include freezing drizzle and freezing rain,
which contain drops larger than those specified in appendix C to
part 25, and can accrete aft of wing leading edge ice protection
systems.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This proposed rule would require manufacturers that choose to
certify an airplane for flight in SLD to demonstrate safe operations in
SLD conditions. For those manufacturers who choose instead to certify
an airplane with a prohibition against flight in SLD conditions, this
proposed rule would require a means for detecting SLD conditions and
showing the airplane can safely exit such conditions. Industry has
indicated that these requirements would not impose significant
additional cost burden on industry because many manufacturers already
have equipped recent airplanes with technology to meet the standards
for detecting and exiting SLD conditions in accordance with current FAA
guidance.
C. Cost and Benefits
The goal of this proposal is to create a cost-effective approach to
certification that facilitates the adoption of new safety enhancing
technologies and allows for alternative means of compliance. The FAA
has analyzed the benefits and costs associated with this NPRM. If the
proposed rule saves only one human life, for example, by improving
stall characteristics and stall warnings, that alone would result in
benefits outweighing the costs. The following table shows these
results.
Estimated Benefits and Costs From 2017 to 2036
[2014 $ millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Costs Safety benefits + cost savings = total benefits
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.......................................... $3.9 $19.6 + $12.6 = $32.2.
Present value.................................. 3.9 $6.2 + $5.8 = $12.0.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, the FAA has determined that the proposed rule would be
cost beneficial.
II. 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. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with promoting safe flight of civil airplanes in air
commerce by prescribing minimum standards required in the interest of
safety for the design and performance of airplanes. This regulation is
within the scope of that authority because it prescribes new
performance-based safety standards for the design of normal, utility,
acrobatic, and commuter category airplanes.
Additionally, this rulemaking addresses the Congressional mandate
set forth in the Small Airplane Revitalization Act of 2013 (Public Law
113-53; 49 U.S.C. 44704 note) (SARA). Section 3 of SARA requires the
Administrator to issue a final rule to advance the safety and continued
development of small airplanes by reorganizing the certification
requirements for such airplanes under part 23 to streamline the
approval of safety advancements. SARA directs that the rule address
specific recommendations of the 2013 Part 23 Reorganization Aviation
Rulemaking Committee (ARC).
III. Background
The range of airplanes certificated under part 23 is diverse in
terms of performance capability, number of passengers, design
complexity, technology, and intended use. Currently, each part 23
airplane's certification requirements are determined by reference to a
combination of factors, including weight, number of passengers, and
propulsion type. The resulting divisions (i.e., normal, utility,
acrobatic, and commuter categories) historically were appropriate
because there was a clear relationship between the propulsion and
weight of the airplane and its associated performance and complexity.
Technological developments have altered the dynamics of that
relationship. For example, high-performance and complex airplanes now
exist within the weight range that historically was occupied by only
light and simple airplanes. The introduction of high-performance,
lightweight airplanes required subsequent amendments of part 23 to
include more stringent and demanding standards--often based on the part
25 requirements for larger transport category airplanes--to ensure an
adequate level of safety for airplanes under part 23. The unintended
result is that some of the more stringent and demanding standards for
high-performance airplanes now apply to the
[[Page 13455]]
certification of simple and low-performance airplanes.
A. Part 23 History
Part 23 originated from performance-based requirements developed by
the Bureau of Air Commerce and the Civil Aeronautics Administration in
the 1930s. These regulations were contained in specific Civil Air
Regulations (CAR) for the certification of aircraft (i.e., CAR 3, 4,
and 4a). These requirements, along with various bulletins and related
documents, were subsequently revised and first published as 14 CFR part
23 in 1964 (29 FR 17955, December 18, 1964). Over the past five decades
and after numerous amendments, part 23 has evolved into a body of
highly complex and prescriptive requirements attempting to codify
specific design requirements, address specific problems encountered
during prior certification projects, and respond to specific
recommendations from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).
Although the intent of the prescriptive language contained in
current part 23 was to increase the level of safety, prevent confusion,
and clarify ambiguities, the current regulations have also restrained
manufacturers' ability to employ new designs and testing methodologies.
The FAA believes moving towards performance-based standards should
significantly reduce or eliminate barriers to innovation and facilitate
the introduction of new safety-enhancing technologies.
In 2008, the FAA conducted a review of part 23 by initiating the
Part 23 CPS. Collaborating with industry, the team's challenge was to
determine the future of part 23, given today's current products and
anticipated future products. The team identified opportunities for
improvements by examining the entire life cycle of a part 23 airplane.
The CPS recommended reorganizing part 23 using criteria focused on
performance and design complexity. The CPS also recommended that the
FAA implement general airworthiness requirements, with the means of
compliance defined in industry consensus standards standards. In 2010,
following the publication of the Part 23 CPS, the FAA held a series of
public meetings to seek feedback concerning the findings and
recommendations. Overall, the feedback was supportive of and in some
cases augmented the CPS recommendations.
One notable difference between the CPS findings and the public
feedback was the public's request that the FAA revise part 23
certification requirements for simple, entry-level airplanes. Over the
past two decades, part 23 standards have become more complex as
industry has generally shifted towards correspondingly complex, high-
performance airplanes. This transition has placed an increased burden
on applicants seeking to certificate smaller, simpler airplanes. Public
comments requested that the FAA focus on reducing the costs and time
burden associated with certificating small airplanes by restructuring
the requirements based on perceived risk. The safety risk for most
simple airplane designs is typically low.
On August 15, 2011, the Administrator chartered the Part 23
Reorganization ARC to consider the following CPS recommendations--
Recommendation 1.1.1--Reorganize part 23 based on airplane
performance and complexity, rather than the existing weight and
propulsion divisions; and
Recommendation 1.1.2--Certification requirements for part
23 airplanes should be written on a broad, general, and progressive
level, segmented into tiers based on complexity and performance.
The ARC's recommendations took into account the FAMRA, which
requires the Administrator, in consultation with the aviation industry,
to assess the aircraft certification and approval process. The purpose
of the ARC's assessment was to develop recommendations for streamlining
and reengineering the certification process to improve efficiency,
reduce costs, and ensure that the Administrator can conduct
certifications and approvals in a manner that supports and enables the
development of new products and technologies and the global
competitiveness of the United States aviation industry.\7\ FAMRA also
directs the Administrator to consider the recommendations from the Part
23 Certification Process Study.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Section 312(c)
\8\ Section 312 (b)(6)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ARC membership represented a broad range of of stakeholder
perspectives, including U.S. and international manufacturers, trade
associations, and foreign civil aviation authorities. The ARC was
supported by FAA subject matter experts from all affected lines of
business, from design and production certification to continued
airworthiness and alterations. The following table identifies ARC
participants:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Manufacturers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Avidyne..................... Bendix-King......... Cessna.
Cirrus...................... Continental Motors.. Cub Crafters.
GAMI........................ Garmin.............. Hawker Beechcraft.
Honda....................... Honeywell........... Kestrel.
Lockheed Martin............. Rockwell-Collins.... Quest.
Sensenich Propellers........ Tamarack Aero....... TruTrak.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S. Organizations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aircraft Electronics Aircraft Owners and ASTM.
Association (AEA). Pilots Association
(AOPA).
Experimental Aircraft General Aviation National Air Traffic
Association (EAA). Manufacturers Controllers
Association (GAMA). Association
(NATCA).
RTCA........................ SAE.................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
International Manufacturers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dassault Falcon............. Diamond............. Flight Design.
Rotax....................... Socata..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 13456]]
International Civil Aviation Authorities
------------------------------------------------------------------------
European Aviation Safety Transport Canada National Civil
Agency (EASA). Civil Aviation Aviation Agency of
(TCCA). Brazil (ANAC).
Civil Aviation Civil Aviation
Administration of China Authority of New
(CAAC). Zealand.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Each member or participant on the committee represented an
identified segment of the aviation community, with the authority to
speak for that segment. The ARC also invited subject matter experts to
support specialized working groups and subgroups, as necessary. These
working groups developed recommendations and briefed the ARC as a
whole. The ARC then collectively discussed and voted to accept or
reject the recommendations. All of the recommendations included in the
ARC's report had overwhelming majority agreement.
The ARC noted the prevailing view within industry was that the only
way to reduce the program risk, or business risk, associated with the
certification of new airplane designs was to avoid novel design
approaches and testing methodologies. The certification of new and
innovative products today frequently requires the FAA's use of ELOS
findings, special conditions, and exemptions. These take time,
resulting in uncertainty and high project costs. The ARC emphasized
that although industry needs from the outset to develop new airplanes
designed to use new technology, current certification costs inhibit the
introduction of new technology. The ARC identified prescriptive
certification requirements as a major barrier to installing
safety[hyphen]enhancing modifications in the existing fleet and to
producing newer, safer airplanes.
The ARC also examined the harmonization of certification
requirements among the FAA and foreign civil aviation authorities
(CAAs), and the potential for such harmonization to improve safety
while reducing costs. Adopting performance-based safety regulations
that facilitate international harmonization, coupled with
internationally accepted means of compliance, could result in both
significant cost savings and the enabling of safety-enhancing equipment
installations. The ARC recommended that internationally accepted means
of compliance should be reviewed and voluntarily accepted by the
appropriate aviation authorities, in accordance with a process
established by those authorities. Although each CAA would be capable of
rejecting all or part of any particular means of compliance, the intent
would be to have full civil authority participation in the creation of
the means of compliance to ease acceptance of the means of compliance.
B. New Safety Requirements
The performance-based standards proposed in this NPRM are designed
to maintain the level of safety provided by current part 23
requirements. The current part 23 weight and propulsion divisions were
based on assumptions that do not reflect the diversity of performance
capabilities, design complexity, technology, intended use, and seating
capacity of today's new airplane designs, or the future airplane
designs that will become possible as technology continues to evolve.
The FAA would therefore replace the current divisions with
certification levels 1 thru 4, low performance, high performance, and
simple. Furthermore, this would replace the current divisions within
the individual sections with technical and operational capabilities
focused on the technical drivers (e.g., stall speed, Visual Flight
Rules (VFR) and Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) operations,
pressurization). These types of technical and operational criteria
would apply a more appropriate set of standards to each airplane, and
continue to accommodate the wide range of airplane designs within part
23.
To begin, the FAA proposes to eliminate commuter, utility, and
acrobatic airplane categories from part 23, retaining only a normal
category for all new part 23 type certificated airplane design
approvals. The differences between normal, utility, and acrobatic
categories are currently very limited and primarily affect airframe
structure requirements. Proposed part 23 would continue to allow a
normal category airplane to be approved for aerobatics, provided the
airplane is certificated for the safety factors and defined limits of
aerobatic operations.
In addition, the FAA proposes that airplanes approved for spins be
certificated to aerobatic standards. Under the current Sec. 23.3(b),
the utility category provides airplanes additional margin for the more
stringent inertial structural loads resulting from intended spins and
other maneuvers. An airplane designed with traditional handling
qualities and designed to allow spin training is more susceptible to
inadvertent departure from controlled flight. The FAA therefore
believes that maintaining the current utility category for spin and
limited aerobatic maneuver capable airplanes would negate the largest,
single safety gain expected from this rulemaking action--the
significant reduction in inadvertent stall-related departures from
controlled flight.
Under this proposal, airplanes already certificated in the
commuter, utility, and acrobatic categories would continue to fall
within those categories. Each new airplane design, however, would be
subject to varying levels of analysis, based on the potential risk and
performance of the airplane's design. A more rigorous standard, such as
currently applied to commuter category airplanes, would apply to higher
risk and higher performance airplanes.
The proposed requirements would also include new enhanced standards
for resistance to departure from controlled flight. Recognizing that
the largest number of fatal accidents for part 23 airplanes results
from LOC in flight, the FAA proposes to update certification standards
to address these risks. LOC happens when an airplane enters a flight
regime outside its normal flight envelope or performance capabilities
and develops into a stall or spin, an event that can surprise the
pilot. A pilot's lack of awareness of the state of the airplane in
flight and the airplane's low-speed handling characteristics are the
main causal factors of LOC accidents. Furthermore, stall and departure
accidents are generally fatal because an airplane is often too low to
the ground for the pilot to recover. Improving safety that reduces
stall and LOC accidents would save lives. The FAA is therefore
proposing new rules for stall characteristics and stall warnings that
would result in airplane designs more resistant to inadvertently
departing controlled flight.
Another type of low-speed LOC accident that occurs in significant
numbers involves minimum control speed (VMC) in light twin-
engine airplanes. Virtually all twin-engine airplanes have a
VMC that allows directional control to be maintained after
one engine fails. This speed is usually above the stall speed of the
airplane. However, light twin-engine airplanes typically have limited
climb capability on one engine. In the accidents reviewed by the ARC
and FAA, often in these situations, pilots attempted to maintain a
climb or
[[Page 13457]]
maintain altitude, which slowed the airplane down, rather than looking
for the best landing site immediately, maintaining control the whole
way. If the airplane's speed drops below VMC, the pilot can
lose control. In tying the minimum control speed to the stall speed of
the airplane, pilots, rather than attempting to maintain climb and lose
directional control, would instead react appropriately with stall
training techniques, resulting in a controlled descent rather than a
loss of directional control. This requirement will be on new airplanes
and should add little or no cost because it can be designed in from the
start.
The FAA also has identified a need for improved certification
standards related to operations in severe icing conditions. More
specifically, in the 1990's, the FAA became aware of the need to expand
the icing conditions considered during the certification of airplanes
and turbine aircraft engines, to increase flight safety during some
severe icing conditions. The 1994 accident in Roselawn, Indiana,
involving an Avions de Transport Regional ATR 72 series airplane in SLD
conditions, brought to public and governmental attention safety
concerns about the adequacy of the existing icing certification
standards.
As a result of the 1994 accident, and consistent with related NTSB
recommendations, in 1997 the Administrator tasked the Aviation
Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) (62 FR 64621, December 8, 1997)
with defining SLD, mixed phase, and ice crystal icing environments, and
designing corresponding safety requirements for those conditions. In
June 2000, the ARAC's task was revised to address only transport
category airplanes. More recent events, such as an Air France Airbus
model A330-203 AF447 \9\ accident, in 2009, highlighted the negative
effects of ice crystals on airspeed indication systems and turbojet
engines.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ See www.regulations.gov (Docket #FAA-2015-1621), Air France
A330-203, Flight AF 447 Final Accident Report
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA ultimately published amendments 25-140 (79 FR 65507,
November 4, 2014) and 33-34 (79 FR 65507, November 4, 2014), Airplane
and Engine Certification Requirements in Supercooled Large Drop, Mixed
Phase, and Ice Crystal Icing Conditions that expanded parts 25 and 33
icing requirements, but did not amend part 23 requirements. On February
19, 2010, the Administrator chartered a Part 23 Icing ARC to review and
recommend SLD, mixed phase, and ice crystal icing conditions
regulations and guidance for part 23. In February 2012, the Part 23
Icing ARC formally identified a need to improve the part 23 regulations
to ensure safe operation of airplanes and engines in SLD and ice
crystal conditions.\10\ In particular, the Part 23 Icing ARC
recommended adopting most of the part 25 icing rules, including the
requirement to show either that an airplane can safely fly in SLD
conditions, or that it can detect and safely exit SLD. The proposals in
this NPRM incorporate the recommendations of the Part 23 Icing ARC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ See www.regulations.gov (Docket #FAA-2015-1621)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Benefits for the Existing Fleet
The proposed revisions would benefit owners and modifiers of
existing part 23 airplanes, as well as airplane designers and
manufacturers. Both currently and under this proposal, airplanes may be
modified by: (1) An alteration to an individual airplane; (2) a
supplemental type certificate (STC) for multiple airplanes, or (3) an
amendment to an original type design via an amended type certificate
(TC). This proposal would streamline each of these methods for
modifying airplanes.
The proposed change to Sec. 21.9 would facilitate FAA approval of
low-risk equipment produced for installation in type-certificated
airplanes, thereby streamlining the process for owners to upgrade
equipment on their individual airplanes. An example of how this change
would facilitate safety improvements is the installation of inexpensive
weather display systems in the cockpits of small airplanes. These
systems allow a pilot to view current weather conditions along the
planned flight route and at the destination airport, avoiding
unexpected or deteriorating weather conditions. Since these systems are
not required and because they represent low safety risk from failure,
the FAA believes streamlining its approval process to produce them for
use in existing airplanes could lower costs and increase availability
of these systems.
The proposed changes in the rules would also streamline the process
for design approval holders applying for a type design change, or for a
third party modifier applying for an STC, to incorporate new and
improved equipment in a model or several models of airplanes. Since the
revised part 23 standards would be much less prescriptive, the
certification process for modifications would be simplified.
Certification of an amended TC or STC under the proposed part 23
standards would require fewer special conditions or exemptions,
lowering costs and causing fewer project delays.
D. Conforming Amendments and Other Minor Amendments
References to part 23 appear throughout the FAA's current
regulations. Accordingly, the FAA proposes to amend the following parts
for consistency with the proposed revisions to part 23: Part 21, part
35, part 43, part 91, part 121, and part 135.
The FAA also proposes to revise part 21 to simplify the approval
process for low-risk articles. Specifically, the FAA proposes amending
Sec. 21.9 to allow FAA-approved production of replacement and
modification articles using methods not listed in Sec. 21.9(a). This
proposed change is intended to reduce constraints on the use of non-
required, low risk articles, such as carbon monoxide detectors and
weather display systems.
E. Public Policy Implementation
The intent of this NPRM is to reduce regulatory barriers by
establishing a system based on safety-focused performance requirements
and FAA acceptance--as a means of compliance--of consensus standards.
FAA-accepted consensus standards would add clarity to the certification
process and streamline FAA involvement in the development of means of
compliance. Additionally, adopting performance standards would
significantly reduce the complexity of part 23. Furthermore, the
introduction of airplane certification levels based on risk (i.e.,
number of passengers) and performance (i.e., speed) would advance the
FAA's effort to introduce risk-based decision-making and better align
with the FAA's safety continuum philosophy. Together, the FAA believes
these changes would allow the FAA to provide appropriate oversight
based on the safety continuum and would restore a simple and cost
effective certification process based on proven engineering practices.
1. Regulatory Planning and Review
In accordance with applicable executive orders, the FAA has
determined that the proposed revisions to part 23 are the most cost-
beneficial way of achieving the agency's regulatory objectives. This is
because the proposal would relieve industry of a significant regulatory
burden while maintaining or improving the level of safety under the
regulations. In particular, Executive Order 12866, Regulatory Planning
and Review (58 FR 51735, October 4, 1993), and Executive Order 13563,
Improving
[[Page 13458]]
Regulation and Regulatory Review (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011), direct
each Federal agency to propose or adopt a regulation only upon a
reasoned determination that the benefits of the intended regulation
justify its costs. This proposal is not an economically ``significant
regulatory action'' as defined in section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866
\11\ and it satisfies Executive Order 13563 by protecting public
health, welfare, safety, while promoting economic growth, innovation,
competitiveness, and job creation.
Under the above-referenced executive orders, when an agency
determines that a regulation is the best available method of achieving
its regulatory objective, the agency must design the regulation or
regulations in the most cost-effective manner. In doing so, each agency
must consider incentives for innovation, consistency, predictability,
enforcement and compliance costs (to the government, regulated
entities, and the public), flexibility, distributive impacts, and
equity. Each agency must identify and assess alternative forms of
regulation and shall specify, to the extent feasible, performance
objectives, rather than specifying the behavior or manner of compliance
that regulated entities must adopt. This proposal meets these
requirements because it would implement performance objectives rather
than a prescriptive methodology, thereby reducing time and cost burdens
on industry and increasing opportunities for innovation.
Executive Order 13610, Identifying and Reducing Regulatory Burdens
(77 FR 28469, May 10, 2012) reiterates the direction from Executive
Order 13563 in stating that our regulatory system must measure, and
seek to improve, the actual results of regulatory requirements. To
promote this goal, agencies are to engage in periodic review of
existing regulations, and are required to develop retrospective review
plans to examine existing regulations in order to determine whether any
such regulations should be modified, streamlined, expanded, or
repealed. The purpose of this requirement is to make the agency's
regulatory program more effective or less burdensome in achieving the
regulatory objectives. In response to Executive Orders13563 and 13610,
agencies have developed and made available for public comment
retrospective review plans. Both the Part 23 Reorganization ARC and
this Part 23 Rulemaking Project are on the Department of
Transportation's retrospective review plans.
2. Consensus Standards
Section 3(c) of SARA requires the Administrator, when developing
regulations, to comply with the requirements of the National Technology
Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 \12\ (Pub. L. 104-113; 15 U.S.C.
272 note) (NTTAA) and to use consensus standards to the extent
practicable while maintaining traditional methods for meeting part 23.
Section 12(d) of the NTTAA directs Federal agencies to use, either by
reference or by inclusion, voluntary consensus standards in lieu of
government-mandated standards, except where inconsistent with law or
otherwise impractical. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
Circular A-119,\13\ Federal Participation in the Development and Use of
Voluntary Consensus Standards and Conformity Assessment Activities,
provides guidance to Executive agencies in implementing the
requirements of the NTTAA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-104publ113/pdf/PLAW-104publ113.pdf.
\13\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_a119/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, the FAA proposes to accept consensus standards as a
means of compliance with the proposed part 23 performance-based
regulations. The use of consensus standards would be one means of
compliance with the performance-based standards of the proposed part
23. Compliance with the current prescriptive provisions within current
part 23 would be yet another means of compliance available under this
proposal. Applicants would still have the option to propose their own
means of compliance as they do today. The process for reviewing new
means of compliance would not change substantially from the process in
place today.
Although a consensus standard works in some cases, the Part 23
Reorganization ARC expressed concerns that a consensus standard could
be biased in favor of a few large manufacturers and thereby create an
unfair competitive advantage. OMB Circular A-119 also cautions
regulators to avoid such potential biases. The FAA notes that industry
groups associated with the Part 23 Reorganization ARC identified ASTM
International (ASTM) as the appropriate organization to initiate the
development of consensus standards, and that ASTM permits any
interested party to participate in the committees developing consensus
standards. The FAA expects other consensus standards bodies to allow
similar opportunities for interested parties to participate in their
standards-development work. In addition to consensus standards and the
current prescriptive design standards in part 23, any individual or
organization may develop its own proposed means of compliance that may
be submitted to the FAA for acceptance.
3. International Cooperation Efforts for Reorganizing Part 23
Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation (77 FR 26413, May 4, 2012), promotes international
regulatory cooperation to meet shared challenges and reduce, eliminate,
or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements.
Consistent with this Order, the FAA's proposal would address
unnecessary differences in regulatory requirements between the United
States and its major trading partners. The U.S. GA industry has
repeatedly informed the FAA of the high costs to address differences
between the airworthiness requirements of the FAA and foreign CAAs. The
FAA believes this proposal has the potential to achieve long-term
harmonization at an unprecedented level, and should result in a
significant savings for both U.S. manufacturers exporting products
abroad and foreign manufacturers exporting products to the U.S. The FAA
requests comments regarding the potential cost savings.
The work of the Part 23 Reorganization ARC forms the foundation of
the proposed changes to part 23. From the onset, the ARC was a
cooperative, international effort. Representatives from several foreign
CAAs \14\ and international members from almost every GA manufacturer
of airplanes and avionics participated in the Part 23 Reorganization
ARC. Several international light-sport aircraft manufacturers, who were
interested in certificating their products using part 23 airworthiness
standards, also participated. In addition to recommending changes to
part 23, the ARC developed proposals to help reduce certification costs
through more international standardization of certification processes
and reducing or eliminating redundant certification activities
associated with foreign certification.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ CAAs included participants from Brazil, Canada, China,
Europe, and New Zealand.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
After the ARC issued its report, the FAA, foreign CAAs, and
industry continued to work together to refine the ARC rule language
until the FAA began drafting the NPRM in December 2014. This included
formal meetings in July and November of 2014. EASA,
[[Page 13459]]
Transport Canada, other foreign authorities, and industry offered
significant contributions to these efforts.
In addition, the CAAs from Europe, Canada, Brazil, China, and New
Zealand are working to produce rules similar to those contained in this
proposal. EASA, for example, published an Advance Notice of Proposed
Amendment (A-NPA) 2015-06 on March 27, 2015, which sets forth EASA's
concept for its proposed reorganization of CS-23, and on which the FAA
provided comments. Like the FAA's current proposal, EASA's A-NPA was
also based on the proposed ARC language with the goal of harmonization.
Both proposals would adopt performance-based standards that facilitate
the use of consensus standards as a means of compliance.
F. Means of Compliance
This proposal would allow type certificate applicants to use FAA-
accepted means of compliance to streamline the certification process.
This proposal, however, is shaped by two concerns raised in the Part 23
Reorganization ARC. First, the rule needs to clearly state that any
applicant must use a means of compliance accepted by the Administrator
when showing compliance with part 23. The FAA emphasizes that any means
of compliance would require FAA review and acceptance by the
Administrator. Second, although a means of compliance developed by a
consensus standards body (i.e., ASTM, SAE, RTCA, etc.) may be
available, any individual or organization would also be able to submit
its own means of compliance documentation to the Administrator for
consideration and potential acceptance.
The FAA anticipates that both individuals and organizations would
develop acceptable means of complying with the proposed performance
standards. The industry groups associated with the ARC discussed the
development of consensus-based standards and selected ASTM as the
appropriate organization to initiate the effort. A standards
organization such as ASTM could, for example, generate a series of
consensus-based standards for review, acceptance, and public notice of
acceptance by the FAA. The ASTM standards would be one way, but not the
only way, to demonstrate compliance with part 23.
Using means of compliance documents to satisfy compliance with the
proposed performance-based rules would diminish the need for special
conditions, ELOS findings, and exemptions to address new technology
advancements. Once the Administrator accepted a means of compliance, it
could be used in future certification applications unless formally
rescinded. Incorporating the use of consensus standards as a means of
compliance with performance-based regulations would provide the FAA
with the agility to more rapidly accept new technology as it develops,
leverage industry experience and expectations to develop of new means
of compliance documents, and encourage the use of harmonized means of
compliance among the FAA, industry, and foreign CAAs. Although an
applicant would not be required to use previously accepted means of
compliance documents, doing so would streamline the certification
process by eliminating the need for the FAA to develop an issue paper
to address the certification of new technology. Proposed Advisory
Circular 23.10, Accepted Means of Compliance, would describe a process
for applicants to submit proposed means of compliance to the FAA for
acceptance by the Administrator.
The Part 23 Reorganization ARC was also concerned that specialists
in the industry could argue for complex means of compliance when the
FAA would accept a simpler or more cost effective approach. To address
these concerns, the FAA would continue to allow applicants to propose
their own means of compliance when the larger industry standard may be
the appropriate level of safety for one but not all certification
levels, consistent with the guidance in OMB Circular A-119, which
reminds the regulator that the government is responsible to the public
for setting the appropriate level of safety and avoiding any unfair
competitive advantage. Additionally, the FAA proposes to continue to
allow the use of the prescriptive means of compliance currently
codified in part 23 as yet another alternative means of compliance with
proposed part 23. This would not apply, however, to the proposed new
requirements, such as Sec. Sec. 23.200, 23.215, and 23.230.
G. FAA Strategic Initiatives
The FAA's Strategic Initiatives 2014-2018 communicates FAA goals
for addressing the challenges presented by the changing aviation
industry and how the FAA intends to make the U.S. aviation system safer
and smarter, and raise the bar on safety. Specifically, one strategic
initiative is for the FAA to embrace and implement risk-based decision
making approaches, which build on safety management principles to
address emerging safety risks using consistent, data-informed
approaches to make smarter, quicker system-level decisions. By
establishing performance-based regulations, coupled with industry
standards, this proposed rulemaking would provide a calibrated and
globally competitive regulatory structure. This new approach would
increase safety in general aviation by enabling and facilitating
innovation and the implementation of safety enhancing designs in newly
certificated products.
This rulemaking effort also directly supports the FAA's Global
Leadership Initiative, by encouraging global harmonization and the
consistent use of regulations, standards, and practices for general
aviation airplanes.
IV. Discussion of Proposal
A. Reorganization of Airworthiness Standards Based on Risk and
Performance
The FAA proposes replacing the current weight and propulsion-based
airplane certification divisions with airplane certification and
performance levels based on the number of potential passengers and the
performance of the airplane. The FAA believes this proposed regulatory
change would better accommodate the wide range of airplanes
certificated under part 23, thereby reducing certification risk, time,
and costs.
Historically, turbine-powered airplanes were assumed to fly at or
above 18,000 feet (5,486 meters) and at high speeds, whereas piston
engine airplanes were assumed to fly below 18,000 feet (5,486 meters)
and at lower speeds. Today, with advancements in aviation technology,
these general design and performance assumptions may not be valid.
Furthermore, the current regulations do not account for airplanes
equipped with new technologies, such as electric propulsion systems,
which may have features that are entirely different from piston and
turbine engines. For these reasons, the FAA is proposing regulations
based on airplane performance and potential risk rather than on
assumptions about specific technologies. These proposed standards would
be appropriate to each specific airplane design.
Certification of airplanes under part 23 would either be conducted
using airplane certification levels based on maximum passenger seating
configuration and airplane performance levels based on speed, or occur
as so-called ``simple airplanes'' that are low-speed airplanes with a
stalling speed (VSO) <= 45 Knots Calibrated Airspeed (KCAS)
approved only for VFR operations. The FAA proposes the following
airplane certification levels:
[[Page 13460]]
Level 1--for airplanes with a maximum seating
configuration of 0 to 1 passengers, including simple airplanes.
Level 2--for airplanes with a maximum seating
configuration of 2 to 6 passengers.
Level 3--for airplanes with a maximum seating
configuration of 7 to 9 passengers.
Level 4--for airplanes with a maximum seating
configuration of 10 to 19 passengers.
B. Introduction of Simple Airplanes
The regulations contained in part 23 have gradually become more
focused on high-performance, turbine-powered airplanes, and this
emphasis has become a barrier to the efficient certification and
introduction to market of new entry-level, simple airplanes. The Part
23 Reorganization ARC specifically noted that current part 23 does not
have appropriate standards for the certification of entry-level
airplanes.
The FAA proposes to define ``simple airplanes'' in Sec. 23.5 to
recognize the entry-level airplane. Simple airplanes would be limited
to airplane designs that allow transport of no more than one passenger
(in addition to the pilot), are limited to VFR operations, and have
both a low top speed and a low stall speed. These airplanes are similar
to EASA's Certification Specification--Very Light Aeroplanes (CS-VLA),
which are currently imported to the U.S. and certificated as special
class airplanes in accordance with 14 CFR 21.17(b). The proposed change
would allow these airplanes to be certified as normal category
airplanes under part 23.
The FAA believes that permitting certification of simple airplanes
would allow more certified entry-level airplanes to enter the
marketplace. The FAA expects simple airplanes to be a more basic
sublevel within proposed certification level 1, but recognizes that
because of similarities between simple and non-simple airplanes within
certification level 1, creating this category may be unnecessary. For
this reason, the FAA is specifically asking for comments concerning the
utility of creating a separate, simple airplane sublevel.
C. Establishing Performance-Based Standards and the Use of Means of
Compliance
The Part 23 Reorganization ARC was aware the Administrator has
accepted as evidence of compliance various manufacturers' internal
design standards in the past, and the ARC recommended expressly stating
that option in the proposal. Proposed Sec. 23.10, Accepted Means of
Compliance, would allow individual persons or companies to submit their
internal standards as means of compliance for consideration by the
Administrator. Proposed Sec. 23.10 would also require an applicant to
show the FAA how it would demonstrate compliance with this part using a
means of compliance, which may include consensus standards accepted by
the Administrator. It would further require an applicant requesting
acceptance of a means of compliance to provide the means of compliance
to the FAA in a form and manner specified by the Administrator. In
addition, proposed Sec. 23.10 specifically recognizes the use of
consensus standards as a means of compliance that could be acceptable
to the Administrator. If this information is proprietary in nature, it
would be afforded the same protections as are applied today in
certification applications submitted under 14 CFR part 21.
The phrase ``means of compliance'' may have different connotations
depending on its context. Historically, the FAA has treated an
applicant's demonstration of compliance as a means of compliance.
Alternatively, as indicated by sec. 3(b)(4) of the SARA, consensus
standards may constitute a means of compliance that can address new and
novel designs and technologies. In other words, as suggested by the
SARA, an applicant would develop a design to satisfy a performance-
based standard, and the design is the means of complying with the
standard.
Currently, an applicant for a type certificate must show the FAA
how it satisfies the applicable airworthiness standards. The applicant
submits the type design, test reports, and computations necessary to
show compliance. The applicant approaches the FAA and enters into
negotiations regarding what constitutes an adequate demonstration--
testing or analysis. The FAA anticipates that, under the proposed
framework, standards developed by consensus standards bodies would
provide a pre-existing means by which any applicant may demonstrate
compliance with the corresponding performance-based requirements. For
example, the proposed fuel system requirements would be broad enough to
certificate airplanes with electric propulsion systems in which
batteries and fuel cells are used as fuel. Airplanes incorporating
these systems cannot currently be certificated without applying for
special conditions or exemptions.
Elements of this proposal are already in place today. Industry
standards bodies like RTCA, SAE, ASTM, and the European Organization
for Civil Aviation Equipment (EUROCAE) have already developed detailed
means of compliance documents that an applicant for a type certificate
may use to demonstrate compliance with our regulatory requirements in
14 CFR parts 23, 25, 27, and 29. For decades, the FAA has identified
these means of compliance documents as an acceptable means of complying
with our regulatory requirements. This proposal would build on and
expand this aspect of our regulations by also transitioning part 23
towards a regulatory framework based on performance standards.
D. Crashworthiness as an Illustration of the Benefits of Performance-
Based Regulations
One area where the implications of a change from prescriptive to
performance-based requirements are most evident is in the demonstration
of crashworthiness. The current part 23 crashworthiness and occupant
safety requirements are based on seat and restraint technology used in
the 1980's. Currently, an applicant demonstrates crashworthiness by a
sled test. Under the proposed standards, an applicant would not
necessarily have to perform a sled test, but could instead employ a
different method accounting for many other factors, several of which
are described below. The FAA is imposing no new requirements, but
would, under this proposal, provide greater flexibility to adopt new
safety-testing methodologies and, ultimately, more advanced safety
technologies.
The FAA proposes to allow greater flexibility with respect to the
testing and demonstration, similar to advancements made in the
automotive industry over the past 30 years. The proposed regulations
would facilitate evaluation of the entirety of a crashworthiness
system--namely, the interaction of all crashworthiness features--rather
than requiring an evaluation of discrete, individual parameters. A
system's ability to protect occupants can be better understood by
evaluating it as a complete system, and using that greater
understanding to develop and implement new technologies. Such an
evaluation could include analyses of important survivability factors
identified by the NTSB, including occupant restraints, survivable
volume, energy-absorbing seats, and seat retention. These proposed
crashworthiness standards would not necessarily prevent accidents, but
should improve survivability.
The NTSB produced a series of reports in the 1980s that evaluated
over 21,000 GA airplane crashes between 1972 and 1981. The NTSB General
[[Page 13461]]
Aviation Crashworthiness Project \15\ evaluated airplane orientation,
impact magnitudes, and survival rates and factors to provide
information supporting changes in crashworthiness design standards for
GA seating and restraint systems. The NTSB reports also established
conditions approximating survivable accidents and identified factors
that would have the largest impact on safety. Amendment 23-36 (53 FR
30802, August 15, 1988) to part 23 referenced these reports for dynamic
seats but did not adopt a systems-evaluation approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ See www.regulations.gov (Docket # FAA-2015-1621).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NTSB reports identified several factors that, working together
as a system, should result in a safer airplane. The assessment also
indicated, however, that shoulder harnesses offer the most immediate
individual improvement for safety. The FAA codified the shoulder
harnesses requirement in amendments 23-19 (42 FR 20601, June 16, 1977)
and 23-32 (50 FR 46872, November 13, 1985) for newly manufactured
airplanes. The FAA also issued policy statement ACE-00-23.561-01,
Methods of Approval of Retrofit Shoulder Harness Installations in Small
Airplanes,\16\ dated September 19, 2000, to streamline the process for
retrofitting older airplanes. Current part 23 requires occupant
restraints to maintain integrity, stay in place on the occupant
throughout an event, properly distribute loads on the occupant, and
restrain the occupant by mitigating interaction with other items in the
cabin. Newer technologies that enhance or supplement the performance of
these restraints, such as airbags, are now being considered for
inclusion in designs. The use of airbags has greatly increased
passenger safety in automobiles, by offering protection in much more
severe impacts and in impacts from multiple directions. The proposed
performance standards would enable the use of these technologies.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ See www.regulations.gov (Docket # FAA-2015-1621).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Survivable volume is another critical factor in crashworthiness.
Survivable volume is the ability of the airframe to protect the
occupants from external intrusion, or the airplane cabin crushing
during and after an accident. There were several observed accidents in
the NTSB study where conventional airplane construction simply crushed
an otherwise restrained occupant. Crashworthiness regulations have
never included survivable volume as a factor, except in some instances
in which an airplane turns over. Airplane designs should provide the
space needed for the protection and restraint of the occupants. This is
one of the first steps in the analysis of airplane crashworthiness.
Data from the NTSB General Aviation Crashworthiness Project
suggested that energy-absorbing seats that protect the occupant from
vertical impact loads could enhance occupant survivability and prevent
serious injury, thereby enhancing odds for exiting the airplane and
preventing many debilitating long-term injuries. The FAA established
dynamic seat testing requirements in amendment 23-36 for airplanes
certificated under part 23. Energy absorbing seats have a smaller
impact than some other safety factors because accident impacts with
large vertical components tend to have lower odds of survival.
Nevertheless, energy attenuation from vertical forces, both static and
dynamic, has been important to crashworthiness regulations for the past
25 years. Seats may crush or collapse, but must remain attached to the
body of the airplane. Coupling the seat performance to the rest of the
airframe response is important to the enhancement and understanding of
occupant survivability. The FAA believes allowing designers to consider
airframe deformation would result in more accurate floor impulses,
which relate to simulated crash impact, and may allow for evaluation
for crash impulses in multiple directions.
The NTSB also identified seat retention as another basic building
block for airplane crashworthiness. The NTSB reports show more than a
quarter of otherwise-survivable accidents included instances where the
seats broke free at the attachment to the airplane, resulting in
fatalities or serious injuries. Dynamic seat testing requirements
address the ability of seat assemblies to remain attached to the floor,
even when the floor shifts during impact. Pitching and yawing of the
seat tracks during dynamic seat tests demonstrates the gimbaling and
flexibility of the seat.
The FAA believes that, under this proposal, all of these
crashworthiness factors could be incorporated into future testing
methodologies and thereby increase the survivability of accidents in
part 23 certificated airplanes. This proposed part 23 amendment would
authorize design approval applicants to use these technologies and
testing methodologies to enhance occupant safety.
E. Additional Requirements To Prevent LOC
LOC continues to be the leading cause of fatal GA accidents. The
FAA identified 74 accidents caused by stall or LOC between January 2008
and December 2013. These accidents, which are listed in Appendix IV of
the Part 23 Regulatory Evaluation,\17\ represent the type of accidents
that could be prevented by the proposed new stall and LOC requirements.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See www.regulations.gov (Docket # FAA-2015-1621).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FAA proposes to add requirements in Sec. Sec. 23.200 and
23.215 to prevent LOC accidents. Inadvertent stalls resulting in
airplane LOC cause a large number of small airplane fatal accidents.
These LOC accidents in the traffic pattern or at low altitudes often
result in fatalities because the airplane is too low to the ground for
the pilot to recover control. The FAA therefore believes it can improve
safety by requiring applicants to use new approaches to improve
airplane stall characteristics to prevent such accidents.
Another type of low-speed LOC accident that occurs in significant
numbers involves VMC in light twin-engine airplanes.
Virtually all twin-engine airplanes have a VMC that allows
directional control to be maintained after one engine fails. This speed
is typically above the stall speed of the airplane. However, light
twin-engine airplanes also typically have limited climb capability on
one engine. Moreover, after the failure of one engine, pilots often
instinctively tend to try to maintain a climb or maintain altitude,
which slows the airplane down. If the speed drops below VMC,
the pilot can lose control of the airplane. Because pilots tend to be
more aware of the airplane's stall speed, the FAA proposes in Sec.
23.200 that certification levels 1 and 2 multiengine airplanes would be
required to have a VMC that does not exceed the stall speed
of the airplane for each configuration. The FAA believes this proposed
requirement would provide a higher level of safety than current Sec.
23.149. The FAA requests comments on this proposal.
The FAA also proposes new requirements in Sec. 23.215 for airplane
stall characteristics and stall warning that would result in airplane
designs more resistant to inadvertently stalling and departing
controlled flight. These proposed requirements would increase the level
of safety over the current requirements. At the same time, the FAA
proposes to eliminate the spin recovery requirement in the current
rules for normal category airplanes. The FAA believes the spin recovery
requirement is unnecessary for normal category airplanes because the
vast
[[Page 13462]]
majority of inadvertent stalls leading to spin entry occur below a safe
altitude for spin recovery. However, airplanes certificated for
aerobatics would still have to meet spin recovery requirements.
The FAA also proposes to address pilot stall awareness by requiring
warnings that are more effective and by allowing new approaches to
improve pilot awareness of stall margins. These warnings could be as
simple as angle of attack or energy awareness presentations, or
sophisticated envelope protection systems that add a forward force to
the pilot's controls as the airplane speed and attitude approach stall.
F. Additional Requirements for Flight in Icing Conditions
The FAA proposes to implement the Part 23 Icing ARC's
recommendations in Sec. Sec. 23.230, 23.940 and 23.1405, to allow an
applicant the option of certifying an airplane to operate in SLD icing
conditions. To do so, an applicant would be required to meet the same
safety standards in SLD icing conditions as currently demonstrated for
part 23 airplanes in the icing conditions defined in appendix C to part
25.
Currently, the FAA does not certify part 23 airplanes to operate in
SLD icing conditions, also known as freezing drizzle and freezing rain.
Instead, current part 23 icing regulations require airplane
performance, flight characteristics, systems, and engine operation to
be demonstrated in the icing conditions defined in appendix C to part
25, which does not contain SLD icing conditions. In 2012, prior to the
Part 23 Reorganization ARC, the Part 23 Icing ARC recommended revising
part 23 to include SLD icing requirements in subparts B, E, and F
(Flight, Powerplant, and Equipment, respectively).
If an applicant chooses not to certify an airplane in SLD icing
conditions, proposed Sec. 23.230 would require the applicant to
demonstrate that SLD icing conditions could be detected and safely
exited. A means of compliance for SLD detection and exit may be found
in FAA Advisory Circular 23.1419-2D, Certification of Part 23 Airplanes
for Flight in Icing Conditions.\18\ The service history of airplanes
certificated under part 23 and certified to the latest icing standards
has shown that AC 23.1419-2D provides an adequate level of safety for
detecting and safely exiting SLD icing conditions. Industry has
indicated that these requirements would not impose an additional burden
because many manufacturers have already equipped recent airplanes to
meet the standards for detecting and exiting SLD in accordance with
current FAA guidance. Proposed Sec. 23.230, along with proposed Sec.
23.940, Powerplant ice protection, and Sec. 23.1405, Flight in icing
conditions, and their respective means of compliance, address NTSB
safety recommendations A-96-54 and A-96-56. The following table
provides a summary of the proposed icing regulations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ See www.regulations.gov (Docket # FAA-2015-1621).
Proposed Icing Regulations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airframe and system
protection,
performance and
flight
Part 23 type certificate Engine protection characteristics
limitations (Sec. 23.940) requirements (Sec.
Sec. 23.230,
23.1300, and
23.1405)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not certified for flight in Safe in part 25, App None, except pitot
icing conditions. C conditions, heat required if
ground ice fog, and airplane certified
falling/blowing for flight in
snow. instrument
meteorological
conditions (IMC).
Certified for flight in Safe in part 25, App Safe in part 25, App
icing conditions, but C conditions, C conditions. Can
prohibited for flight in ground ice fog, and detect SLD and
SLD. falling/blowing safely exit.
snow.
Certified for flight in Safe in part 25, App Safe in part 25, App
icing conditions and SLD. C conditions, C conditions and
ground ice fog, and SLD.
falling/blowing
snow, and SLD.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
G. Production of Replacement and Modification Articles
The Part 23 Reorganization ARC recommended simplifying
certification requirements for non-required systems and equipment, with
an emphasis on improvement in overall fleet safety from the prevailing
level. In the past, the FAA has not established different production
requirements for required and non-required equipment that may enhance
safety, or for articles whose improper operation or failure would not
cause a hazard. The current requirements for producing articles and
representing those articles as suitable for installation on type-
certificated products are well suited for articles manufactured in
accordance with a product's TC or STC, as well as for TSO and PMA
parts. However, they may unnecessarily constrain the production of non-
required, low risk articles.
Current standards for the production approval of these articles can
create a barrier for their installation in the existing fleet of
aircraft. Examples of such articles include carbon monoxide detectors,
weather display systems, clocks, small hand-held fire extinguishers,
and flashlights. In many cases, these articles are ``off-the-shelf''
products. It is frequently difficult for a person to install these
articles on a type-certificated aircraft because the level of design
and production details necessary for these articles to meet the
provisions of current Sec. 21.9, as expected for more critical
articles, are frequently unavailable.
The FAA is therefore proposing to revise Sec. 21.9, Replacement
and Modification Articles, to provide applicants with an alternative
method to obtain FAA approval to produce replacement and modification
articles. This proposed change would allow a production approval
applicant to submit production information for a specific article,
without requiring the producer of the article to obtain approval of the
article's design or approval of its quality system. The FAA intends to
use the flexibility provided by this proposal to streamline the
approval process for non-required safety enhancing equipment and other
articles that pose little or no risk to aircraft occupants and the
public. The FAA requests comments on this proposal, and particularly is
interested in comments regarding whether the proposed change would
safely facilitate retrofit of low risk articles and whether there are
alternative methods to address the perceived retrofit barrier.
V. Key Terms and Concepts Used in This Document
The proposal includes a number of terms introduced into the
regulations for the first time. These terms may be used
[[Page 13463]]
to replace existing prescriptive requirements or may explain other
terms that have had longstanding use in the aircraft certification
process, but in context of this rulemaking proposal, the FAA wants to
specify its meaning. These terms are intended to set forth and clarify
the safety intent of the proposed rules. Although certain terms may
differ from those currently in use, these differences are not intended
to increase the regulatory burden on an applicant unless specifically
stated. The FAA's intent is that the proposed requirements
incorporating these new terms not change the intent, understanding, or
implementation of the original rule unless that requirement has been
specifically revised in the proposal, such as is the case for
requirements governing stall characteristics. To assist applicants in
understanding the intent of the proposal, these terms are discussed
below:
Airplane Certification Level--A division used for the certification
of airplanes that is associated directly with the number of passengers
on the airplane. Airplane certification levels would be established to
implement the agency's concept of certificating airplanes using a
process that recognizes a safety continuum.
Airplane Performance Level--Maximum airspeed divisions that are
intended, along with airplane certification levels, to replace current
weight and propulsion divisions used for the certification of
airplanes. Current propulsion-based divisions assume that piston engine
airplanes are slower than turbine-powered airplanes. Current weight-
based divisions assume that heavier airplanes are more complex and
would be more likely to be used in commercial passenger carriage than
lighter airplanes. These assumptions are no longer valid. Airplane
certification based on performance levels would apply regulatory
standards appropriate to airplane's performance and complexity.
Departure Resistant--For the purposes of this NPRM, departure
resistant refers to stall characteristics that make it very difficult
for the airplane to depart controlled flight. Most fatal stall or spin
accidents start below 1000 feet above ground level and do not actually
spin, but start a yawing and rolling maneuver to enter the spin called
a post stall gyration. In these low-altitude accidents, the airplane
typically hits the ground before completing one turn. Therefore, the
important safety criterion is preventing the airplane from exhibiting
stall characteristics that could result in a departure from controlled
flight.
Entry-Level Airplane--A two or four-place airplane typically used
for training, rental, and by flying clubs. Historically, most of these
airplanes have four cylinder engines with less than 200 horsepower.
These airplanes typically have fixed-gear and fixed-pitch propellers,
but may also have retractable landing gear and constant speed
propellers. Entry-level airplanes typically cannot be used to train
pilots to meet the requirements to operate a complex aircraft, as that
term is defined for airman certification purposes.
Equivalent Level of Safety (ELOS) Finding--A finding made by the
accountable aircraft certification directorate when literal compliance
with a certification requirement cannot be shown and compensating
factors in the design can be shown to provide a level of safety
equivalent to that established by the applicable airworthiness
standard.
Fuel--Any source used by the powerplant to generate its power.
Hazard--Any existing or potential condition that can lead to
injury, illness or death; damage to or loss of a system, equipment, or
property; or damage to the environment. A hazard is a condition that is
a prerequisite to an accident or an incident. (Cf. Order VS 8000.367,
Appendix A)
Issue Paper--A structured means for describing and tracking the
resolution of significant technical, regulatory, and administrative
issues that occur during a certification project. The issue paper
process constitutes a formal communication vehicle for addressing
significant issues among an applicant, the FAA, and if applicable, the
validating authority (VA) or certificating authority (CA) for type
validation programs. An issue paper may also be used to address novel
or controversial technical issues.
Means of Compliance--A documented procedure used by an applicant to
demonstrate compliance to a performance or outcome-based standard.
Similar to an Advisory Circular (AC), a means of compliance is one
method, but not the only method, to show compliance with a regulatory
requirement. Additionally, if a procedure is used as a means of
compliance, it must be followed completely to maintain the integrity of
the means of compliance.
Performance- or Outcome-Based Standard--A standard that states
requirements in terms of required results, but does not prescribe any
specific method for achieving the required results. A performance-based
standard may define the functional requirements for an item,
operational requirements, or interface and interchangeability
characteristics.
Pilot or Flightcrew--This is used generically throughout the
proposed part 23 because part 23 has airplanes approved for single
pilot operations as well as and two flightcrew members. For most
airplanes certificated under part 23 that are single pilot, applicants
should consider pilot and flightcrew to be interchangeable.
Prescriptive Design Standard--Specifies a particular design
requirement, such as materials to be used, how to perform a test, or
how an item is to be fabricated or constructed. (Cf. OMB Circular A-119
Section 5.f.)
Safety Continuum--The concept that one level of safety is not
appropriate for all aviation activities. Accordingly, higher levels of
risk, with corresponding requirements for less rigorous safety
demonstrations for products, are accepted as aircraft are utilized for
more personal forms of transportation.
Survivable Volume--The airplane cabin's ability to resist external
intrusion or structural collapse during and after impact. The ability
to resist is usually represented as a stiffer design around the cabin
(not unlike a racecar roll cage) that is generally stronger than the
surrounding structure. While the airframe may deform or disintegrate
and attenuate impact energy, the cabin of the airplane will still
maintain its integrity and protect the occupants restrained within.
During otherwise survivable accident scenarios, including rollover,
this structure should maintain its shape under static and dynamic
loading conditions.
VI. Discussion of the Proposed Regulatory Amendments
A. Part 23, Airworthiness Standards
1. Subpart A--General
a. General Discussion
The FAA proposes eliminating the utility, acrobatic, and commuter
categories for future airplanes certificated under part 23. The FAA
also proposes to change from weight and propulsion divisions to
performance and risk divisions. This would address the wide range of
airplanes to be certificated under part 23 and enhance application of
the safety continuum approach. Appendix 1 of this preamble contains a
cross-reference table detailing how the current regulations are
addressed in the proposed part 23 regulations.
[[Page 13464]]
b. Specific Discussion of Changes
i. Proposed Sec. 23.1, Applicability and Definition
Proposed Sec. 23.1 would prescribe airworthiness standards for the
issuance of type certificates, and changes to those certificates, for
airplanes in the normal category. Current Sec. 23.3, Airplane
categories, defines normal category as airplanes that have a seating
configuration, excluding pilot seats, of nine or less, a maximum
certificated takeoff weight of 12,500 pounds or less, and intended for
nonacrobatic operation. Proposed Sec. 23.1 would delete references to
utility, acrobatic, and commuter category airplanes, and paragraph (b)
would not include the current reference to procedural requirements for
showing compliance. The reference to procedural requirements for
showing compliance is redundant with the requirement in Sec. 21.21,
Issue of type certificate: Normal, utility, acrobatic, commuter, and
transport category aircraft; manned free balloons; special classes of
aircraft; aircraft engines; propellers, to show compliance. Proposed
Sec. 23.1 would also add three definitions specific to part 23: (1)
Continued safe flight and landing, (2) designated fire zone, and (3)
empty weight.
ii. Proposed Sec. 23.5, Certification of Normal Category Airplanes
Proposed Sec. 23.5 would apply certification in the normal
category to airplanes with a passenger-seating configuration of 19 or
less and a maximum certificated takeoff weight of 19,000 pounds or
less. Proposed Sec. 23.5 would also establish certification levels
based on the passenger seating configuration and airplane performance
levels based on speed.
The diversity of airplanes certificated under part 23 is large
relative to performance, numbers of passengers, complexity, technology,
and intended use. Airplane certification requirements under part 23 are
currently determined using a combination of weight, numbers of
passengers, and propulsion type. These divisions historically were
appropriate because there was a clear relationship between the
propulsion and weight of the airplane and its associated performance
and complexity. Recent technological developments have altered the
dynamics of this relationship. High-performance and complex airplanes
now exist within the weight range that was typical for light and simple
airplanes. Furthermore, current part 23 has evolved to meet the
additional regulatory requirements resulting from the introduction of
high-performance airplanes. This has resulted in the introduction of
more stringent and demanding requirements in the lower weight airplanes
such as the use of 14 CFR part 25 based requirements for simple,
single-engine turbine airplanes. The result is that some of the current
requirements have become more demanding for simple and low-performance
airplanes.
The FAA proposes replacing the current part 23 weight and
propulsion divisions because they were based on assumptions that do not
always fit the large diversity of airplane performance, complexity,
technology, intended use, and seating capacity encompassed in today's
new airplane designs. Also, the current divisions may not be
appropriate to address unforeseen designs of the future. The commuter
category, originally intended for the certification of airplanes over
12,500 pounds and up to 19 passengers, is currently used for larger
business jets with less than ten passengers. The proposed certification
and performance level approach, while different from the current
divisions, would capture the safety intent of part 23 more
appropriately than the current propulsion and weight divisions.
The FAA proposes replacing the current divisions with specific
technical and operational capabilities by addressing, for example,
stall speed, VFR/IFR operation, pressurization, etc., that represent
the actual technical drivers for current prescriptive requirements.
These types of design specific technical and operational criteria would
be more appropriate for a means of compliance document where a complete
range of airplane designs could be addressed. The FAA proposes that
high-speed, multiengine airplanes and multiengine airplanes over 12,500
pounds should continue meeting the equivalent commuter category
performance-based requirements. The proposed performance requirements
would be based on number of passengers (certification level) and
airplane performance (performance level); not weight or propulsion
type.
The FAA proposes to eliminate commuter, utility, and acrobatic
airplane categories in part 23, retaining only normal category for all
new part 23 type certificated airplane design approvals. The FAA
believes this action would not affect the existing fleet of small
airplanes. For example, the commuter category was originally introduced
into part 23 to apply to a 10 to 19 passenger, multiengine airplane,
operated in scheduled service under 14 CFR parts 121 and 135. However,
new airplanes certified under part 23 can no longer be used in
scheduled service under part 121 because Sec. 121.157, Aircraft
certification and equipment requirements, paragraph (h), requires a
part 25 certification for newly type certificated airplanes. The
majority of airplanes recently certified in the commuter category are
multiengine business jets. Additionally, the certification category of
commuter can be confused with the same term in the operating rules
because the term is defined differently in the certification and
operation rules. The FAA recognizes that moving away from weight and
propulsion divisions would result in changes for the criteria used to
determine when to apply the existing commuter category certification
requirements using the numbers of passenger seats (excluding crewmember
seats), performance, and technical divisions proposed in this NPRM. The
FAA proposes the following airplane certification levels:
Level 1--for airplanes with a maximum seating
configuration of 0 to 1 passengers.
Level 2--for airplanes with a maximum seating
configuration of 2 to 6 passengers.
Level 3--for airplanes with a maximum seating
configuration of 7 to 9 passengers.
Level 4--for airplanes with a maximum seating
configuration of 10 to 19 passengers.
The differences between normal, utility, and acrobatic categories
are currently very limited and primarily affect airframe structure
requirements. Proposed part 23 would still allow a normal category
airplane to be approved for aerobatics provided the airplane was
certified to address the factors affecting safety for the defined
limits for that kind of operation. Currently, the utility category
provides airplanes additional margin for the more stringent inertial
structural loads resulting from intended spins and the additional
maneuvers stated in the requirements of the utility category in Sec.
23.3(b). The FAA proposes that airplanes approved for spins be
certificated to aerobatic standards. An airplane designed with
traditional handling qualities and designed to allow spin training is
more susceptible to inadvertent departure from controlled flight. The
FAA believes that maintaining the current utility category for
airplanes approved for spins and limited aerobatic maneuvers would
negate the single largest safety gain expected from this rulemaking
action--the significant reduction in inadvertent stall-related
departures from controlled flight.
Proposed Sec. 23.5(c) would categorize the performance level of an
airplane as low speed or high speed. The combination of certification
levels and performance levels is intended to
[[Page 13465]]
provide divisions that address the actual safety concern of occupant
numbers and performance, for example, future designs using novel
propulsion methods. The FAA proposes the following airplane performance
levels:
Low speed--for airplanes with a design cruising speed
(VC) or maximum operating limit speed (VMO) <=
250 KCAS (or MMO <= 0.6).
High speed--for airplanes with a VC or
VMO > 250 KCAS (or MMO > 0.6).
Proposed Sec. 23.5(d) would identify a simple airplane as one with
a certification level 1, a VC or VMO <= 250 KCAS
(and MMO <= 0.6), and a VSO <= 45 KCAS, and
approved only for VFR operations. The FAA proposes a simple airplane as
equivalent to airplanes certificated under EASA's current CS-VLA. In
most cases, EASA's CS-VLA requirements are identical to the proposed
corresponding part 23 requirements and have been proposed in the
requirements for certification level 1 airplanes. The FAA considered
using the CS-VLA standards in combination with the proposed part 23
certification standards for all certification level 1, low-speed
airplanes. However, the FAA believes that there are several
requirements in CS-VLA that are not appropriate for all certification
level 1, low-speed airplanes, such as no requirement for a type
certified engine in CS-VLA. Therefore, the FAA proposes creating a
limited certification and performance level for simple airplanes.
Simple airplanes would be a subset of certification level 1, low-speed
airplanes and would have a VSO <= 45 KCAS and would only be
approved for VFR operations.
In accordance with the FAA's objective to remove weight and
propulsion divisions from the rules and use performance and
certification divisions, the proposed requirements applicable to the
certification of simple airplanes would not completely conform to the
criteria EASA uses to certificate very light airplanes. The FAA
proposes that simple airplanes would constitute a subset of
certification level 1, low-speed airplanes that would be required to
have a low stall speed limit and a VFR limitation in order to maintain
a level of safety appropriate for these airplanes. The FAA believes
that creating the simple certification level would encourage
manufacturers of light-sport and experimental aircraft kits to pursue
type certificates for their airplane designs without encountering the
administrative, procedural or regulatory barriers existing in current
part 23, while allowing innovative technology in those designs.
The FAA considered allowing airplanes that meet the consensus
standards applicable to the certification of special light-sport
aircraft to be included in proposed part 23. However, the FAA decided
that this would not be in the best interest of the GA community because
it could result in the elimination of the special light-sport aircraft
category. There are advantages in the certification of special light-
sport aircraft, such as self-certification, that would not be available
if the aircraft were type certificated under part 23. This proposal
would instead enable a simpler path to part 23 certification for
airplanes that meet the definition of a light-sport aircraft and wish
to pursue a type of certificate for business reasons.
The FAA expects simple airplanes to be more basic than the proposed
certification level 1, low-speed airplanes. A simple airplane is a
certification level 1, low-speed airplane with a stall speed limit of
45 KCAS that would be limited to VFR operations. The FAA recognizes
that a simple airplane level would have characteristics very similar to
certification level 1, low-speed airplanes, and that creating this
category may be unnecessary. For this reason, the FAA is specifically
asking for comments concerning the value of creating a separate, simple
airplane level.
iii. Proposed Sec. 23.10, Accepted Means of Compliance
Proposed Sec. 23.10 would require an applicant to show the FAA how
it would demonstrate compliance with this part using a means of
compliance, which may include consensus standards, accepted by the
Administrator. Proposed Sec. 23.10 would also require an applicant
requesting acceptance of a means of compliance to provide the means of
compliance to the FAA in a form and manner specified by the
Administrator.
Proposed Sec. 23.10 would create flexibility for applicants in
developing means of compliance and also specifically identify consensus
standards as a means of compliance the Administratory may find
acceptable. The Part 23 Reorganization ARC proposed using consensus
standards for the detailed means of compliance to the fundamental
safety requirements in proposed part 23. As discussed in the
International Harmonization Efforts section of this NPRM, the intent of
this proposal is to create a regulatory architecture for part 23 that
is agile enough to keep up with innovation. Allowing the use of
consensus standards would accomplish this goal.
The Part 23 Reorganization ARC recommended creating this proposed
section to identify specifically the means of compliance documents
developed by industry, users such as large flight schools, the
interested public, and the FAA, that an applicant could use in
developing a certification application. The ARC expressed two concerns
that led to the creation of the proposed requirement. First, applicants
need to use a means of compliance accepted by the Administrator when
showing compliance to part 23. Second, while a consensus standards body
(i.e., ASTM, SAE, RTCA, etc.) developed means of compliance document
may be available, individuals or organizations may also submit their
own means of compliance documentation to the Administrator for
consideration and potential acceptance. Additionally, the FAA wants to
ensure applicants understand that an applicant-developed means of
compliance document would require FAA review and acceptance by the
Administrator.
The FAA anticipates that individuals or organizations would develop
acceptable means for complying with the proposed performance standards.
A standards organization such as ASTM, for example, could generate a
series of consensus-based standards for review, acceptance, and public
notice of acceptance by the FAA. The ASTM standards could be one way,
but not the only way, to demonstrate compliance with part 23. Other
consensus standard bodies such as RTCA and SAE are currently focused on
developing standards for aircraft components and appliances.
The proposed airworthiness standards would allow airplanes to be
certificated at different airplane certification levels. For example,
software integrity levels appropriate for a certification level 1
airplane may not be appropriate for a certification level 4 airplane.
Additionally, the takeoff performance of an airplane might be evaluated
differently for an airplane intended to be certificated at different
airplane certification levels. An applicant seeking certification of a
certification level 1 airplane with a takeoff distance of 200 feet, for
example, would not need to establish the takeoff distance with the same
degree of accuracy as would an applicant seeking certification of a
certification level 4 high-speed airplane with a takeoff distance of
4,000 feet.
By using means of compliance documents to show compliance with the
proposed performance-based rules, the need for special conditions, ELOS
[[Page 13466]]
findings, and exemptions to address new technology advancements would
diminish. Once the Administrator accepted a means of compliance, it may
be used for future applications for certification unless formally
rescinded. Allowing the use of consensus standards as a means of
compliance to performance-based regulations would provide the FAA with
the agility necessary to more rapidly accept new technology, leverage
industry expectations in the development of new means of compliance
documents, and provide for the use of harmonized means of compliance
among the FAA, industry, and foreign CAAs. While an applicant would not
be required to use previously accepted means of compliance documents,
their use would streamline the certification process by eliminating the
need to develop an issue paper to address the certification of new
technology. Proposed AC 23.10,\19\ Accepted Means of Compliance, would
provide guidance for applicants on the process applicants would follow
to submit proposed means of compliance to the FAA for consideration by
the Administrator.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ See www.regulations.gov (Docket # FAA-2015-1621).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Part 23 Reorganization ARC expressed concerns that a consensus
standard could be biased in favor of a few large manufacturers and
would create an unfair competitive advantage. The FAA notes that any
interested party may participate in the ASTM committees developing
consensus standards thereby, mitigating this concern. The FAA expects
that other consensus standards bodies would allow similar opportunities
for interested parties to participate in their standards development
work. Additionally, any individual or organization could develop its
own means of compliance and submit it to the FAA for acceptance by the
Administrator. The other risk identified by the Part 23 Reorganization
ARC was that specialists in the industry could argue for complex means
of compliance when the FAA would accept a simpler or more cost
effective approach. However, the FAA would continue to allow applicants
to propose their own means of compliance when the larger industry
standard may be the appropriate level of safety for one, but not all
certification levels. Lastly, the FAA intends to continue to allow the
use of the current prescriptive means of compliance contained in
current part 23 requirements as one obvious alternative to showing
compliance with proposed part 23. This would not apply to the proposed
sections that contain new requirements, such as Sec. Sec. 23.200,
23.215, and 23.230.
The Part 23 Reorganization ARC also was aware the Administrator has
accepted various manufacturers' internal standards in the past and
recommended having that option stated in the proposal. Proposed Sec.
23.10 would allow applicants to submit their internal standards as
means of compliance for consideration by the Administrator.
iv. Removal of Subpart A Current Regulations
The FAA proposes removing current Sec. 23.2, Special retroactive
requirements, from part 23 because the operational rules currently
address these requirements. The current retroactive rule is more
appropriate in the operating rules. The FAA proposes amending 14 CFR
part 91, as discussed later in the Discussion of the Proposed
Regulatory Amendments to ensure removing the current Sec. 23.2
requirement would not affect the existing fleet.
2. Subpart B--Flight
a. General Discussion
The FAA proposes moving away from the current stall characteristics
and spin testing approach to address the largest cause of fatal
accidents in small airplanes. Proposed Sec. 23.215 in subpart B would
omit the one turn/three second spin requirement for normal category
airplanes, but it would increase the stall handling characteristics and
stall warning requirements so the airplane would be substantially more
resistant to stall-based departures than the current rules require.
The FAA also proposes eliminating the utility, acrobatic, and
commuter categories in part 23. Accordingly, a new airplane would have
to be approved for aerobatic loads as the normal category, even if an
applicant only wanted to spin the airplane. Therefore, the FAA proposes
to restrict certification of new airplanes for dual use, which can be
done today using both the normal and utility categories. The FAA
believes that if the airplane can spin for spin training, then the
airplane can inadvertently stall and depart into a spin during normal
operations. One of the FAA's goals is to prevent inadvertent stalls, so
allowing airplanes that are commonly used as rental airplanes to spin
would defeat the goal. However, the FAA would consider accepting a
dual-purpose airplane if the airplane manufacturer provided a system
that could be changed mechanically or electronically from normal to
aerobatic as a maintenance function rather than controlled by the
pilot.
The FAA proposes consolidating the performance requirements for
high-speed multiengine airplanes and multiengine airplanes that weigh
over 12,500 pounds. These airplanes are currently required to meet a
series of one-engine-inoperative climb gradients. These climb gradients
were based on part 25 requirements and intended for commuter category
airplanes used in scheduled air service under parts 135 and 121. New
airplanes certificated under part 23 are not eligible for operation in
scheduled service under part 121, diminishing the utility of the
commuter category for these airplanes.
More recently, part 23 multiengine jets intended to be used under
parts 91 or 135 have been certificated in the commuter category, using
part 25 based climb gradient requirements. In the spirit of the
proposed rule change, the FAA has decided that the one-engine-
inoperative climb requirements would be independent of the number of
engines and some of the original requirements would be consolidated
into a single requirement that would require performance very close to
what is required today. This action intends to maintain the performance
capabilities expected in 14 CFR part 135 operations.
The FAA proposes changes in the flight characteristics rules to
keep the safety intent of the existing requirements consistent with the
other proposed part 23 sections. The current part 23 requirements are
based on small airplanes, designed with reversible controls, which
include some accommodations for stability augmentation and autopilots.
The FAA believes the proposed language would capture the current
requirements for flight characteristics and allows for varying degrees
of automated flight control systems in the future.
Finally, the FAA proposes adding a requirement to require
certification levels 1 and 2 multiengine airplanes, not capable of
climbing after a critical loss of thrust, to stall prior to reaching
the minimum directional control speed (VMC).
b. Specific Discussion of Changes
i. Proposed Sec. 23.100, Weight and Center of Gravity
Proposed Sec. 23.100 would require an applicant to determine
weights and centers of gravity that provide limits for the safe
operation of the airplane. Additionally, it would require an applicant
to show compliance with each requirement of this subpart at each
combination of weight and center of
[[Page 13467]]
gravity within the airplane's range of loading conditions using
tolerances acceptable to the Administrator. Proposed Sec. 23.100 would
also require the condition of the airplane at the time of determining
its empty weight and center of gravity to be well defined and easily
repeatable.
Proposed Sec. 23.100 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. Sec. 23.21, Proof of compliance; 23.23, Load distribution limits;
23.25, Weight limits; 23.29, Empty weight and corresponding center of
gravity; and 23.31, Removable ballast. This proposed section would
ensure an applicant considers the important weight and balance
configurations that influence performance, stability, and control when
showing compliance with the flight requirements. The main safety
requirements of current Sec. Sec. 23.21-23.31 are located in current
Sec. Sec. 23.21 and 23.23. Current Sec. 23.21 allows for a range of
loading conditions shown by test or systematic investigation. The
proposed rule would still allow for this flexibility, including the
tolerances for flight test. Sections 23.25-23.31 provide definitions
and directions for determining weights and centers of gravity and
provides directions for informing the pilot. For these reasons, the
information in these sections is more appropriate as a means of
compliance.
ii. Proposed Sec. 23.105, Performance
Proposed Sec. 23.105 would require an airplane to meet the
performance requirements of this subpart in various conditions based on
the airplane's certification and performance levels for which
certification is requested. Proposed Sec. 23.105 also would require an
applicant to develop the performance data required by this subpart for
various conditions, while also accounting for losses due to atmospheric
conditions, cooling needs, and other demands on power sources. Finally,
proposed Sec. 23.105 would require the procedures used for determining
takeoff and landing distances to be executed consistently by pilots of
average skill in atmospheric conditions expected to be encountered in
service.
Proposed Sec. 23.105 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. 23.45, Performance--General. The safety intent of Sec. 23.45(a)
is captured in proposed Sec. 23.105(a) and is essentially unchanged
from the current rule, except to incorporate the proposed certification
levels and speed divisions.
Proposed Sec. 23.105(b) would capture the safety intent of Sec.
23.45(b) by retaining Sec. 23.45(b)(1) requirements and combining
Sec. 23.45(b)(2) and (b)(3) and allowing all airplanes to use the
cooling climb limits as their upper temperature. The level of safety
remains the same as the current part 23 because part 23 airplane pilots
only have the limitations identified in the airplane flight manual,
including engine temperature limits.
Proposed Sec. 23.105(c) would also capture the safety intent of
Sec. 23.45(f). The safety intent of the current rule is to ensure an
average pilot can consistently get the same results as published in the
Airplane Flight Manual (AFM). The FAA believes this requirement would
ensure applicants either perform their performance tests in a
conservative manner or add margins and procedures to the AFM
performance section so an average pilot can achieve the same
performance.
Proposed Sec. 23.105(d) would require performance data to account
for losses due to atmospheric conditions, cooling needs, and other
demands. The current rule specifies the position of cowl flaps or other
means for controlling the engine air supply. The proposed language
accounts for airplane performance, if affected by the cooling needs of
the propulsion system, which is the safety intent of Sec. 23.45, but
would omit the details because they are more appropriate as a means of
compliance.
Proposed Sec. 23.105(d) would also capture the safety intent Sec.
23.45(d) and (e). The safety intent of the current rule is to ensure
the airplane performance accounts for minimum power available from the
propulsion system, considering atmospheric and cooling conditions and
accessories requiring power.
iii. Proposed Sec. 23.110, Stall Speed
Proposed Sec. 23.110 would require an applicant to determine the
airplane stall speed or the minimum steady flight speed for each flight
configuration used in normal operations, accounting for the most
adverse conditions for each flight configuration, with power set at
idle or zero thrust.
Proposed Sec. 23.110 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. 23.49, Stalling speed. Stall speeds are necessary to define
operating and limiting speeds used to determine airplane performance.
They also provide a basis for determining kinetic energy in emergency
landing conditions. Therefore, determining stall speeds is required in
the configurations used in the operation of the airplane.
The FAA proposes removing the 61-knot stall speed division for
single-engine airplanes from the rules because this speed has not been
a limitation since 1992 with the addition of the options for stall
speeds in excess of 61 knots in Sec. 23.562, Emergency landing dynamic
conditions. Therefore, the 61-knot stall speed is a technical division
rather than a limitation and would be more appropriate as a means of
compliance.
The FAA is changing its approach to crashworthiness. Instead of
constraining the connection between stall speed and crashworthiness to
a single fixed speed, the FAA proposes allowing alternative approaches
to crashworthiness. The intent is to encourage incorporation of
innovations from other industries to provide more occupant protection
in the airframe. This approach would base occupant protection on the
actual stall speed rather than a single mandated stall speed.
iv. Proposed Sec. 23.115, Takeoff Performance
Proposed Sec. 23.115 would require an applicant to determine
airplane takeoff performance, which includes the determination of
ground roll and initial climb distance to 50 feet, accounting for stall
speed safety margins, minimum control speeds; and climb gradients.
Proposed Sec. 23.115 would also require the takeoff performance
determination to include accelerate-stop, ground roll and initial climb
to 50 feet, and net takeoff flight path, after a sudden critical loss
of thrust for certification levels 1, 2, and 3 high-speed multiengine
airplanes, multiengine airplanes with a maximum takeoff weight greater
than 12,500 pounds, and certification level 4 multiengine airplanes.
Proposed Sec. 23.115 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. Sec. 23.51, Takeoff speeds; and 23.61, Takeoff flight path.
Takeoff distance information and the associated procedures for
achieving those distances are necessary for the safe operation of all
airplanes certified under part 23. Proposed Sec. 23.115 would require
applicants to determine, develop, and publish distance and procedure
data for the pilot to use. The effects of airplane weight, field
temperature and elevation, winds, runway gradient, and runway surface
also need to be available to the pilot because they affect airplane
performance. For proposed simple entry-level airplanes, conservative
analysis may supplement flight test while data for larger, higher
performance airplanes are expected to provide the level of precision
that is accepted today.
Additionally, proposed Sec. 23.115 would require applicants to
determine critical thrust loss cases for multiengine airplanes. Today,
the loss of one engine on a two-engine airplane is the standard model.
The future possibilities for the functions of engines, if different
from
[[Page 13468]]
thrust, and how the engines are controlled, may determine critical
thrust loss. For example, a large number of engines along the leading
edge of a wing could function as a high-lift device as well as provide
thrust.
Historically, limited propulsion options and the need for inherent
stability from reversible, mechanical control systems have restrained
airplane configurations. The FAA anticipates that new propulsion
systems and affordable electronic flight control systems will challenge
these traditional designs and need alternative means of compliance.
Speed multiples and factors used in current part 23 prescriptive
requirements are based on traditional airplane configurations. Part 23
mandates these details of design for compliance. The FAA believes
removing these details would provide applicants with the agility and
flexibility to address these new airplane configurations. The current
factors will still apply for traditional configurations, but proposed
performance-based requirements should allow rapid adoption of new means
of compliance for future airplane configurations.
The FAA proposes removing airplane categories and weight and
propulsion certification divisions for multiengine jets over 6,000
pounds and replacing them with divisions based on risk and performance.
The commuter category, originally intended for the certification of
airplanes over 12,500 pounds and up to 19 passengers, is currently used
for larger business jets with less than ten passengers. The FAA
proposes that high-speed, multiengine and multiengine airplanes over
12,500 pounds should continue meeting the equivalent commuter category
performance-based requirements. The historical assumption applied to
jets was that they were fast, had high wing loadings, and used
significant runway distances for takeoff and landing. Therefore, all
jets were required to have guaranteed climb performance with one engine
inoperative. This requirement does not currently apply to single engine
jets. The proposed performance requirements would be based on number of
passengers (certification level) and airplane performance (performance
level), not weight or propulsion type. The proposed certification and
performance levels approach would not offer a one-to-one relationship
with the current requirements. A low-speed turbine-powered airplane may
be more appropriately addressed by regulations currently applicable to
piston-powered airplanes, while a piston-powered or a high-speed
electric airplane may be more appropriately addressed by regulations
currently used for the certification of turbine-powered airplanes. The
proposed certification and performance level approach, while different
from the current divisions, would capture the safety intent of part 23
more appropriately than the current propulsion and weight divisions.
v. Proposed Sec. 23.120, Climb Requirements
Proposed Sec. 23.120 would require an applicant to demonstrate
various minimum climb performances out of ground effect, depending on
the airplane's certification level, engines, and performance
capability. This new provision would capture the safety intent of
current Sec. Sec. 23.65, Climb: All engines operating; 23.67, Climb:
One engine inoperative; and 23.77, Balked landing. Minimum climb
performance information is necessary so pilots can determine if they
have adequate clearance from obstacles beyond the end of the runway.
New engine technologies, especially electric, would allow for
alternative configurations that would invalidate many of the detailed
test configuration and power assumptions that are in the current
requirements.
Part 23 currently has a large matrix for all the climb requirements
that includes category, weight, and number of engines, resulting in
over 20 different climb gradient requirements. This reflects the growth
in the variety of different airplane types that has occurred since the
certification regulations were first adopted in CAR 3. Because the FAA
proposes simplifying these divisions using certification levels and
airplane performance levels, it can eliminate required climb gradients
for three and four engines. The FAA proposes basing multiengine climb
gradients on critical loss for thrust and using the gradient for the
current twin-engine airplanes because it has resulted in a safe service
history. The FAA proposes replacing the term ``failure of the critical
engine'' (which addresses a twin engine airplane) with ``critical loss
of thrust'' for airplanes certificated under those provisions. The
reason for replacing this term is that with configurations utilizing
large numbers of engines, the failure modes may not follow the
traditional failure modes as with the loss of one engine on a two-
engine airplane. Furthermore, the FAA proposes retaining and
consolidating the climb gradients from current Sec. 23.67 because
these gradients are important minimum performance requirements for
maintaining the current level of safety.
Proposed Sec. 23.120(a) would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. 23.65. It would retain the existing climb gradients and
atmospheric conditions required for pilot planning.
Proposed Sec. 23.120(b) would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. 23.67, and consolidates the weight and propulsion divisions into
all engines operating, critical loss of thrust, and balked landing
groups. Furthermore, for high-speed airplanes, after a critical loss of
thrust, the FAA proposes reducing the number of required climb
conditions for certification to one gradient at 400 feet (122 meters)
above the takeoff surface. For the typical part 23 certified twin-
engine airplane, the required climb gradient at 400 feet (122 meters)
above the takeoff surface is generally the most challenging. Airplanes
that have the performance to meet this one requirement typically can
meet all the current requirements. For certification levels 3 and 4,
high-speed multiengine airplanes, the FAA proposes consolidating the
configurations currently prescribed for the second segment climb and a
discontinued approach. The climb gradient difference between these
segments is 0.1 percent and uses the takeoff flap configuration rather
than the approach flap configuration. Requiring only one climb gradient
at 400 feet (122 meters) above the takeoff surface with the landing
gear retracted and flaps in the approach position would maintain the
current level of safety while reducing the requirements by eliminating
initial, final, and discontinued approach climb tests. Because the
proposed requirements would reduce the amount of climb testing for
designs intended for use under part 91, applicants would also need to
provide the traditional operational performance data, as is currently
done, if the design is intended to be used for commercial operations
under part 135 operating rules.
The FAA also proposes to normalize the initial climb height to 50
feet (15 meters) above the takeoff surface. The regulations for the
certification of commuter category airplanes essentially adopted many
of the part 25 climb requirements, including an initial climb height of
35 feet (11 meters) above the takeoff surface. When the commuter
category was adopted, the expectation was that these airplanes would be
used in part 121 service. This expectation allowed the FAA to accept
the part 25 assumption that takeoff distances would be factored; thus,
providing a safety margin to offset the lower initial climb height.
Part 23 requirements provide minimum safe operations for part 91, which
does not require factored takeoff
[[Page 13469]]
distances. Therefore, allowing a 35 foot (11 meters) height above the
takeoff surface is a lower safety margin than used for smaller
airplanes and, for this reason, the FAA proposes to make all airplanes
certificated under part 23 use 50 feet (15 meters) above the takeoff
surface.
vi. Proposed Sec. 23.125, Climb Information
Proposed Sec. 23.125 would require an applicant to determine the
climb performance for--
All single engine airplanes;
Certification level 3 multiengine airplanes after a
critical loss of thrust on takeoff in the initial climb configuration;
and
All multiengine airplanes during the enroute phase of
flight with all engines operating and after a critical loss of thrust
in the cruise configuration.
Proposed Sec. 23.125 would also require an applicant to determine
the glide performance of the airplane after a complete loss of thrust
for single engine airplanes.
Proposed Sec. 23.125 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. Sec. 23.63, Climb: General; 23.66, Takeoff climb: One-engine
inoperative; 23.69, Enroute climb/descent; and 23.71, Glide: Single-
engine airplanes. The intent of these requirements is to provide pilots
with climb and glide performance data that is important for safety,
especially in conditions near the performance limits of the airplane.
Sections 23.63, 23.66, and 23.69 are not minimum performance sections,
but contain information used in the development of the AFM. Proposed
Sec. 23.125 would require an applicant to determine climb performance.
The performance data determination provides a good example of how the
use of certification levels can allow simplified approaches to meet
applicable airworthiness requirements for simple, and levels 1 and 2
airplanes.
vii. Proposed Sec. 23.130, Landing
Proposed Sec. 23.130 would require an applicant to determine the
landing distance for standard temperatures at each weight and altitude
within the operational limits for landing. The landing distance
determination would start from a height of 50 feet (15 meters) above
the landing surface, require the airplane to land and come to a stop
(or for water operations, reach a speed of 3 knots) using approach and
landing speeds, configurations, and procedures, which allow a pilot of
average skill to meet the landing distance consistently and without
causing damage or injury. Proposed Sec. 23.130 would require these
determinations for standard temperatures at each weight and altitude
within the operational limits for landing.
Proposed Sec. 23.130 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. 23.73, Reference landing approach speed, and Sec. 23.75, Landing
Distance. Landing distance information and the associated procedures
for achieving those distances are necessary to prevent runway overruns.
Applicants would be required to determine, develop, and publish
distance and procedures data for use in pilot planning. Proposed Sec.
23.130 would combine the current requirements to determine approach
speed and landing distance because a determination of both is required
for a landing distance determination.
viii. Proposed Sec. 23.200, Controllability
Proposed Sec. 23.200 would require the airplane to be controllable
and maneuverable, without requiring exceptional piloting skill,
alertness, or strength, within the operating envelope, at all loading
conditions for which certification is requested. This would would
include during low-speed operations, including stalls, with any
probable flight control or propulsion system failure, and during
configuration changes. Proposed Sec. 23.200 would require the airplane
to be able to complete a landing without causing damage or serious
injury, in the landing configuration at a speed of VREF
minus 5 knots using the approach gradient equal to the steepest used in
the landing distance determination. Proposed Sec. 23.200 would require
VMC not to exceed VS1 or VS0 for all
practical weights and configurations within the operating envelope of
the airplane for certification levels 1 and 2 multiengine airplanes
that cannot climb after a critical loss of thrust. Proposed Sec.
23.200 would also require an applicant to demonstrate those aerobatic
maneuvers for which certification is requested and determine entry
speeds.
Proposed Sec. 23.200 would capture the safety intent of Sec. Sec.
23.141, Flight Characteristics--General, 23.143, Controllability and
Maneuverability--General; 23.145, Longitudinal control; 23.147
Directional and lateral control; 23.149, Minimum control speed; 23.151,
Acrobatic maneuvers; 23.153, Control during landing; 23.155, Elevator
control force in maneuvers; 23.157, Rate of roll; 23.697(b) and (c),
Wing flap controls. Proposed Sec. 23.200 would ensure the maneuvering
flight characteristics of the airplane are safe and predictable
throughout the flight envelope and result in repeatable, smooth
transitions between turns, climbs, descents, and level flight.
Configuration changes, such as flap extension and retraction, landing
gear extension and retraction, and spoiler extension and retraction,
along with probable failures resulting in asymmetric thrust, would also
have to result in safe, controllable, and predictable characteristics.
Proposed Sec. 23.200(a) and (b) would capture the safety intent of
Sec. Sec. 23.143, Controllability and Maneuverability--General;
23.145, Longitudinal control; 23.147, Directional and lateral control;
23.149, Minimum control speed; 23.151, Acrobatic maneuvers; 23.153,
Control during landings; 23.155, Elevator control force in maneuvers;
and 23.157, Rate of roll. The FAA proposes limiting the requirements
for practical loadings and operating altitudes without the use of
exceptional piloting skill, alertness, or strength.
Current part 23 provides prescriptive and detailed test
requirements based on specific airplane configurations. Additionally,
the current rules include flight test procedures that are based on
traditional reversible controls and engine locations that are, in some
cases, derived from airplanes designed in the 1930's. The FAA proposes
performance-based requirements that would remain applicable to
traditionally designed airplanes, but allow alternative approaches to
showing compliance based on new configurations, flight control systems,
engine locations, and number of engines.
Proposed Sec. 23.200(c) would require all certification levels 1
and 2 multiengine airplanes that lack the performance to climb after a
critical loss of thrust to stall before loss of directional control.
This is a new requirement and it targets the high number of fatal
accidents that occur after an engine failure in this class of airplane.
Light multiengine airplanes that lack the performance to climb after
the critical loss of thrust are especially susceptible to this type of
accident. The Part 23 Reorganization ARC discussed and several members
proposed that all multiengine airplanes have guaranteed climb
performance after a critical loss of thrust. Ultimately, this approach
was rejected, as it could impose a significant cost on the production
of training airplanes. Furthermore, several members pointed out that
the safety concern was not that the airplane could not climb on one
engine, but rather that the airplane would depart controlled flight at
low speeds above stall as a result of asymmetric thrust. The FAA agrees
that loss of control caused by asymmetric thrust is the critical safety
issue that should be addressed and the FAA believes that the proposed
rule responds to this concern.
[[Page 13470]]
The FAA recognizes concerns regarding the proposed requirement--if
the airplane is allowed to stall, the asymmetric thrust will still
cause the airplane to lose directional control and likely depart
controlled flight. The FAA agrees, but believes that pilots are
typically more aware of their stall speeds than minimum control speed,
especially during turns. Furthermore, these airplanes would be required
to meet the proposed stall warning and stall characteristic
requirements, which the FAA expects would provide additional safety
margins beyond current requirements. Finally, the system that provides
stall warning could also be designed to provide VMC warning.
ix. Proposed Sec. 23.205, Trim
Proposed Sec. 23.205 would require the airplane to maintain
longitudinal, lateral, and directional trim under various conditions,
depending on the airplane's certification level, without allowing
residual forces to fatigue or distract the pilot during likely
emergency operations, including a critical loss of thrust on
multiengine airplanes.
Proposed Sec. 23.205 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. 23.161, Trim. Section 23.161(a) addresses the safety intent while
paragraphs (b), (c), (d), and (e) provide prescriptive details on how
to do flight testing for traditionally configured airplanes and are
more appropriate for inclusion in means of compliance.
x. Proposed Sec. 23.210, Stability
Proposed Sec. 23.210 would require airplanes not certified for
aerobatics to have static and dynamic longitudinal, lateral, and
directional stability in normal operations, and provide stable control
force feedback throughout the operating envelope. Proposed Sec. 23.210
would also preclude any airplane from exhibiting any divergent
stability characteristic so unstable as to increase the pilot's
workload or otherwise endanger the airplane and its occupants.
Proposed Sec. 23.210 would capture the safety intent of the
current Sec. Sec. 23.171, Stability--General; 23.173, Static
longitudinal stability; 23.175, demonstration of static longitudinal
stability; 23.177, Static directional and lateral stability; 23.179,
Instrumented stick force measurements; and 23.181, Dynamic stability.
The current requirements have their origins in Aeronautics Bulletin 7,
amendment 7a, effective October 1, 1934, which predates CAR 3. These
airplane handling quality and stability requirements were based on the
technology associated with simple mechanical control systems and what
was considered acceptable on existing airplanes of the time. Although
many of these requirements are still appropriate for traditional flight
control systems, they do not take into account the capabilities of new
computer-based flight control systems. The FAA recognizes the
availability of hybrid reversible and automated flight control systems
and proposes performance-based language that would allow their
installation in part 23 certificated airplanes without the use of
special conditions, while still maintaining adequate requirements for
reversible controls. The intent is to facilitate the use of systems
that may enhance safety while reducing pilot workload.
xi. Proposed Sec. 23.215, Stall Characteristics, Stall Warning, and
Spins
Proposed Sec. 23.215 would require an airplane to have
controllable stall characteristics in straight flight, turning flight,
and accelerated turning flight with a clear and distinctive stall
warning that would provide sufficient margin to prevent inadvertent
stalling. Proposed Sec. 23.215 would allow for alternative approaches
to meeting this requirement for certification levels 1 and 2 airplanes
and certification level 3 single-engine airplanes, not certified for
aerobatics, in order to avoid a tendency to inadvertently depart
controlled flight. Proposed Sec. 23.215 would require airplanes
certified for aerobatics to have controllable stall characteristics and
the ability to recover within one and one-half additional turns after
initiation of the first control action from any point in a spin.
Additionally, the airplane would not be allowed to exceed six turns or
any greater number of turns for which certification is requested while
remaining within the operating limitations of the airplane. Proposed
Sec. 23.215 would preclude airplanes certified for aerobatics from
having spin characteristics that would result in unrecoverable spins
due to pilot disorientation or incapacitation or any use of the flight
or engine power controls.
Proposed Sec. 23.215 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. Sec. 23.201, Wings level stall; 23.203, Turning flight and
accelerated turning stalls; 23.207, Stall warning; and 23.221,
Spinning. Historically, the FAA focused its requirements on the ability
of the airplane to recover from a one-turn or three-second spin more
than on the stall characteristics of the airplane. From the first fatal
stall accident in the Wright Flyer airplane to today's fatal stall
accidents, the number one cause in small airplanes is a departure from
controlled flight following an inadvertent stall.
Except for accidental departures from controlled flight during
stall training, most of these inadvertent departures occur in close
proximity to the ground, and because of this, the current requirement
to recover from a one-turn or three-second spin may not be the best
method to assess the safety of the airplane. Even an experienced pilot
may not have enough altitude to recover from the spin before impacting
the ground. For this reason, the FAA proposes to delete the one-turn/
three-second spin recovery requirement for normal category airplanes.
Instead, the FAA proposes to increase the stall characteristics
requirements by requiring that all certification levels 1 and 2
airplanes and certification level 3 single-engine airplanes provide
substantial departure resistance to prevent inadvertent stalls from
resulting in a departure from controlled flight and becoming fatal
accidents.
Accident studies show that even hitting the ground as a result of a
stall can be survivable if the airplane is still in controlled flight.
Conversely, impacting the ground out of control is typically fatal. The
FAA envisions numerous alternative approaches to meeting the proposed
requirements, ranging from one extreme of spin resistance to the other
extreme of a total systems-based approach such as stick pusher.
Furthermore, there are envelope protection systems and stall warning
concepts that could also be considered when assessing departure
resistance. The possible approaches to meeting the proposed
requirements are so broad that these alternatives would be better
addressed in means of compliance. This level of protection may vary
based on the characteristics of the airplane, but the FAA expects this
change in design philosophy would increase the level of protection
designed into airplanes under this proposed rule. Certification level 3
multiengine airplanes and certification level 4 airplanes historically
have not had a large number of departure-related accidents. While the
FAA encourages manufacturers to consider designing departure resistance
into these airplanes, the FAA does not propose adding a new requirement
for certification level 3 multiengine airplanes and certification level
4 airplanes.
The FAA also proposes revising stall warning requirements by
removing prescriptive speed based stall warning requirements and
requiring a clear and distinctive warning with sufficient
[[Page 13471]]
warning margin for the pilot to prevent a stall. Historically, stall
warning systems in part 23 airplanes have been simple, mechanical vanes
that may or may not provide reasonable lead-time to prevent a stall.
These systems also can provide false alerts when they are not needed,
creating a nuisance. Furthermore, similar sounding warning horns that
alert the pilot of other situations can result in the pilot either
becoming used to the warning sounds or mistaking the stall warning for
another warning such as the autopilot disconnect horn. The FAA believes
removing the current prescriptive speed based stall warning from the
rules would encourage the installation of better, more effective low
speed awareness systems that may use angle of attack, a speed decay
rate, or clear voice commands to alert the pilot.
xii. Proposed Sec. 23.220, Ground and Water Handling Characteristics
Proposed Sec. 23.220 would require airplanes intended for
operation on land or water to have controllable longitudinal, and
directional handling characteristics during taxi, takeoff, and landing
operations. Proposed Sec. 23.220 would also require an applicant to
establish a maximum wave height shown to provide for controllable
longitudinal, and directional handling characteristics and any
necessary water handling procedures for those airplanes intended for
operation on water.
Proposed Sec. 23.220 would capture the safety intent of Sec. Sec.
23.231, Longitudinal stability and control; 23.233, Directional
stability and control; 23.235, Operation on unpaved surfaces; 23.237,
Operation on water; and 23.239, Spray characteristics.
xiii. Proposed Sec. 23.225, Vibration, Buffeting, and High-Speed
Characteristics
Proposed Sec. 23.225 would preclude vibration and buffeting from
interfering with the control of the airplane or causing fatigue to the
flightcrew, for operations up to VD/MD. Proposed
Sec. 23.225 would allow stall warning buffet within these limits.
Proposed Sec. 23.225 would preclude perceptible buffeting in cruise
configuration at 1g and at any speed up to VMO/
MMO, except stall buffeting for high-speed airplanes and all
airplanes with a maximum operating altitude greater than 25,000 feet
(7,620 meters) pressure altitude. Proposed Sec. 23.225 would require
an applicant seeking certification of a high-speed airplane to
determine the positive maneuvering load factors at which the onset of
perceptible buffet occurs in the cruise configuration within the
operational envelope and preclude likely inadvertent excursions beyond
this boundary from resulting in structural damage. Proposed Sec.
23.225 would also require high-speed airplanes to have recovery
characteristics that do not result in structural damage or loss of
control, beginning at any likely speed up to VMO/
MMO, following an inadvertent speed increase and a high-
speed trim upset.
Proposed Sec. 23.225 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. Sec. 23.251, Vibration and buffeting; 23.253, High speed
characteristics; and 23.255, Out of trim characteristics. Proposed
Sec. 23.225(a), (b), and (c) would capture the safety of current Sec.
23.251(a), (b), and (c). The current safety intent of Sec. Sec. 23.253
and 23.255 are incorporated in proposed Sec. 23.225(d).
Proposed Sec. 23.225(d)(1) addresses the current language in Sec.
23.253, which indirectly divides the airplanes by engine type rather
than performance. These requirements have typically been applied
automatically to turbine-powered airplanes with the assumption that all
turbine-powered airplanes flew fast and high. Piston or electric
airplanes were not required to meet these requirements even if they
were faster than many turboprops, because of propulsion assumptions in
the past. For this reason, the FAA is amending this requirement to be
based on performance instead of propulsion type using the same high-
speed criteria from other subpart B sections. The existing details
would be removed from the rules, as they are more appropriate as means
of compliance because it would allow for alternatives for non-
traditional airplanes, such as very fast piston airplanes.
Proposed Sec. 23.225(d)(2) would address the current safety intent
in Sec. 23.255 by relying on performance and design characteristics
without discriminating based on propulsion type. The specific design
details are more appropriate as means of compliance.
xiv. Proposed Sec. 23.230, Performance and Flight Characteristics
Requirements for Flight in Icing Conditions
Proposed Sec. 23.230 would require an applicant requesting
certification for flight in icing conditions to demonstrate compliance
with each requirement of this subpart. Exceptions to this rule would be
those applicable to spins and any requirement that would have to be
demonstrated at speeds in excess of 250 KCAS, VMO or
MMO, or a speed that an applicant demonstrates the airframe
would be free of ice accretion. Proposed Sec. 23.230 would require the
stall warning for flight in icing conditions and non-icing conditions
to be the same. Proposed Sec. 23.230 would require an applicant
requesting certification for flight in icing conditions to provide a
means to detect any icing conditions for which certification is not
requested and demonstrate the airplane's ability to avoid or exit those
conditions. Proposed Sec. 23.230 would also require an applicant to
develop an operating limitation to prohibit intentional flight,
including takeoff and landing, into icing conditions for which the
airplane is not certified to operate. Proposed Sec. 23.230 would also
increase safety by adding optional icing conditions a manufacturer may
demonstrate its airplane can either safely operate in, detect and
safely exit, or avoid. Proposed Sec. 23.230 would only apply to
applicants seeking certification for flight in icing.
Proposed Sec. 23.230 would capture the safety intent of the
performance and flight characteristics requirements in current Sec.
23.1419(a) and along with proposed Sec. Sec. 23.940, Powerplant ice
protection, and 23.1405, Flight in icing conditions, and their
respective means of compliance would address NTSB safety
recommendations A-96-54 and A-96-56. Section 23.1419 specifies that
airplanes must be able to operate safely in the icing conditions
identified in appendix C to part 25, which encompass cloud size drops
of less than 100 microns in diameter. Freezing drizzle (i.e., drops up
to 500 microns in diameter) and freezing rain (i.e., drops greater than
500 microns in diameter) icing conditions, which can result in ice
accretion aft of leading edge ice protection systems, are not included
in appendix C to part 25. Amendment 25-140 (79 FR 65507, November 4,
2014) added these icing conditions to appendix O to part 25 and are not
being defined in proposed Sec. 23.230. The FAA believes that the
definitions of these optional icing conditions would be more
appropriate as a means of compliance. The standards for ``capable of
operating safely'' in these conditions would be the same as cloud icing
with additional icing conditions in the takeoff phase.
If certification for flight in the optional freezing drizzle or
freezing rain conditions is not sought, proposed Sec. 23.230 would
require these conditions be avoided or detected and exited safely. The
means of compliance for the latter, detect and exit the situation,
would be similar to current guidance in AC 23.1419-2D, Certification of
Part 23 Airplanes for Flight in Icing Conditions, and is currently
applied during part 23
[[Page 13472]]
airplane icing certifications. These criteria are not as extensive as
recommended by the Part 23 Icing ARC, but the FAA did not want to
impose an additional burden on industry because the service history of
airplanes certified under part 23 and the latest icing regulations at
amendment 23-43 (58 FR 18958, April 9, 1993) show no SLD related
accidents. The FAA believes the safety of the existing fleet can be
greatly increased by improving the freezing drizzle and freezing rain
capability of automated surface weather observation systems and pilot
education and training of the limits of icing certification.
Proposed Sec. 23.230(b) would provide an option to avoid, in lieu
of detecting and exiting, the freezing drizzle or freezing rain icing
conditions for which the airplane is not certified. This option is not
in current guidance and such technology currently does not exist. The
rule would provide an option in the event the technology is developed.
The FAA believes avoiding rather than detecting and exiting would
provide for safer airplane operations and reduce certification costs.
Proposed Sec. 23.230(c) would require an AFM limitation to
prohibit flight in icing conditions for which the airplane is not
certified. This reflects current guidance in AC 23.1419-2D, which most
manufacturers of new part 23 icing certified airplanes follow today. A
minority of new manufacturers are not using AC 23.1419-2D guidance and
have inserted AFM limitation language that reflects Airworthiness
Directives (AD) that were issued globally to pneumatic boot-equipped
airplanes between 1996 and 1998. The ADs in the below table require
immediate exit from severe icing and warn that freezing drizzle and
freezing rain may be conducive to severe icing. The proposed new
limitation is intended to prohibit flight in known icing conditions,
not forecast conditions.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Airplane model Docket Final rule
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aerostar Aircraft Corporation Models PA- 97-CE-56-AD 98-04-23
60-600, PA-60-601, PA-60-601P, PA-60-
602P, and PA-60-700P Airplanes.........
Pilatus Britten-Norman Ltd., Models BN- 97-CE-54-AD 98-04-21
2A, BN-2B, and BN-2T Airplanes.........
Pilatus Aircraft Ltd., Models PC-12 and 97-CE-53-AD 98-20-28
PC-12/45 Airplanes.....................
Partenavia Costruzioni Aeronauticas, 97-CE-51-AD 98-04-20
S.p.A. Model P68, AP68TP 300, AP68TP
600 Airplanes..........................
Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, Ltd., MU-2B 96-CE-61-AD 96-25-02
Series Airplanes.......................
Harbin Aircraft Manufacturing Corp., 97-CE-50-AD 98-04-19
Model Y12 IV airplanes.................
Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica S.A. 96-CE-02-AD 96-09-12
Airplanes. (Embraer) Models EMB-110P1
and EMB-110P2 Airplanes................
Dornier Luftfahrt GmbH, 228 Series 96-CE-04-AD 96-09-14
Airplanes..............................
De Havilland, Inc., DHC-6 Series 96-CE-01-AD 96-09-11
Airplanes..............................
The Cessna Aircraft Company, 208 Series. 96-CE-05-AD 96-09-15
The Cessna Aircraft Company, Model T210R 98-CE-19-AD 98-20-33
airplane...............................
The Cessna Aircraft Company, Models 97-CE-62-AD 98-05-14 R1
T210, P210, P210R airplanes............
The Cessna Aircraft Company Models T303, 97-CE-63-AD 98-04-28
310R, T310R, 335, 340A, 402B, 402C,
404, F406, 414, 414A, 421B, 421C, 425,
and 441 Airplanes......................
Jetstream Aircraft Limited Models 3101 96-CE-07-AD 96-09-17
and 3201 Airplanes.....................
The New Piper Aircraft PA-23, PA-30, PA- 98-CE-77-AD 99-14-01
31, PA-34, PA-39, PA-40, and PA-42
Series Airplanes.......................
The New Piper Aircraft Corporation 97-CE-60-AD 98-04-26
Models PA-46-310P and PA-46-350P
Airplanes..............................
Beech Aircraft Corporation Models 99, 96-CE-03-AD 96-09-13
99A, A99A, B99, C99, B200, B200C, 1900,
1900C, and 1900D Airplanes.............
Raytheon Aircraft Company 200 Series 98-CE-17-AD 98-20-38
Airplanes..............................
Raytheon Aircraft Company Models E55, 97-CE-58-AD 98-04-24
E55A, 58, 58A, 58P, 58PA, 58TC, 58TCA
Airplanes, and 60, 65-B80, 65-B90, 90,
F90, 100, 300, and B300 Series
Airplanes..............................
Raytheon Aircraft Company Model 2000 97-CE-59-AD 98-04-25
Airplanes..............................
AeroSpace Technologies Of Australia Pty 97-CE-49-AD 98-04-18
Ltd., Models N22B and N24A.............
SIAI Marchetti, S.r.1 Models SF600 and 97-CE-64-AD 98-05-15
SF600A Airplanes.......................
SOCATA--Groupe AEROSPATIALE, Model TBM 97-CE-55-AD 98-04-22
700 Airplanes..........................
Twin Commander Aircraft Corporation 97-CE-57-AD 98-20-34
Models 500, 500-A, 500-B, 500-S, 500-U,
520, 560, 560-A, 560-E, 560-F, 680, 680-
E, 680FL(P), 680T, 680V, 680W, 681,
685, 690, 690A, 690B, 690C, 690D, 695,
695A, 695B, and 720 Airplanes..........
Fairchild Aircraft Corporation, SA226 96-CE-06-AD 96-09-16
and SA227 Series Airplanes.............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recently, manufacturers of airplanes certificated under part 23
have proposed inhibiting, or optimizing, bleed air ice protection
systems above an altitude of 30,000 feet (9,144 meters) because the
icing conditions defined in the appendix C to part 25 are limited to
below this altitude. The FAA believes ice protection design at high
altitude should be addressed as a means of compliance and not in the
proposed rule due to various acceptable design solutions. An industry
means of compliance would negate the need for a special condition or
means of compliance issue paper currently required for these projects.
xv. Current Subpart B Regulations Relocated to Other Proposed Subparts
The FAA proposes addressing the safety intent of Sec. 23.33,
Propeller speed and pitch limits, in Sec. 23.900(a) of the propulsion
rules. Additionally, the first part of the current Sec. 23.251(a) that
addresses structural damage has been relocated and is now addressed
under ``flutter'' in proposed subpart C to part 23.
The FAA proposes adopting the Part 23 Icing and Part 23
Reorganization ARC's recommendations to move performance and flight
characteristics requirements in icing, currently in Sec. 23.1419, to
subpart B, so that proposed Sec. 23.1405 only contains systems
requirements. Proposed Sec. 23.230(a) would also include stall warning
requirements. Current guidance contains these stall warning
recommendations (i.e., margin and type of stall) and service history
shows them to be necessary for safe flight in icing conditions. The
exceptions for spin and high-speed requirements are consistent with the
current rule and industry practice that have shown to provide an
adequate level of safety in icing conditions. The FAA determined that
the evaluations of ice contaminated tailplane stall susceptibility,
lateral control in icing, and autopilot operation in icing, which are
included in current guidance for part 23 icing certification,
[[Page 13473]]
are more appropriately addressed as a means of compliance.
xvi. Removal of Subpart B Current Regulations
The FAA proposes removing Sec. 23.45(g) that requires takeoff and
landing distances be determined on a smooth, dry, hard-surfaced runway.
The FAA believes that most performance tests would be done on smooth,
dry, hard-surfaced runways because these surfaces provide applicants
with the best results. Performance determinations on surfaces other
than smooth, dry hard surfaces would provide conservative results and
be acceptable as long as the surface was specified in the AFM.
Therefore, the FAA believes retaining this requirement is unnecessary.
The FAA proposes removing Sec. 23.63, Climb: General, which
addresses the general climb requirements, because the safety intent
contained in this section is redundant with the safety intent proposed
in Sec. 23.125 and the testing procedures contained in Sec. 23.63 are
more appropriate for inclusion in means of compliance.
The FAA proposes removing current Sec. 23.221(a) and (b), which
address spinning requirements for normal and utility category
airplanes, and would no longer be necessary. The increased focus on
preventing stall-based departures along with improved stall margin
awareness would provide a level of safety higher than would be achieved
through spin testing.
The FAA proposes removing the reference to appendix C to part 25,
part II, currently in Sec. 23.1419, Ice protection, paragraph (a),
when relocating Sec. 23.1419 to proposed Sec. 23.230 and 23.1405.
Part II is a means of compliance for determining critical ice
accretions on transport category airplanes and is not applicable to
airplanes certified under part 23.
3. Subpart C--Structures
a. General Discussion
The FAA's intent in proposed subpart C is to provide a regulatory
framework that maintains the current level of safety while (1) allowing
for certification of unique airplane configurations with new technology
and materials, and (2) supporting new means of compliance, testing, and
analysis. To support new technologies, the FAA proposes to incorporate
the safety intent of recent special conditions for airplanes equipped
with systems that affect structural performance, such as load
alleviation systems, in proposed Sec. 23.305. To support new means of
compliance, the FAA proposes in Sec. 23.600 to emphasize a holistic
approach to occupant safety, which would allow certain applicants to
omit current required dynamic seat testing.
It is not the FAA's intent to reduce the level of safety in the
proposed subpart C. The FAA based the prescriptive requirements in
current subparts C and D on service history, historic test data, and
lessons learned. These requirements have provided a level of safety
where structural failure is rare and most often attributable to
airplane upset or pilot disorientation in instrument meteorological
conditions. A means of compliance to proposed subpart C must maintain
the level of safety provided by the current regulations. Applicants
would need to substantiate the level of safety for proposed means of
compliance that deviate from the prescriptive regulations.
Proposed subpart C would replace current subpart C and include
those sections of current subpart D that are applicable to the
airframe. We have arranged proposed subpart C into the following five
topics:
General: Including Sec. 23.300, Structural design
envelope; and Sec. 23.305 Interaction of systems and structures.
Structural Loads: Including Sec. 23.310, Structural
design loads; Sec. 23.315, Flight load conditions; Sec. 23.320,
Ground and water load conditions; Sec. 23.325, Component loading
conditions; and Sec. 23.330, Limit and ultimate loads.
Structural performance: Including Sec. 23.400,
Structural strength; Sec. 23.405, Structural durability; and Sec.
23.410, Aeroelasticity.
Design: Including Sec. 23.500, Structural design;
Sec. 23.505, Protection of structure; Sec. 23.510, Materials and
processes; and Sec. 23.515, Special factors of safety.
Structural occupant protection: Included in Sec.
23.600, Emergency conditions.
The FAA proposes removing the content of current appendix A to part
23, Simplified design load criteria; appendix C to part 23, Basic
landing conditions; appendix D to part 23, Wheel spin-up and spring-
back loads; and appendix I to part 23, Seaplane loads. The content of
these current part 23 appendices is more appropriate for inclusion in
means of compliance. The FAA also proposes removing appendix B to part
23, Reserved, since the content of this appendix was removed at
amendment 23-42 (56 FR 344, January 3, 1991). Refer to appendix 1 of
this preamble for a cross-reference table detailing how the current
regulations are addressed in the proposed part 23 regulations.
b. Specific Discussion of Changes
i. Proposed Sec. 23.300, Structural Design Envelope
Proposed Sec. 23.300 would require an applicant to determine the
structural design envelope, which describes the range and limits of
airplane design and operational parameters for which an applicant would
show compliance with the requirements of this subpart. Proposed Sec.
23.300 would capture the safety intent of current Sec. Sec. 23.321,
Loads--General, paragraphs (b) and (c); 23.333, Flight envelope,
paragraphs (a), (b), and (d); 23.335, Design airspeeds; 23.337, Limit
maneuvering load factors, paragraphs (a) and (b); and 23.343, Design
fuel loads, paragraphs (a) and (b).
Proposed Sec. 23.300 would require the applicant to determine and
document the range of airplane and operational parameters for which the
applicant will show compliance with the requirements of subpart C.
These parameters would include the design airspeeds and maneuver load
factors often depicted as a V-n diagram. An applicant would be required
to determine design airspeeds, including the design maneuvering speed
(VA), the design cruising speed (VC), the design
dive speed (VD), design flap and landing gear speeds, and
any other speed used as a design limitation. For certification of level
4 airplanes, an applicant would be required to determine a rough air
penetration speed, VB.
Additionally, applicants would have to determine the design
maneuver load factors based on the intended usage of the airplane and
the values associated with the level of safety experienced with current
designs. Applicants have rarely used the relief for maneuvering load
factors based on airplane capabilities in current Sec. 23.337(c). The
FAA views this relief as an application of physical principles, and
believes that this current requirement does not need to be addressed in
proposed Sec. 23.300.
Design weights and inertia parameters are also part of the
structural design envelope. Design weights include the empty weight,
maximum weight, takeoff and landing weight, and maximum zero fuel
weight. The range of center of gravity locations at these and other
weights is depicted as the weight center of gravity envelope. An
applicant would have to determine the weight and center of gravity of
occupants, payload, and fuel as well as any mass moments of inertia
required for loads or flutter analysis. An applicant would also have to
specify any other parameters that describe the structural design
envelope. These parameters include maximum
[[Page 13474]]
altitude limitations, Mach number limitations, and control surface
deflections.
ii. Proposed Sec. 23.305, Interaction of Systems and Structures
Proposed Sec. 23.305 would provide a regulatory framework for the
evaluation of systems intended to modify an airplane's structural
design envelope or structural performance and other systems whose
normal operating state or failed states may affect structural
performance. Compliance with proposed Sec. 23.305 would provide
acceptable mitigation of structural hazards identified in the
functional hazard assessments required by proposed Sec. 23.1315.
Proposed Sec. 23.305 would apply to airplanes equipped with--
Structural systems, including load alleviation systems,
where the intended function is to modify structural performance, to
alleviate the impact of subpart C requirements, or provide a means of
compliance to subpart C requirements; and
Systems where the intended function is non-structural, but
whose normal operation or failure states affect the structural design
envelope or structural performance, and would include fuel management
systems, flight-envelope protection systems, and active control
systems.
Under the current regulations, an applicant seeking certification
of airplanes incorporating structural and non-structural systems must
ensure that failures of these systems will not result in exceeding the
structural design envelope or the structural design loads, or other
structural performance characteristics. An applicant has the option of
designing the structure to the full subpart C and subpart D
requirements, including margins of safety, with the system in its
failed state. This option may result in increased structural weight and
reduced airplane performance and utility.
Proposed Sec. 23.1315 in subpart F would apply to both structural
and non-structural systems. Guidance material for current Sec.
23.1309, the corresponding regulation to proposed Sec. 23.1315, allows
for different acceptable values for likelihood of failures based on the
severity of the hazard, airplane weight, and method of propulsion.
These different values encourage the incorporation of equipment that
improves pilot situational awareness and other systems that promote the
overall airplane level of safety.
In most cases, means of compliance with proposed Sec. 23.305 would
follow an approach somewhat similar to that used in the guidance
material for current Sec. 23.1309. Structural failures resulting in
fatalities are rare, occurring at a rate of approximately 3 x
10-8 per flight hour for small airplanes. The reason for
incorporating structural systems is not, in general, to improve safety,
but rather to reduce structural weight and thereby improve airplane
performance. Proposed Sec. 23.305 would require that the level of
safety must be the same for airplanes equipped with systems that affect
the structure and airplanes without such systems.
An existing acceptable means of complying with proposed Sec.
23.305 is provided in several existing special conditions that address
the interaction of systems and structures, for example, FAA Special
Condition 25-390-SC.\20\ Most of these special conditions address load
alleviation systems. Load alleviation systems counteract the effects of
gust and maneuver loads and allow an applicant to design a lighter
structure, thereby improving the performance and utility of the
airplane. These special conditions require that an applicant design the
structure to the required structural safety margins with the load
alleviation system its normal functioning state. The special conditions
provide a means for an applicant to maintain the required structural
safety margins with the system in its failed state by adjusting the
required safety margins based on the likelihood of system failure.
Systems that fail frequently require higher safety margins than systems
that rarely fail in order to maintain the same level of safety. The
means of compliance described in these special conditions allow an
applicant to utilize the benefits of structural systems and potentially
eliminate weight and performance penalties associated with structural
hazards due to system failures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ https://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgSC.nsf/0/7B2D4B459E27848586257620006A6999?OpenDocument&Highlight=25-390-sc
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicants who use the means of compliance described in the
existing special conditions would be able to use data developed for
compliance with proposed Sec. 23.1315. This data includes
identification of failure modes, identification of hazards resulting
from the failure modes, and the likelihood of the occurrence of the
failure modes. With or without the proposed Sec. 23.305 requirements,
an applicant would have to account for structural performance with the
system in its normal operating and failed states and evaluate the
system for compliance to the proposed Sec. 23.1315. The FAA does not
expect that additional detailed structural analysis would be required
for compliance with proposed Sec. 23.305 other then the application of
optional lower safety margins to the structural performance analysis.
Proposed Sec. 23.305 would allow an applicant to realize the value
of structural and non-structural systems and would potentially allow
reduced structural weight of the airplane. The magnitude of the weight
reduction would depend on the functional characteristics of the systems
and the likelihood of system failures. The FAA believes proposed Sec.
23.305 would reduce the need for special conditions that deal with
interaction of systems and structures, saving time and effort for the
FAA and the applicant.
iii. Proposed Sec. 23.310, Structural Design Loads
Proposed Sec. 23.310 would require an applicant to determine
structural design loads resulting from any externally or internally
applied pressure, force, or moment, which may occur in flight, ground
and water operations, ground and water handling, and while the airplane
is parked or moored. Proposed Sec. 23.310 would require the applicant
to determine structural design loads at all combinations of parameters
on and within the boundaries of the structural design envelope which
result in the most severe loading conditions. Proposed Sec. 23.310
would also require the magnitude and distribution of these loads to be
based on physical principles and would be no less than service history
has shown can occur within the structural design envelope.
Proposed Sec. 23.310 would capture the safety intent of Sec. Sec.
23.301, Loads; 23.302, Canard or tandem wing configurations; 23.321,
Flight Loads--General, paragraph (a); and 23.331, Symmetrical flight
conditions. Proposed Sec. 23.310 would also capture the intent of
several current requirements for sound and physics-based engineering
evaluations. An example is in current Sec. 23.301(b), which requires
that the forces and moments applied to the airplane must balance in
equilibrium, and the distribution of loads on the airplane must
reasonably approximate actual conditions. The part 23 regulations
should not need to prescribe basic physical principles, sound
engineering judgment, and common sense. Proposed Sec. 23.310 would
place the burden on the applicant to properly account for loads acting
on the structure.
[[Page 13475]]
iv. Proposed Sec. 23.315, Flight Load Conditions
Proposed Sec. 23.315 would require an applicant to determine the
loads resulting from vertical and horizontal atmospheric gusts,
symmetric and asymmetric maneuvers, and, for multiengine airplanes,
failure of the powerplant unit which results in the most severe
structural loads. Proposed Sec. 23.315 would capture the safety intent
of current Sec. Sec. 23.333, Flight envelope, paragraph (c); 23.341,
Gust loads factors; 23.347, Unsymmetrical flight conditions; 23.349,
Rolling conditions; 23.351, Yawing conditions; 23.367, Unsymmetrical
loads due to engine failure; 23.421, Balancing loads; 23.423,
Maneuvering loads; 23.425, Gust loads; 23.427, Unsymmetrical loads;
23.441, Maneuvering loads; 23.443, Gust loads; and 23.445, Outboard
fins or winglets, paragraphs (b), (c), and (d).
These current part 23 sections establish prescriptive requirements
for gust loads and symmetrical, rolling, and yawing maneuvering loads,
acting on the wing, horizontal tail, vertical tail, and other lifting
surfaces. Portions of the current sections, such as Sec. 23.331(c),
are restatements of basic physical principles. Proposed Sec. 23.315
would remove this language.
The FAA's intent is not to lessen the structural load requirements.
The current prescriptive flight load requirements have established a
level of safety where structural failure due to overloading is rare.
When structural failures do occur, the most common cause is airplane
upset or pilot disorientation in instrument meteorological conditions.
The FAA believes the prescriptive content of the current
regulations, including the modified Pratt formula for gust loads, the
descriptions of symmetrical maneuvers, checked and unchecked maneuvers,
rolling maneuvers, and yawing maneuvers are more appropriate for
inclusion in means of compliance. Applicants who wish to propose
alternate design loading conditions should note that extensive data
collection, testing, and evaluation may be necessary to substantiate
their proposal.
v. Proposed Sec. 23.320, Ground and Water Load Conditions
Proposed Sec. 23.320 would require an applicant to determine the
loads resulting from taxi, take-off, landing, and ground handling
conditions occurring in normal and adverse attitudes and
configurations. Proposed Sec. 23.320 would capture the safety intent
of current Sec. Sec. 23.471, Ground Loads--General; 23.473, Ground
load conditions and assumptions; 23.477, Landing gear arrangement;
23.479, Level landing conditions; 23.481, Tail down landing conditions;
23.483, One-wheel landing conditions; 23.485, Side load conditions;
23.493, Braked roll conditions; 23.497, Supplementary conditions for
tail wheels; 23.499, Supplementary conditions for nose wheels; 23.505,
Supplementary conditions for skiplanes; 23.507, Jacking loads; 23.509,
Towing loads; 23.511, Ground load; unsymmetrical loads on multiple-
wheel units; 23.521, Water load conditions; 23.523, Design weights and
center of gravity positions; 23.525, Application of loads; 23.527, Hull
and main float load factors; 23.529 Hull and main float landing
conditions; 23.531, Hull and main float takeoff condition; 23.533, Hull
and main float bottom pressures; 23.535, Auxiliary float loads; 23.537,
Seawing loads, and 23.753 Main float design.
The current requirements set forth prescriptive requirements for
determining takeoff and landing loads for airplanes operated on land,
loads acting on floats and hulls for airplanes operated on water, as
well as ground handling loads, including jacking and towing conditions.
The current requirements also provide applicants with descriptions of
the normal and adverse operating conditions and configurations for
which applicants must determine ground and water loads.
The FAA believes that the prescriptive descriptions of the loading
conditions, normal and adverse conditions, and configurations are more
appropriate for inclusion in means of compliance. Applicants who wish
to propose alternate design loading conditions should note that
extensive data collection, testing, and evaluation may be necessary to
substantiate their proposal.
vi. Proposed Sec. 23.325, Component Loading Conditions
Proposed Sec. 23.325 would require an applicant to determine the
loads acting on each engine mount, flight control and high lift
surface, and the loads acting on pressurized cabins. Proposed Sec.
23.325 would capture the safety intent of current Sec. Sec. 23.345,
High lift devices; 23.361, Engine torque; 23.363, Side load on engine
mount; 23.365, Pressurized cabin loads; 23.371, Gyroscopic and
aerodynamic loads; 23.373, Speed control devices; 23.391, Control
surface loads; 23.393, Loads parallel to hinge line; 23.395, Control
system loads; 23.397, Limit control forces and torques; 23.399, Dual
control system; 23.405, Secondary control system; 23.407, Trim tab
effects; 23.409, Tabs; 23.415, Ground gust conditions; 23.455,
Ailerons; and 23.459, Special devices.
The current part 23 regulations establish prescriptive requirements
for determining loads acting on pressurized cabins, engine mounts and
attachment structure, control surfaces, high lift surfaces, and speed
control devices. The FAA believes that these prescriptive requirements
in the current regulations are more appropriate for inclusion in means
of compliance. However, in proposed Sec. 23.325, we have retained some
of the prescriptive requirements for pressurized cabins, including
descriptions of combined loading conditions and additional factors of
safety for determining limit load.
vii. Proposed Sec. 23.330, Limit and Ultimate Loads
Proposed Sec. 23.330 would describe how the applicant must
determine the limit and ultimate loads associated with the structural
design loads. Proposed Sec. 23.330 would capture the safety intent of
current Sec. Sec. 23.301, Loads, paragraph (a); and 23.303, Factor of
safety. These current sections specify factors of safety for
determining limit and ultimate loads.
Proposed Sec. 23.330 retains the current 1.5 safety factor for
ultimate loads. This safety factor has resulted in a service history
where structural failures due to applied static loads are rare. The FAA
believes the 1.5 factor of safety is critical to maintaining the
current level of safety.
Proposed Sec. 23.330 would allow for additional special factors of
safety to account for material and manufacturing variability. Proposed
Sec. 23.330 would also allow alternate factors of safety when showing
compliance with occupant protection loading conditions and when showing
compliance with proposed Sec. 23.305.
viii. Proposed Sec. 23.400, Structural Strength
Proposed Sec. 23.400 would require an applicant to demonstrate
that the structure will support limit and ultimate loads. Proposed
Sec. 23.400 would capture the safety intent of current Sec. Sec.
23.305, Strength and deformation; and 23.307, Proof of structure.
These current sections provide performance criteria for the
structure when subjected to limit and ultimate loads. Proposed Sec.
23.400 would retain these performance criteria and would require the
applicant to demonstrate that the structure will meet these performance
criteria. In this context, ``demonstrate'' means the applicant must
conduct structural tests to show
[[Page 13476]]
compliance with the structural performance requirements, unless the
applicant shows that a structural analysis is reliable and applicable
to the structure. The FAA proposes not to retain the ``3 second'' rule
in proposed Sec. 23.400. This prescriptive requirement in current
Sec. 23.305(b) requires the applicant to demonstrate that the
structure will support ultimate load for at least three seconds. The
FAA believes this prescriptive requirement is a statement of physical
principles and testing experience and is more appropriate for inclusion
in means of compliance.
ix. Proposed Sec. 23.405, Structural Durability
Proposed Sec. 23.405 would require an applicant to develop and
implement procedures to prevent structural failures due to foreseeable
causes of strength degradation, and to prevent rapid decompression in
airplanes with a maximum operating altitude above 41,000 feet. Proposed
Sec. 23.405 would also require an airplane to be reasonably capable of
continued safe flight and landing with foreseeable structural damage
caused by high-energy fragments from an uncontained engine or rotating
machinery failure. Proposed Sec. 23.405 would capture the safety
intent of current Sec. Sec. 23.365(e), Pressurized cabin loads;
23.571, Metallic pressurized cabin structures; 23.572, Metallic wing,
empennage, and associated structures; 23.573, Damage tolerance and
fatigue evaluation of structure; 23.574, Metallic damage tolerance and
fatigue evaluation of commuter category airplanes; 23.575, Inspections
and other procedures; and 23.627, Fatigue strength.
Proposed Sec. 23.405(a) would require an applicant to develop and
implement procedures to prevent structural failures. These procedures
may include the safe-life, damage tolerance, or fail-safe design
approaches described in the current regulations. An applicant can
propose other means of compliance, but these means must provide at
least the same level of safety as current means of compliance. Any new
means of compliance must consider the airplane design, manufacturing,
operational, and maintenance environments. The FAA proposes
implementing these procedures by including them in the airplane's
Instructions for Continued Airworthiness.
The procedures must be able to prevent structural failures due to
foreseeable causes of strength degradation. Foreseeable causes include
fatigue and corrosion in metallic structures, and fatigue,
delaminations, disbonds, and impact damage in composite structures. New
material systems or structural designs, such as additive manufacturing,
may introduce new causes of strength degradation and may require
development of new and unique procedures to prevent structural
failures.
The current part 23 regulations use prevention of catastrophic
failures as the safety intent of the regulations. The word
``catastrophic'' is used throughout the current regulations, current
policy, and guidance material, especially in context of system safety
analysis. To avoid any potential conflict over the meaning of
``catastrophic,'' proposed Sec. 23.405(a) would specify the
consequences we want to prevent. These consequences include the obvious
performance criteria for prevention of serious injuries, fatalities, or
hull loss of the airplane.
The FAA also wants to prevent extended periods of operations with
reduced safety margins in those structural components whose failure
could result in serious injuries, fatalities, or hull loss. One
situation that can result in reduced safety margins is fail-safe
design. The FAA has identified potential shortcomings in fail-safe
designs, including an applicant's difficulty to anticipate all possible
failure scenarios and ensure that all structural failures would be
immediately obvious and corrected before further flight. The concept of
failures being obvious and repaired before further flight is basic to
the successful implementation of a fail-safe design. This scenario
could allow operation for extended periods with a passive structural
failure and reduced safety margins. If an applicant chooses fail-safe
design as a means of compliance, an applicant would have to ensure that
the structure was not operating for extended periods with reduced
safety margins. An applicant may be able to apply safe-life or damage
tolerance principles to ensure that fail-safe structure maintains the
required safety margins without extended periods of operation with
reduced safety margins through life limits or damage tolerance based
inspections.
Proposed Sec. 23.405(b) would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. 23.365(e), requiring the applicant to design the structure for
sudden loss of pressurization after the failure of a door or window in
pressurized compartments. Proposed Sec. 23.405(c) incorporates the
safety intent of current Sec. 23.571(d). Our intention is that the
damage tolerance methodology would remain the accepted means of
compliance. The FAA views damage tolerance as necessary since current
Sec. 23.571(d) and proposed Sec. 23.405(c) require the applicant to
assume that structural damage exists in the pressurized cabin. However,
proposed Sec. 23.405(c) would allow for other means of compliance as
long as serious injuries and fatalities will be prevented. Examples of
other means of compliance might include requiring pilots and occupants
to use oxygen masks or wear pressurized flight suits when operating
above 41,000 feet (12,497 meters). This means of compliance could be
acceptable in certain airplane designs, such as two-seat jet trainers.
Proposed Sec. 23.405(d) would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. 23.903(b)(1) to minimize hazards to the airframe resulting from
turbine engine rotorburst. The FAA would move the structural portion of
the rotorburst evaluation from current Sec. 23.903(b)(1) to proposed
Sec. 23.405(d) to ensure all structural requirements are contained in
subpart C and to avoid potential confusion over the structural
rotorburst requirements in part 23.
Proposed Sec. 23.405(d) would require an applicant to show that
the design of the structure would provide sufficient structural
capability to allow continued safe flight and landing with foreseeable
structural damage caused by high energy fragments from an uncontained
engine or rotating machinery failure. The FAA recognizes that some
high-energy fragment events may result in catastrophic failures that
may not be avoidable and that complete elimination of the hazards
resulting from high energy fragment events may not be possible.
An applicant would be required to address other sources of high
energy rotating machinery fragments in the proposed structural
rotorburst requirements. Our intent is to ensure an adequate regulatory
framework for applications of electrical propulsion systems and other
unique and novel approaches to propulsion, which may release high-
energy fragments.
Applicants who have shown compliance with current Sec.
23.903(b)(1) would be able to show compliance with proposed Sec.
23.405(d). Applicants should note that previous certification programs
with turbine engine installations have been able to show that the
airplane structure is capable of continued safe flight and landing
following a rotorburst event. AC 23-13A, Fatigue, Fail-Safe, and Damage
Tolerance Evaluation of Metallic Structure for Normal, Utility,
Acrobatic, and Commuter Category airplanes, provides guidance on the
required structural evaluation.
[[Page 13477]]
x. Proposed Sec. 23.410, Aeroelasticity
Proposed Sec. 23.410 would require an airplane to be free from
flutter, control reversal, and divergence at all speeds within and
sufficiently beyond the structural design envelope, for any
configuration and condition of operation, accounting for critical
degrees of freedom, and any critical failures or malfunctions. Proposed
Sec. 23.410 would also require an applicant to establish tolerances
for all quantities that affect flutter.
Proposed Sec. 23.410 would capture the safety intent of the
current Sec. Sec. 23.629, Flutter; 23.677, Trim systems, paragraph
(c); and 23.687, Spring devices, in part. Specifically, proposed Sec.
23.410 would address the safety intent of these rules by requiring
freedom from flutter, control reversal, and divergence, while
accounting for all speeds, configurations, modes, and failures, and to
establish tolerances on anything affecting flutter. The current Sec.
23.629(a) states that freedom from flutter, control reversal, and
divergence must be shown by the methods of Sec. 23.629(b) and (c) or
(d). These paragraphs are prescriptive in nature and some portions are
applicable only to very specific types of designs and include speed
limitations. Therefore, these paragraphs are more appropriate as means
of compliance.
The current Sec. 23.629(e) requires the evaluation of whirl mode
flutter. Since this is another flutter mode, it must be accounted for
when an airplane is determined to be free from flutter. The current
Sec. 23.629(f), (g), (h), and (i) provide instructions on how to
evaluate (1) certain airplane design types, (2) designs employing
certain methods (fail-safe or damage tolerant), or (3) airplanes
incorporating design modifications. The current Sec. 23.677(c)
requires either that the tab be balanced or that the tab controls be
irreversible. Additionally, it requires that irreversible tab systems
have adequate rigidity and reliability. These are very specific design
solutions for ensuring freedom from flutter. The current Sec. 23.687
requires that the reliability of spring devices used in control systems
be established by tests unless its failure would not cause flutter.
This is a method of compliance to ensure freedom from flutter. All of
these current requirements are more appropriate as means of compliance
because they describe how to ensure freedom from flutter, control
reversal, and divergence. They are not the safety intent, but just one
method to achieve the safety intent. As such, they serve only specific
designs utilizing current methods, and may or may not be adequate for
innovative designs or accommodate new analytical methods or testing
techniques.
xi. Proposed Sec. 23.500, Structural Design
Proposed Sec. 23.500 would require an applicant to design each
part, article, and assembly for the expected operating conditions of
the airplane. Proposed Sec. 23.500 would require the design data to
adequately define the part, article, or assembly configuration, its
design features, and any materials and processes used. Proposed Sec.
23.500 would require an applicant to determine the suitability of each
design detail and part having an important bearing on safety in
operations. Proposed Sec. 23.500 would also require the control system
to be free from--
Jamming;
Excessive friction, and
Excessive deflection when the control system and its
supporting structure are subjected to loads corresponding to the limit
airloads when the primary controls are subjected to the lesser of the
limit airloads or limit pilot forces and when the secondary controls
are subjected to loads not less than those corresponding to maximum
pilot effort.
Proposed Sec. 23.500 would capture the safety intent of the
current Sec. Sec. 23.601, Design and Construction--General; 23.603,
Materials and workmanship, paragraph (b); 23.671, Control Systems--
General, paragraph (a); 23.683, Operation tests; 23.685, Control system
details; 23.687, Spring devices, in part; and 23.689, Cable systems.
These current requirements explain methods and techniques to ensure an
adequate design. The proposed rule would require an applicant to
produce an adequate design without specifying how. The prescriptive
language within these current sections noted above, are more
appropriate for a means of compliance.
xii. Proposed Sec. 23.505, Protection of Structure
Proposed Sec. 23.505 would require an applicant to protect each
part of the airplane, including small parts such as fasteners, against
deterioration or loss of strength due to any cause likely to occur in
the expected operational environment. Proposed Sec. 23.505 would
require each part of the airplane to have adequate provisions for
ventilation and drainage and would require an applicant to incorporate
a means into the airplane design to allow for required maintenance,
preventive maintenance, and servicing.
Proposed Sec. 23.505 would capture the safety intent of the
current Sec. Sec. 23.607, Fasteners; 23.609, Protection of structure;
and 23.611, Accessibility. These current requirements explain methods
and techniques to ensure an adequate design. This proposed rule would
require the applicant to produce an adequate design without specifying
how to accomplish it. The prescriptive language within these current
sections is more appropriate as a means of compliance.
xiii. Proposed Sec. 23.510, Materials and Processes
Proposed Sec. 23.510 would require an applicant to determine the
suitability and durability of materials used for parts, articles, and
assemblies, the failure of which could prevent continued safe flight
and landing, while accounting for the effects of likely environmental
conditions expected in service. Proposed Sec. 23.510 would require the
methods and processes of fabrication and assembly used to produce
consistently sound structures and, if a fabrication process requires
close control to reach this objective, an applicant would have to
perform the process under an approved process specification.
Additionally, proposed Sec. 23.510 would require an applicant to
justify the selected design values to ensure material strength with
probabilities, account for--
The criticality of the structural element; and
The structural failure due to material variability, unless
each individual item is tested before use to determine that the actual
strength properties of that particular item would equal or exceed those
used in the design, or the design values are accepted by the
Administrator.
Proposed Sec. 23.510 would require a determination of required
material strength properties to be based on sufficient tests of
material meeting specifications to establish design values on a
statistical basis. Proposed Sec. 23.510 would also require an
applicant to determine the effects on allowable stresses used for
design if thermal effects were significant on an essential component or
structure under normal operating conditions.
Proposed Sec. 23.510 would capture the safety intent of the
current Sec. Sec. 23.605, Fabrication methods and 23.613, Material
strength properties and design values. These current requirements
explain methods and techniques to ensure adequate materials and process
controls. This proposed rule would require the applicant to ensure the
resulting materials and processes are adequate without specifying how.
The prescriptive language within the current
[[Page 13478]]
sections is more appropriate as a means of compliance.
xiv. Proposed Sec. 23.515, Special Factors of Safety
Proposed Sec. 23.515 would require an applicant to determine a
special factor of safety for any critical design value that was
uncertain, used for a part, article, or assembly likely to deteriorate
in service before normal replacement, or subject to appreciable
variability because of uncertainties in manufacturing processes or
inspection methods. Proposed Sec. 23.515 would require an applicant to
determine a special factor of safety using quality controls and
specifications that accounted for each structural application,
inspection method, structural test requirement, sampling percentage,
and process and material control. Proposed Sec. 23.515 would require
an applicant to apply any special factor of safety in the design for
each part of the structure by multiplying each limit load and ultimate
load by the special factor of safety.
Proposed Sec. 23.515 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. Sec. 23.619, Special factors; 23.621, Casting factors; 23.623,
Bearing factors; 23.625, Fitting factors; 23.657, Hinges; 23.681(b),
Limit load static test (in part); and 23.693, Joints. These current
requirements explain methods and techniques to ensure adequate special
factors are used and the proposed rule would simply require the
applicant to determine and apply adequate special factors without
specifying what these are. The prescriptive language within the current
sections is more appropriate as a means of compliance.
xv. Proposed Sec. 23.600, Emergency Conditions
Proposed Sec. 23.600 would require the airplane, even if damaged
in emergency landing conditions, to provide protection to each occupant
against injury that would preclude egress. Proposed Sec. 23.600 would
require the airplane to have seating and restraints for all occupants,
consisting of a seat, a method to restrain the occupant's pelvis and
torso, and a single action restraint release, which meets its intended
function and does not create a hazard that could cause a secondary
injury to an occupant. Proposed Sec. 23.600 would require the airplane
seating, restraints, and cabin interior to account for likely flight
and emergency landing conditions. Additionally, they could not prevent
occupant egress or interfere with the operation of the airplane when
not in use.
Proposed Sec. 23.600 would require each baggage and cargo
compartment be designed for its maximum weight of contents and for the
critical load distributions at the maximum load factors corresponding
to the determined flight and ground load conditions. Proposed Sec.
23.600 would also require each baggage and cargo compartment to have a
means to prevent the contents of the compartment from becoming a hazard
by impacting occupants or shifting, and to protect any controls,
wiring, lines, equipment, or accessories whose damage or failure would
affect operations.
Proposed Sec. 23.600 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. Sec. 23.561, Emergency Landing Conditions--General; 23.562,
Emergency landing dynamic conditions; 23.785, Seats, berths, litters,
safety belts, and shoulder harnesses; and 23.787, Baggage and cargo
compartments. The prescriptive language within these current sections
are more appropriate as a means of compliance, and thus would allow
flexibility for new technology to be available in new part 23 airplanes
in a timely manner.
Occupant safety for aviation has progressed incrementally over the
years. This has resulted in rulemaking that has enhanced safety for
individual system components, but not in an integrated fashion.
Modeling and analysis techniques have matured to a point that may allow
evaluation of more crash scenarios and crashworthiness components as an
integrated system. The FAA has relied on many industry studies to
develop current occupant safety rules. These studies evaluated
characteristics of actual accidents, full-scale aircraft drop testing,
and dynamic seat testing on a sled. When dynamic seat testing began,
determination of an adequate generic floor impulse that represented a
survivable aircraft crash was established. As an alternative to current
crashworthiness requirements, the proposed rule would allow for
evaluation of the conditions of likely impacts, assessment of vehicle
response, and ultimately, evaluation of occupant reaction to vehicle
impact and vehicle response.
Technology used in aviation crashworthiness, in a large part, has
come from the automotive industry. The automotive industry has analyzed
crashworthiness components as a system for many years. The automotive
industry generally has a more developed crashworthiness analysis
capability than that used in the aviation industry. This advanced
crashworthiness analysis capability has evolved primarily because of
the--
Public expectation for automobile safety;
Higher general public likelihood and exposure to
automobile accidents; and
High automobile production rates allow for multiple actual
full-vehicle crash tests that result in very accurate crash impulse
data from the outer surface of the vehicle all the way to the occupant.
Because of these facts, automotive designers know accurate impulses
and the specific vehicle response for impact conditions. Furthermore,
this data can be extrapolated to consider many more accident scenarios.
Automotive safety requirements progressively add new impact scenario
requirements and enhanced impulse magnitudes, thus requiring more
industry innovation. This innovation has enabled rapid advances in
automotive occupant protection systems.
Automotive safety begins at the outside of the vehicle, evaluating
the entire system's response. In contrast, aircraft manufacturers have
used essentially the same generic designed pulse imparted at the cabin
floor for the last 25 years. The same impulse applies to all GA
airplanes independent of the structure below the cabin floor and the
aircraft's stall speed, unless the stall speed is greater than 61
knots. Determining airplane crashworthiness is a more complex process
than determining automotive crashworthiness because of higher impact
speeds, lighter weight structures, and the effect of the third
dimension of altitude on the aircraft. Dynamic seat testing has
improved crashworthiness in aviation; however, the FAA believes that
newer means of evaluating the full aircraft response to crash
conditions via modeling, newer materials, and new technologies promise
to offer improved features, evaluation, and accuracy that would
facilitate consideration of more crash scenarios and evaluation of more
variables that could improve survivability.
The NTSB produced a series of reports, called the General Aviation
Crashworthiness Project,\21\ in the 1980s that evaluated over 21,000 GA
airplane crashes that occurred between 1972 and 1981. The NTSB
evaluated airplane orientation, impact magnitudes, and survival rates
and factors on many of these accidents in order to provide information
to support changes in crashworthiness design standards for seating and
restraint systems in GA airplanes. These reports also established
[[Page 13479]]
conditions approximating survivable accidents, and categorized factors
that would have the largest impact on safety. These reports further
illuminated the various crashworthiness systems and their respective
impact to overall safety. Amendment 23-36 (53 FR 30802, August 15,
1988), to part 23 referenced these reports for dynamic seats but did
not adopt a systems-approach to evaluating crashworthiness of an
airplane design.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ See www.regulations.gov (Docket #FAA-2015-1621).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NTSB reports identified several factors that would enhance
safety. All of these factors working together as a system should result
in a safer airplane. However, the assessment indicated that shoulder
harnesses offer the fastest individual improvement for safety. The FAA
codified the shoulder harnesses requirement in amendments 23-19 (42 FR
20601, June 16, 1977) and 23-32 (50 FR 46872, November 13, 1985), for
newly manufactured airplanes. The FAA also issued policy statement ACE-
00-23.561-01,\22\ Methods of Approval of Retrofit Shoulder Harness
Installations in Small Airplanes, to streamline the process for
retrofitting older airplanes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ See www.regulations.gov (Docket #FAA-2015-1621).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Survivable volume is another critical factor to survival.
Survivable volume is the ability of the airframe to protect the
occupants from external intrusion or cabin crushing during and after
the accident sequence. There were several observed accidents in the
NTSB study where conventional aircraft construction simply crushed an
otherwise restrained occupant. Crashworthiness regulations have never
included survivable volume as a factor, except for aircraft turnover.
Airplane designs should provide the space needed for the protection and
restraint of the occupants. A compromised survivable volume could cause
occupant impact with objects in the cabin. This is one of the first
steps in the analysis of airplane crashworthiness.
Additional data from the NTSB General Aviation Crashworthiness
Project suggested that energy-absorbing seats that protect the occupant
from vertical loads could enhance occupant survivability and work to
prevent serious injury, thereby enhancing odds for egress and
preventing many debilitating long-term injuries. The FAA established
dynamic seat testing requirements in amendment 23-36 for airplanes
certificated under part 23. Energy absorbing seats benefit a smaller
portion of accident occupants because accident impacts with larger
vertical components tend to reduce occupant survival odds. Energy
attenuation from vertical forces, both static and dynamic, has been
important to crashworthiness regulations within the past 25 years. Seat
deformation throughout the emergency landing sequence is acceptable if
the load path through attachment, seat, and restraint remains
continuous. Coupling the seat performance to the rest of the airframe
response is important to the enhancement and understanding of occupant
survivability. The FAA believes that allowing designers to consider a
particular airframe's unique deformation in a crash, the designers can
create a safer cabin for the occupants. Using unique airframe
deformations would result in more accurate accident floor impulses and
may allow evaluation of crash impulses in multiple directions; instead
of only two directions considered in current certification.
Occupant restraints must maintain integrity, stay in place on the
occupant throughout the event, properly distribute loads on the
occupant, and restrain the occupant by mitigating interaction with
other items in the cabin. Restraints originally were comprised of lap
belts. Shoulder harnesses were later required as discussed above. Newer
technology that enhances or supplements the performance of restraints,
like airbags and consideration of items in the cabin that the occupant
might impact, are now being considered for inclusion in designs. The
use of airbags has greatly increased passenger safety in automobiles,
which offer protection in much more severe impacts and in impacts from
multiple directions, and could be a viable option for airplanes as
well.
Seat retention in airplanes is a factor identified as another basic
building block for crashworthiness. The NTSB reports shows more than a
quarter of otherwise-survivable accidents included instances where the
seats broke free at the attachment to the airplane, resulting in
fatalities or serious injuries. Dynamic seat testing requirements
address the ability of seat assemblies to remain attached to the floor,
even when the floor shifts during impact. Pitching and yawing of the
seat tracks during dynamic seat tests demonstrates the gimbaling and
flexibility of the seat.
All of the aforementioned safety considerations must work together
to enhance occupant safety and survivability. The FAA believes that
evaluating occupant safety, as a whole system, would allow for a better
understanding of vehicle performance in an emergency landing, enabling
the incorporation of innovative technology. The transportation industry
has made significant progress with energy absorbing seats and restraint
technology. The FAA believes enhanced cabin strength that improves
survivable volume, coupled with better restraint technology and refined
energy absorbing seats, would be key factors in improving expansion of
the survivable accident envelope. These factors and additional
considerations were included in the Small Airplane Crashworthiness
Design Guide.\23\ This guide was prepared for the Advanced General
Aviation Transports Experiments and the National Aerospace and Space
Administration and addresses the concept of designing crashworthiness
into an airplane design as a system.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ See www.regulations.gov (Docket #FAA-2015-1621).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to evaluate an accident from an occupant's perspective,
the emergency landing condition must first be defined, starting with
the conditions external to the aircraft. In most survivable accidents,
the pilot is able to maintain control of the aircraft prior to impact.
Accidents where the airplane impacts the ground out of control are
typically much less survivable. Speed and impact orientation are
significant factors in crash survivability. Therefore, considerations
for impact beyond a controllable impact are beyond the scope of these
proposed regulations. The slowest forward speed that any fixed wing
airplane can fly is its stall speed. This stall speed can vary with
airplane configuration and weight, but represents the most universal
parameter for impact speed and energy attenuation at impact. For this
reason, stall speed is the starting point for consideration of expected
impact conditions.
Orientation of impact can vary with pitch, yaw, terrain angle, and
angle of flight path and becomes dynamic as the pilot loses control
effectiveness at stall. The result is the airplane impact angle can
result in a combination of horizontal and vertical loads and impulses
that vary widely. Angle of impact, the line of the center of mass with
respect to the angle of the impact surface, can also affect the amount
of energy absorbed or transmitted to the occupant.
An accident impulse is a dynamic event that rapidly loads and
unloads the structure. Dynamic impacts accurately represent the impact
event, often including load levels far surpassing the static load
requirements. Dynamic testing is also subject to a wide variation of
results due to the unpredictable dynamic responses of varying
[[Page 13480]]
construction methods and materials, resulting in complicated modeling
and analysis. This contrasts with static load tests that load the
structure slowly, maintain that load at high levels, are generally
simpler, and often provide adequate demonstration of part strength.
Static analysis is generally more reliable with both testing and
modeling; however, it does not capture the nature of rapid loading.
Some combination of dynamic and static testing allows for the best
understanding of airplane behavior during an accident.
Compliance with the proposed rule could be shown using conventional
means of compliance like dynamic testing of seats, and static testing
of other components using the prescriptive methods contained in the
current part 23. Alternative compliance methods could include analysis
or modeling supported by testing using an airframe coupled with the
airplane's performance envelope, viewing the entire interaction of
ground, airplane, and occupant, thus using a more complete systemic
approach to achieve improved protection.
Proposed Sec. 23.600(a) is intended to provide structural
performance that protects the occupant during an emergency landing
while accounting for only static loads and assuming all safety
equipment is in use. The proposed section would capture the safety
intent of the current Sec. 23.561. As noted earlier, static loads are
generally lower than peak dynamic loads; however, they may offer a
more-easily predictable loading condition and are generally of longer
duration such that the structure can fully react to the load. The
landing conditions should consider possible accident sequence variables
at impact, including restraint of items of mass within the cabin,
directions of loading along or about the three axes, and airframe
response with respect to the occupants and effects of airframe
deflection during an emergency landing. Effects of emergency landing on
the airplane should also be considered to include the effect of
airframe damage and how static loads would affect egress and survivable
cabin volume. Items of mass within the cabin and rear mounted engines
have also been traditionally considered using even higher static loads
as an additional factor of safety to ensure that these items of mass
are restrained and would be among the last items to come free in an
accident.
Proposed Sec. 23.600(b) is intended to provide boundary conditions
for the emergency landing sequence for both static and dynamic load
considerations. The proposed section would capture the safety intent of
the current Sec. Sec. 23.561 and 23.562. The airplane stall speed
limits the maximum forward impact speed. The emergency landing
condition assumes the pilot maintains airplane control at or near final
impact, thereby limiting impact velocity.
Proposed Sec. 23.600(c) would capture the survivability factors
for the occupant in the cabin during the emergency landing sequence and
would capture the safety intent of current Sec. 23.562. These factors
include proper use and loading of seats and restraints, and the
interaction of the occupants with each other and the cabin interior.
Survivability is determined upon the occupant's interaction with the
interior, seat, and restraints, and bounded by established human injury
criteria.
Proposed Sec. 23.600(d) would provide the framework for seats and
occupant restraints and would require simplified seat and restraint
requirements for all occupants. This proposed section would capture the
safety intent of current Sec. 23.785.
Proposed Sec. 23.600(e) would establish requirements for baggage
and cargo compartments and the restraint of contents. The proposed
section would capture the safety intent of current Sec. 23.787.
xvi. Current Subpart C Regulations Relocated to Other Proposed Subparts
As discussed, the FAA proposes removing current Sec. Sec. 23.561,
23.562, 23.785, and 23.787. Also, this proposal would consolidate the
safety intent of these crashworthiness regulations in proposed Sec.
23.600.
4. Subpart D--Design and Construction
a. General Discussion
The FAA proposes restructuring current subpart D to retain the
requirements for flight control systems, along with their attachment to
the structure and landing gear, and occupant safety other than
structural requirements. The FAA proposes to align structural
requirements, found in current Sec. Sec. 23.601 through 23.659, to
proposed subpart C. Aspects that directly affected the pilot's
interface with the airplane, such as the throttle shape, would be
relocated to proposed Sec. 23.1500, Flightcrew Interface.
The FAA also proposes, in those sections where there are
requirements specific to the current commuter category, to use
certification level 4. In those sections where there are current
requirements specific to multiengine jets over 6,000 pounds, the FAA
proposes requirements for certification level 3, high-speed multiengine
airplanes as discussed earlier in this proposal. Refer to appendix 1 of
this preamble for a cross-reference table detailing how the current
regulations are addressed in the proposed part 23 regulations.
The subpart D organization was more complex than other subparts due
to the relocation and removal of many requirements at the sub-paragraph
level. To reduce confusion, the specific discussion of subpart D
changes is shown in a cross reference table at the end of the specific
discussion section below rather than the Relocation and Removal
paragraphs in other subparts.
b. Specific Discussion of Changes
i. Proposed Sec. 23.700, Flight Controls Systems
Proposed Sec. 23.700 would require an applicant to design airplane
flight control systems to prevent major, hazardous, and catastrophic
hazards. Proposed Sec. 23.700 would require an applicant to design
trim systems to prevent inadvertent, incorrect, or abrupt trim
operation. In addition, proposed Sec. 23.700 would require an
applicant to design trim systems to provide a means to indicate--
The direction of trim control movement relative to
airplane motion;
The trim position with respect to the trim range;
The neutral position for lateral and directional trim; and
For all airplanes except simple airplanes, the range for
takeoff for all applicant requested center of gravity ranges and
configurations.
Proposed Sec. 23.700 would also require an applicant to design
trim systems to provide control for continued safe flight and landing
when any one connecting or transmitting element in the primary flight
control system failed, except for simple airplanes. Additionally,
proposed Sec. 23.700 would require an applicant to design trim systems
to limit the range of travel to allow safe flight and landing, if an
adjustable stabilizer is used.
Furthermore, proposed Sec. 23.700 would require the system for an
airplane equipped with an artificial stall barrier system to prevent
uncommanded control or thrust action and provide for a preflight check.
The FAA also proposes requiring an applicant seeking certification of a
certification level 3 high-speed or certification level 4 airplane to
install a takeoff warning system on the airplane, unless the applicant
demonstrates that the airplane, for each configuration, could takeoff
at the limits of its trim and flap ranges.
Proposed Sec. 23.700(b)(3) would also allow an exception for
simple airplanes
[[Page 13481]]
from the requirement to provide control for continued safe flight and
landing when any one connecting or transmitting element in the primary
control system fails. This would provide a level of safety equivalent
to that specified in EASA's CS-VLA. Last, proposed Sec. 23.700(d)
would maintain the level of safety in the current requirements for a
takeoff warning system.
Proposed Sec. 23.700 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. Sec. 23.677, Trim systems, paragraphs (a), (b), and (d); 23.689,
Cable systems, paragraphs (a) and (f); 23.691, Artificial stall barrier
system, paragraphs (a), (b), (d), (e) and (f); 23.697, Wing flap
controls, paragraphs (a); and 23.703, Takeoff warning system,
paragraphs (a) and (b). This proposed section would apply to the
function, usability, and hazard levels of all mechanical, electrical,
or electronic control systems. The certification levels proposed in
this NPRM would be incorporated into the mechanical, electrical, or
electronic control systems to maintain the differences in airplanes
certificated under part 23 (i.e., weight and powerplant.)
ii. Proposed Sec. 23.705, Landing Gear Systems
Proposed Sec. 23.705 would require an airplane's landing gear and
retracting mechanism be able to withstand operational and flight loads.
Proposed Sec. 23.705 would require an airplane with retractable
landing gear to have a positive means to keep the landing gear extended
and a secondary means for extending the landing gear that could not be
extended using the primary means. Proposed Sec. 23.705 would also
require a means to inform the pilot that each landing gear is secured
in the extended and retracted positions. Additionally, proposed Sec.
23.705 would require an airplane, except for airplanes intended for
operation on water, with retractable landing gear to also have a
warning to the pilot if the thrust and configuration is selected for
landing and yet the landing gear is not fully extended and locked.
Furthermore, if the landing gear bayis used as the location for
equipment other than the landing gear, proposed Sec. 23.705 would
require that equipment be designed and installed to avoid damage from
tire burst and from items that may enter the landing gear bay. Proposed
Sec. 23.705 would also require the design of each landing gear wheel,
tire, and ski account for critical loads and would require a reliable
means of stopping the airplane with kinetic energy absorption within
the airplane's design specifications for landing. For certification
level 3 high-speed multiengine and certification level 4 multiengine
airplanes, proposed Sec. 23.705 would require the braking system to
provide kinetic energy absorption within the design of the airplane
specifications for rejected takeoff as the current rules do for
multiengine jets over 6,000 pounds and commuter category airplanes.
Proposed Sec. 23.705 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. Sec. 23.729, Landing gear extension and retraction system,
paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (e); 23.731, Wheels; 23.733, Tires,
paragraph (a); 23.735, Brakes, paragraphs (a), (b), and (e); 23.737,
Skis. The FAA proposes to combine the fixed and retractable landing
gear systems into the proposed section, which would apply to the
function, usability, and hazard levels of all mechanical, electrical,
or electronic landing gear systems.
iii. Proposed Sec. 23.710, Buoyancy for Seaplanes and Amphibians
Proposed Sec. 23.710 would require airplanes intended for
operations on water to provide buoyancy of 80 percent in excess of the
buoyancy required to support the maximum weight of the airplane in
fresh water. Proposed Sec. 23.710 would also require airplanes
intended for operations on water to have sufficient watertight
compartments so the airplane will stay afloat at rest in calm water
without capsizing if any two compartments of any main float or hull are
flooded.
Proposed Sec. 23.710 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. Sec. 23.751(a), Main float buoyancy; 23.755, Hulls; and 23.757,
Auxiliary floats. The FAA proposes combining the floats or hulls
landing gear systems into the proposed section and having it apply to
the function, usability, and hazard levels of hulls and floats. The
existing rule requires at least four watertight compartments of
approximately equal volume, which the FAA proposes to remove because
they are specific design requirements and are addressed in the proposed
performance-based requirements.
To encourage the installation of buoyancy systems with new safety
enhancing technology and streamlining the certification process, the
FAA proposes removing most of the current prescriptive requirements and
the detailed means of compliance for these requirements from the
current part 23 and replacing them with performance-based regulations.
The FAA expects the current means of compliance would continue to be
used for the traditional airplane designs under part 23.
iv. Sec. 23.750, Means of Egress and Emergency Exits
Proposed Sec. 23.750 would require the airplane cabin exit be
designed to provide for evacuation of the airplane within 90 seconds in
conditions likely to occur, excluding ditching, following an emergency
landing. For ditching, proposed Sec. 23.750 would require the cabin
exit for all certification levels 3 and 4 multiengine airplanes be
designed to allow evacuation in 90 seconds. Proposed Sec. 23.750 would
require each exit to have a simple and obvious means, marked inside and
outside the airplane, to be opened from both inside and outside the
airplane, when the internal locking mechanism is in the locked
position.
Proposed Sec. 23.750 would also require airplane evacuation paths
to protect occupants from serious injury from the propulsion system,
and require that doors, canopies, and exits be protected from opening
inadvertently in flight. Proposed Sec. 23.750 would preclude each exit
from being obstructed by a seat or seat back, unless the seat or seat
back could be easily moved in one action to clear the exit. Proposed
Sec. 23.750 would also require airplanes certified for aerobatics to
have a means to exit the airplane in flight.
Proposed Sec. 23.750 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. Sec. 23.783, Doors, paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d); 23.791,
23.803, Emergency evacuation, paragraph (a); 23.805, Flightcrew
emergency exits; 23.807, Emergency exits except paragraphs (a)(3),
(b)(1), (c), (d)(1) and (d)(4); 23.811, Emergency exit marking; 23.812,
Emergency lighting; 23.813, Emergency exit access, paragraph (a); and
23.815, Width of aisle; and CS-VLA-783, Exits. This proposed rule would
incorporate the requirements for all door and emergency exits and
remove specified design solutions and means of compliances.
To encourage the installation of egress and emergency exits with
new safety enhancing technology and streamline the certification
process, the FAA proposes removing most of the current prescriptive
requirements and the detailed means of compliance for these
requirements from the current part 23. The FAA expects that the current
prescriptive means of compliance would continue to be used for
traditional part 23 airplane designs.
The FAA would continue to accept an airplane designed to meet these
prescriptive design constraints as means of compliance to meet the
proposed performance standard. However, if an airplane did not meet the
prescriptive design constraints, the applicant could
[[Page 13482]]
propose its own means of compliance to show compliance with the
proposed performance standard. Historically, the FAA has accepted an
emergency evacuation demonstration in less than 90 seconds as an ELOS
for airplanes that did not meet the prescriptive design requirements in
the current part 23 regulations. AC 20-118A, Emergency Evacuation
Demonstration, contains an acceptable means of compliance for the 90-
second requirement for emergency evacuation.
v. Proposed Sec. 23.755, Occupant Physical Environment
Proposed Sec. 23.755 would require an applicant to design the
airplane to allow clear communication between the flightcrew and
passengers and provide a clear, sufficiently undistorted external view
to enable the flightcrew to perform any maneuvers within the operating
limitations of the airplane. Proposed Sec. 23.755 would also require
an applicant to design the airplane to protect the pilot from serious
injury due to high energy rotating failures in systems and equipment,
and protect the occupants from serious injury due to damage to
windshields, windows, and canopies.
Additionally, proposed Sec. 23.755 would require, for
certification level 4 airplanes, each windshield and its supporting
structure directly in front of the pilot to withstand the impact
equivalent of a two-pound bird at maximum approach flap airspeed and
allow for continued safe flight and landing after the loss of vision
through any one panel.
Furthermore, proposed Sec. 23.755 would require any installed
oxygen system to include a means to determine whether oxygen is being
delivered and a means for the flightcrew to turn on and shut off the
oxygen supply, and the ability for the flightcrew to determine the
quantity of oxygen available. Proposed Sec. 23.755 would also require
any installed pressurization system to include a pressurization system
test and a warning if an unsafe condition exists.
Proposed Sec. 23.755 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. Sec. 23.771, Pilot compartment, paragraphs (b) and (c); 23.775,
Windshields and windows, paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), and (h);
23.831, Ventilation; 23.841, Pressurized cabins, paragraphs (a),
(b)(6), (c) and (d); 23.843, Pressurization tests; 23.1441, Oxygen
equipment and supply, paragraphs (c), (d) and (e); 23.1443, minimum
mass flow of supplemental oxygen, paragraphs (a), (b), and (c);
23.1445; Oxygen distribution system; 23.1447, Equipment standards for
oxygen dispensing units, paragraphs (a) through (d) and (f); 23.1449,
means of determining use of oxygen; and 23.1461, Equipment containing
high energy rotors. Current part 23 regulations contain prescriptive
language and means of compliance for the occupant physical environment
requirements. The FAA proposes to remove the specific requirements to
allow an applicant to specify the means of compliance for the physical
needs of the occupants including temperature, ventilation,
pressurization, supplemental oxygen, etc. For example, current Sec.
23.831(a) requires carbon monoxide not exceeding one part in 20,000
parts of air. The FAA proposes revising this by requiring breathable
atmosphere without hazardous concentrations of gases and vapors.
vi. Proposed Sec. 23.800, Fire Protection Outside Designated Fire
Zones
Proposed Sec. 23.800 would require that insulation on electrical
wire and electrical cable outside designated fire zones be self-
extinguishing. Proposed Sec. 23.800 would require airplane cockpit and
cabin materials in certification levels 1, 2, and 3 be flame-resistant.
Proposed Sec. 23.800 would require airplane cockpit and cabin
materials in certification level 4 airplanes be self-extinguishing.
Proposed Sec. 23.800 would also require that airplane materials in the
baggage and cargo compartments, which are inaccessible in flight and
outside designated fire zones, be self-extinguishing. Proposed Sec.
23.800 would require that any electrical cable installation that would
overheat in the event of circuit overload or fault be flame resistant.
Additionally, proposed Sec. 23.800 would preclude thermal acoustic
materials outside designated fire zones from being a flame propagation
hazard. Proposed Sec. 23.800 would also require sources of heat that
are capable of igniting adjacent objects outside designated fire zones
to be shielded and insulated to prevent such ignition.
Proposed Sec. 23.800 would require airplane baggage and cargo
compartments, outside designated fire zones, to be located where a fire
would be visible to the pilots, or equipped with a fire detection
system and warning system, and be accessible for the manual
extinguishing of a fire, have a built-in fire extinguishing system, or
be constructed and sealed to contain any fire within the compartment.
Proposed Sec. 23.800 would require a means to extinguish any fire
in the cabin, outside designated fire zones, such that the pilot, while
seated, could easily access the fire extinguishing means, and for
certification levels 3 and 4 airplanes, passengers would have a fire
extinguishing means available within the passenger compartment. Where
flammable fluids or vapors might escape by leakage of a fluid system,
proposed Sec. 23.800 would require each area, outside designated fire
zones, be defined and have a means to make fluid and vapor ignition,
and the resultant hazard, if ignition occurs, improbable. Additionally,
proposed Sec. 23.800 would also require combustion heater
installations outside designated fire zones be protected from
uncontained fire.
Proposed Sec. 23.800 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. Sec. 23.851, Fire extinguishers, paragraphs (a) and (b); 23.853,
Passenger and crew compartment interiors, Paragraphs (a), (d)(3)(i),
(d)(3)(iii) and (d)(3)(iv), (e), and (f); 23.855, Cargo and baggage
compartment fire protection; 23.856, Thermal/acoustic insulation
materials; 23.859, Combustion heater fire protection, paragraph (a);
23.863, Flammable fluid fire protection, paragraphs (a) and (d);
23.1359, Electrical system fire protection, paragraph (c); 23.1365,
Electric cables and equipment, paragraph (b); 23.1383, Taxi and landing
lights, paragraph (d); 23.1385, Position light system installation,
paragraph (d). It would also capture the safety intent of CS-VLA-853,
Compartment interiors. Proposed Sec. 23.800 would incorporate the
requirements for flammability of all subpart D and F systems and
equipment outside designated fire zones needed for continued safe
flight and landing and remove specified design solutions and means of
compliances.
vii. Proposed Sec. 23.805, Fire Protection in Designated Fire Zones
Proposed Sec. 23.805 would require flight controls, engine mounts,
and other flight structures within or adjacent to designated fire zones
be capable of withstanding the effects of a fire. Proposed Sec. 23.805
would require engines inside designated fire zones to remain attached
to the airplane in the event of a fire or electrical arcing. Proposed
Sec. 23.805 would also require terminals, equipment, and electrical
cables, inside designated fire zones, used during emergency procedures,
be fire-resistant.
Proposed Sec. 23.805 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. 23.865, Fire protection of flight controls, engine mounts, and
other flight structure and Sec. 23.1359(b), Electrical system fire
protection. The intent of proposed Sec. 23.805 is to protect flight
controls, engine mounts, and other flight structure as well as
electrical cables,
[[Page 13483]]
terminals and equipment from the effects of fire in designated fire
zones.
viii. Proposed Sec. 23.810, Lightning Protection of Structure
Proposed Sec. 23.810 would preclude primary structure failure
caused by exposure to the direct effects of lightning, that could
prevent continued safe flight and landing for airplanes approved for
IFR. Proposed Sec. 23.810 would require airplanes approved only for
VFR to achieve lightning protection by following FAA accepted design
practices found in FAA issued advisory circulars and in FAA accepted
consensus standards.
Proposed Sec. 23.810 would capture the safety intent of the
current Sec. 23.867(a) and (c), Electrical bonding and protection
against lightning and static electricity. The FAA proposes adopting the
structure requirements in part 23, amendment 23-7 (34 FR 13078, August
13, 1969), to limit the rule to protection of primary structure from
direct effects of lightning.
ix. Reorganization of Subpart D
The FAA proposes relocating the underlying safety. intent of
various subpart D sections with proposed sections in subparts B, C, F,
and G. The following table shows where the FAA proposes moving the
current subpart D sections in part 23.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current section Title Proposed section Proposed title
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
23.601............................... General................ 23.500................. Structural design.
23.603............................... Materials and 23.500................. Structural design.
workmanship.
23.605............................... Fabrication methods.... 23.510................. Materials and
processes.
23.607............................... Fasteners.............. 23.505................. Protection of
structure.
23.609............................... Protection of Structure 23.505................. Protection of
structure.
23.611............................... Accessibility.......... 23.505................. Protection of
structure.
23.613............................... Material strength 23.510................. Materials and
properties and design processes.
values.
23.619............................... Special factors........ 23.515................. Special factors of
safety.
23.621............................... Casting factors........ 23.515................. Special factors of
safety.
23.623............................... Bearing factors........ 23.515................. Special factors of
safety.
23.625............................... Fitting factors........ 23.515................. Special factors of
safety.
23.627............................... Fatigue strength....... 23.405................. Structural durability.
23.629............................... Flutter................ 23.410................. Aeroelasticity.
23.641............................... Proof of strength...... Means of Compliance....
23.651............................... Proof of strength...... Means of Compliance....
23.655............................... Installation........... Means of Compliance....
23.657............................... Hinges................. 23.515................. Special factors of
safety.
23.659............................... Mass balance........... 23.315................. Flight load conditions.
23.671............................... Control Surfaces--
General.
(a).................................. ....................... 23.500................. Structural design.
(b).................................. ....................... 23.1305................ Function and
installation.
23.672............................... Stability augmentation 23.1305................ Function and
and automatic and installation.
power-operated systems.
23.673............................... Primary flight controls 23.1305................ Function and
installation.
23.675............................... Stops.................. 23.1305................ Function and
installation.
23.677............................... Trim systems...........
(a).................................. ....................... 23.700................. Flight control systems.
(b).................................. ....................... 23.700................. Flight control systems.
(c).................................. ....................... 23.410................. Aeroelasticity.
(d).................................. ....................... 23.700................. Flight control systems.
23.679............................... Control system locks... 23.1305................ Function and
installation.
23.681(a)............................ Limit load static tests 23.325(b).............. Component loading
conditions.
23.681(b)............................ Limit load static tests 23.515................. Special factors of
safety.
23.683............................... Operation tests........ 23.500(d).............. Structural design.
23.685(a), (b), (c).................. Control system details. 23.500(d).............. Structural design.
23.685(d)............................ Control system details. 23.1305................ Function and
installation.
23.687............................... Spring devices......... 23.410 and 23.500...... Aeroelasticity and
Structural design.
23.689............................... Cable systems.......... ....................... Component loading
conditions, Structural
design, and Equipment
Systems and
Installations.
(a).................................. ....................... 23.700................. Flight control systems.
(b).................................. ....................... 23.325(b), 23.500(d)... Component loading
conditions, Structural
design.
(c).................................. ....................... 23.325(b), 23.500(d)... Component loading
conditions, Structural
design.
(d).................................. ....................... 23.325(b), 23.500(d)... Component loading
conditions, Structural
design.
(e).................................. ....................... 23.325(b), 23.500(d)... Component loading
conditions, Structural
design.
(f).................................. ....................... 23.700................. Flight control systems.
23.691............................... Artificial stall
barrier system.
(a).................................. ....................... 23.700................. Flight control systems.
(b).................................. ....................... 23.700................. Flight control systems.
(c).................................. ....................... 23.1305................ Function and
installation.
(d).................................. ....................... 23.700................. Flight control systems.
(e).................................. ....................... 23.700................. Flight control systems.
(f).................................. ....................... 23.700................. Flight control systems.
(g).................................. ....................... 23.1315................ Equipment, systems and
Installations.
23.693............................... Joints................. 23.515................. Special factors of
safety.
[[Page 13484]]
23.697............................... Wing flap controls.....
(a).................................. ....................... 23.700................. Flight control systems.
(b) and (c).......................... ....................... 23.200................. Controllability.
23.699............................... Wing flap position 23.1500................ Flightcrew interface.
indicator.
23.701............................... Flap interconnection... Means of Compliance....
23.703............................... Takeoff warning system.
(a).................................. ....................... 23.700................. Flight control systems.
(b).................................. ....................... 23.700................. Flight control systems.
(c).................................. ....................... Definition.............
23.721............................... General................ 23.910................. Powerplant installation
hazard assessment.
23.723............................... Shock absorption tests. Means of Compliance....
23.725............................... Limit drop tests....... Means of Compliance....
23.726............................... Ground load dynamic Means of Compliance....
tests.
23.727............................... Reserve energy Means of Compliance....
absorption drop tests.
23.729............................... Landing gear extension
and retraction system.
(a).................................. ....................... 23.705................. Landing gear systems.
(b).................................. ....................... 23.705................. Landing gear systems.
(c).................................. ....................... 23.705................. Landing gear systems.
(d).................................. ....................... Means of Compliance....
(e).................................. ....................... 23.705................. Landing gear systems.
(f).................................. ....................... 23.1315................ Equipment, systems and
installation.
(g).................................. ....................... Means of Compliance....
23.731............................... Wheels................. 23.705................. Landing gear systems.
23.733............................... Tires..................
(a).................................. ....................... 23.705................. Landing gear systems.
(b).................................. ....................... Means of Compliance....
(c).................................. ....................... Means of Compliance....
23.735............................... Brakes................. 23.705.................
(a).................................. ....................... 23.705................. Landing gear systems.
(1).................................. ....................... Means of Compliance....
(2).................................. ....................... Means of Compliance....
(b).................................. ....................... 23.705................. Landing gear systems.
(c).................................. ....................... Means of Compliance....
(d).................................. ....................... 23.1315................ Equipment, systems and
installation.
(e).................................. ....................... 23.705................. Landing gear systems.
(1).................................. ....................... Means of Compliance....
(2).................................. ....................... Means of Compliance....
23.737............................... Skis................... 23.705................. Landing gear systems.
23.745............................... Nose/Tail wheel 23.1500................ Flightcrew interface.
steering.
23.751............................... Main float buoyancy....
(a).................................. ....................... 710.................... Buoyancy for seaplanes
and amphibians.
(b).................................. ....................... Means of Compliance....
23.753............................... Main float design...... 23.320................. Ground and water load
conditions.
23.755............................... Hulls.................. 23.710................. Buoyancy for seaplanes
and amphibians.
23.757............................... Auxiliary floats....... 23.710................. Buoyancy for seaplanes
and amphibians.
23.771............................... Pilot compartment......
(a).................................. ....................... 23.1500................ Flightcrew interface.
(b).................................. ....................... 23.755................. Occupant physical
environment.
(c )................................. ....................... 23.755................. Occupant physical
environment.
23.773............................... Pilot compartment view.
(a).................................. ....................... 23.1500................ Flightcrew interface.
(b).................................. ....................... 23.755................. Occupant physical
environment.
23.775............................... Windshields and windows
(a), (b), (c), (d)................... ....................... 23.755................. Occupant physical
environment.
(e).................................. ....................... Means of Compliance....
(f).................................. ....................... 23.1405................ Flight in icing
conditions.
(g).................................. ....................... Means of Compliance....
(h).................................. ....................... 23.755................. Occupant physical
environment.
23.777............................... Cockpit controls....... 23.1500................ Flightcrew interface.
23.779............................... Motion and effect of 23.1500................ Flightcrew interface.
cockpit controls.
23.781............................... Cockpit control knob 23.1500................ Flightcrew interface.
shape.
23.783............................... Doors..................
(a), (b), (c), (d)................... ....................... 23.750................. Means of egress and
emergency exits.
(e), (f), (g)........................ ....................... Means of Compliance....
23.785............................... Seats, berths, litters, 23.600 and 23.515...... Special factors of
safety belts, and safety, Emergency
shoulder harnesses. landing conditions.
23.787............................... Baggage and cargo 23.600(e).............. Emergency landing
compartments. conditions.
23.791............................... Passenger information 23.755................. Occupant physical
signs. environment.
23.803............................... Emergency evacuation...
[[Page 13485]]
(a).................................. ....................... 23.750................. Means of egress and
emergency exits.
(b).................................. ....................... Means of Compliance....
23.805............................... Flightcrew emergency 23.750................. Means of egress and
exits. emergency exits.
23.807............................... Emergency exits........
(a)(3 ), (b)(1), (c), (d)(1), (d)(4). ....................... Means of Compliance....
Balance of 23.807.................... ....................... 23.750................. Means of egress and
emergency exits.
23.811............................... Emergency exit marking. 23.750................. Means of egress and
emergency exits.
23.812............................... Emergency lighting..... 23.750................. Means of egress and
emergency exits.
23.813............................... Emergency exit access..
(a).................................. ....................... 23.750................. Means of egress and
emergency exits.
(b).................................. ....................... Means of Compliance....
CS-VLA 853........................... ....................... 23.750................. Means of egress and
emergency exits.
23.815............................... Width of aisle......... 23.750................. Means of egress and
emergency exits.
23.831............................... Ventilation............ 23.755................. Occupant physical
environment.
23.841(a), (b)(6), (c), (d).......... Pressurized cabins..... 23.755................. Occupant physical
environment.
(b)(1) through (5) and (7)........... ....................... Means of Compliance....
23.843............................... Pressurization tests... 23.755................. Occupant physical
environment.
23.851............................... Fire extinguishers.....
(a) and (b).......................... ....................... 23.800................. Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
(c).................................. ....................... Means of Compliance....
23.853............................... Passenger and crew
compartment interiors.
(a).................................. ....................... 23.800................. Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
(b)(c) and (d)(1)(2)................. ....................... Means of Compliance....
(d)(3)(i), (d)(3)(iii), (d)(3)(iv)... ....................... 23.800................. Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
(e).................................. ....................... 23.800................. Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
(f).................................. ....................... 23.800................. Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
23.855............................... Cargo and baggage 23.800................. Fire protection outside
compartment fire designated fire zones.
protection.
23.856............................... Thermal/acoustic 23.800................. Fire protection outside
insulation materials. designated fire zones.
23.859............................... Combustion heater fire
protection.
(a).................................. ....................... 23.800................. Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
(b) thru (i)......................... ....................... Means of Compliance....
23.863............................... Flammable fluid fire
protection.
(a) and (d).......................... ....................... 23.800................. Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
(b) and (c).......................... ....................... Means of Compliance.... Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
23.865............................... Fire protection of 23.805................. Fire protection in
flight controls, designated fire zones.
engine mounts, and
other flight structure.
23.867............................... Electrical bonding and
protection against
lightning and static
electricity.
(a), (c)............................. ....................... 23.810................. Lightning protection of
structure.
(b).................................. ....................... 23.1320................ Electrical and
electronic system
lightning protection.
23.871............................... Leveling means......... Means of Compliance....
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5. Subpart E--Powerplant
a. General Discussion
The FAA proposes substantial changes to subpart E based on two
considerations. First, many of the current regulations could be
combined to provide fewer regulations that accomplish the same safety
intent. Second, part 23 overlaps with the requirements in parts 33 and
35. Refer to appendix 1 of this preamble for a cross-reference table
detailing how the current regulations are addressed in the proposed
part 23 regulations.
b. Specific Discussion of Changes
i. Proposed Sec. 23.900, Powerplant Installation
Proposed Sec. 23.900 would clarify, for the purpose of this
subpart, that the airplane powerplant installation must include each
component necessary for propulsion, affects propulsion safety, or
provides auxiliary power to the airplane. Proposed Sec. 23.900 would
require the applicant to construct and arrange each powerplant
installation to account for likely hazards in operation and maintenance
and, except for simple airplanes,\24\ each aircraft engine would have
to be type certificated.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Refer to Section III, Discussion of Proposal, paragraphs A
and B of this NPRM for definition and discussion of a simple
airplane.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Sec. 23.900 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. Sec. 23.901, Installation, paragraphs (a), (b), and (f); 23.903,
Engines, paragraph (a); 23.905, Propellers, paragraph (a), 23.909,
Turbocharger systems, paragraphs (a) and (c); and 23.925, Propeller
clearance. Proposed Sec. 23.900 would combine the installation
requirements that are scattered throughout the subpart into a
[[Page 13486]]
general requirement for installation, and remove any duplication with
part 33. The following table illustrates the duplication between the
current part 23 regulations and part 33 requirements:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part 23 Part 33
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 23.901(d), Installation......... Sec. 33.33, Vibration.
Sec. 23.901(e), Installation......... Sec. 33.1, Applicability.
Sec. 23.934, Turbojet and turbofan Sec. 33.97, Thrust reversers.
engine thrust reverser systems tests.
Sec. 23.939, Powerplant operating Sec. Sec. 33.61 thru 33.79.
characteristics.
Sec. 23.1011, Oil System--General.... Sec. Sec. 33.39 and 33.71,
Lubrication system.
Sec. 23.1013(a) and (d), Oil tanks... Sec. Sec. 33.39, and 33.71,
Lubrication system.
Sec. 23.1015, Oil tank tests......... Sec. 33.33, Vibration.
Sec. 23.1023, Oil radiators.......... Sec. 33.33, Vibration.
Sec. 23.1041, Cooling--General....... Sec. 33.1, Applicability.
Sec. 23.1043, Cooling tests.......... Sec. Sec. 33.41 and 33.81,
Applicability--Block Tests.
Sec. 23.1045, Cooling test procedures Sec. 33.81, Applicability--
for turbine engine powered airplanes. Block Tests.
Sec. 23.1047, Cooling test procedures Sec. 33.35, Fuel and
for reciprocating engine powered induction system.
airplanes.
Sec. 23.1061, Liquid Cooling-- Sec. 33.21, Engine cooling.
Installation.
Sec. 23.1063, Coolant tank tests..... Sec. 33.41 and 33.81,
Applicability--Block Tests.
Sec. 23.1093, Induction system icing Sec. Sec. 33.35(b), Fuel and
protection. induction system and 33.68,
Induction system icing.
Sec. 23.1099, Carburetor deicing Sec. 33.35, Fuel and
fluid system detail design. induction system.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, proposed Sec. 23.900 would identify the scope of the
powerplant installation in the same manner as the current requirements.
However, the FAA would redefine several terms to allow for alternate
sources of propulsion, such as electric motors. The FAA considers the
term powerplant to include all equipment used by the airplane that
provides propulsion or auxiliary power. The word engine would be
replaced with the term power unit and would include other power sources
driven by fuel such as liquid fuel, electrical, or other power sources
not yet envisioned. This proposal also predicates that each airplane
power unit or propeller receive a type certificate as a prerequisite
for installation, with the exception of simple airplanes. The current
part 33 airworthiness standards did not envision providing
certification requirements for types of engines outside of those that
operate on fossil fuels. As such, the ability of an applicant to obtain
the required engine type certificate for an alternate fuel type may be
impractical. For those power units, the FAA proposes to include them in
the airplane certification, which could include the use of an ELOS to
part 23. The FAA would expect an applicant to utilize all the
requirements listed in part 33 as a baseline matrix to find compliance
for an alternate powerplant type and for those requirements that could
not be met. Also, Sec. 21.16, Special conditions, may apply. It should
be noted that additional requirements might also be necessary due to an
absence of a corresponding part 33 requirement. This matrix would
become part of the certification baseline and recorded in an issue
paper as an ELOS, exemption, or special condition. Also, simple
airplanes will follow the precedence set for CS-VLA and will maintain
the exception to the requirement to be type certificated.
ii. Proposed Sec. 23.905, Propeller Installation
Proposed Sec. 23.905 would retain the requirement that each
propeller be type certificated, except for simple airplanes. Proposed
Sec. 23.905 would retain the requirement that each pusher propeller be
marked so that it is conspicuous under daylight conditions. All the
other requirements of the current section either duplicate part 35
standards, or would condense into the other requirements proposed in
Sec. Sec. 23.900, Powerplant installation; 23.910, Powerplant
installation hazard assessment; and 23.940, Powerplant ice protection.
iii. Proposed Sec. 23.910, Powerplant Installation Hazard Assessment
Proposed Sec. 23.910 would require an applicant to assess each
powerplant separately and in relation to other airplane systems and
installations to show that a failure of any powerplant system component
or accessory will not--
Prevent continued safe flight and landing;
Cause serious injury; and
Require immediate action by crewmembers for continued
operation of any remaining powerplant system.
Proposed Sec. 23.910 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. Sec. 23.721, Landing gear--General; 23.903, Engines, paragraph
(c); 23.905, Propellers, paragraph (h); 23.909, Turbocharger systems,
paragraph (b), (c), and (e); 23.933 Reversing systems, paragraph (b);
23.937, Turbopropeller-drag limiting systems, paragraph (a); 23.959,
Unusable fuel supply; 23.979, Pressure fueling systems, paragraphs (c)
and (d); 23.991, Fuel pumps, paragraph (d); 23.994, Fuel system
components; 23.1001, Fuel jettisoning system, paragraph (h); 23.1027,
Propeller feathering system; 23.1111, Turbine engine, paragraph (a) and
(c); 23.1123, Exhaust system; 23.1125 Exhaust heat exchangers,
paragraph (a); 23.1142, Auxiliary power unit controls, paragraphs (d)
and (e); 23.1155, Turbine engine reverse thrust and propeller pitch
settings below the flight regime; 23.1163, Powerplant accessories,
paragraphs (b) and (d); 23.1191, Firewalls, paragraph (f); 23.1193,
Cowling and nacelle, paragraphs (f) and (g); 23.1201, Fire
extinguishing systems materials, paragraph (a); and 23.1203, Fire
detector system, paragraphs (b) and (c).
The proposed standard would reduce the repetitive requirements
found throughout the subpart and create one general powerplant
requirement to analyze and mitigate hazards associated with the
powerplant installation. For example, current Sec. 23.903(b)(1)
requires that design precautions be taken to minimize the hazards to
the airplane in the event of an engine rotor failure or a fire
originating inside the engine that could burn though the engine case.
These are very specific failure conditions, but are actually only two
small categories of many engine failure
[[Page 13487]]
conditions an applicant must assess. Section 23.903(c) requires that
multiple engines must be isolated from one another so a malfunction of
one engine does not affect the operation of the other. This is a
general analysis technique frequently called common mode analysis that
should apply to all powerplant components and include other critical
airplane systems that are not powerplant related, but could be affected
by a powerplant failure. Hazards the FAA proposes to remove from other
regulations and which would be addressed in this proposed section
include, but are not limited to, fire, ice, rain and bird ingestion,
rotorburst, engine case burn through, and flammable leakage.
iv. Proposed Sec. 23.915, Automatic Power Control Systems
Proposed Sec. 23.915 would require a power or thrust augmentation
system that automatically controls the power or thrust on the operating
powerplant to provide an indication to the flightcrew when the system
is operating; provide a means for the pilot to deactivate the automatic
functions; and prevent inadvertent deactivation.
Proposed Sec. 23.915 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. 23.904, Automatic power reserve system and appendix H to part
23--Installation of An Automatic Power Reserve (APR) System. To foster
the growth and approval of technological advances, the FAA believes
that the detailed and prescriptive language of appendix H is more
appropriate as means of compliance. We would also include requirements
for thrust augmenting systems into this proposed section since there
seems to be a trend in general aviation to provide thrust management
systems more sophisticated than historical automatic power reserve
systems.
v. Proposed Sec. 23.920, Reversing Systems
Proposed Sec. 23.920 would require an airplane to be capable of
continued safe flight and landing under any available reversing system
setting, and would capture the safety intent of current Sec. 23.933(a)
and (b). The current rule includes a separate requirement for a
propeller reversing system that would be covered in the more general
language of the proposed section and applied to any type of reverser
system. Current Sec. 23.933 also requires an analysis of the system
for a failure condition. Those provisions would be addressed in the
general analysis requirements of proposed Sec. 23.910.
vi. Proposed Sec. 23.925, Powerplant Operational Characteristics
Proposed Sec. 23.925 would require the powerplant to operate at
any negative acceleration that could occur during normal and emergency
operation within the airplane operating limitations. Proposed Sec.
23.925 would require the pilot to have the capability to stop and
restart the powerplant in flight. Proposed Sec. 23.925 would require
the airplane to have an independent power source for restarting each
powerplant following an in-flight shutdown.
Proposed Sec. 23.925 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. Sec. 23.903, Engines, paragraph (d), (e), (f), and (g); 23.939,
Powerplant operating characteristics; and 23.943, Negative
acceleration. Current Sec. 23.939 addresses powerplant operating
characteristics and clearly requires an analysis that would be required
by proposed Sec. 23.910 and the existing requirements of part 33.
Current Sec. 23.943 would be included in this proposed rule because it
is another analysis requirement, and one that provides an environment
where powerplant systems are required to operate.
vii. Proposed Sec. 23.930, Fuel Systems
Proposed Sec. 23.930 would require that each fuel system provide
an independent fuel supply to each powerplant in at least one
configuration and prevent ignition from an unknown source. This section
would require that each fuel system provide the fuel required to
achieve maximum power or thrust plus a margin for likely variables in
all temperature conditions within the operating envelope of the
airplane and provide a means to remove the fuel from the airplane.
Proposed Sec. 23.930 would require each fuel system to be capable of
retaining fuel when subject to inertia loads under expected operating
conditions and prevent hazardous contamination of the fuel supply.
Proposed Sec. 23.930 would require each fuel storage system to
withstand the loads and pressures under expected operating conditions
and provide a means to prevent loss of fuel during any maneuver under
operating conditions for which certification is requested. Also,
proposed Sec. 23.930 would require each fuel storage system to prevent
discharge when transferring fuel, provide fuel for at least one-half
hour of operation at maximum continuous power or thrust, and be capable
of jettisoning fuel, if required for landing.
Proposed Sec. 23.930 would require installed pressure refueling
systems to have a means to prevent the escape of hazardous quantities
of fuel, automatically shut-off before exceeding the maximum fuel
quantity of the airplane, and provide an indication of a failure at the
fueling station. Proposed Sec. 23.930 would capture the safety intent
of current Sec. Sec. 23.951, Fuel System--General, paragraphs (a),
(b), (c), and (d); 23.953, Fuel System; 23.954, Fuel system lightning
protection; 23.955, Fuel flow; 23.957, Flow between interconnected
tanks, paragraph (a); 23.961, Fuel system hot weather operation;
23.963, Fuel tanks: General, paragraphs (a), (d), and (e); 23.977, Fuel
tank outlet; 23.979, Pressure fueling systems, paragraphs (a) and (b);
23.991, Fuel pumps, paragraphs (a), (b), and (c); 23.997, Fuel strainer
or filter, paragraphs (a), (b), (c), and (d); 23.999, Fuel system
drains; and 23.1001, Fuel jettisoning system, paragraph (a).
The FAA believes that the regulations for the design of fuel
systems may be overly prescriptive and exceed what is necessary to
design a safe system. Accordingly, a more general set of requirements
could include the intent of many current rules. More importantly, this
proposed rule would allow for other types of energy sources to power
propulsion systems such as electrical motors and future energy sources.
viii. Proposed Sec. 23.935, Powerplant Induction and Exhaust Systems
Proposed Sec. 23.935 would require the air induction system to
supply the air required for each power unit and its accessories under
expected operating conditions, and provide a means to discharge
potential harmful material. Proposed Sec. 23.935 would capture the
safety intent of current Sec. Sec. 23.1091, Air induction system,
paragraph (a); 23.1101, Induction air preheater design, paragraph (a);
23.1103, Induction system ducts; 23.1107, Induction system filters; and
23.1121, Exhaust System--General, paragraphs (a) through (g). This
proposed rule would combine induction and exhaust systems into a single
rule because of the commonality with issues associated with moving air.
The prescriptive language of the regulations identified above in this
paragraph drove the development of this proposed section. For example,
Sec. 23.1091(b) mandates a certain number of intake sources and
specifies particular requirements for a primary and alternate intakes.
Current Sec. 23.1101 requires inspection access of critical parts, and
current Sec. 23.1103 is considered a part of a proper safety analysis
that would be required by proposed Sec. 23.910.
[[Page 13488]]
ix. Proposed Sec. 23.940, Powerplant Ice Protection
Proposed Sec. 23.940 would require the airplane design, including
the engine induction system, to prevent foreseeable accumulation of ice
or snow that would adversely affect powerplant operation. Proposed
Sec. 23.940 would also require the applicant design the powerplant to
prevent any accumulation of ice or snow that would adversely affect
powerplant operation, in those icing conditions for which certification
is requested. Proposed Sec. 23.940 would capture the safety intent of
current Sec. Sec. 23.905, Propellers, paragraph (e); 23.929, Engine
installation ice protection; 23.975, Fuel tank vents and carburetor
vapor vents, paragraph (a)(1); 23.1093, Induction system icing
protection; 23.1095, Carburetor deicing fluid flow rate; 23.1097,
Carburetor deicing fluid system capacity; and 23.1099, Carburetor
deicing fluid system detail design.
Proposed Sec. 23.940(a) would reflect the requirements in current
Sec. 23.1093, which applies to all airplanes, regardless if flight in
icing certification is sought. We are proposing to remove the type of
powerplant to accommodate for new powerplant technologies. In addition,
we propose to define other foreseeable icing in the means of
compliance, which would include conditions conducive to induction icing
of reciprocating engines. Foreseeable icing in the means of compliance
would also include the cloud icing conditions of appendix C to part 25,
currently defined in Sec. 23.1093(b)(1)(i), falling and blowing snow
currently defined in Sec. 23.1093(b)(1)(ii), and ground ice fog
conditions currently defined in Sec. 23.1093(b)(2). The FAA proposes
to remove the prescriptive requirements of the current Sec. Sec.
23.1093(a), 23.1095, 23.1097, and 23.1099 as these are more
appropriately considered as means of compliance. The FAA would expect
the means of compliance to expand the ground ice fog conditions to
colder ambient temperatures to harmonize with EASA. The FAA would also
expect the means of compliance to include optional ground and flight
freezing drizzle and freezing rain conditions, similar to appendix O of
part 25, for those airplanes that seek certification to operate in
those conditions. The Part 23 Icing ARC had recommended specific pass/
fail criteria for the effect of ice accretion on engine operation. The
FAA would expect this criterion to be defined in a means of compliance.
Proposed paragraph (a) would require an airplane design to prevent
``foreseeable'' ice or snow accumulation, including accumulation in
inadvertent icing encounters, described in appendix C to part 25, on
airplanes not certified for icing, which may pose a shed hazard to the
powerplant.
Airplane design in proposed Sec. 23.940(a) refers to the engine
induction system and airframe components on which accumulated ice may
shed into the powerplant. Powerplant design in proposed Sec. 23.940(b)
refers to the engine, propeller, and other powerplant components such
as cooling inlets.
Proposed Sec. 23.940(b) would apply only to airplanes certified
for flight in icing and would require compliance to the icing
requirements in part 33, which currently only apply to turbine engines.
Part 33, amendment 33-34 (79 FR 65507, November 4, 2014) and effective
January 5, 2015, added SLD and ice crystal requirements to Sec. 33.68
and amended the engine ice ingestion requirements in Sec. 33.77.
Proposed Sec. 23.940(b) would require installation of an engine(s)
certified to Sec. 33.68 amendment 33-34, or later, if the airplane
will be certified for flight in freezing drizzle and freezing rain.
Proposed Sec. 23.940(b) would allow an airplane manufacturer to
install an engine, type certified at an earlier amendment, in an
airplane not certified for flight in freezing drizzle or freezing rain,
as long as no ADs have been applied that relate to engine operation in
inadvertent SLD or ice crystal conditions. Airplanes certified under
part 23 have not had ADs related to SLD or ice crystals. Certain part
23 turbojet engines have experienced thrust rollback due to ice
crystals blocking the heated inlet temperature probe. The FAA would
expect the means of compliance to address this in a similar manner to
what is accomplished on current certification projects. The engine ice
ingestion requirements of the current Sec. 23.903(a)(2) would be moved
to proposed Sec. 23.940(b).
x. Proposed Sec. 23.1000, Powerplant Fire Protection
Proposed Sec. 23.1000 would require that a powerplant only be
installed in a designated fire zone and would require an applicant to
install a fire detection system in each designated fire zone for
certification levels 3 and 4 airplanes. This rulemaking effort is
maintaining the current level of safety for fire protection. While not
a perfect one-to-one relationship, airplanes equivalent to
certification levels 1 and 2 airplanes are not required to have a fire
detection system today and therefore, should not be required to have
them in this proposed rule. This would increase the cost of
certification. Each fire detection system would be required to provide
a means to alert the flightcrew in the event of a detection of fire or
failure of the system and a means to check the fire detection system in
flight. Proposed Sec. 23.1000 would also require an applicant to
install a fire extinguishing system for certification levels 2, 3, and
4 airplanes with a powerplant located outside the pilot's view that
uses combustible fuel.
Additionally, proposed Sec. 23.1000 would require each component,
line, and fitting carrying flammable fluids, gases, or air subject to
fire conditions to be fire resistant, except components storing
concentrated flammable material would have to be fireproof or enclosed
by a fireproof shield. Proposed Sec. 23.1000 would also require an
applicant to provide a means to shut off fuel or flammable material for
each powerplant, while not restricting fuel to remaining units, and
prevent inadvertent operation. Proposed Sec. 23.1000 would capture the
safety intent of current Sec. Sec. 23.1181, Designated fire zones:
Regions included; 23.1182, Nacelle areas behind firewalls; 23.1183,
Lines, fittings, and components; 23.1189, Shutoff means; 23.1191,
Firewalls; 23.1192 Engine accessory compartment diaphragm; 23.1193,
Cowling and nacelle; 23.1195, Fire extinguishing systems; 23.1197, Fire
extinguishing agents; 23.1199, Extinguishing agent containers; 23.1201,
Fire extinguishing system materials; and 23.1203, Fire detector system.
Regulations for fuel may have become too detailed and prescriptive.
A more general set of requirements should capture the intent of these
many rules. More importantly, this new proposed rule would allow other
types of energy sources to power propulsion systems such as electrical
motors and future energy sources.
xi. Current Subpart E Regulations Relocated to Other Proposed Subparts
The requirements of current Sec. 23.903(b)(1) would be moved to
subpart C, Sec. 23.405, Structural durability, paragraph (d). Section
23.903(b)(1) requires design precautions for turbine engine
installations to be taken to minimize hazards to the airplane in the
event of an engine rotor failure or of a fire originating inside the
engine which burns through the engine case.
Additionally, the requirements of current Sec. 23.929 would be
moved to proposed Sec. 23.940(b) and would only apply to airplanes
certified for flight in icing. The means of compliance for Sec.
23.940(b) should address propeller ice
[[Page 13489]]
protection system design and analysis. However, the means of compliance
for climb performance for proposed Sec. 23.230 should address ice
accretion effects on propeller performance on airplanes certified for
flight in icing.
xii. Removal of Subpart E Current Regulations
The following current regulations are considered duplicative of
part 35 and would be removed from subpart E: Sec. 23.905(b)--
duplicative of Sec. 35.5, Propeller ratings and operation limitations;
Sec. 23.905(c)--duplicative of Sec. 35.22, Feathering propellers;
Sec. 23.905(d)--duplicative of Sec. Sec. 35.21, 35.23, 35.42 and
35.43; and Sec. 23.905(e)(g) and (h)--duplicative of Sec. 35.7,
Features and characteristics.
6. Subpart F--Equipment
a. General Discussion
The proposed changes to subpart F would consolidate the current
rules into new performance-based standards and allow for use of new
technologies once consensus standards are developed that could be used
as a means of compliance.The FAA believes the proposed part 23
requirements would maintain the current level of safety while staying
relevant for new future technologies. The prescriptive design solutions
in the current rules are often not relevant to new technology requiring
special conditions, exemptions, and ELOS findings. The rate of new
technology development and adoption has increased dramatically in the
last decade. As a result, airplane systems with new features and
capabilities are rapidly becoming available. The FAA believes that
removing the prescriptive design solutions, which are based on outdated
or existing technology, while focusing on the safety intent of the rule
and maintaining design solutions as a documented means of compliance
would enable the adoption of newer technologies.
The FAA also believes the current part 23 regulatory prescriptive
structure does not effectively address the safety continuum,
particularly the low performance end of the continuum. Recent part 23
amendments have increasingly focused on high-performance, complex
airplanes. These stricter requirements have also been applied to the
low-performance airplanes even though their risk in the safety
continuum is lower. This has created an unintended barrier to new
safety enhancing technology in low-performance airplanes.
b. Specific Discussion of Changes
i. Proposed Sec. 23.1300, Airplane Level Systems Requirements
Proposed Sec. 23.1300 would require equipment and systems that are
required for an airplane to operate safely, be designed and installed
to meet the level of safety applicable to the certification and
performance levels of the airplane, and to perform their intended
function throughout the operating and environmental limits specified by
an applicant. Proposed Sec. 23.1300 would mandate that
non[hyphen]required airplane equipment and systems, considered
separately and in relation to other systems, be designed and installed
so their operation or failure would not have an adverse effect on the
airplane or its occupants.
Proposed Sec. 23.1300 would capture the safety intent found in
portions of current Sec. Sec. 23.1301, Function and installation;
23.1303, Flight and navigation instruments; 23.1305, Powerplant
instruments; 23.1307, Miscellaneous equipment; 23.1309, Equipment,
systems, and installations; 23.1311, Electronic display instrument
systems; 23.1321, Arrangement and visibility; 23.1323, Airspeed
indicating system, 23.1325, Static pressure system; 23.1327, Magnetic
direction indicator; 23.1329, Automatic pilot system; 23.1335, Flight
director systems; 23.1337, Powerplant instruments installation;
23.1351, Electrical Systems and Equipment--General; 23.1353, Storage
battery design and installation; and 23.1361, Master switch
arrangement.
The current requirements can be traced back to CAR 3, specifically
CAR 3.651, 3.652, 3.655, 3.661, 3.662, 3.663, 3.665, 3.666, 3.667,
3.669, 3.670, 3.671, 3.672, 3.673, 3.674, 3.681, 3.682, 3.686, 3.687,
and 3.683. These requirements, including Sec. 23.1311, which does not
have a corresponding rule in CAR 3, were based on the technology and
design solutions available at the time of their adoption. Although
these requirements are appropriate for traditional systems found in
airplanes designed to these assumptions, they lack the flexibility to
adopt current and anticipated technologies and design capabilities. The
FAA wants to facilitate the use of systems in new airplanes that reduce
pilot workload and enhance safety. The FAA proposes the use of
performance-based language that maintains the level of safety achieved
with the current requirements for traditionally designed airplanes but
also allows for alternative system designs in the future.
Proposed Sec. 23.1300(a) would address equipment and systems
required to operate safely. Required equipment may be defined by other
parts such as part 91 or part 135, by other sections of this part such
as equipment necessary for flight into known icing, or other
requirements placed on the Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS) such as a
working autopilot for single pilot operations. The FAA proposes in
Sec. 23.1300(b) that non-required equipment may be installed because
it offers some benefit and its failure or use would not result in a
reduction in safety of the airplane or for its occupants from the base
aircraft if the system was not installed. This proposed section would
contain general requirements for the environmental qualifications of
installed equipment, and would require installed equipment to perform
its intended function over its defined environmental range. This would
mean that the equipment should have the same environmental
qualification as requested for the useful range of the airplane.
Proposed Sec. 23.1300(b) would not mandate that non-required
equipment and systems function properly during all airplane operations
once in service, provided all potential failure conditions do not
effect safe operation of the airplane. The equipment or system would
have to function in the manner expected by the manufacturer's operating
manual for the equipment or system. An applicant's statement of
intended function would have to be sufficiently specific and detailed
so that the FAA could evaluate whether the system was appropriate for
the intended function.
ii. Proposed Sec. 23.1305, Function and Installation
Proposed Sec. 23.1305 would require that each item of installed
equipment perform its intended function, be installed according to
limitations specified for that equipment, and the equipment be labeled,
if applicable, due to size, location, or lack of clarity as to its
intended function, as to its identification, function or operating
limitations, or any combination of these factors. Proposed Sec.
23.1305 would require a discernable means of providing system operating
parameters required to operate the airplane, including warnings,
cautions, and normal indications to the responsible crewmember.
Proposed Sec. 23.1305 would require information concerning an unsafe
system operating condition be provided in a clear and timely manner to
the crewmember responsible for taking corrective action.
[[Page 13490]]
Proposed Sec. 23.1305 would capture the safety intent found in
portions of the current Sec. Sec. 23.671, Control systems-General;
23.672, Stability augmentation and automatic and power-operated
systems; 23.673, Primary flight controls; 23.675, Stops; 23.679,
Control system locks; 23.685(d), Control system details; 23.691(c),
Artificial stall barrier system; 23.1361, Master switch arrangement;
and 23.1365(a) and (b), Electric cables and equipment; 23.1301,
Function and installation; 23.1303, Flight and navigation instruments;
23.1305, Powerplant instruments; 23.1309, Equipment, systems, and
installations; 23.1322, Warning, caution, and advisory lights; 23.1323,
Airspeed indicating system; 23.1326, Pitot heat indication systems;
23.1327, Magnetic direction indicator; 23.1329, Automatic pilot system;
23.1331, Instruments using a power source; 23.1335, Flight director
systems; 23.1337, Powerplant instruments installation; 23.1351,
Electrical Systems and Equipment--General; 23.1353, Storage battery
design and installation; 23.1365, Electric cables and equipment;
23.1367, Switches; 23.1416, Pneumatic de-icer boot system. The current
requirements can be traced to CAR 3, specifically, CAR 3.651, 3.652,
3.655, 3.663, 3.666, 3.667, 3.668, 3.669, 3.670, 3.671, 3.672, 3.673,
3.674, 3.675, 3.681, 3.682, 3.683, 3.686, 3.687, 3.693, 3.694, 3.696,
3.697, 3.700, 3.712, and 3.726. These requirements, including
Sec. Sec. 23.1322, 23.1326, and 23.1441, which did not have
corresponding rules in CAR 3, were based on the technology and design
solutions available at the time of their adoption. Although these
requirements are appropriate for traditional systems and designs found
in airplanes designed to these assumptions, they lack the flexibility
to adopt current and anticipated technologies and design capabilities.
The FAA wants to facilitate the use of systems in new airplanes that
reduce pilot workload and enhance safety. The FAA proposes the use of
performance-based language that maintains the safety requirements for
traditionally designed airplanes, but also allows for alternative
system designs.
The equipment or system would have to function in the manner
expected by the manufacturer's operating manual for the equipment or
system. An applicant's statement of intended function would have to be
sufficiently specific and detailed so that the FAA could evaluate
whether the system was appropriate for the intended function. The
equipment should function when installed as intended by the
manufacturer's instructions. The intent is for an applicant to define
proper functionality and to propose an acceptable means of compliance.
Proposed Sec. 23.1305(a) would require that equipment be installed
under prescribed limitations. Therefore, if an equipment manufacturer
specified any allowable installation requirements, the installer would
stay within the limitations or substantiate the new limits. The
proposed requirement that the equipment be labeled as to its
identification, function or operating limitations, or any combination
of these factors, if applicable, would apply to the manufacturer of the
equipment, not to the installer.
Proposed Sec. 23.1305 would require that information concerning an
unsafe system operating condition be provided to the flightcrew.
Microprocessing units that monitor parameters and warn of system
problems have already been incorporated in some airplanes and are used
by other industries, including the automobile and nuclear energy
fields. Pilots may not monitor gauges as they used to; instead, they
could rely on warnings and alerts. The FAA does not propose to allow
simple on-off failure lights to replace critical trend displays.
Warning systems would need to be sophisticated enough to read
transients and trends, when appropriate, and give useful warning to the
flightcrew.
iii. Proposed Sec. 23.1310, Flight, Navigation, and Powerplant
Instruments
Proposed Sec. 23.1310 would require installed systems to provide
the flightcrew member who sets or monitors flight parameters for the
flight, navigation, and powerplant information necessary to do so
during each phase of flight. Proposed Sec. 23.1310 would require this
information include parameters and trends, as needed for normal,
abnormal, and emergency operation, and limitations, unless an applicant
showed the limitation would not be exceeded in all intended operations.
Proposed Sec. 23.1310 would prohibit indication systems that integrate
the display of flight or powerplant parameters to operate the airplane
or are required by the operating rules of this chapter, from inhibiting
the primary display of flight or powerplant parameters needed by any
flightcrew member in any normal mode of operation. Proposed Sec.
23.1310 would require these indication systems be designed and
installed so information essential for continued safe flight and
landing would be available to the flightcrew in a timely manner after
any single failure or probable combination of failures.
Proposed Sec. 23.1310 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. Sec. 23.1303, Flight and navigation instruments; 23.1305,
Powerplant instruments; 23.1307, Miscellaneous equipment; 23.1311,
Electronic display instrument systems; 23.1321, Arrangement and
visibility; 23.1323, Airspeed indicating system; 23.1331, Instruments
using a power source; and 23.1337, Powerplant instruments installation.
The current requirements can be traced to CAR 3, specifically, CAR
3.655, 3.661, 3.662, 3.675, 3.663, 3.668, 3.670, 3.671, 3.672, 3.673,
and 3.674. These requirements, including Sec. 23.1311, which did not
have a corresponding rule in CAR 3, were based on the technology and
design solutions available at the time of their adoption. Although
these requirements are appropriate for traditional systems and designs
found in airplanes designed to these assumptions, they lack the
flexibility to adopt current and anticipated technologies and design
capabilities. Furthermore, the FAA proposes to remove prescriptive
requirements from the rule that historically provided standardization
for primary flight instruments and controls. The FAA still believes
this standardization is important for traditionally designed airplane
instrumentation. Accordingly, to reduce the potential for pilot error,
the reliance on standards accepted by the Administrator would maintain
standardization for traditional systems.
The proposed regulations would require applicants to use a means of
compliance based on consensus standards or other means accepted by the
Administrator. However, new technology is already being approved that
does not meet the traditional installation requirements and guidance.
At the same time, this technology is proving equivalent or better than
the traditional technology.\25\ Furthermore, the FAA believes that new
systems, displays, and controls have the potential to reduce pilot
workload with a direct safety benefit. By removing prescriptive
requirements for the rules and allowing alternatives, the industry
would be able to develop and certify safety-enhancing technology
faster.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ See Accident and GA Safety reports from NTSB, AOPA Safety
Foundation, and the General Aviation Joint Steering Committee (GA-
JSC) over the past 10 years.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Sec. 23.1310 would not require limitations that could not
be exceeded due to system design or physical properties to be shown
because they would be useless information and result in clutter of the
displays. Additionally, the FAA proposes removing the
[[Page 13491]]
prescriptive design requirement in current Sec. 23.1311 for the
installation of secondary indicators. The safety intent is that a
single failure or likely multiple failures would not result in the lack
of all critical flight data. The design and installation of flight
critical information should be such that the pilot could still fly
partial panel after probable failures. The prescriptive redundancy
requirements for installed secondary indicators have been too
restrictive for airplanes limited to VFR operations. This has caused
several applicants to request an ELOS finding from current Sec.
23.1311(a)(5).
The safety intent of Sec. 23.1311 is to provide crewmembers the
ability to obtain the information necessary to operate the airplane
safely in flight. Traditionally, the minimum was prescribed as
airspeed, altimeter, and magnetic direction. The corresponding CAR 3
rule is 3.655. The regulation is redundant with the operating rules,
specifically, Sec. Sec. 91.205 and 135.149, as well as providing
prescriptive design solutions that were assumed to achieve an
acceptable level of safety. The prescriptive solutions precluded
finding more effective or more economical paths to providing acceptable
safety. Proposed Sec. 23.1310 would maintain the safety intent of the
current rule.
The FAA proposes consolidating the safety intent of current Sec.
23.1305, Powerplant instruments, into proposed Sec. 23.1310, Flight,
Navigation, and Powerplant Instruments. The safety intent of Sec.
23.1305 is to provide crewmembers the ability to obtain the information
necessary to operate the airplane and powerplant safely in flight.
Traditionally, the minimum was prescribed, such as oil pressure, oil
temperature, and oil quantity for all airplanes. The corresponding
rules in CAR 3 are 3.655 and 3.675. Some of the regulation was
redundant with the operating rules as well as providing prescriptive
design solutions that were assumed to achieve an acceptable level of
safety based on an assumption of powerplant types. The prescriptive
solutions precluded finding more effective or more economical paths to
providing acceptable safety. Additionally, they do not facilitate
adoption of new technologies such as electric powered airplanes. The
proposed Sec. 23.1310, Flight, Navigation, and Powerplant Instruments,
would maintain the safety intent of the current rule.
iv. Proposed Sec. 23.1315, Equipment, Systems, and Installation
Proposed Sec. 23.1315 would require an applicant to examine the
design and installation of airplane systems and equipment, separately
and in relation to other airplane systems and equipment, for any
airplane system or equipment whose failure or abnormal operation has
not been specifically addressed by another requirement in this part.
Proposed Sec. 23.1315 would require an applicant to determine if a
failure of these systems and equipment would prevent continued safe
flight and landing and if any other failure would significantly reduce
the capability of the airplane or the ability of the flightcrew to cope
with adverse operating conditions. Proposed Sec. 23.1315 would require
an applicant to design and install these systems and equipment,
examined separately and in relation to other airplane systems and
equipment, such that each catastrophic failure condition is extremely
improbable, each hazardous failure condition is extremely remote, and
each major failure condition was remote. Proposed Sec. 23.1315 would
capture the safety intent found in portions of current Sec. Sec.
23.691(g), Artificial stall barrier system; 23.729(f), Landing gear
extension and retraction system; 23.735(d), Brakes; 23.1309, Equipment,
systems, and installations; 23.1323, Airspeed indicating system;
23.1325, Static pressure system; 23.1329, Automatic pilot system;
23.1331, Instruments using a power source; 23.1337, Powerplant
instruments installation; 23.1335, Flight director systems; 23.1353,
Storage battery design and installation, 23.1357, Circuit protective
devices; 23.1431, Electronic equipment; 23.1441(b), Oxygen equipment
and supply; 23.1450(b), Chemical oxygen generators; 23.1451, Fire
protection for oxygen equipment; and 23.1453, Protection of oxygen
equipment from rupture. The current requirements can be traced to CAR
3, specifically, 3.652, 3.663, 3.665, 3.667, 3.668, 3.670, 3.671,
3.672, 3.673, 3.674, and 3.683. The foundation of the current Sec.
23.1309 was derived from CAR 3.652, which stated that ``each item of
equipment, which is essential to the safe operation of the airplane,
shall be found by the Administrator to perform adequately the functions
for which it is to be used . . .''. At that time, the airworthiness
requirements were based on single-fault or fail-safe concepts. Due to
the increased use of airplanes certificated under part 23 in the 1970s
for all-weather operation, and a pilot's increased reliance on
installed avionic systems and equipment, Sec. 23.1309, amendment 23-14
(38 FR 31816, November 19, 1973), was issued to provide an acceptable
level of safety for such equipment, systems, and installations. Section
23.1309 introduced two main concepts: multiple failure combinations as
well as a single failure had to be considered and there must be an
inverse relationship between the likelihood of occurrence and the
severity of consequences. The premise was that more severe consequences
should happen less often.
In addition to specific part 23 design requirements, proposed Sec.
23.1315 requirements would apply to any equipment or system installed
in the airplane. This proposed section addresses general requirements
and is not intended to supersede any specific requirements contained in
other part 23 sections. Proposed Sec. 23.1315 would not apply to the
performance or flight characteristics requirements of subpart B, and
structural loads and strength requirements of subpart C and D. However,
it would apply to systems that complied with subpart B, C, D, and E
requirements. As an example, proposed Sec. 23.1315 would not apply to
an airplane's inherent stall characteristics, but would apply to a
stick pusher system installed to attain stall compliance. Both current
Sec. 23.1309 and proposed Sec. 23.1315 rules are not intended to add
requirements to specific rules in part 23, but to account for the added
complexity of integration and new technologies.
This proposed regulation would require an engineering safety
analysis to identify possible failures, interactions, and consequences,
and would require an inverse relationship between the probability of
failures and the severity of consequences. This would be accomplished
by requiring all of the airplane's systems to be reviewed to determine
if the airplane was dependent upon a system function for continued safe
flight and landing and if a failure of any system on the airplane would
significantly reduce the ability of the flightcrew to cope with the
adverse operating condition. If the design of the airplane included
systems that performed such functions, the systems would be required to
meet standards that establish that maximum allowable probability of
that failure. Section 23.1315 would impose qualitative, rather than
quantitative probabilities of occurrence. As the FAA determined which
quantitative values satisfied the proposed performance standards, it
would share that information in FAA guidance or documented means of
compliance appropriate to the certification levels of proposed Sec.
23.5.
[[Page 13492]]
v. Proposed Sec. 23.1320, Electrical and Electronic System Lightning
Protection
Proposed Sec. 23.1320 would require, for an airplane approved for
IFR operations, that each electrical or electronic system that
performed a function, the failure of which would prevent the continued
safe flight and landing of the airplane, be designed and installed such
that the airplane level function continues to perform during and after
the time the airplane is exposed to lightning. Proposed Sec. 23.1320
would also require these systems automatically recover normal operation
of that function in a timely manner after the airplane is exposed to
lightning, unless the system's recovery conflicts with other
operational or functional requirements of the system.
Proposed Sec. 23.1320 would require each electrical and electronic
system that performed a function, the failure of which would reduce the
capability of the airplane or the ability of the flightcrew to respond
to an adverse operating condition, be designed and installed such that
the function recovers normal operation in a timely manner after the
airplane is exposed to lightning.
Proposed Sec. 23.1320 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. 23.1306, Electrical and electronic system lightning protection.
The original adoption of the rule, first introduced as part of Sec.
23.1309, was justified because there was an increased use of small
airplanes in all-weather operations with an increasing reliance on
complex systems and equipment in the modern, complex, high-performance
airplanes.
The FAA wants to facilitate the use of systems in new airplanes
that reduce pilot workload and enhance safety. The current requirement
that all aircraft regardless of their design or operational limitations
meet the same requirements for lightning regardless of the potential
threat has been burdensome for the traditional VFR-only airplane
designs. Proposed Sec. 23.1320 would cover the airplanes with the
greatest threat of lightning. In addition, the proposed language
clarifies that the failure consequence of interest is at the airplane
system level, which allows credit for design and installation
architecture.
vi. Proposed Sec. 23.1325, High-Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF)
Protection
Proposed Sec. 23.1325 would require that electrical and electronic
systems that perform a function whose failure would prevent the
continued safe flight and landing of the airplane, be designed and
installed such that the airplane level function is not adversely
affected during and after the time the airplane is exposed to the HIRF
environment. Proposed Sec. 23.1325 would also require that these
systems automatically recover normal operation of that function in a
timely manner after the airplane is exposed to the HIRF environment,
unless the system's recovery conflicts with other operational or
functional requirements of the system. Proposed Sec. 23.1325, High-
Intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF) protection, would incorporate the
safety intent of current Sec. 23.1308, High-intensity Radiated Fields
(HIRF) protection.
Before Sec. 23.1308, amendment 23-57 (72 FR 44016, August 6,
2007), the requirements for HIRF protection were found in Sec.
23.1309. The adoption of Sec. 23.1308 was justified because there was
an increased use of complex systems and equipment, including engine and
flight controls, in small airplanes. These systems are more susceptible
to the adverse effects of operation in the HIRF environment.
The electromagnetic HIRF environment results from the transmission
of electromagnetic energy from radar, radio, television, and other
ground-based, ship-borne, or airborne radio frequency transmitters. The
HIRF environment changes as the number and types of transmitters
change. During the 1990's, extensive studies were conducted to define
the environment that then existed. The FAA codified this environment in
amendment 23-57 in appendix J to part 23--HIRF Environments and
Equipment HIRF Test Levels.
Proposed Sec. 23.1325 would require the applicant to address the
HIRF environment expected in service instead of solely relying on the
HIRF environment codified in appendix J. The current appendix J to part
23 would become a means of compliance as the accepted expected HIRF
environment, until other levels were accepted by the Administrator.
This would allow the test levels to match the current threat as the
environment changes over time. Additionally, the proposed language
would clarify that the failure consequence of interest is at the
airplane level, which allows credit for design and installation
architecture.
vii. Proposed Sec. 23.1330, System Power Generation, Storage, and
Distribution
Proposed Sec. 23.1330(a) would require that the power generation,
storage, and distribution for any system be designed and installed to
supply the power required for operation of connected loads during all
likely operating conditions. Also, proposed Sec. 23.1330(b) would
require the design installation ensure no single failure or malfunction
would prevent the system from supplying the essential loads required
for continued safe flight and landing. Proposed Sec. 23.1330 would
also require the design and installation have enough capacity to supply
essential loads, should the primary power source fail, for at least 30
minutes for airplanes certificated with a maximum altitude of 25,000
feet or less, and at least 60 minutes for airplanes certificated with a
maximum altitude over 25,000 feet.
Proposed Sec. 23.1330 would capture the safety intent of the
current Sec. Sec. 23.1310, Power source capacity and distribution;
23.1351, General; 23.1353, Storage battery design and installation; and
23.1357, Circuit protective devices. The intent is to ensure airplane
power generation and the related distribution systems are designed for
adequate capacity and safe operation under anticipated use and in the
event of a failure or malfunction.
viii. Proposed Sec. 23.1335, External and Cockpit Lighting
Proposed Sec. 23.1335 would require an applicant to design and
install all lights to prevent adverse effects on the performance of
flightcrew duties. Proposed Sec. 23.1335 would require position and
anti-collision lights, if installed, to have the intensities, flash
rate, colors, fields of coverage, and other characteristics to provide
sufficient time for another aircraft to avoid a collision. Proposed
Sec. 23.1335 would require position lights, if installed, to include a
red light on the left side of the airplane, a green light on the right
side of the airplane, spaced laterally as far apart as practicable, and
a white light facing aft, located on an aft portion of the airplane or
on the wing tips.
Proposed Sec. 23.1335 would require that an applicant design and
install any taxi and landing lights, if required by operational rules,
so they provide sufficient light for night operations. For seaplanes or
amphibian airplanes, this section would also require riding lights to
provide a white light visible in clear atmospheric conditions.
Airplanes moored or maneuvering on water are by mairtime law considered
watercraft; therefore, riding lights are required for seaplanes and
amphibians during water operations.
To encourage the installation of internal and external lighting
systems with new safety enhancing technology and streamline the
certification process, the FAA proposes removing most of the current
prescriptive requirements and the detailed means of compliance for
these requirements from current part 23.
[[Page 13493]]
The current prescriptive requirements would be replaced with
performance-based requirements. The FAA expects that current means of
compliance would continue to be used for the traditional airplane
designs under part 23.
Required lighting for the operation requested by an applicant would
have to be installed and approved as part of the type design. The
current rule requires that interior and exterior lighting function as
intended without causing any safety hazard in normal operation. The
proposed rule would require external lighting to make each airplane
visible at night at a distance allowing each pilot to maneuver in
sufficient time to avoid collision. The current rule specifies a
specific amount of light illumination accounting for airframe
obstructions. The FAA proposes removing this specified location and
amount of illumination because it is more appropriate as means of
compliance. The FAA does not consider small obstructions caused by
airplane structure to be a safety issue.
This section would capture the safety intent of current Sec. Sec.
23.1381, Instrument lights, paragraph (c); 23.1383, Taxi and landing
lights, paragraphs (a), (b) and (c); 23.1385, Position light system
installation, paragraphs (a), (b) and (c); 23.1387, Position light
dihedral angles; 23.1389, position light distribution and intensities;
23.1391, Minimum intensities in the horizontal plane of position
lights; 23.1393, Minimum intensities in any vertical plane of position
lights; 23.1395, Maximum intensities in overlapping beams of position
lights; 23.1397, color specifications; 23.1399, Riding light; and
23.1401, Anticollision light system, paragraphs (a), (a)(1), (b), (c),
(d), (e), and (f).
ix. Proposed Sec. 23.1400, Safety Equipment
Proposed Sec. 23.1400 would require safety and survival equipment,
required by the operating rules of this chapter, to be reliable,
readily accessible, easily identifiable, and clearly marked to identify
its method of operation.
The FAA proposes requirements for safety equipment needed for
emergency landings and ditching when required by operational rules, and
removal of the duplicative rules that are found in current part 23.
Required safety equipment would have to be installed, located, and
accessible for use in an emergency, and secured against emergency
landing accelerations. The proposed rule would require safety,
ditching, and survival equipment, be reachable, plainly marked for
operation, and not be damaged in survivable emergency landings.
This section would capture the safety intent of current Sec. Sec.
23.1411, Safety equipment--General, paragraphs (a) and (b)(1); and
23.1415; Ditching equipment, paragraphs (a), (c), and (d).
x. Proposed Sec. 23.1405, Flight in Icing Conditions
Proposed Sec. 23.1405 would require an applicant to demonstrate
its ice protection system would provide for safe operation, if
certification for flight in icing conditions is requested. Proposed
Sec. 23.1405 would also require these airplanes to be protected from
stalling when the autopilot is operating in a vertical mode. Proposed
Sec. 23.1405 would require this demonstration be conducted in
atmospheric icing conditions specified in part 1 of appendix C to part
25 of this chapter, and any additional icing conditions for which
certification is requested.
Proposed Sec. 23.1405 would capture the safety intent of current
Sec. 23.775(a) Windshields and windows, and Sec. 23.1419, Ice
protection. Proposed Sec. 23.1405 would also increase safety by adding
icing conditions beyond those specified in the current Sec. 23.1419.
The proposed Sec. 23.1405 would only apply to airplanes seeking
certification for flight in icing. The current Sec. 23.1419 only
applies to airplanes seeking certification for flight in icing;
however, ice protection systems can be certified without certification
for flight in icing.
The current ice protection system requirements in Sec. 23.1419(a)
would be captured in proposed Sec. 23.1405(a)(1). The proposed rule
would require an applicant to show systems are adequate in the icing
conditions for which certification is requested. As in the current
rule, ice protection systems would have to be shown to be adequate in
the icing conditions of appendix C to part 25. Freezing drizzle and
freezing rain icing conditions are optional icing conditions in which
the airplane may be certificated to operate. These icing conditions,
which the FAA added to appendix O to part 25 in amendment 25-140, are
not being defined in proposed Sec. 23.230. The FAA determined that the
definition of these optional icing conditions is more appropriate as a
means of compliance. Ice crystal conditions are added to this proposal
for certain air data probes to harmonize with EASA requirements.
The Part 23 Icing ARC recommendations on activation and operation
of ice protection systems would be used as a means of compliance to
proposed Sec. 23.1405(a)(1). This proposal would satisfy the intent of
NTSB Safety Recommendations A-07-14 and A-07-15.
Proposed Sec. 23.1405(a)(2) is the Part 23 Icing ARC
recommendation for airplanes certified under part 23 in icing and is
based on NTSB safety recommendation A-10-12. The target for this
proposed rule is older airplanes adding an autopilot for first time,
modifying certain autopilots on airplanes with a negative service
history in icing, or significant changes that affect performance or
flight characteristics. Proposed Sec. 23.1405 would require, under the
changed product rule, to add proposed Sec. 23.1405(a)(2) to the
certification basis without requiring the remainder of Sec. 23.1405
for certain autopilot modifications. For new airplanes, a stall warning
system that complies with proposed Sec. 23.230 would comply with
proposed Sec. 23.1405(a)(2). The vertical mode is a prescriptive
requirement to limit the applicability. Simple autopilots such as a
wing leveler would not be affected by this requirement. Numerous icing
accidents have shown that unrecognized airspeed loss can occur with
autopilots in altitude hold mode or vertical speed mode. Demonstration,
as a means of compliance, may include design and/or analysis and does
not mean natural icing flight tests are required.
xi. Proposed Sec. 23.1410, Pressurized System Elements
Proposed Sec. 23.1410 would require the minimum burst pressure
of--
Hydraulic systems be at least 2.5 times the design
operating pressure with the proof pressure at least 1.5 times the
maximum operating pressure;
Pressurization system elements be at least 2.0 times, and
proof pressure be at least 1.5 times, the maximum normal operating
pressure; and
Pneumatic system elements be at least 3.0 times, and proof
pressure be at least 1.5 times, the maximum normal operating pressure.
Additionally, this proposed section would also require that other
pressurized system elements have pressure margins that take into
account system design and operating conditions.
This section would capture the safety intent of current Sec. Sec.
23.1435, Hydraulic system, paragraphs (a)(4) and (b); 23.1437,
Accessories for multiengine airplanes; and 23.1438, Pressurization and
pneumatic systems, paragraphs (a) and (b).
xii. Proposed Sec. 23.1457, Cockpit Voice Recorders
The FAA is not proposing to revise current Sec. 23.1457 because
amendment
[[Page 13494]]
23-58 (73 FR 12542, March 7, 2008) and corrected on July 9, 2009 (74 FR
32799), was written to standardize the cockpit voice recorder rules to
address the NTSB's recommendations (70 FR 9752, February 28, 2005). The
FAA agrees with NTSB recommendation numbers A-96-89, A-96-171, A-99-18,
and parts of A-99-16 and A-99-17 and believes changing the current rule
to remove prescriptive requirements could hinder the conduct of future
accident investigations and be detrimental to aviation accident
investigations.
xiii. Proposed Sec. 23.1459, Flight Data Recorders
The FAA is not making any substantive changes to the current Sec.
23.1459 because amendment 23-58 (73 FR 12541, March 7, 2008) was
written to standardize the flight data recorder rules to address the
NTSB's recommendations. The FAA agrees with NTSB recommendation numbers
A-96-89, A-96-171, A-99-18, and parts of numbers A-99-16 and A-99-17
and believes changing the current rule to remove prescriptive
requirements could hinder the conduct of future accident investigations
and be detrimental to aviation safety. Proposed Sec. 23.1459(a)(1),
however, is amended to revise current references to Sec. Sec. 23.1323,
Airspeed indicating system; 23.1325, Static pressure system; and
23.1327, Magnetic direction indicator, as those sections are not
contained in this NPRM.
xiv. Current Subpart F Regulations Relocated to Other Proposed Subparts
The requirement currently in Sec. 23.1419(a) to comply with
subpart B requirements to show safe operating capability is moved to
proposed Sec. 23.230 as recommended by the Part 23 Icing ARC and Part
23 Reorganization ARC.
Ice protection of engine inlets would move to proposed Sec.
23.940, Powerplant ice protection. The Part 23 Reorganization ARC had
proposed that Sec. 23.1405 include these requirements, as well as
heated pitot probe requirements for IFR airplanes. The FAA decided to
separate them since compliance with proposed Sec. Sec. 23.940 and
23.1300 would be required for all airplanes, whereas compliance with
Sec. 23.1405 would be optional. The FAA wants to avoid potential
confusion on TCDS interpretation as to whether an airplane is certified
for flight in icing.
The requirements currently in Sec. 23.1381, Instrument lights,
paragraphs (a) and (b) would be relocated to proposed Sec. 23.1500,
Flightcrew Interface. The requirements currently in Sec. 23.1411,
Safety equipment--General, paragraph (b)(2) would be relocated to
proposed Sec. 23.600, Emergency conditions.
xv. Removal of Subpart F of the Current Regulations
When the FAA evaluated the current regulations, it determined that
the prescriptive icing requirements in Sec. Sec. 23.1323, Airspeed
indicating system, and 23.1325, Static pressure system, would be means
of compliance to proposed Sec. 23.1405(a)(1). The current requirement
for a heated pitot probe or an equivalent means on an IFR certified and
a flight in icing conditions airplane in current Sec. 23.1323(d) would
become a means of compliance for proposed Sec. 23.1300.
The part 23 re-write ARC had recommended that proposed Sec.
23.1405 include the requirement for a heated pitot probe on an IFR
certified airplane, but the FAA determined this would be better
addressed on a performance standard under proposed Sec. 23.1300,
because proposed Sec. 23.1405 would only apply to icing certified
airplanes. High altitude mixed phase and ice crystal conditions for
certain high-performance airplanes, and ice protection requirements for
stall warning and angle of attack would be means of compliance. The
proposed standard would harmonize with EASA requirements.
Current Sec. 23.1416 would be removed since the requirements for
proper inflation and annunciation of operation of pneumatic boots would
be covered on a performance basis in proposed Sec. Sec. 23.1300 and
23.1305. This would reflect that all types of ice protection systems
have annunciation requirements, and would eliminate unnecessary
annunciations. The Part 23 Icing ARC recommended this approach.
The analysis required in the current Sec. 23.1419(a), and all the
requirements in the current Sec. 23.1419(b) and (c), would become
means of compliance to proposed 1405(a) and would be removed.
Current Sec. 23.1419(d) requires a means to detect critical ice
accretions, including night lighting. The Part 23 Icing ARC had
proposed a new Sec. 23.1403 to replace these ice detection
requirements, which would also address the SLD detection required by
proposed Sec. 23.230. These ice detection requirements are more
appropriately addressed as a means of compliance to accommodate new
technology. For example, visual ice accretion detection as a means to
activate ice protection systems is no longer necessary on some designs,
examples being primary ice detection systems and icing conditions
detection systems. However, there would remain a requirement for pilots
to detect severe ice accretions, and this would be addressed in
proposed Sec. 23.230(b).
When the FAA evaluated the current regulations, it determined that
the prescriptive requirements in Sec. Sec. 23.1323, Airspeed
indicating system; 23.1325, Static pressure system; 23.1327, Magnetic
direction indicator; 23.1329, Automatic pilot system; 23.1335, Flight
director systems; 23.1337, Powerplant instruments installation;
23.1353, Storage battery design and installation; and 23.1357, Circuit
protective devices, would be covered on a performance basis by proposed
Sec. Sec. 23.1300; 23.1305; 23.1310; and 23.1315.
Current Sec. 23.1401, Anticollision light system, paragraph (a)(2)
would be removed as introductory material. Current Sec. 23.1415,
ditching equipment, paragraph (b) would be removed but could serve as a
means of compliance. The current Sec. Sec. 23.1435, Hydraulic systems,
paragraphs, (a), (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(3), and (c); 23.1438,
Pressurization and pneumatic systems, paragraph (c), would be removed
as prescriptive design and means of compliance. Current Sec. 23.1443,
Minimum mass flow of supplemental oxygen, paragraph (d) would be
removed as a definition. Current Sec. 23.1445, paragraph (e) would be
removed as redundant to current Sec. 91.211, paragraph (a)(3).
7. Subpart G--Flightcrew Interface and Other Information
a. General Discussion
The FAA proposes to expand subpart G to address not only current
operating limitations and information, but also the concept of
flightcrew interface. Based on current technologies, the FAA
anticipates that new airplanes will heavily rely on automation and
systems that require new and novel pilot or flightcrew interface. The
FAA is proposing to address the pilot interface issues found in
subparts D and F with proposed Sec. 23.1500. Otherwise, subpart G
retains the safety requirements from the current rules without change.
Refer to appendix 1 of this preamble for a cross-reference table
detailing how the current regulations are addressed in the proposed
part 23 regulations.
b. Specific Discussion of Changes
i. Proposed Sec. 23.1500, Flightcrew Interface
Proposed Sec. 23.1500 would require the pilot compartment and its
equipment to allow the pilot(s) to perform their duties, including
taxi, takeoff, climb,
[[Page 13495]]
cruise, descent, approach, and landing; and perform any maneuvers
within the operating envelope of the airplane, without excessive
concentration, skill, alertness, or fatigue. Proposed Sec. 23.1500
would also require an applicant to install flight, navigation,
surveillance, and powerplant controls and displays so qualified
flightcrew could monitor and perform all tasks associated with the
intended functions of systems and equipment in order to make the
possibility that a flightcrew error could result in a catastrophic
event highly unlikely. Proposed Sec. 23.1500 would capture the safety
intent of current part 23 rules that are directly related to the pilot
or flightcrew interface with the airplane. Interfaces include controls,
displays, and visibility requirements.
Current and anticipated technologies that affect how the pilot
interfaces with the airplane are expected to expand faster than other
technologies. The FAA believes that significant safety improvements can
result from the evolution of how the pilot interfaces with the
airplane. Pilot workload is a major factor in causing accidents, but it
is almost impossible to connect workload-related mistakes to an
accident after the accident has happened. Evidence from large airplane
accidents, where we have recorded data as well as research, points to
the importance of the pilot interface and associated mistakes as causal
factors in aircraft accidents. The smart use of automation and phase-
of-flight-based displays could reduce pilot workload and increase pilot
awareness.
The converse is also true. Equipment is becoming available faster
than manufacturers and the FAA can evaluate it. Determining the safety
risks and recognizing the safety benefits of new technology available
to the pilot is important. For this reason, the proposed language
addresses the safety issues of the current Sec. Sec. 23.699, Wing flap
position indicator; 23.745 Nose/Tail wheel steering, 23.1303, Flight
and navigation instruments, paragraph (g)(3); 23.1321, Arrangement and
visibility, paragraphs (a),(b),(d), and (e); 23.1311, Electronic
display instrument systems, paragraphs (a)(6) and (7); 23.771, Pilot
compartment, paragraph (a), 23.773(a) Pilot compartment view, 23.777,
Cockpit controls; 23.779, Motion and effect of cockpit controls; and
23.781, Cockpit control knob shape; are addressed in proposed Sec.
23.1500(a) and (b). The proposed language would allow the FAA to
rapidly evaluate new equipment for concentration, skill, alertness, and
fatigue against pilot workload as is current practice. More
importantly, the FAA would remove the prescriptive requirements from
the current rules to allow for alternative approaches to pilot
interface that would reduce pilot workload or increase safety.
ii. Proposed Sec. 23.1505, Instrument Markings, Control Markings, and
Placards
Proposed Sec. 23.1505 would require each airplane to display in a
conspicuous manner any placard and instrument marking necessary for
operation. Proposed Sec. 23.1505 would also require an applicant to
clearly mark each cockpit control, other than primary flight controls,
as to its function and method of operation and include instrument
marking and placard information in the AFM. The consolidation of these
sections appears large, but many of these sections contain one
prescriptive requirement that, in many cases, is based on traditional
airplanes, instruments, and equipment.
iii. Proposed Sec. 23.1510, Airplane Flight Manual
Proposed Sec. 23.1510 would require an applicant to furnish an AFM
with each airplane that contains the operating limitations and
procedures, performance information, loading information, and any other
information necessary for the operation of the airplane.
The proposed rules capture the prescriptive list of information
that is considered necessary for the operation of the traditional
airplanes. The current rules contain very prescriptive and detailed
information. Furthermore, that level of detail assumes a traditional
airplane configuration and operation. The FAA proposes to remove this
detail from the rule because it is more appropriate as means of
compliance. Currently, the majority of airplanes certificated under
part 23 already use an industry standard to develop their AFMs--General
Aviation Manufactures Association Specification 1, Specification for
Pilot's Operating Handbook.\26\ The FAA already accepts this industry
standard for many airplanes certificated under part 23 because it
includes the information that is currently required in part 23. The FAA
believes that allowing alternative approaches to information would
facilitate new technology integration into airplanes certified under
part 23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ See www.regulations.gov (Docket #FAA-2015-1621).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed Sec. 23.1510(d) would capture the safety intent of
the current Sec. Sec. 23.1505, Airspeed limitations, thru 23.1527,
Maximum operating altitude, specific to operating limitations and other
limitations and information necessary for safe operation.
iv. Proposed Sec. 23.1515, Instructions for Continued Airworthiness
Proposed Sec. 23.1515 would require an applicant to prepare
Instructions for Continued Airworthiness in accordance with proposed
appendix A to this part, that are acceptable to the Administrator,
prior to the delivery of the first airplane or issuance of a standard
certification of airworthiness, whichever occurs later. This proposed
section would capture the current Sec. 23.1529 without change. The FAA
proposes renaming Appendix G to Part 23--Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness, to Appendix A to Part 23--Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness.
8. Appendices to Part 23
a. General Discussion
Many of the appendices to part 23 contain information that the FAA
believes would be more appropriate as a means of compliance, with the
exception of Appendix G to Part 23-Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness. Appendices A, B, C, D, E, F, H, and J would be removed
and appendix G would be renamed Appendix A--Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness.
b. Specific Discussion of Changes
i. Proposed Appendix A to Part 23--Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness
The FAA proposes renaming Appendix G to Part 23--Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness, as Appendix A to Part 23--Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness.
ii. Removal of Appendices to Part 23
Appendix A to Part 23--Simplified Design Load Criteria. The FAA
proposes to remove this appendix because the content is more
appropriate for inclusion in methods of compliance.
Appendix B to Part 23--[Reserved]. The FAA proposes to remove this
appendix because it has been reserved since amendment 23-42. There is
no reason to include this appendix in the proposed revision to part 23.
Appendix C to Part 23--Basic Landing Conditions. The FAA proposes
to remove this appendix because the content is more appropriate for
inclusion in methods of compliance.
Appendix D to Part 23--Wheel Spin-Up and Spring-Back Loads. The FAA
proposes to remove this appendix because the content is more
appropriate for inclusion in methods of compliance.
Appendix E to Part 23--[Reserved]. The FAA proposes to remove this
[[Page 13496]]
appendix because the current appendix is reserved and contains no
information.
Appendix F to Part 23--Test Procedure. The FAA proposes to remove
this appendix because this is purely a means of showing compliance for
materials that must comply with self-extinguishing flammability
requirements.
Appendix H to Part 23--Installation of an Automatic Power Reserve
(APR) System. The FAA proposes to remove this appendix because the FAA
believes that the detailed and prescriptive language of appendix H is
more appropriate as means of compliance.
Appendix I to Part 23--Seaplane Loads. The FAA proposes to remove
this appendix because the content is more appropriate for inclusion in
methods of compliance.
Appendix J to Part 23--HIRF Environments and Equipment HIRF Test
Levels. The accepted HIRF environment is codified as appendix J to part
23--HIRF Environments and Equipment HIRF Test Levels. The proposed
language in Sec. 23.1325 would revise this to the expected HIRF
environment. The current appendix J to part 23 would remain an accepted
expected HIRF environment until the Administrator accepted other
levels. Any new expected HIRF environment would be found in FAA
guidance material or other standards accepted by the Administrator.
This would allow the certification requirement to match the current
threat agreed to over time. Additionally, the proposed language would
clarify that the failure consequence of interest is at the airplane
level, which allows credit for design and installation architecture.
B. Miscellaneous Amendments (Sec. Sec. 21.9, 21.17, 21.24, 21.35,
21.50, 21.101, 35.1, 35.37, 91.205, 91.313, 91.323, 91.531, 121.310,
135.169, and Appendix E to Part 43)
1. Production of Replacement and Modification Articles (Sec. 21.9)
The FAA proposes amending Sec. 21.9 by adding paragraph (a)(7) to
provide applicants with an alternative method to obtain FAA approval to
produce replacement and modification articles that are reasonably
likely to be installed on type certificated aircraft. We also propose
to revise paragraphs (b) and (c) to specify these articles would be
suitable for use in a type certificated product. These proposed changes
would allow an applicant to submit production information for a
specific article, but would not require the producer of the article to
apply for approval of the article's design or obtain approval of its
quality system. Accordingly, approval to produce a modification or
replacement article under proposed Sec. 21.9(a)(7) would not
constitute a production approval as defined in Sec. 21.1(b)(6). The
FAA intends to limit use of this procedure to articles whose improper
operation or failure would not cause a hazard. Approval would be
granted to the applicant on a case-by-case basis, specific to the
installation proposed, accounting for potential risk and considering
the safety continuum.
2. Designation of Applicable Regulations (Sec. 21.17)
The FAA proposes amending Sec. 21.17, by removing the reference to
Sec. 23.2, because this section would be deleted. The requirements in
Sec. 23.2 are currently addressed in the operational rules. Since
Sec. 23.2 is a retroactive rule, it is appropriate for the requirement
to be in the operating rules. As a result, the FAA also proposes
amending Sec. 91.205 by revising paragraphs (b)(13) and (b)(14) to
ensure removing this requirement would not have any effect on the
existing fleet.
3. Issuance of Type Certificate: Primary Category Aircraft (Sec.
21.24)
The FAA proposes amending Sec. 21.24 by revising paragraph
(a)(1)(i) to modify the phrase as defined by Sec. 23.49 to include
reference to amendment 23-62 (76 FR 75736, December 2,2011), effective
on January 31, 2012. This revision is necessary to maintain a complete
definition of stall speed in this section, as the current Sec. 23.49
would be removed from the proposed rule.
4. Flight Tests (Sec. 21.35)
The FAA proposes amending Sec. 21.35 by revising paragraph (b)(2)
to delete the reference to reciprocating engines and expanding the
exempted airplanes to include all low-speed part 23 airplanes 6,000
pounds or less. This proposed change would align the requirements for
function and reliability testing with the proposed changes in part 23
that do not distinguish between propulsion types. This change would
allow the FAA flexibility to address new propulsion types based on the
changes to part 23.
5. Instructions for Continued Airworthiness and Manufacturer's
Maintenance Manuals Having Airworthiness Limitations Sections (Sec.
21.50)
The FAA proposes amending Sec. 21.50(b) to reference Sec. 23.1515
rather than Sec. 23.1529. This change is editorial and would align
with the proposed part 23 numbering convention.
6. Designation of Applicable Regulations (Sec. 21.101)
The FAA proposes amending Sec. 21.101 by removing the reference to
Sec. 23.2 as this section is proposed to be deleted and is addressed
in the operating rules, and to refer to the proposed part 23
certification levels in paragraph (c). The current 6,000-pound
reference would be augmented by the inclusion of simple airplanes,
certification level 1 low-speed airplanes, and certification level 2
low-speed airplanes, in order to align the current rules with the
proposed part 23 certification levels.
Additionally, the FAA recognizes that it may be impractical for
airplanes certified under part 23, amendment 23-62, or prior
amendments, to move up to the latest amendment for modifications.
Section 21.101 would not be revised to address this circumstance, as
this section allows for certification at a lower amendment level if
meeting the current amendment is impractical. This current provision
would allow for compliance to the certification requirements at
amendment 23-62 or earlier when compliance to the latest amendment of
part 23 was determined by the FAA to be impractical.
7. Applicability (Sec. 35.1)
The FAA proposes amending Sec. 35.1 by replacing the reference to
Sec. 23.907 with proposed Sec. 23.905(c).
8. Fatigue Limits and Evaluation (Sec. 35.37)
The FAA proposes amending Sec. 35.37 by replacing the reference to
Sec. 23.907 with proposed Sec. 23.905(c).
9. Altimeter System Test and Inspection (Appendix E to Part 43)
The FAA proposes amending appendix E to part 43 by revising
paragraph (a)(2) to conform with proposed part 23 changes. This
proposed change would affect owners and operators of part 23
certificated airplanes in controlled airspace under instrument flight
rules who must comply with Sec. 91.411. Concurrent with this rule
change, AC 43-6, Altitude Reporting Equipment and Transponder System
Maintenance and Inspection Practices, would be revised to include a
static pressure system proof test acceptable to the Administrator.
Additionally, while reviewing appendix E to part 43, paragraph (a)(2),
we noted that it remains silent on parts 27 and 29 rotorcraft and Civil
Air Regulations certificated aircraft. The static pressure system proof
test in AC 43-6 ensures the accuracy needed to meet Sec. 91.411
requirements.
[[Page 13497]]
10. Powered Civil Aircraft With Standard Category U.S. Airworthiness
Certificates: Instrument and Equipment Requirements (Sec. 91.205)
The FAA proposes amending Sec. 91.205 by revising paragraphs
(b)(13) and (b)(14) to include the potential for allowing other
approved restraint systems. Additionally, paragraph (b)(14) refers to
Sec. 23.561(b)(2), which would be retitled in the proposed revision
for structural strength limits and would be addressed in the means of
compliance. Section 91.205(b)(16) would be deleted and incorporated
into (b)(14) with no additional requirements. The part 23 proposal
would delete references to utility and acrobatic categories, as they
would be incorporated into the normal categories that would be
redefined into performance-based standards.
11. Restricted Category Civil Aircraft: Operating Limitations (Sec.
91.313)
The FAA proposes amending Sec. 91.313(g) to include the potential
for allowing other approved restraint systems. Additionally, paragraph
(g) includes a regulatory reference to Sec. 23.561(b)(2), which would
be retitled in the proposed revision as Sec. 23.600, which would be
accompanied by accepted means of compliance. Approval for a shoulder
harness or restraint system, therefore, would require withstanding the
static inertia loads specified in Sec. 23.600 during emergency
conditions.
12. Increased Maximum Certification Weights for Certain Airplanes
Operated in Alaska (Sec. 91.323)
The FAA proposes amending Sec. 91.323 by removing reference to
Sec. 23.337 because this section would be revised and consolidated
with other structural requirements. The relevant prescriptive
requirement(s) maneuvering load factors found in Sec. 23.337 would be
added to the regulation in Sec. 91.323(b)(3).
13. Second in Command Requirements (Sec. 91.531)
The FAA proposes amending Sec. 91.531(1) and (3) to incorporate
the new risk and performance levels proposed in this NPRM. The FAA
proposes deleting the reference to utility, acrobatic, and commuter
categories in part 23. Other divisions would be used to define levels
of certification for normal category airplanes. This proposed amendment
would ensure airplanes certificated in the commuter category in the
past and airplanes certificated in the future under the proposed part
23 airworthiness and performance levels would be addressed in this
rule.
14. Additional Emergency Equipment (Sec. 121.310)
The FAA proposes amending Sec. 121.310(b)(2)(iii) to reflect the
reference to Sec. 23.811(b), effective June 16, 1994. This would be an
update to the reference for conformity only. This amendment would make
no change to the requirements of the rule.
15. Additional Airworthiness Requirements (Sec. 135.169)
The FAA proposes amending Sec. 135.169(b) by deleting the terms,
``reciprocating-engine or turbopropeller-powered''. The current rule
limits operation under this part to reciprocating-engine or
turbopropeller-powered small airplanes. By amending the paragraph as
proposed, other small airplanes, regardless of propulsion type and
including turbojet-powered, would potentially be considered for
certification under this part.
The FAA also proposes to allow a small airplane in normal category,
in Sec. 135.169(b)(8), to operate within the rules governing commuter
and on demand operations. This action would be necessary as a result of
the proposed part 23 rules which would sunset the commuter category for
newly type certificated airplanes and create a normal category,
certification level 4 airplane as equivalent to the commuter category
by applying to 10-19 passengers. This proposed amendment would allow
for the consideration of the new category airplane and to ensure a
continued higher level of safety for commercial operations. Because of
the ground-breaking nature of the part 23 proposals, the associated
adjustment to performance-based airworthiness standards in future
airplane designs and manufacturing, and the myriad of potential
possibilities for attaining a means of compliance for airplane type
certification, the FAA proposes to require the new normal category
certification level 4 airplanes to meet the current airworthiness and
performance standards of the commuter category found in part 23 thru
amendment 23-62. These standards are envisioned to remain as
requirements for the new normal category certification level 4
airplanes into the near-term future, but not the long-term. It is
intended that once the new part 23 requirements have proven successful
with the new normal category certification levels 1, 2, and 3
airplanes, the FAA would reconsider normal category certification level
4 airplanes for part 135 commercial operations.
VII. Regulatory Notices and Analyses
A. Regulatory Evaluation Summary
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 (Pub.
L. 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, this 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 proposed rule. We suggest
readers seeking greater detail read the full regulatory evaluation, a
copy of which we have placed in the docket for this rulemaking.
In conducting these analyses, FAA has determined that this proposed
rule: (1) Would have benefits that justify its costs, (2) would not be
an an economically ``significant regulatory action'' as defined in
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, (3) would be ``significant'' as
defined in DOT's Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (4) would have a
significant positive economic impact on small entities; (5) would not
create unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United
States; and (6) would not impose an unfunded mandate on state, local,
or tribal governments, or on the private sector by exceeding the
threshold identified above. These analyses are summarized below.
1. Total Benefits and Costs of This Rule
The following table shows the estimated benefits and costs of the
proposed rule. The major factors driving the expected costs of this
proposal are the additional training tasks, database development, and
documentation to
[[Page 13498]]
FAA and industry part 23 certification engineers. Benefits consist of
safety benefits from preventing stall and spin accidents and savings
from reducing the number of special conditions, exemptions, and
equivalent levels of safety. If the proposed rule saves only one human
life by improving stall characteristics and stall warnings, that alone
would result in benefits outweighing the costs.
Estimated Benefits and Costs From 2017 to 2036
[2014 $ Millions]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Safety benefits + cost
Costs savings = total
benefits
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.......................... $3.9 $19.6 + $12.6 = $32.2.
Present value.................. $3.9 $6.2 + $5.8 = $12.0.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Who is potentially affected by this rule?
The proposal would affect U.S. manufacturers and operators of new
part 23 type certificated airplanes.
3. Assumptions
The benefit and cost analysis for the regulatory evaluation is
based on the following factors/assumptions:
The analysis is conducted in constant dollars with 2014
as the base year.
The final rule would be effective in 2017.
The primary analysis period for costs and benefits
extends for 20 years, from 2017 through 2036. This period was
selected because annual costs and benefits will have reached a
steady state by 2036.
Future part 23 type certifications and deliveries are
estimated from historical part 23 type certifications and
deliveries.
Costs for the new part 23 type certifications
forecasted in the ``Fleet Discussion'' section of the regulatory
evaluation would occur in year 1 of the analysis interval.
Airplane deliveries from the forecasted part 23 type
certificates would start in year 5 of the analysis interval.
The FAA uses a seven percent discount rate for the
benefits and costs as prescribed by OMB in Circular A-4.
The baseline for estimating the costs and benefits of
the proposed rule would be part 23, through amendment 62.
The FAA estimates 335 FAA part 23 certification
engineers would require additional training as a result of this
proposal. The FAA assumes that the same number of industry part 23
certification engineers would also require additional training as a
result of this proposal.
The FAA estimates that this proposal would add 16 hours
of training to FAA and industry part 23 certification engineers.
Since this training program would be on-line, we
estimate no travel costs for the engineers.
FAA pay-band tables and the Bureau of Labor Statistics
(BLS) determine the hourly wages used to estimate the costs to the
FAA and applicants.
Using the U.S. Department of Transportation guidance,
the wage multiplier for employee benefits is 1.17.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ On January 30, 2014, the DOT published a memo on
``Estimating Total Costs of Compensation Based on Wage Rates or
Salaries.'' The memo directs the FAA that when a rule requires
incremental hours per existing employee, the wage/salary multiplier
is of smaller magnitude because not all categories of employer
provided benefits increase with additional hours worked by an
individual employee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Benefits of This Rule
The major safety benefit of this proposed rule is to add stall
characteristics and stall warnings that would result in airplane
designs that are more resistant to depart controlled flight
inadvertently. The largest number of accidents for small airplanes is a
stall or departure-based LOC in flight. This proposal would also have
cost savings by streamlining the certification process and encouraging
new and innovative technology. Streamlining the certification process
would reduce the issuance of special conditions, exemptions, and
equivalent level of safety findings.
5. Costs of This Rule
The proposed rules major costs are the engineer training costs and
the certification database creation costs. Additional costs would also
accrue from the proposed controllability and stall sections that would
increase scope over current requirements and manual upgrade costs.
In the following table, we summarize the total estimated compliance
costs by category. The FAA notes that since we assumed that all costs
occurred in Year 1 of the analysis interval, the 2014-dollar costs
equal the present value costs.
Total Cost Summary by Category
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total costs
Type of cost (2014$) and
P.V.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sec. 23.200 Controllability........................... $276,939
Sec. 23.215 Stall characteristics, stall warning, and 500,000
spins..................................................
Engineer Training Costs................................. 1,149,418
Certification Database Costs............................ 1,293,750
Manual Upgrade Costs.................................... 700,000
---------------
Total Costs......................................... 3,920,106
------------------------------------------------------------------------
* These numbers are subject to rounding error.
B. Initial Regulatory Flexibility Determination
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (Pub. L. 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.
The FAA believes that this proposed rule could have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of entities because we believe
that this rule could enable the creation of new part 23 type
certificates and new manufacturers. The FAA has been working with U.S.
and foreign small aircraft manufacturers since 2007 to review the life
cycle of part 23 airplanes and determine what needed improvement.
The purpose of this analysis is to provide the reasoning underlying
the FAA determination.
[[Page 13499]]
Under Section 603(b) of the RFA, the initial analysis must address:
Description of reasons the agency is considering the
action;
Statement of the legal basis and objectives for the
proposed rule;
Description of the record keeping and other compliance
requirements of the proposed rule;
All federal rules that may duplicate, overlap, or
conflict with the proposed rule;
Description and an estimated number of small entities
to which the proposed rule will apply; and
Describe alternatives considered.
1. Reasons Why the Rule Is Being Proposed
The FAA proposes this action to amend the airworthiness standards
for new part 23 type certificated airplanes to reflect the current
needs of the small airplane industry, accommodate future trends,
address emerging technologies, and enable the creation of new part 23
manufacturers and new type certificated airplanes. The proposed changes
to part 23 are necessary to eliminate the current workload of
exemptions, special conditions, and equivalent levels of safety
findings necessary to certificate new part 23 airplanes. These proposed
part 23 changes would also promote safety by enacting new regulations
for controllability and stall standards and promote new technologies in
part 23 airplanes.
2. Statement of the Legal Basis and Objectives
The FAMRA required the Administrator, in consultation with the
aviation industry, to assess the aircraft certification and approval
process. In addition, the SARA directs the FAA to create performance-
based regulations for small airplanes and provide for the use of
industry developed consensus standards to allow flexibility in the
certification of new technology.
Accordingly, this proposed rule would amend Title 14 of the Code of
Federal Regulations to revise the airworthiness standards for small
airplanes by removing current prescriptive design requirements and
replacing those requirements with risk and performance-based
airworthiness standards.
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. Under that section,
the FAA is charged with promoting safe flight of civil airplanes in air
commerce by prescribing minimum standards required in the interest of
safety for the design and performance of airplanes. This regulation is
within the scope of that authority because it prescribes new
performance-based safety standards for the design of normal category
airplanes.
3. Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other Requirements
The FAA expects no more than minimal new reporting and
recordkeeping compliant requirements would result from this proposed
rule because the prescriptive nature of part 23 would be in other FAA
approved documents where future technology can readily be adopted into
the regulatory framework. The FAA requests comment regarding the
anticipated reduction in paperwork and recordkeeping burdens that may
result from this revision.
4. Overlapping, Duplicative, or Conflicting Federal Rules
The proposed rule would not overlap, duplicate, or conflict with
existing federal rules.
5. Estimated Number of Small Firms Potentially Impacted
Under the RFA, the FAA must determine whether a proposed or final
rule significantly affects a substantial number of small entities. This
determination is typically based on small entity size and cost
thresholds that vary depending on the affected industry. Using the size
standards from the Small Business Administration for Air Transportation
and Aircraft Manufacturing, we defined companies as small entities if
they have fewer than 1,500 employees.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ 13 CFR 121.201, Size Standards Used to Define Small
Business Concerns, Sector 48-49 Transportation, Subsector 481 Air
Transportation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are seven U.S. owned aircraft manufacturers who delivered
part 23 airplanes in the 1998-2013 analysis interval. These
manufacturers are Adam, American Champion, Cessna, Hawker Beechcraft,
Maule, Quest, and Sino-Swearingen.
Using information provided by the Internet filings and news
reports, manufacturers that are subsidiary businesses of larger
businesses, manufacturers that are foreign owned, and businesses with
more than 1,500 employees were eliminated from the list of small
entities. Cessna and Hawker Beechcraft are businesses with more than
1,500 employees. For the remaining businesses, we obtained company
revenue and employment from the above sources.
The base year for the final rule is 2014. Although the FAA
forecasts traffic and air carrier fleets, we cannot determine either
the number of new entrants or who will be in the part 23 airplane
manufacturing business in the future. Therefore, we use current U.S.
part 23 airplane manufacturers' revenue and employment in order to
determine the number of small entities this proposed rule would affect.
The methodology discussed above resulted in the following list of
five U.S. part 23 airplane manufacturers, with less than 1,500
employees.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
Manufacturer employees Annual revenue
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part 23 Manufacturer 1.................. 2 $110,000
Part 23 Manufacturer 2.................. 65 7,000,000
Part 23 Manufacturer 3.................. 75 35,000,000
Part 23 Manufacturer 4.................. 175 34,000,000
Part 23 Manufacturer 5.................. 2 97,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
From this list of small entity U.S. airplane manufacturers, there
are three manufacturers currently producing part 23 reciprocating
engine airplanes; only one manufacturer producing turboprops and only
one producing turbojets. The single manufacturer producing a part 23
turbojet has not delivered an airplane since 2009 and is still working
on
[[Page 13500]]
acquiring the means to start up its production line again. One of the
manufacturers producing a part 23 reciprocating engine airplane has not
delivered an airplane since 2007 and is working on acquiring the means
to start up their production line again. The FAA is not aware that
either of these manufacturers is considering a new airplane for part 23
type certification in the future and therefore this proposed rulemaking
would most likely not add costs to these two manufacturers because the
proposed rule only affects new part 23 type certificates.
For the remaining two reciprocating engine part 23 airplane
manufacturers, their last type certificates were issued in 1961 and
1970. The 1961 type certificate was issued for the only airplane this
manufacturer produces and the manufacturer with the 1970 type
certificate produces one other airplane that was type certificated in
1941. The last small entity manufacturer produces only turboprop
airplanes and it started delivering airplanes in 2007. Again, the FAA
is not aware that any of these manufacturers is considering a new
airplane for part 23 type certification in the future and therefore
this proposed rulemaking would most likely not add costs for it.
While this rulemaking may enable the creation of new manufacturers,
the FAA is not aware of any new small entity part 23 manufacturers who
want a type certification in the future for a new part 23 airplane.
However, by simplifying and lowering the costs for certification of new
small airplanes, barriers to entry may be lowered and thus new
manufacturers may emerge.
6. Cost and Affordability for Small Entities
In 2009, a joint FAA/industry team finalized the Part 23 CPS. This
proposed rulemaking resulted from this study by the recommendation to
use consensus standards to supplement the regulatory language. Since
then, the FAA and the part 23 industry have worked together to develop
common part 23 airplane certification requirements for this rulemaking.
In 2011, with the Part 23 CPS as a foundation, the FAA formed the Part
23 Reorganization ARC. The ARC consisted of large and small entity
domestic and international businesses. We contacted the part 23
airplane manufacturers, the ARC, and GAMA for specific cost estimates
for each section change for the rule and they all believe that this
proposed rule would have a minimal cost impact on their operations and
in many cases, would have significant cost savings by streamlining the
part 23 type certification process. Many of the ARC members
collaborated and provided a joint cost estimate for the proposed rule.
The ARC has informed us that the proposed rule would save the
manufacturers design time for the certification of part 23 airplanes by
reducing the number of exemptions, equivalent level of safety findings
and special conditions required to incorporate new and future
technology into their new airplane certifications. The proposed rule
would also require manuals to be updated and database development. We
expect these updates to be minimal and request commen on these
anticipated costs and overall reduction in paperwork burden.
The ARC has also informed us that every other section of this
proposed rule would be cost-neutral since the majority of the
prescriptive requirements in part 23 would be moved from part 23. The
FAA expects that these current requirements would form the basis for
consensus standards that would be used as a means of compliance to the
proposed performance based regulations.
The FAA expects this proposed rule could have a positive economic
impact to small entities because it would enable new businesses to
produce new part 23 type certificated airplanes while maintaining a
safe operating environment in the NAS. This proposal is based on the
ARC's recommendations and would allow for the use of consensus
standards that have been developed in partnership with industry.
Therefore, the FAA believes that this proposed rule could have a
positive significant economic impact on a substantial number of
entities.
7. Alternative Analysis
a. Alternative 1
The FAA would continue to issue special conditions, exemptions, and
equivalent level of safety findings to certificate part 23 airplanes.
As this approach would not follow congressional direction, we choose
not to continue with the status quo.
b. Alternative 2
The FAA would continue to enforce the current regulations that
affect stall and controllability. The FAA rejected this alternative
because the accident rate for part 23 airplanes identified a safety
issue that had to be addressed.
c. Alternative 3
The FAA notes that a multi-engine part 23 aircraft manufacturer
could decide it wants to comply with Sec. 23.200(b) by making the
airplane capable of climbing after a critical loss by installing larger
engines. But this is a very expensive alternative that would raise
certification costs and operating costs and we believe that part 23
aircraft manufacturers would not make the airplane capable of climbing
after a critical loss by installing larger engines.
The FAA solicits comments regarding this determination.
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 as 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 proposed rule and determined that
the standards are necessary for aviation safety and would not create
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign commerce of the United States.
D. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 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 $155.0 million in lieu of $100
million. This proposed 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 information requirements
for aircraft certification are covered by existing OMB No. 2120-0018.
Burdens associated with special conditions,
[[Page 13501]]
ELOS, and exemptions are not quantified in this collection because the
need to seek relief under one of these options is dependent on each
applicant and is difficult to quantify. It is expected that this
rulemaking would reduce the number of special conditions, ELOS, and
exemptions filed, thus reducing paperwork and processing time for both
the FAA and industry. It would also maintain the fundamental safety
requirements from the current part 23 regulations but allow more
flexibility in airplane designs, faster adoption of safety enhancing
technology, and reduce the regulatory cost burden. To estimate savings
driven by this change, the FAA counted the special conditions, ELOS,
and exemption applications submitted to the FAA for part 23 aircraft
between 2012 and 2013 and divided the number by two years for an
average of 47 applications per year.\29\ The ARC report offered a
similar average of 37 applications per year.\30\ Additionally, the FAA
counted the number of pages per application for all 47 applications to
obtain an average number of pages per application. For special
conditions, there were approximately 21 pages, 16 pages for an
exemption, and 15 pages per ELOS application. The FAA assumes that the
applicant and each FAA office that reviews the application spend 8
hours on research, coordination, and review per page. The ARC also
noted ``an ELOS finding or exemption can take the FAA between 4 to 12
months to develop and approve. The applicant spends roughly the same
amount of time as the FAA in proposing what they need and responding to
FAA questions for SC, exemption, or ELOS.'' \31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ https://my.faa.gov/org/linebusiness/avs/offices/air/tools/cert.html.
\30\ A report from the 14 CFR part 23 Reorganization Aviation
Rulemaking Committee to the Federal Aviation Administration;
Recommendation for increasing the safety of small general aviation
airplanes certificated to 14 CFR part 23, June 5, 2013, Table 7.1--
Special Conditions, Exemptions, Equivalent Safety Findings, Page 55.
\31\ Ibid., 54.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The number of applications is multiplied by the number of pages and
by the hourly wage for the applicant and different FAA offices to
account for the cost to the FAA and the applicant. The estimated hourly
wage is $74.10 for a Small Airplane Directorate employee,\32\ $50.75
for an Aircraft Certificate Office employee,\33\ and $60.58 for an
engineer \34\ employed by the applicant. Annual cost equals the sum of
the associated costs of special conditions, exemptions, plus equivalent
level of safety. Yearly cost totals roughly $502,469 for the Small
Airplane Directorate, $344,172 for Aircraft Certificate Offices, and
$410,823 for the applicants. Tables 1, 2, and 3 show cost by office and
applicant as well as by special condition, exemption, and ELOS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ 2014 FAA Bay Band, Average K Band Salary (Rest of the U.S.)
plus wage multiplier for benefits https://employees.faa.gov/org/staffoffices/ahr/program_policies/policy_guidance/hr_policies/hrpm/comp/comp_ref/2014payadjustment/.
\33\ 2014 FAA Bay Band, Average I Band Salary (Rest of the U.S.)
plus wage multiplier for benefits https://employees.faa.gov/org/staffoffices/ahr/program_policies/policy_guidance/hr_policies/hrpm/comp/comp_ref/2014payadjustment/.
\34\ National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates United
States, May 2014; Aerospace Engineer mean hourly wage, NAIC code 17-
2011 plus wage multiplier for benefits https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#17-0000. A more detailed discussion is provided
in the ``Costs'' section below.
Table 1--Savings From Special Conditions (SC) *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average number Average FAA SAD FAA ACO Applicant
Part 23 Section of SC (2012- number of -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2013) pages Man-hours Savings Man-hours Savings Man-hours Savings
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
143.......................................... 0.5 20.8 83 $6,165 83 $4,223 83 $5,040
171.......................................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
173.......................................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
175.......................................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
177.......................................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
251.......................................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
361.......................................... 1 20.8 166 12,330 166 8,445 166 10,081
562.......................................... 1 20.8 166 12,330 166 8,445 166 10,081
572.......................................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
573.......................................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
574.......................................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
613.......................................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
627.......................................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
629.......................................... 1.5 20.8 250 18,495 250 12,668 250 15,121
901.......................................... 1 20.8 166 12,330 166 8,445 166 10,081
939.......................................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
951.......................................... 1 20.8 166 12,330 166 8,445 166 10,081
961.......................................... 1 20.8 166 12,330 166 8,445 166 10,081
973.......................................... 1 20.8 166 12,330 166 8,445 166 10,081
977.......................................... 1.5 20.8 250 18,495 250 12,668 250 15,121
1141......................................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
1301......................................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
1305......................................... 1 20.8 166 12,330 166 8,445 166 10,081
1308......................................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
1309......................................... 1 20.8 166 12,330 166 8,445 166 10,081
1329......................................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
1337......................................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
1521......................................... 1 20.8 166 12,330 166 8,445 166 10,081
1557......................................... 1 20.8 166 12,330 166 8,445 166 10,081
3Pt Restraint with Airbag.................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
Inflatable Restraint......................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
Electronic Engine Controls................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
[[Page 13502]]
Fuel Jettisoning............................. 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
Load Alleviation System...................... 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
Side Facing Seat with Airbag................. 0.5 20.8 83 6,165 83 4,223 83 5,040
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals................................... 24.5 728 4077 302,080 4077 206,914 4077 246,983
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* These numbers are subject to rounding error.
Table 2--Savings From Exemptions *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average number Average FAA SAD FAA ACO Applicant
Part 23 Section exemptions number of -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2012-2013) pages Man-hours Savings Man-hours Savings Man-hours Savings
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1359......................................... 0.5 15.6 62.4 $4,624 62 $3,167 62 $3,780
1549......................................... 0.5 15.6 62.4 4,624 62 3,167 62 3,780
177.......................................... 0.5 15.6 62.4 4,624 62 3,167 62 3,780
49........................................... 1 15.6 124.8 9,247 125 6,334 125 7,561
562.......................................... 1 15.6 124.8 9,247 125 6,334 125 7,561
1419......................................... 0.5 15.6 62.4 4,624 62 3,167 62 3,780
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals................................... 4 94 499 36,989 499 25,336 499 30,243
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* These numbers are subject to rounding error.
Table 3--Savings From Equivalent Level of Safety (ELOS) *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Average number Average FAA SAD FAA ACO Applicant
Part 23 Section ELOS (2012- number of -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
2013) pages Man-hours Savings Man-hours Savings Savings Man-hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
145.......................................... 1 14.9 119.2 $8,832 119 $6,050 119 $7,221
207.......................................... 1 14.9 119.2 8,832 119 6,050 119 7,221
672.......................................... 0.5 14.9 59.6 4,416 60 3,025 60 3,611
777.......................................... 1.5 14.9 178.8 13,249 179 9,075 179 10,832
779.......................................... 0.5 14.9 59.6 4,416 60 3,025 60 3,611
781.......................................... 1.5 14.9 178.8 13,249 179 9,075 179 10,832
807.......................................... 0.5 14.9 59.6 4,416 60 3,025 60 3,611
815.......................................... 0.5 14.9 59.6 4,416 60 3,025 60 3,611
841.......................................... 1 14.9 119.2 8,832 119 6,050 119 7,221
973.......................................... 0.5 14.9 59.6 4,416 60 3,025 60 3,611
1092......................................... 0.5 14.9 59.6 4,416 60 3,025 60 3,611
1145......................................... 1 14.9 119.2 8,832 119 6,050 119 7,221
1305......................................... 1.5 14.9 178.8 13,249 179 9,075 179 10,832
1311......................................... 0.5 14.9 59.6 4,416 60 3,025 60 3,611
1353......................................... 0.5 14.9 59.6 4,416 60 3,025 60 3,611
1357......................................... 0.5 14.9 59.6 4,416 60 3,025 60 3,611
1397......................................... 0.5 14.9 59.6 4,416 60 3,025 60 3,611
1401......................................... 0.5 14.9 59.6 4,416 60 3,025 60 3,611
1419......................................... 0.5 14.9 59.6 4,416 60 3,025 60 3,611
1443......................................... 0.5 14.9 59.6 4,416 60 3,025 60 3,611
1505......................................... 0.5 14.9 59.6 4,416 60 3,025 60 3,611
1545......................................... 0.5 14.9 59.6 4,416 60 3,025 60 3,611
1549......................................... 2.5 14.9 298 22,081 298 15,125 298 18,054
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals................................... 19 343 2205 163,400 2205 111,923 2205 133,597
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* These numbers are subject to rounding error.
Using these yearly cost estimates, over 20 years $25.1 million in
man-hours would be spent on applying for and processing special
conditions, exemptions, and ELOS. However under the proposed rule, the
FAA believes that the need to demonstrate compliance through special
conditions, exemptions, or ELOS would largely be eliminated. Instead
new products will simply need to demonstrate compliance by following
consensus standards acceptable to the Administrator, or by submitting
their own novel demonstrations of compliance. As a conservative
estimate, the FAA estimates that special conditions, exemptions, and
ELOS would be reduced by half for a savings to the FAA and applicant of
roughly $12.6 million ($5.8 million present value). Savings by year is
shown in the chart below. The FAA asks for comment regarding the amount
of reduction in the alternative means of compliance.
[[Page 13503]]
In addition to this savings, there would also be additional
paperwork burden associated with proposed Sec. 23.200. As proposed,
this provision could result in a change to a limitation or a
performance number in the flight manual, which would reqire an update
to the training courseware or flight manual. Industry believes that
this proposed change could cost from $100,000 to $150,000. Therefore,
the FAA uses $125,000 (($100,000 + $150,000)/2) as an average cost for
this proposed change.
There would also be additional paperwork associated with this
requirement that is not part of the costs discussed above. The FAA
estimates the paperwork costs for these proposed provisions by
multiplying the number of hours the FAA estimates for each page of
paperwork, by the number of pages for the training courseware, or
flight manual, by the hourly rate of the person responsible for the
update. The Small Aircraft Directorate of the FAA provided average
hourly times and the number of additional pages of paperwork the
proposal would add. The FAA estimates that this section would add a
total of four pages to the training courseware and flight manual. The
FAA also estimates that it would take a part 23 certification engineer
eight hours to complete the one page required for each new type
certification. The eight hours to complete a page includes the
research, coordination, and review each document requires. Therefore,
the FAA estimates the total paperwork costs for proposed
controllability section would be about $1,939 (8 hours * 4 pages *
$60.58 per hour) in 2014 dollars.
The FAA is expecting part 23 airplane manufacturers to update their
engineering procedures manuals to reflect the changes from this
proposed rulemaking. However, most of the engineering procedures
manuals are not written around the requirements of part 23, but around
the requirements of part 21. Since the part 23 changes would have
minimal impact on the part 21 requirements, there should be little
change in the engineering procedures manuals. Conversations with
industry indicate that there may need to be some changes to the
engineering manuals to describe how the accepted means of compliance
must be related to the regulations. Depending on the complexity of each
company's manual, industry estimates that these changes could run from
about $50,000 up to $200,000. This would be a one-time cost per new
type certification.
Since the FAA is unable to determine the complexity of each
company's manual, we assume that the manufacturers of the two new part
23 reciprocating engine airplane type certifications, discussed in the
``Fleet Discussion'' section of the regulatory impact analysis, would
spend $50,000 to make the changes to the engineering manual. We also
assume that the one new part 23 turboprop airplane certification and
the two new part 23 turbojet airplane certifications, discussed in the
``Fleet Discussion'' section, would use the more complex and costly
approach of $200,000.
The FAA notes that either the simple approach or the more complex
approach to updating the manuals could also either take place in-house
or could be contracted out to a consultant.
Table 4 shows the total costs for the proposed changes to the
controllability section.
Table 4--Estimate Costs for Updating Engineering Manuals
[2014 $]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of
estimated Simple Complex
Airplane new type approach approach Total
certificates
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recip...................................................... 2 $50,000 $0 $100,000
Turboprop.................................................. 1 0 200,000 200,000
Turbojet................................................... 2 0 200,000 400,000
----------------------------------------------------
Total.................................................. ............ ........... ........... 700,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* These numbers are subject to rounding error.
F. International Compatibility and Cooperation
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 the following differences with these proposed
regulations. The ICAO Standards for small airplanes use weight and
propulsion to differentiate between some requirements. The proposed
regulations use certification levels and performance to differentiate
between some requirements. Furthermore, part 23 will still allow the
certification of airplanes up to 19,000 pounds. If this proposal is
adopted, the FAA intends to file these differences with ICAO. 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 CAAs by aligning the
revised part 23 standards with the new CS-23 standards that are being
developed concurrently by EASA. Several other CAAs are participating in
this effort and intend to either adopt the new part 23 or CS-23
regulations or revise their airworthiness standards to align with these
new regulations.
The Part 23 Reorganization ARC included participants from several
foreign CAAs and international members from almost every GA
manufacturer of both airplanes and avionics. It also included several
Light-Sport Aircraft manufacturers who are interested in certificating
their products using the airworthiness standards contained in part 23.
The rulemaking and means of compliance documents are international
efforts. Authorities from Europe, Canada, Brazil, China, and New
Zealand all are working to produce similar rules. These rules, while
not identical, are intended to allow the use
[[Page 13504]]
of the same set of industry developed means of compliance. Industry has
told that FAA that it is very costly to address the differences that
some contrived means of compliance imposes. If there is substantial
agreement between the major CAAs to use the same industry means of
compliance document, then U.S. manufactures expect a significant saving
for exporting their products.
Furthermore, this project is a harmonization project between the
FAA and EASA.
EASA has worked a parallel rulemaking program for CS-23. The FAA
provided comments to the EASA A-NPA The EASA and other authorities will
have an opportunity to comment on this NPRM when it is published. These
efforts will allow the FAA, EASA and other authorities to work toward a
harmonized set of regulations when the final rules are published.
G. Environmental Analysis
FAA Order 1050.1F 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 5-6.6 and involves no extraordinary
circumstances.
H. Regulations Affecting Intrastate Aviation in Alaska
Section 1205 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 1996 (110 Stat.
3213) requires the Administrator, when modifying 14 CFR regulations in
a manner affecting intrastate aviation in Alaska, to consider the
extent to which Alaska is not served by transportation modes other than
aviation, and to establish appropriate regulatory distinctions. Because
this proposed rule would apply to GA airworthiness standards, it could,
if adopted, affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. The FAA, therefore,
specifically requests comments on whether there is justification for
applying the proposed rule differently in intrastate operations in
Alaska.
VIII. Executive Order Determination
A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism
The FAA has analyzed this proposed rule under the principles and
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The agency has
determined that this action would 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, would not have
Federalism implications.
B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use
The FAA analyzed this proposed 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
would not be a ``significant energy'' action under the executive order
and would not be likely to have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy.
IX. Additional Information
A. Comments Invited
The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this
rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. The agency
also invites comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy,
or federalism impacts that might result from adopting the proposals in
this document. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion
of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and
include supporting data. To ensure the docket does not contain
duplicate comments, commenters should send only one copy of written
comments, or if comments are filed electronically, commenters should
submit only one time.
The FAA will file in the docket all comments it receives, as well
as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this
proposal, the FAA will consider all comments it receives on or before
the closing date for comments. The FAA will consider comments filed
after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without
incurring expense or delay. The agency may change this proposal in
light of the comments it receives.
Proprietary or Confidential Business Information: Commenters should
not file proprietary or confidential business information in the
docket. Such information must be sent or delivered directly to the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document, and marked as proprietary or confidential. If submitting
information on a disk or CD-ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD-
ROM, and identify electronically within the disk or CD-ROM the specific
information that is proprietary or confidential.
Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), if the FAA is aware of proprietary
information filed with a comment, the agency does not place it in the
docket. It is held in a separate file to which the public does not have
access, and the FAA places a note in the docket that it has received
it. If the FAA receives a request to examine or copy this information,
it treats it as any other request under the Freedom of Information Act
(5 U.S.C. 552). The FAA processes such a request under Department of
Transportation procedures found in 49 CFR part 7.
B. Availability of Rulemaking Documents
An electronic copy of rulemaking documents may be obtained from the
Internet by--
1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking Portal (https://www.regulations.gov);
2. Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at https://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies or
3. Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/.
Copies may also be obtained by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling (202) 267-9680.
Commenters must identify the docket or notice number of this
rulemaking.
All documents the FAA considered in developing this proposed rule,
including economic analyses and technical reports, may be accessed from
the Internet through the Federal eRulemaking Portal referenced in item
(1) above.
Appendix 1 to the Preamble--Current to Proposed Regulations Cross-
Reference Table
The below cross-reference table is intended to permit easy access
from proposed to current regulations. The preamble is organized
topical, section-by-section, proposed to current regulations. This
table should assist the reader in following the section discussions
contained in the preamble.
[[Page 13505]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current section Title Proposed section Proposed title
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart A--General
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
23.1.............................. Applicability............. 23.1................. Applicability.
23.2.............................. Special retroactive ..................... --Deleted--
requirements.
23.3.............................. Airplane categories....... 23.5................. Certification of normal
category airplanes.
.......................... 23.10................ Accepted means of
compliance.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart B--Flight
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
23.21............................. Proof of compliance....... 23.100............... Weight and center of
gravity.
23.23............................. Load distribution limits.. 23.100............... Weight and center of
gravity.
23.25............................. Weight limits............. 23.100............... Weight and center of
gravity.
23.29............................. Empty weight and 23.100............... Weight and center of
corresponding center of gravity.
gravity.
23.31............................. Removable ballast......... 23.100............... Weight and center of
gravity.
23.33............................. Propeller speed and pitch 23.900............... Powerplant installation.
limits.
23.45............................. Performance--General...... 23.105............... Performance.
23.49............................. Stalling speed............ 23.110............... Stall Speed.
23.51............................. Takeoff speeds............ 23.115............... Takeoff performance.
23.53............................. Takeoff performance....... 23.115............... Takeoff performance.
23.55............................. Accelerate-stop distance.. 23.115............... Takeoff performance.
23.57............................. Takeoff path.............. 23.115............... Takeoff performance.
23.59............................. Takeoff distance and 23.115............... Takeoff performance.
takeoff run.
23.61............................. Takeoff flight path....... 23.115............... Takeoff performance.
23.63............................. Climb: General............ 23.120............... Climb.
23.65............................. Climb: All engines 23.120............... Climb.
operating.
23.66............................. Takeoff climb: one engine 23.125............... Climb.
inoperative.
23.67............................. Climb: One engine 23.120............... Climb.
inoperative.
23.69............................. Enroute climb/descent..... 23.125............... Climb.
23.71............................. Glide: single engine 23.125............... Climb.
airplanes.
23.73............................. Reference landing approach 23.130............... Landing.
speed.
23.75............................. Landing distance.......... 23.130............... Landing.
23.77............................. Balked landing............ 23.120............... Climb.
23.141............................ Flight Characteristics-- 23.200............... Controllability.
General.
23.143............................ Controllability and 23.200............... Controllability.
Maneuverability--General.
23.145............................ Longitudinal control...... 23.200............... Controllability.
23.147............................ Directional and lateral 23.200............... Controllability.
control.
23.149............................ Minimum control speed..... 23.200............... Controllability.
23.151............................ Acrobatic maneuvers....... 23.200............... Controllability.
23.153............................ Control during landings... 23.200............... Controllability.
23.155............................ Elevator control force in 23.200............... Controllability.
maneuvers.
23.157............................ Rate of roll.............. 23.200............... Controllability.
23.161............................ Trim...................... 23.205............... Trim.
23.171............................ Stability--General........ 23.210............... Stability.
23.173............................ Static longitudinal 23.210............... Stability.
stability.
23.175............................ Demonstration of static 23.210............... Stability.
longitudinal stability.
23.177............................ Static directional and 23.210............... Stability.
lateral stability.
23.179............................ Instrument stick force 23.210............... Stability.
measurements.
23.181............................ Dynamic stability......... 23.210............... Stability.
23.201............................ Wings level stall......... 23.215............... Stall characteristics,
stall warning, and
spins.
23.203............................ Turning Flight and 23.215............... Stall characteristics,
accelerated turning stall warning, and
stalls. spins.
23.207............................ Stall Warning............. 23.215............... Stall characteristics,
stall warning, and
spins.
23.221............................ Spinning.................. 23.215............... Stall characteristics,
stall warning, and
spins.
23.231............................ Longitudinal stability and 23.220............... Ground handling.
control.
23.233............................ Directional stability and 23.220............... Ground handling.
control.
23.235............................ Operation on unpaved 23.220............... Ground handling.
surfaces.
23.237............................ Operation on water........ 23.220............... Ground handling.
23.239............................ Spray characteristics..... 23.220............... Ground handling.
23.251............................ Vibration and buffeting... 23.225............... Vibration, buffeting, and
high-speed
characteristics.
23.253............................ High speed characteristics 23.225............... Vibration, buffeting, and
high-speed
characteristics.
23.255............................ Out of trim 23.225............... Vibration, buffeting, and
characteristics. high-speed
characteristics.
23.230............... Performance and flight
characteristics
requirements for flight
in icing conditions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 13506]]
Subpart C--Structure
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
23.301............................ Loads..................... 23.310, 23.330....... Structural design loads,
Limit and ultimate
loads.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.330............... Limit and ultimate loads.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.310............... Structural design loads.
(c)............................... .......................... 23.310............... Structural design loads.
(d)............................... .......................... 23.310............... Structural design loads.
23.302............................ Canard or tandem wing 23.310............... Structural design loads.
configurations.
23.303............................ Factors of safety......... 23.330............... Limit and ultimate loads.
23.305............................ Strength and deformation.. 23.400............... Structural strength.
23.305............... Interaction of systems
and structures.
23.307............................ Proof of structure........ 23.400............... Structure strength.
23.321............................ Flight Loads--General..... 23.310............... Structural design loads.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.310............... Structural design loads.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.300............... Structural design
envelope.
(c)............................... .......................... 23.300............... Structural design
envelope.
23.331............................ Symmetrical flight 23.310............... Structural design loads.
conditions.
23.333............................ Flight envelope........... 23.300............... Structural design
envelope.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.300............... Structural design
envelope.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.300............... Structural design
envelope.
(c)............................... .......................... 23.315............... Flight load conditions.
(d)............................... .......................... 23.300............... Structural design
envelope.
23.335............................ Design airspeeds.......... 23.300............... Structural design
envelope.
23.337............................ Limit maneuvering load 23.300............... Flight load conditions.
factors.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.300............... Structural design
envelope.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.300............... Structural design
envelope.
(c)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
23.341............................ Gust load factors......... 23.315............... Flight load conditions.
23.343............................ Design fuel loads......... 23.300............... Structural design
envelope.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.300............... Structural design
envelope.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.300............... Structural design
envelope.
(c)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
23.345............................ High lift devices......... 23.325............... Component loading
conditions.
23.347............................ Unsymmetrical flight loads 23.315............... Flight load conditions.
23.349............................ Rolling conditions........ 23.315............... Flight load conditions.
23.351............................ Yawing conditions......... 23.315............... Flight load conditions.
23.361............................ Engine torque............. 23.325............... Component loading
conditions.
23.363............................ Side load on engine mount. 23.325............... Component loading
conditions.
23.365............................ Pressurized cabin loads... 23.325............... Flight load conditions.
(e)............................... .......................... 23.405............... Structural durability.
23.367............................ Unsymmetrical loads due to 23.315............... Flight load conditions.
engine failure.
23.369............................ Rear lift truss........... Means of Compliance..
23.371............................ Gyroscopic and aerodynamic 23.325............... Component loading
loads. conditions.
23.373............................ Speed control devices..... 23.325............... Component loading
conditions.
23.391............................ Control surface loads..... 23.325............... Component loading
conditions.
23.393............................ Loads parallel to hinge 23.325............... Component loading
line. conditions.
23.395............................ Control system loads...... 23.325............... Component loading
conditions.
23.397............................ Limit control forces and 23.325............... Component loading
torques. conditions.
23.399............................ Dual control system....... 23.325............... Component loading
conditions.
23.405............................ Secondary control system.. 23.325............... Component loading
conditions.
23.407............................ Trim tab effects.......... 23.325............... Component loading
conditions.
23.409............................ Tabs...................... 23.325............... Component loading
conditions.
23.415............................ Ground gust conditions.... 23.325............... Component loading
conditions.
23.421............................ Balancing loads........... Means of Compliance..
23.423............................ Maneuvering loads......... 23.315............... Flight load conditions.
23.425............................ Gust loads................ 23.315............... Flight load conditions.
23.427............................ Unsymmetrical loads due to 23.315............... Flight load conditions.
engine failure.
23.441............................ Maneuvering loads......... 23.315............... Flight load conditions.
23.443............................ Gust loads................ 23.315............... Flight load conditions.
23.445............................ Outboard fins or winglets. Means of Compliance..
23.455............................ Ailerons.................. 23.325............... Component loading
conditions.
23.459............................ Special devices........... 23.325............... Component loading
conditions.
23.471............................ Ground Loads--General..... 23.320............... Ground and water load
conditions.
23.473............................ Ground load conditions and 23.320............... Ground and water load
assumptions. conditions.
23.477............................ Landing gear arrangement.. 23.320............... Ground and water load
conditions.
23.479............................ Level landing conditions.. 23.320............... Ground and water load
conditions.
23.481............................ Tail down landing 23.320............... Ground and water load
conditions. conditions.
23.483............................ One-wheel landing 23.320............... Ground and water load
conditions. conditions.
23.485............................ Side load conditions...... 23.320............... Ground and water load
conditions.
23.493............................ Braked roll conditions.... 23.320............... Ground and water load
conditions.
23.497............................ Supplementary conditions 23.320............... Ground and water load
for tail wheels. conditions.
23.499............................ Supplementary conditions 23.320............... Ground and water load
for nose wheels. conditions.
23.505............................ Supplementary conditions 23.320............... Ground and water load
for skiplanes. conditions.
[[Page 13507]]
23.507............................ Jacking loads............. 23.320............... Ground and water load
conditions.
23.509............................ Towing loads.............. 23.320............... Ground and water load
conditions.
23.511............................ Ground load: unsymmetrical 23.320............... Ground and water load
loads on multiple-wheel conditions.
units.
23.521............................ Water load conditions..... 23.320............... Ground and water load
conditions.
23.523............................ Design weights and center 23.320............... Ground and water load
of gravity positions. conditions.
23.525............................ Application of loads...... 23.320............... Ground and water load
conditions.
23.527............................ Hull and main float load 23.320............... Ground and water load
factors. conditions.
23.529............................ Hull and main float 23.320............... Ground and water load
landing conditions. conditions.
23.531............................ Hull and main float 23.320............... Ground and water load
takeoff conditions. conditions.
23.533............................ Hull and main float bottom 23.320............... Ground and water load
pressures. conditions.
23.535............................ Auxiliary float loads..... 23.320............... Ground and water load
conditions.
23.537............................ Seawing loads............. 23.320............... Ground and water load
conditions.
23.561............................ Emergency Landing 23.600............... Emergency conditions.
Conditions--General.
23.562............................ Emergency landing dynamic 23.600............... Emergency conditions.
conditions.
23.571............................ Metallic pressurized cabin 23.405............... Structural durability.
structures.
23.572............................ Metallic wing, empennage, 23.405............... Structural durability.
and associated structures.
23.573............................ Damage tolerance and 23.405............... Structural durability.
fatigue evaluation of
structure.
23.574............................ Metallic damage tolerance 23.405............... Structural durability.
and fatigue evaluation of
commuter category
airplanes.
23.575............................ Inspections and other 23.405............... Structural durability.
procedures.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart D--Design and Construction
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
23.601............................ General................... 23.500............... Structural design.
23.603............................ Materials and workmanship. 23.500............... Structural design.
23.605............................ Fabrication methods....... 23.510............... Materials and processes.
23.607............................ Fasteners................. 23.505............... Protection of structure.
23.609............................ Protection of Structure... 23.505............... Protection of structure.
23.611............................ Accessibility............. 23.505............... Protection of structure.
23.613............................ Material strength 23.510............... Materials and processes.
properties and design
values.
23.619............................ Special factors........... 23.515............... Special factors of
safety.
23.621............................ Casting factors........... 23.515............... Special factors of
safety.
23.623............................ Bearing factors........... 23.515............... Special factors of
safety.
23.625............................ Fitting factors........... 23.515............... Special factors of
safety.
23.627............................ Fatigue strength.......... 23.405............... Structural durability.
23.629............................ Flutter................... 23.410............... Aeroelasticity.
23.641............................ Proof of strength......... Means of Compliance..
23.651............................ Proof of strength......... Means of Compliance..
23.655............................ Installation.............. Means of Compliance..
23.657............................ Hinges.................... 23.515............... Special factors of
safety.
23.659............................ Mass balance.............. 23.315............... Flight load conditions.
23.671............................ Control Surfaces--General.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.500............... Structural design.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.1305.............. Function and
installation.
23.672............................ Stability augmentation and 23.1305.............. Function and
automatic and power- installation.
operated systems.
23.673............................ Primary flight controls... 23.1305.............. Function and
installation.
23.675............................ Stops..................... 23.1305.............. Function and
installation.
23.677............................ Trim systems..............
(a)............................... .......................... 23.700............... Flight control systems.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.700............... Flight control systems.
(c)............................... .......................... 23.410............... Aeroelasticity.
(d)............................... .......................... 23.700............... Flight control systems.
23.679............................ Control system locks...... 23.1305.............. Function and
installation.
23.681(a)......................... Limit load static tests... 23.325(b)............ Component loading
conditions.
23.681(b)......................... Limit load static tests... 23.515............... Special factors of
safety.
23.683............................ Operation tests........... 23.500(d)............ Structural design.
23.685(a), (b), (c)............... Control system details.... 23.500(d)............ Structural design.
23.685(d)......................... Control system details.... 23.1305.............. Function and
installation.
23.687............................ Spring devices............ 23.410 and 23.500.... Aeroelasticity and
Structural design.
23.689............................ Cable systems.............
(a)............................... .......................... 23.700............... Flight control systems.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.325(b), 23.500(d). Component loading
conditions, Structural
design.
(c)............................... .......................... 23.325(b), 23.500(d). Component loading
conditions, Structural
design.
(d)............................... .......................... 23.325(b), 23.500(d). Component loading
conditions, Structural
design.
[[Page 13508]]
(e)............................... .......................... 23.325(b), 23.500(d). Component loading
conditions, Structural
design.
(f)............................... .......................... 23.700............... Flight control systems.
23.691............................ Artificial stall barrier
system.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.700............... Flight control systems.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.700............... Flight control systems.
(c)............................... .......................... 23.1305.............. Function and
installation.
(d)............................... .......................... 23.700............... Flight control systems.
(e)............................... .......................... 23.700............... Flight control systems.
(f)............................... .......................... 23.700............... Flight control systems.
(g)............................... .......................... 23.1315.............. Equipment, systems and
Installations.
23.693............................ Joints.................... 23.515............... Special factors of
safety.
23.697............................ Wing flap controls........
(a)............................... .......................... 23.700............... Flight control systems.
(b) and (c)....................... .......................... 23.200............... Controllability.
23.699............................ Wing flap position 23.1500.............. Flightcrew interface.
indicator.
23.701............................ Flap interconnection...... Means of Compliance..
23.703............................ Takeoff warning system....
(a)............................... .......................... 23.700............... Flight control systems.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.700............... Flight control systems.
(c)............................... .......................... Definition...........
23.721............................ General................... 23.910............... Powerplant installation
hazard assessment.
23.723............................ Shock absorption tests.... Means of Compliance..
23.725............................ Limit drop tests.......... Means of Compliance..
23.726............................ Ground load dynamic tests. Means of Compliance..
23.727............................ Reserve energy absorption Means of Compliance..
drop tests.
23.729............................ Landing gear extension and
retraction system.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.705............... Landing gear systems.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.705............... Landing gear systems.
(c)............................... .......................... 23.705............... Landing gear systems.
(d)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
(e)............................... .......................... 23.705............... Landing gear systems.
(f)............................... .......................... 23.1315.............. Equipment, systems and
installation.
(g)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
23.731............................ Wheels.................... 23.705............... Landing gear systems.
23.733............................ Tires.....................
(a)............................... .......................... 23.705............... Landing gear systems.
(b)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
(c)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
23.735............................ Brakes.................... 23.705...............
(a)............................... .......................... 23.705............... Landing gear systems.
(1)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
(2)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
(b)............................... .......................... 23.705............... Landing gear systems.
(c)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
(d)............................... .......................... 1315................. Equipment, systems and
installation.
(e)............................... .......................... 705.................. Landing gear systems.
(1)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
(2)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
23.737............................ Skis...................... 23.705............... Landing gear systems.
23.745............................ Nose/Tail wheel steering.. 23.1500.............. Flightcrew interface.
23.751............................ Main float buoyancy.......
(a)............................... .......................... 710.................. Buoyancy for seaplanes
and amphibians.
(b)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
23.753............................ Main float design......... 23.320............... Ground and water load
conditions.
23.755............................ Hulls..................... 23.710............... Buoyancy for seaplanes
and amphibians.
23.757............................ Auxiliary floats.......... 23.710............... Buoyancy for seaplanes
and amphibians.
23.771............................ Pilot compartment.........
(a)............................... .......................... 23.1500.............. Flightcrew interface.
(b)............................... .......................... 755.................. Occupant physical
environment.
(c)............................... .......................... 755.................. Occupant physical
environment.
23.773............................ Pilot compartment view....
(a)............................... .......................... 1500................. Flightcrew interface.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.755............... Occupant physical
environment.
23.775............................ Windshields and windows...
(a), (b), (c), (d)................ .......................... 23.755............... Occupant physical
environment.
(e)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
(f)............................... .......................... 23.1405.............. Flight in icing
conditions.
(g)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
(h)............................... .......................... 23.755............... Occupant physical
environment.
23.777............................ Cockpit controls.......... 23.1500.............. Flightcrew interface.
23.779............................ Motion and effect of 23.1500.............. Flightcrew interface.
cockpit controls.
23.781............................ Cockpit control knob shape 23.1500.............. Flightcrew interface.
[[Page 13509]]
23.783............................ Doors.....................
(a), (b), (c), (d)................ .......................... 23.750............... Means of egress and
emergency exits.
(e), (f), (g)..................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
23.785............................ Seats, berths, litters, 23.515 and 23.600.... Special factors of
safety belts, and safety, Emergency
shoulder harnesses. landing conditions.
23.787............................ Baggage and cargo 23.600(e)............ Emergency landing
compartments. conditions.
23.791............................ Passenger information 23.755............... Occupant physical
signs. environment.
23.803............................ Emergency evacuation......
(a)............................... .......................... 23.750............... Means of egress and
emergency exits.
(b)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
23.805............................ Flightcrew emergency exits 23.750............... Means of egress and
emergency exits.
23.807............................ Emergency exits...........
(a)(3), (b)(1), (c), (d)(1), .......................... Means of Compliance..
(d)(4).
Balance of 23.807................. .......................... 23.750............... Means of egress and
emergency exits.
23.811............................ Emergency exit marking.... 23.750............... Means of egress and
emergency exits.
23.812............................ Emergency lighting........ 23.750............... Means of egress and
emergency exits.
23.813............................ Emergency exit access.....
(a)............................... .......................... 23.750............... Means of egress and
emergency exits.
(b)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
CS-VLA 853........................ .......................... 23.750............... Means of egress and
emergency exits.
23.815............................ Width of aisle............ 23.750............... Means of egress and
emergency exits.
23.831............................ Ventilation............... 23.755............... Occupant physical
environment.
23.841(a), (b)(6), (c) ,(d)....... Pressurized cabins........ 23.755............... Occupant physical
environment.
(b)(1) through (5) and (7)........ .......................... Means of Compliance..
23.843............................ Pressurization tests...... 23.755............... Occupant physical
environment.
23.851............................ Fire extinguishers........
(a) and (b)....................... .......................... 23.800............... Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
(c)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
23.853............................ Passenger and crew
compartment interiors.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.800............... Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
(b)(c) and (d)(1)(2).............. .......................... Means of Compliance..
(d)(3)(i), (d)(3)(iii), (d)(3)(iv) .......................... 23.800............... Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
(e)............................... .......................... 23.800............... Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
(f)............................... .......................... 23.800............... Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
23.855............................ Cargo and baggage 23.800............... Fire protection outside
compartment fire designated fire zones.
protection.
23.856............................ Thermal/acoustic 23.800............... Fire protection outside
insulation materials. designated fire zones.
23.859............................ Combustion heater fire
protection.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.800............... Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
(b) thru (i)...................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
23.863............................ Flammable fluid fire
protection.
(a) and (d)....................... .......................... 23.800............... Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
(b) and (c)....................... .......................... Means of Compliance.. Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
23.865............................ Fire protection of flight 23.805............... Fire protection in
controls, engine mounts, designated fire zones.
and other flight
structure.
23.867............................ Electrical bonding and
protection against
lightning and static
electricity.
(a) and (c)....................... .......................... 23.810............... Lightning protection of
structure.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.1320.............. Electrical and electronic
system lightning
protection.
23.871............................ Leveling means............ Means of Compliance..
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart E--Powerplant
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
23.901............................ Installation.............. 23.900(c)............ Powerplant Installation.
(a), (b), (f)..................... .......................... 23.900(b)............
(c)............................... .......................... 23.900(b)............
(d) and (e)....................... .......................... 23.900(b)............ Note: In addition to
900(b) these rules are
covered under Part
33.63, 76, 77 and 78.
23.903............................ Engines...................
[[Page 13510]]
(a)............................... .......................... 23.900(c)............
(a)(2)............................ .......................... 23.940(b)............ Powerplant ice
protection.
(b)(c)............................ .......................... 23.910 and 23.920.... Powerplant installation
hazard assessment;
Reversing systems.
(b)(1)............................ .......................... 23.405(d)............ Structural durability.
(d) thru (g)...................... .......................... 23.925............... Powerplant operational
characteristics.
23.904............................ Automatic power reserve 23.915............... Automatic power control
system. systems.
23.905............................ Propellers................
(a)............................... .......................... 23.910(a)............ Powerplant installation
hazard assessment.
(b), (d), (g)..................... .......................... ..................... Note: Intent covered
under part 35.
(c)............................... .......................... 23.905............... Propeller installation.
(e)............................... .......................... 23.940............... Powerplant ice
protection.
(f)............................... .......................... 23.905............... Propeller installation.
(h)............................... .......................... 23.910............... Powerplant installation
hazard assessment.
23.907............................ Propeller vibration and ..................... Note: Intent covered
fatigue. under part 35.
23.909............................ Turbocharger systems......
(a) and (c)....................... .......................... 23.900............... Powerplant installation.
(b), (d), (e)..................... .......................... 23.910............... Powerplant installation
hazard assessment.
23.925............................ Propeller clearance....... 23.905(c)............ Installation.
23.929............................ Engine installation ice 23.940............... Powerplant ice
protection. protection.
23.933............................ Reversing systems......... 23.920...............
(a)............................... .......................... 23.920............... Reversing systems.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.920............... Reversing systems.
23.934............................ Turbojet and turbofan 23.920............... Note: In addition to Sec.
engine thrust reverser 23.920, this rule is
systems tests. covered under Sec.
33.97.
23.937............................ Turbopropeller-drag 23.920...............
limiting systems.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.920............... Reversing systems.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.920............... Reversing systems.
23.939............................ Powerplant operating 23.925............... In addition to 925 this
characteristics. rule is covered under
Part 33, subpart D and
F--Block Tests.
23.943............................ Negative acceleration..... 23.925............... Operational
characteristics.
23.951............................ Fuel System--General...... 23.930(a)(3).........
(a) and (b)....................... .......................... 23.930(a)(3)......... Fuel systems.
(c)............................... .......................... 23.930(a)(3).........
(d)............................... .......................... 23.930(a)(3)......... Intent covered under Part
34.
23.953............................ Fuel system independence.. 23.930............... Fuel systems.
23.954............................ Fuel system lightning 23.930............... Fuel systems.
protection.
23.955............................ Fuel flow................. 23.930............... Fuel systems.
23.957............................ Flow between 23.930(a)(7)......... Fuel systems.
interconnected tanks.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.930(a)(7).........
(b)............................... .......................... 23.930(a)(7).........
23.959............................ Unusable fuel supply...... 23.930(c)............ Hazard assessment.
23.961............................ Fuel system hot weather 23.930(a)(3)......... Fuel systems.
operation.
23.963............................ Fuel tank: general........
(a), (d), (e)..................... .......................... 23.930(b)(4)......... Fuel systems.
(b) and (c)....................... .......................... 23.930(b)(6).........
23.965............................ Fuel tank tests........... 23.930(b)(1).........
23.967............................ Fuel tank installation.... 23.930(b)(6).........
23.969............................ Fuel tank expansion space. 23.930(b)(6).........
23.971............................ Fuel tank sump............ 23.930(b)(6).........
23.973............................ Fuel tank filler 23.930(b)(6).........
connection.
23.975............................ Fuel tank vents and 23.930(b)(6).........
carburetor vapor vents.
(a)(1)............................ .......................... 23.940............... Powerplant ice
protection.
23.977............................ Fuel tank outlet.......... 23.930(b)(6)......... Fuel systems.
23.979............................ Pressure fueling systems.. 23.930(d)............
(a) and (b)....................... .......................... 23.930(d)............ Fuel systems.
(c) and (d)....................... .......................... 23.930(d)............ Hazard assessment.
23.991............................ Fuel pumps................ 23.930(a)(8).........
(a), (b), (c)..................... .......................... 23.930(a)(8)......... Fuel systems.
(d)............................... .......................... 23.910............... Powerplant installation
hazard assessment.
23.993............................ Fuel system lines and 23.930...............
fittings.
23.994............................ Fuel system components.... 23.930(a)(7)......... Hazard assessment.
23.995............................ Fuel valves and controls.. 23.930(d)............
(a)............................... .......................... 23.930(d)............ Powerplant installation.
(b) thru (g)...................... .......................... 23.930(d)............
23.997............................ Fuel strainer or filter... 23.930(a)............
(a) thru (d)...................... .......................... 23.930(a)(6)......... Fuel systems.
(e)............................... .......................... 23.950............... Powerplant ice
protection.
23.999............................ Fuel system drains........ 23.930(a)(4)......... Fuel systems.
23.1001........................... Fuel jettisoning system... 23.930(b)(5).........
(a)............................... .......................... 23.930(b)(5)......... Fuel systems.
(b) thru (g)...................... .......................... 23.930(b)(5).........
(h)............................... .......................... 23.910............... Powerplant installation
hazard assessment.
23.1011........................... General................... 23.935............... Intent covered under Part
33.
[[Page 13511]]
23.1013........................... Oil tanks................. 23.935(b)(1)......... Intent covered under Part
33.
23.1015........................... Oil tank tests............ 23.935(b)(1)......... Intent covered under Part
33.
23.1017........................... Oil lines and fittings.... 23.935(b)(1)......... Intent covered under Part
33.
23.1019........................... Oil strainer or filter.... 23.935(b)(2)......... Intent covered under Part
33.
23.1021........................... Oil system drains......... 23.935(b)(2)......... Intent covered under Part
33.
23.1023........................... Oil radiators............. 23.935(b)(1)......... Intent covered under Part
33.
23.1027........................... Propeller feathering 23.935(b)(2)......... Hazard assessment.
system.
23.1041........................... Cooling--General.......... 23.940(a)............ Intent covered under Part
33.
23.1043........................... Cooling tests............. 23.940(a)............ Intent covered under Part
33.
23.1045........................... Cooling test procedures 23.940(a)............ Intent covered under Part
for turbine engine 33.
powered airplanes.
23.1047........................... Cooling test procedures 23.940(a)............ Intent covered under Part
for reciprocating engine 33.
powered airplanes.
23.1061........................... Installation.............. 23.940(b)............ Intent covered under Part
33.
23.1063........................... Coolant tank tests........ 23.940(b)............ Intent covered under Part
33.
23.1091........................... Air induction system...... 23.945(a)............ Intent covered under Part
33.
23.1093........................... Induction system icing 23.940............... Powerplant ice
protection. protection.
23.1095........................... Carburetor deicing fluid 23.940............... Powerplant ice
flow rate. protection.
23.1097........................... Carburetor deicing fluid 23.940............... Powerplant ice
system capacity. protection.
23.1099........................... Carburetor deicing fluid 23.940............... Powerplant ice
system detail design. protection.
23.1101........................... Induction air preheater 23.935...............
design.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.935............... Powerplant induction and
exhaust systems.
(b) and (c)....................... .......................... 23.935...............
23.1103........................... Induction system ducts.... 23.935............... Powerplant induction and
exhaust systems.
23.1105........................... Induction system screens.. 23.935...............
23.1107........................... Induction system filters.. 23.935............... Powerplant induction and
exhaust systems.
23.1109........................... Turbocharger bleed air 23.910...............
system.
23.1111........................... Turbine engine bleed air 23.910...............
system.
(a) and (c)....................... .......................... 23.910............... Hazard assessment.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.910...............
23.1121........................... Exhaust System--General... 23.935...............
(a) thru (g)...................... .......................... 23.935............... Powerplant induction and
exhaust systems.
(h)............................... .......................... 23.910............... Hazard assessment.
23.1123........................... Exhaust system............ 23.910............... Hazard assessment.
23.1125........................... Exhaust heat exchangers... 23.910...............
(a)............................... .......................... 23.910............... Hazard assessment.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.910...............
23.1141........................... Powerplant controls: 23.1505(b)...........
general (a)(c)(g).
(b)(d)(e) and (f)......... 23.910............... Powerplant installation
hazard assessment.
23.1142........................... Auxiliary power unit 23.1500(b)...........
controls.
23.1143........................... Engine controls........... 23.1500(b)...........
23.1145........................... Ignition switches......... 23.1500(b)...........
23.1147........................... Mixture controls.......... 23.1500(b)...........
23.1149........................... Propeller speed and pitch 23.1500(b)...........
controls.
23.1153........................... Propeller feathering 23.1500(b)...........
controls.
23.1155........................... Turbine engine reverse 23.910 and 23.1500(b) Hazard assessment.
thrust and propeller
pitch settings below the
flight regime.
23.1157........................... Carburetor air temperature 23.1500(b)...........
controls.
23.1163........................... Powerplant accessories.... 23.910(a)............ Powerplant installation
hazard assessment.
(a), (c), (e)..................... .......................... 23.910(a)............
(b) and (d)....................... .......................... 23.910(a)............
23.1165........................... Engine ignition systems... Means of Compliance..
23.1181........................... Designated fire zones: 23.1000(a)........... Powerplant fire
regions included. protection.
23.1182........................... Nacelle areas behind 23.1000(b)...........
firewalls.
23.1183........................... Lines, fittings, and 23.1000(b)...........
components.
23.1189........................... Shutoff means............. 23.1000(c)...........
23.1191........................... Firewalls................. 23.1000(d)...........
(a) thru (e), (g), (h)............ .......................... 23.1000(d)...........
(f)............................... .......................... 23.910............... Powerplant installation
hazard assessment.
23.1192........................... Engine accessory 23.1000(d)...........
compartment diaphragm.
23.1193........................... Cowling and nacelle....... 23.1000(d)...........
(a) thru (e)...................... .......................... 23.1000(d)...........
(f) and (g)....................... .......................... 23.1000(d)........... Hazard assessment.
23.1195........................... Fire extinguishing systems 23.1000(e)...........
23.1197........................... Fire extinguishing agents. 23.1000(e)...........
23.1199........................... Extinguishing agent 23.1000(e)...........
containers.
23.1201........................... Fire extinguishing system 23.1000(e)...........
materials.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.1000(e)........... Hazard assessment.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.1000(e)...........
23.1203........................... Fire detector system...... 23.1000(f)...........
(a), (d), (e)..................... .......................... 23.1000(f)...........
(b) and (c)....................... .......................... 23.1000(f)........... Hazard assessment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 13512]]
Subpart F--Equipment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
23.1301........................... Function and installation.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.1300(a) and Airplane level systems
23.1305(a). requirements; Function
and installation.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.1305(a)(3)........ Function and
installation.
(c)............................... .......................... 23.1305(a)(2)........ Function and
installation.
23.1303........................... Flight and navigation 23.1300, 23.1310, Airplane level systems
instruments. 23.1305(b) and (c), requirements; Flight,
and 23.1330(c). navigation, and
powerplant instruments;
Function and
installation; System
power generation,
storage, and
distribution.
23.1305........................... Powerplant instruments.... 23.1300, 23.1310 and Airplane level systems
23.1305(c). requirements; Flight,
navigation, and
powerplant instruments;
Function and
installation.
23.1306........................... Electrical and electronic 23.1320.............. Electrical and electronic
system lightning system lightning
protection. protection.
23.1307........................... Miscellaneous equipment... 23.1300 and 23.1310.. Airplane level systems
requirements; Flight,
navigation, and
powerplant instruments.
23.1308........................... High-Intensity Radiated 23.1325.............. High-intensity Radiated
Fields (HIRF) protection. Fields (HIRF)
protection.
23.1309........................... Equipment, systems, and 23.1315.............. Equipment, systems, and
installations. installations.
(a)(1)............................ .......................... 23.1300(a)........... Airplane level systems
requirements.
(a)(2)............................ .......................... 23.1300(b)........... Airplane level systems
requirements.
(b)............................... .......................... ..................... --Deleted--.
(c)............................... .......................... 23.1315(b)........... Equipment, systems, and
installations.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.1305(c)........... Function and
installation.
23.1310........................... Power source capacity and 23.1330.............. System power generation,
distribution. storage, and
distribution.
23.1311........................... Electronic display 23.1300 and 23.1310.. Airplane level systems
instrument systems. requirements; Flight,
navigation, and
powerplant instruments.
23.1321........................... Arrangement and visibility 23.1300 and 23.1310.. Airplane level systems
requirements; Flight,
navigation, and
powerplant instruments.
23.1322........................... Warning, caution, and 23.1305(b) and (c)... Flight, navigation, and
advisory lights. powerplant instruments.
23.1323........................... Airspeed indicating system 23.1300, 23.1305, Airplane level systems
23.1310, and 1315. requirements; Function
and installation;
Flight, navigation, and
powerplant instruments;
and Equipment, systems,
and installations.
(d)............................... .......................... 23.1405.............. Flight in icing
conditions.
23.1325........................... Static pressure system.... 23.1300, 23.1310, and Airplane level systems
23.1315. requirements; Flight,
navigation, and
powerplant instruments;
and Equipment, systems,
and installations.
(b)(3) and (g).................... .......................... 1405................. Flight in icing
conditions.
23.1326........................... Pitot heat indication 23.1305.............. Function and
systems. installation.
23.1327........................... Magnetic direction 23.1300, 23.1305 and Airplane level systems
indicator. 23.1310. requirements; Function
and installation;
Flight, navigation, and
powerplant instruments.
23.1329........................... Automatic pilot system.... 23.1300, 23.1305 and Airplane level systems
23.1315. requirements; Function
and installation;
Equipment, systems, and
installations.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.1300 and 23.1315.. Airplane level systems
requirements; Equipment,
systems, and
installations.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.700 and 23.1500... Flight control systems;
Flightcrew interface.
(c)............................... .......................... 23.1305.............. Function and
installation.
(d)............................... .......................... 23.700 and 23.1500... Flight control systems;
Flightcrew interface.
(e), (f), (g)..................... .......................... 23.1300 and 23.1315.. Airplane level systems
requirements; Equipment,
systems, and
installations.
(h)............................... .......................... 23.1305.............. Function and
installation.
23.1331........................... Instruments using a power
source.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.1305(c)........... Function and
installation.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.1315(b) and Equipment, systems, and
23.1330(b). installations; System
power generation,
storage, and
distribution.
(c)............................... .......................... 23.1310(b)........... Flight, navigation, and
powerplant instruments.
23.1335........................... Flight director systems... 23.1300, 23.1305, Airplane level systems;
23.1315, and 23.1500. Function and
installation; Equipment
systems and
installations; and
Flightcrew interface.
23.1337........................... Powerplant instruments
installation.
(a)............................... .......................... 23.800(g)............ Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
23.930............... Fuel systems.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.1305(c) and (d)... Function and
installation.
[[Page 13513]]
23.1310(a)........... Flight, navigation, and
powerplant instruments.
23.1315(b)........... Equipment, systems, and
installations.
(c)............................... .......................... 23.1315(b)........... Equipment, systems, and
installations.
(d)............................... .......................... 23.1305(c)........... Function and
installation.
23.1310(a)........... Flight, navigation, and
powerplant instruments.
23.1351........................... Electrical Systems-- 23.1300.............. Airplane level systems
General. requirements.
23.1305.............. Function and
installation.
23.1315.............. Equipment, systems, and
installations.
23.1330.............. System power generation,
storage, and
distribution.
23.1353........................... Storage battery design and 23.1300.............. Airplane level systems
installation. requirements.
23.1305.............. Function and
installation.
23.1315.............. Equipment, systems, and
installations.
23.1330.............. System power generation,
storage, and
distribution.
23.1357........................... Circuit protective devices 23.1300.............. Airplane level systems
requirements.
23.1305.............. Function and
installation.
23.1315.............. Equipment, systems, and
installations.
23.1330.............. System power generation,
storage, and
distribution.
23.1359........................... Electrical system fire
protection.
(a)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
(b)............................... .......................... 805.................. Flammability in
designated fire zones.
(c)............................... .......................... 800.................. Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
23.1361........................... Master switch arrangement. 23.1300 and 23.1305.. Airplane level systems
requirements; Function
and installation.
23.1365........................... Electrical cables and 23.1305.............. Function and
equipment. installation.
(b)............................... .......................... 23.805............... Flammability in
designated fire zones.
(a), (c) thru (f)................. .......................... Means of Compliance..
23.1367........................... Switches..................
(a) and (b)....................... .......................... 23.1305.............. Function and
installation.
(c) and (d)....................... .......................... 23.1500.............. Flightcrew interface.
23.1381........................... Instrument lights.........
(a) and (b)....................... .......................... 23.1500.............. Flightcrew interface.
(c)............................... .......................... 23.1335.............. External and cockpit
lighting.
23.1383(a), (b), (c).............. Taxi and landing lights... 23.1335.............. External and cockpit
lighting.
(d)............................... Taxi and landing lights... 23.800............... Fire protection outside
designated fire zones.
23.1385(a), (b), (c).............. Position light system 23.1335.............. External and cockpit
installation. lighting.
(d)............................... Position light system 23.800............... Fire protection outside
installation. designated fire zones.
23.1387........................... Position light system 23.1335.............. External and cockpit
dihedral angles. lighting.
23.1389........................... Position light 23.1335.............. External and cockpit
distribution and lighting.
intensities.
23.1391........................... Minimum intensities in the 23.1335.............. External and cockpit
horizontal plane of lighting.
position lights.
23.1393........................... Minimum intensities in any 23.1335.............. External and cockpit
vertical plane of lighting.
position lights.
23.1395........................... Maximum intensities in 23.1335.............. External and cockpit
overlapping beams of lighting.
position lights.
23.1397........................... Color specifications...... 23.1335.............. External and cockpit
lighting.
23.1399........................... Riding light.............. 23.1335.............. External and cockpit
lighting.
23.1401........................... Anticollision light system
(a), (a)(1)....................... .......................... 23.1335.............. External and cockpit
lighting.
(a)(2)............................ .......................... Means of Compliance..
(b) thru (f)...................... .......................... 23.1335.............. External and cockpit
lighting.
23.1411........................... Safety Equipment-General..
(a), (b)(1)....................... .......................... 23.1400.............. Safety equipment.
(b)(2)............................ .......................... 23.600............... Emergency conditions.
23.1415........................... Ditching equipment........ 23.1400.............. Safety equipment.
(a), (c), (d)..................... .......................... 23.1400.............. Safety equipment.
(b)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
23.1416........................... Pneumatic de-icer boot 23.1300.............. Airplane level systems
system. requirements.
.......................... 23.1305.............. Function and
installation.
23.1419........................... Ice protection............ 23.230............... Flight in icing
conditions.
23.1405.............. Performance and flight
characteristics
requirements for flight
in icing conditions.
23.1431........................... Electronic equipment...... 23.1315.............. Equipment, systems and
installations.
23.1435........................... Hydraulic systems.........
(a)(4) and (b).................... .......................... 23.1410.............. Pressurized system
elements.
[[Page 13514]]
(a), (a)(1) through (3), (c)...... .......................... Means of Compliance..
23.1437........................... Accessories for 23.1410.............. Pressurized system
multiengine airplanes. elements.
23.1438........................... Pressurization and
pneumatic systems.
(a), (b).......................... .......................... 23.1410.............. Pressurized system
elements.
(c)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
23.1410(e)........... Pressurized system
elements.
23.1441........................... Oxygen equipment and
supply.
(a)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
(b)............................... .......................... 23.1315.............. Equipment, systems and
installation.
(c), (d), (e)..................... .......................... 23.755............... Occupant physical
environment.
23.1443(a), (b), (c).............. Minimum mass flow of 23.755............... Occupant physical
supplemental oxygen. environment.
(d)............................... .......................... Definition...........
23.1445........................... Oxygen distribution system 23.755............... Occupant physical
environment.
23.1447........................... Equipment standards for
oxygen dispensing units.
(a), (b), (c), (d), (f)........... .......................... 23.755............... Occupant physical
environment.
(e)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
23.1449........................... Means for determining use 23.755............... Occupant physical
of oxygen. environment.
23.1450........................... Chemical oxygen generators
(a)............................... .......................... Means of Compliance..
(b)............................... .......................... 23.1315.............. Equipment, systems and
installation.
(c)............................... .......................... 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
control markings, and
placards.
23.1451........................... Fire protection for oxygen 23.1315.............. Equipment, systems and
equipment. installation.
23.1453........................... Protection of oxygen 23.1315.............. Equipment, systems and
equipment from rupture. installation.
23.1457........................... Cockpit voice recorders... 23.1457.............. No Change.
23.1459........................... Flight recorders..........
(a)(1)............................ .......................... 23.1459.............. Flight data recorders.
(a)(2) thru (d)................... .......................... 23.1459.............. No Change.
23.1461........................... Equipment containing high 23.755............... Occupant physical
energy rotors. environment.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart G--Operating Limitations and Information
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
23.1501........................... General................... 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
control markings, and
placards.
23.1505........................... Airspeed limitations...... 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
control markings, and
placards.
23.1507........................... Operating maneuvering 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
speed. control markings, and
placards.
23.1511........................... Flap extended speed....... 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
control markings, and
placards.
23.1513........................... Minimum control speed..... 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
control markings, and
placards.
23.1519........................... Weight and center of 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
gravity. control markings, and
placards.
23.1521........................... Powerplant limitations.... 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
control markings, and
placards.
23.1522........................... Auxiliary power unit 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
limitations. control markings, and
placards.
23.1523........................... Minimum flight crew....... 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
control markings, and
placards.
23.1524........................... Maximum passenger seating 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
configuration. control markings, and
placards.
23.1525........................... Kinds of operation........ 23.1300.............. Airplane level system
requirements.
23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
control markings, and
placards.
23.1527........................... Maximum operating altitude 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
control markings, and
placards.
23.1529........................... Instructions for continued 23.1515.............. Instructions for
airworthiness. continued airworthiness.
23.1541........................... Marking and Placards-- 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
General. control markings, and
placards.
23.1543........................... Instrument marking: 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
general. control markings, and
placards.
23.1545........................... Airspeed indicator........ 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
control markings, and
placards.
23.1547........................... Magnetic direction 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
indicator. control markings, and
placards.
23.1549........................... Powerplant and auxiliary 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
power unit instruments. control markings, and
placards.
23.1551........................... Oil quantity indicator.... 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
control markings, and
placards.
[[Page 13515]]
23.1553........................... Fuel quantity indicator... 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
control markings, and
placards.
23.1555........................... Control markings.......... 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
control markings, and
placards.
23.1557........................... Miscellaneous marking and 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
placards. control markings, and
placards.
23.1559........................... Operating limitations 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
placard. control markings, and
placards.
23.1561........................... Safety equipment.......... 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
control markings, and
placards.
23.1563........................... Airspeed placards......... 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
control markings, and
placards.
23.1567........................... Flight maneuver placard... 23.1505.............. Instrument markings,
control markings, and
placards.
23.1581........................... Airplane Flight Manual and 23.1510.............. Airplane flight manual.
Approved Manual Material--
General.
23.1583........................... Operating limitations..... 23.1510.............. Airplane flight manual.
23.1585........................... Operating procedures...... 23.1510.............. Airplane flight manual.
23.1587........................... Performance information... 23.1510.............. Airplane flight manual.
23.1589........................... Loading information....... 23.1510.............. Airplane flight manual.
Appendix A........................ Simplified Design Load Means of Compliance..
Criteria.
Appendix B........................ [Reserved]................ ..................... --Deleted--
Appendix C........................ Basic Landing Conditions.. Means of Compliance..
Appendix D........................ Wheel Spin-Up and Spring- Means of Compliance..
Back Loads.
Appendix E........................ [Reserved]................ ..................... --Deleted--
Appendix F........................ Test Procedure............ Means of Compliance..
Appendix G........................ Instructions for Continued Appendix A........... Instructions for
Airworthiness. Continued Airworthiness.
Appendix H........................ Installation of An Means of Compliance..
Automatic Power Reserve
(APR) System.
Appendix I........................ Seaplane Loads............ Means of Compliance..
Appendix J........................ HIRF Environments and Means of Compliance..
Equipment HIRF Test
Levels.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix 2 to the Preamble--Abbreviations and Acronyms Frequently Used
in This Document
AD Airworthiness Directive
AFM Airplane Flight Manual
ARC Aviation Rulemaking Committee
ASTM ASTM International
CAA Civil Aviation Authority
CAR Civil Aviation Regulations
Cf Confer (to identify a source or a usage citation for a word or
phrase)
CPS Certification Process Study
CS Certification Specification
CS-VLA Certification Specification--Very Light Aeroplanes
EASA European Aviation Safety Agency
ELOS Equivalent Level of Safety
FR Federal Register
GA General Aviation
HIRF High-Intensity Radiated Field
IFR Instrument Flight Rules
KCAS Knots Calibrated Airspeeds
LOC Loss of Control
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
NTSB National Transportation Safety Board
OMB Office of Management and Budget
SAE SAE International
SLD Supercooled Large Droplet
TCDS Type Certificate Data Sheet
VA Design Maneuvering Speed
VC Design Cruising Speed
VD Design Dive Speed
VMC Minimum Control Speed
VMO/MMO Maximum Operating Limit Speed
VFR Visual Flight Rules
VSO Stalling speed or the minimum steady flight speed in the
landing configuration
List of Subjects
14 CFR Part 21
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Recording and recordkeeping
requirements.
14 CFR Part 23
Aircraft, Aviation Safety, Signs and symbols.
14 CFR Part 35
Aircraft, Aviation safety.
14 CFR Part 43
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
14 CFR Part 91
Air traffic control, Aircraft, Airmen, Airports, Aviation safety,
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
14 CFR Part 121
Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
14 CFR Part 135
Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements.
The Proposed Amendment
In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend chapter I of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:
PART 21--CERTIFICATION PROCEDURES FOR PRODUCTS AND ARTICLES
0
1. The authority citation for part 21 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7572; 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40105,
40113, 44701-44702, 44704, 44707, 44709, 44711, 44713, 44715, 45303.
0
2. In Sec. 21.9, revise paragraphs (a)(5), (a)(6), (b), and (c)
introductory text, and add paragraph (a)(7) to read as follows:
Sec. 21.9 Replacement and modification articles.
(a) * * *
(5) Produced by an owner or operator for maintaining or altering
that owner or operator's product;
(6) Fabricated by an appropriately rated certificate holder with a
quality system, and consumed in the repair or alteration of a product
or article in
[[Page 13516]]
accordance with part 43 of this chapter; or
(7) Produced in any other manner approved by the FAA.
(b) Except as provided in paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2) and (a)(7) of
this section, a person who produces a replacement or modification
article for sale may not represent that part as suitable for
installation on a type-certificated product.
(c) Except as provided in paragraphs (a)(1), (a)(2) and (a)(7) of
this section, a person may not sell or represent an article as suitable
for installation on an aircraft type-certificated under Sec.
21.25(a)(2) or Sec. 21.27 unless that article--
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 21.17, revise paragraph (a) introductory text to read as
follows:
Sec. 21.17 Designation of applicable regulations.
(a) Except as provided in Sec. Sec. 25.2, 27.2, 29.2, and in parts
26, 34, and 36 of this subchapter, an applicant for a type certificate
must show that the aircraft, aircraft engine, or propeller concerned
meets--
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec. 21.24, revise paragraph (a)(1)(i) to read as follows:
Sec. 21.24 Issuance of type certificate: primary category aircraft.
(a) * * *
(1) * * *
(i) Is unpowered; is an airplane powered by a single, naturally
aspirated engine with a 61-knot or less Vso stall speed as
defined in Sec. 23.49 of this chapter, at amendment 23-62, effective
on Jan 31, 2012; or is a rotorcraft with a 6-pound per square foot main
rotor disc loading limitation, under sea level standard day conditions;
* * * * *
0
5. In Sec. 21.35, revise paragraph (b)(2) to read as follows:
Sec. 21.35 Flight tests.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) For aircraft to be certificated under this subchapter, except
gliders, and except for low-speed airplanes, as defined in part 23 of
this chapter, of 6,000 pounds or less maximum weight that are to be
certificated under part 23 of this chapter, to determine whether there
is reasonable assurance that the aircraft, its components, and its
equipment are reliable and function properly.
* * * * *
0
6. In Sec. 21.50, revise paragraph (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 21.50 Instructions for continued airworthiness and
manufacturer's maintenance manuals having airworthiness limitations
sections.
* * * * *
(b) The holder of a design approval, including either a type
certificate or supplemental type certificate for an aircraft, aircraft
engine, or propeller for which application was made after January 28,
1981, must furnish at least one set of complete Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness to the owner of each type aircraft, aircraft
engine, or propeller upon its delivery, or upon issuance of the first
standard airworthiness certificate for the affected aircraft, whichever
occurs later. The Instructions for Continued Airworthiness must be
prepared in accordance with Sec. Sec. 23.1515, 25.1529, 25.1729,
27.1529, 29.1529, 31.82, 33.4, 35.4, or part 26 of this subchapter, or
as specified in the applicable airworthiness criteria for special
classes of aircraft defined in Sec. 21.17(b), as applicable. If the
holder of a design approval chooses to designate parts as commercial,
it must include in the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness a list
of commercial parts submitted in accordance with the provisions of
paragraph (c) of this section. Thereafter, the holder of a design
approval must make those instructions available to any other person
required by this chapter to comply with any of the terms of those
instructions. In addition, changes to the Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness shall be made available to any person required by this
chapter to comply with any of those instructions.
* * * * *
0
7. In Sec. 21.101 revise paragraphs (b) introductory text, and (c) to
read as follows:
Sec. 21.101 Designation of applicable regulations.
* * * * *
(b) Except as provided in paragraph (g) of this section, if
paragraphs (b)(1), (2), or (3) of this section apply, an applicant may
show that the change and areas affected by the change comply with an
earlier amendment of a regulation required by paragraph (a) of this
section, and of any other regulation the FAA finds is directly related.
However, the earlier amended regulation may not precede either the
corresponding regulation incorporated by reference in the type
certificate, or any regulation in Sec. Sec. 25.2, 27.2, or Sec. 29.2
of this chapter that is related to the change. The applicant may show
compliance with an earlier amendment of a regulation for any of the
following:
* * * * *
(c) An applicant for a change to an aircraft (other than a
rotorcraft) of 6,000 pounds or less maximum weight, to a non-turbine
rotorcraft of 3,000 pounds or less maximum weight, to a simple, to a
level 1 low speed, or to a level 2 low speed airplane may show that the
change and areas affected by the change comply with the regulations
incorporated by reference in the type certificate. However, if the FAA
finds that the change is significant in an area, the FAA may designate
compliance with an amendment to the regulation incorporated by
reference in the type certificate that applies to the change and any
regulation that the FAA finds is directly related, unless the FAA also
finds that compliance with that amendment or regulation would not
contribute materially to the level of safety of the product or would be
impractical.
* * * * *
0
8. Revise part 23 to read as follows:
PART 23--AIRWORTHINESS STANDARDS: NORMAL CATEGORY AIRPLANES
Sec.
Subpart A--General
23.1 Applicability and definitions.
23.5 Certification of normal category airplanes.
23.10 Accepted means of compliance.
Subpart B--Flight
Performance
23.100 Weight and center of gravity.
23.105 Performance data.
23.110 Stall speed.
23.115 Takeoff performance.
23.120 Climb requirements.
23.125 Climb information.
23.130 Landing.
Flight Characteristics
23.200 Controllability.
23.205 Trim.
23.210 Stability.
23.215 Stall characteristics, stall warning, and spins.
23.220 Ground and water handling characteristics.
23.225 Vibration, buffeting, and high-speed characteristics.
23.230 Performance and flight characteristics requirements for
flight in icing conditions.
Subpart C--Structures
23.300 Structural design envelope.
23.305 Interaction of systems and structures.
Structural Loads
23.310 Structural design loads.
[[Page 13517]]
23.315 Flight load conditions.
23.320 Ground and water load conditions.
23.325 Component loading conditions.
23.330 Limit and ultimate loads.
Structural Performance
23.400 Structural strength.
23.405 Structural durability.
23.410 Aeroelasticity.
Design
23.500 Structural design.
23.505 Protection of structure.
23.510 Materials and processes.
23.515 Special factors of safety.
Structural Occupant Protection
23.600 Emergency conditions.
Subpart D--Design and Construction
23.700 Flight control systems.
23.705 Landing gear systems.
23.710 Buoyancy for seaplanes and amphibians.
Occupant System Design Protection
23.750 Means of egress and emergency exits.
23.755 Occupant physical environment.
Fire and High Energy Protection
23.800 Fire protection outside designated fire zones.
23.805 Fire protection in designated fire zones.
23.810 Lightning protection of structure.
Subpart E--Powerplant
23.900 Powerplant installation.
23.905 Propeller installation.
23.910 Powerplant installation hazard assessment.
23.915 Automatic power control systems.
23.920 Reversing systems.
23.925 Powerplant operational characteristics.
23.930 Fuel system.
23.935 Powerplant induction and exhaust systems.
23.940 Powerplant ice protection.
23.1000 Powerplant fire protection.
Subpart F--Equipment
23.1300 Airplane level systems requirements.
23.1305 Function and installation.
23.1310 Flight, navigation, and powerplant instruments.
23.1315 Equipment, systems, and installations.
23.1320 Electrical and electronic system lightning protection.
23.1325 High-intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF) protection.
23.1330 System power generation, storage, and distribution.
23.1335 External and cockpit lighting.
23.1400 Safety equipment.
23.1405 Flight in icing conditions.
23.1410 Pressurized system elements.
23.1457 Cockpit voice recorders.
23.1459 Flight data recorders.
Subpart G--Flightcrew Interface and Other Information
23.1500 Flightcrew interface.
23.1505 Instrument markings, control markings and placards.
23.1510 Airplane flight manual.
23.1515 Instructions for continued airworthiness.
Appendix A to Part 23--Instructions for Continued Airworthiness
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701-44702, 44704,
Pub. L. 113-53, 127 Stat. 584 (49 U.S.C. 44704) note.
Subpart A--General
Sec. 23.1 Applicability and definitions.
(a) This part prescribes airworthiness standards for the issuance
of type certificates, and changes to those certificates, for airplanes
in the normal category.
(b) For the purposes of this part, the following definitions apply:
(1) Continued safe flight and landing means an airplane is capable
of continued controlled flight and landing, possibly using emergency
procedures, without requiring exceptional pilot skill or strength. Upon
landing, some airplane damage may occur as a result of a failure
condition.
(2) Designated fire zone means a zone where catastrophic
consequences from fire in that zone must be mitigated by containing the
fire in that zone.
(3) Empty weight means the weight of the airplane with fixed
ballast, unusable fuel, full operating fluids, and other fluids
required for normal operation of airplane systems.
Sec. 23.5 Certification of normal category airplanes.
(a) Certification in the normal category applies to airplanes with
a passenger-seating configuration of 19 or less and a maximum
certificated takeoff weight of 19,000 pounds or less.
(b) Airplane certification levels are:
(1) Level 1--for airplanes with a maximum seating configuration of
0 to 1 passengers.
(2) Level 2--for airplanes with a maximum seating configuration of
2 to 6 passengers.
(3) Level 3--for airplanes with a maximum seating configuration of
7 to 9 passengers.
(4) Level 4--for airplanes with a maximum seating configuration of
10 to 19 passengers.
(c) Airplane performance levels are:
(1) Low speed--for airplanes with a VC or VMO
<= 250 Knots Calibrated Airspeed (KCAS) (and MMO <= 0.6).
(2) High speed--for airplanes with a VC or
VMO > 250 KCAS (or MMO > 0.6).
(d) Simple--Simple is defined as a level 1 airplane with a
VC or VMO <= 250 KCAS (and MMO <=
0.6), a VSO <= 45 KCAS and approved only for VFR operations.
(e) Airplanes not certified for aerobatics may be used to perform
any maneuver incident to normal flying, including--
(1) Stalls (except whip stalls); and
(2) Lazy eights, chandelles, and steep turns, in which the angle of
bank is not more than 60 degrees.
(f) Airplanes certified for aerobatics may be used to perform
maneuvers without limitations, other than those limitations necessary
to avoid damage or injury.
Sec. 23.10 Accepted means of compliance.
(a) An applicant must show the FAA how it will demonstrate
compliance with this part using a means of compliance, which may
include consensus standards, accepted by the Administrator.
(b) A person requesting acceptance of a means of compliance must
provide the means of compliance to the FAA in a form and manner
specified by the Administrator.
Subpart B--Flight
Performance
Sec. 23.100 Weight and center of gravity.
(a) The applicant must determine weights and centers of gravity
that provide limits for the safe operation of the airplane.
(b) The applicant must show compliance with each requirement of
this subpart at each combination of weight and center of gravity within
the airplane's range of loading conditions using tolerances acceptable
to the Administrator.
(c) The condition of the airplane at the time of determining its
empty weight and center of gravity must be well defined and easily
repeatable.
Sec. 23.105 Performance data.
(a) Unless otherwise prescribed, an airplane must meet the
performance requirements of this subpart in--
(1) Still air and standard atmospheric conditions at sea level for
all airplanes; and
(2) Ambient atmospheric conditions within the operating envelope
for--
(i) Level 1 high-speed and level 2 high-speed airplanes; and
(ii) Levels 3 and 4 airplanes.
(b) Unless otherwise prescribed, the applicant must develop the
performance data required by this subpart for the following conditions:
(1) Airport altitudes from sea level to 10,000 feet (3,048 meters);
and
(2) Temperatures from standard to 30[deg] Celsius above standard or
the maximum ambient atmospheric temperature at which compliance with
propulsion cooling requirements in climb is shown, if lower.
[[Page 13518]]
(c) The procedures used for determining takeoff and landing
distances must be executable consistently by pilots of average skill in
atmospheric conditions expected to be encountered in service.
(d) Performance data determined in accordance with paragraph (b) of
this section must account for losses due to atmospheric conditions,
cooling needs, and other demands on power sources.
Sec. 23.110 Stall speed.
The applicant must determine the airplane stall speed or the
minimum steady flight speed for each flight configuration used in
normal operations, including takeoff, climb, cruise, descent, approach,
and landing. Each determination must account for the most adverse
conditions for each flight configuration with power set at idle or zero
thrust.
Sec. 23.115 Takeoff performance.
(a) The applicant must determine airplane takeoff performance
accounting for--
(1) Stall speed safety margins;
(2) Minimum control speeds; and
(3) Climb gradients.
(b) For all airplanes, takeoff performance includes the
determination of ground roll and initial climb distance to 50 feet (15
meters) above the takeoff surface.
(c) For levels 1, 2, and 3 high-speed multiengine airplanes,
multiengine airplanes with a maximum takeoff weight greater than 12,500
pounds and level 4 multiengine airplanes, takeoff performance includes
a determination the following distances after a sudden critical loss of
thrust:
(1) Accelerate-stop;
(2) Ground roll and initial climb to 50 feet (15 meters) above the
takeoff surface; and
(3) Net takeoff flight path.
Sec. 23.120 Climb requirements.
The applicant must demonstrate the following minimum climb
performance out of ground effect:
(a) With all engines operating and in the initial climb
configuration--
(1) For levels 1 and 2 low speed airplanes, a climb gradient at sea
level of 8.3 percent for landplanes and 6.7 percent for seaplanes and
amphibians; and
(2) For levels 1 and 2 high-speed airplanes and all level 3
airplanes, a climb gradient at takeoff of 4 percent.
(b) After a critical loss of thrust on multiengine airplanes--
(1) For levels 1and 2 low-speed airplanes that do not meet single
engine crashworthiness requirements, a 1.5 percent climb gradient at a
pressure altitude of 5,000 feet (1,524 meters) in the cruise
configuration;
(2) For levels 1 and 2 high-speed airplanes, and level 3 low-speed
airplanes, a 1 percent climb gradient at 400 feet (122 meters) above
the takeoff surface with the landing gear retracted and flaps in the
takeoff configuration;
(3) For level 3 high-speed airplanes and all level 4 airplanes, a 2
percent climb gradient at 400 feet (122 meters) above the takeoff
surface with the landing gear retracted and flaps in the approach
configuration;
(4) At sea level for level 1 and level 2 low-speed airplanes; and
(5) At the landing surface for all other airplanes.
(c) For a balked landing, a climb gradient of 3 percent with--
(1) Takeoff power on each engine;
(2) Landing gear extended; and
(3) Flaps in the landing configuration.
Sec. 23.125 Climb information.
(a) The applicant must determine climb performance--
(1) For all single engine airplanes;
(2) For level 3 multiengine airplanes, following a critical loss of
thrust on takeoff in the initial climb configuration; and
(3) For all multiengine airplanes, during the enroute phase of
flight with all engines operating and after a critical loss of thrust
in the cruise configuration.
(b) For single engine airplanes, the applicant must determine the
glide performance of the airplane after a complete loss of thrust.
Sec. 23.130 Landing.
The applicant must determine the following, for standard
temperatures at each weight and altitude within the operational limits
for landing:
(a) The distance, starting from a height of 50 feet (15 meters)
above the landing surface, required to land and come to a stop, or for
water operations, reach a speed of 3 knots.
(b) The approach and landing speeds, configurations, and
procedures, which allow a pilot of average skill to meet the landing
distance consistently and without causing damage or injury.
Flight Characteristics
Sec. 23.200 Controllability.
(a) The airplane must be controllable and maneuverable, without
requiring exceptional piloting skill, alertness, or strength, within
the operating envelope--
(1) At all loading conditions for which certification is requested;
(2) During low-speed operations, including stalls;
(3) With any probable flight control or propulsion system failure;
and
(4) During configuration changes.
(b) The airplane must be able to complete a landing without causing
damage or serious injury, in the landing configuration at a speed of
VREF minus 5 knots using the approach gradient equal to the
steepest used in the landing distance determination.
(c) For levels 1 and 2 multiengine airplanes that cannot climb
after a critical loss of thrust, VMC must not exceed
VS1 or VS0 for all practical weights and
configurations within the operating envelope of the airplane.
(d) If the applicant requests certification of an airplane for
aerobatics, the applicant must demonstrate those aerobatic maneuvers
for which certification is requested and determine entry speeds.
Sec. 23.205 Trim.
(a) The airplane must maintain longitudinal, lateral, and
directional trim under the following conditions:
(1) For levels 1, 2, and 3 airplanes, in cruise, without further
force upon, or movement of, the primary flight controls or
corresponding trim controls by the pilot, or the flight control system.
(2) For level 4 airplanes in normal operations, without further
force upon, or movement of, the primary flight controls or
corresponding trim controls by the pilot, or the flight control system.
(b) The airplane must maintain longitudinal trim under the
following conditions:
(1) Climb.
(2) Level flight.
(3) Descent.
(4) Approach.
(c) Residual forces must not fatigue or distract the pilot during
likely emergency operations, including a critical loss of thrust on
multiengine airplanes.
Sec. 23.210 Stability.
(a) Airplanes not certified for aerobatics must--
(1) Have static longitudinal, lateral, and directional stability in
normal operations;
(2) Have dynamic short period and combined lateral-directional
stability in normal operations; and
(3) Provide stable control force feedback throughout the operating
envelope.
(b) No airplane may exhibit any divergent longitudinal stability
characteristic so unstable as to increase the pilot's workload or
otherwise endanger the airplane and its occupants.
[[Page 13519]]
Sec. 23.215 Stall characteristics, stall warning, and spins.
(a) The airplane must have controllable stall characteristics in
straight flight, turning flight, and accelerated turning flight with a
clear and distinctive stall warning that provides sufficient margin to
prevent inadvertent stalling.
(b) Levels 1 and 2 airplanes and level 3 single-engine airplanes,
not certified for aerobatics, must not have a tendency to inadvertently
depart controlled flight.
(c) Airplanes certified for aerobatics must have controllable stall
characteristics and the ability to recover within one and one-half
additional turns after initiation of the first control action from any
point in a spin, not exceeding six turns or any greater number of turns
for which certification is requested, while remaining within the
operating limitations of the airplane.
(d) Spin characteristics in airplanes certified for aerobatics must
not result in unrecoverable spins--
(1) With any use of the flight or engine power controls; or
(2) Due to pilot disorientation or incapacitation.
Sec. 23.220 Ground and water handling characteristics.
(a) For airplanes intended for operation on land or water, the
airplane must have controllable longitudinal and directional handling
characteristics during taxi, takeoff, and landing operations.
(b) For airplanes intended for operation on water, the following
must be established and included in the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM):
(1) The maximum wave height at which the aircraft demonstrates
compliance to paragraph (a) of this section. This wave height does not
constitute an operating limitation.
(2) Any necessary water handling procedures.
Sec. 23.225 Vibration, buffeting, and high-speed characteristics.
(a) Vibration and buffeting, for operations up to VD/
MD, must not interfere with the control of the airplane or
cause fatigue to the flightcrew. Stall warning buffet within these
limits is allowable.
(b) For high-speed airplanes and all airplanes with a maximum
operating altitude greater than 25,000 feet (7,620 meters) pressure
altitude, there must be no perceptible buffeting in cruise
configuration at 1g and at any speed up to VMO/
MMO, except stall buffeting.
(c) For high-speed airplanes, the applicant must determine the
positive maneuvering load factors at which the onset of perceptible
buffet occurs in the cruise configuration within the operational
envelope. Likely inadvertent excursions beyond this boundary must not
result in structural damage.
(d) High-speed airplanes must have recovery characteristics that do
not result in structural damage or loss of control, beginning at any
likely speed up to VMO/MMO, following--
(1) An inadvertent speed increase; and
(2) A high-speed trim upset.
Sec. 23.230 Performance and flight characteristics requirements for
flight in icing conditions.
(a) If an applicant requests certification for flight in icing
conditions as specified in part 1 of appendix C to part 25 of this
chapter and any additional atmospheric icing conditions for which an
applicant requests certification, the applicant must demonstrate the
following:
(1) Compliance with each requirement of this subpart, except those
applicable to spins and any that must be demonstrated at speeds in
excess of--
(i) 250 knots CAS;
(ii) VMO or MMO; or
(iii) A speed at which the applicant demonstrates the airframe will
be free of ice accretion.
(2) The stall warning for flight in icing conditions and non-icing
conditions is the same.
(b) If an applicant requests certification for flight in icing
conditions, the applicant must provide a means to detect any icing
conditions for which certification is not requested and demonstrate the
aircraft's ability to avoid or exit those conditions.
(c) The applicant must develop an operating limitation to prohibit
intentional flight, including takeoff and landing, into icing
conditions for which the airplane is not certified to operate.
Subpart C--Structures
Sec. 23.300 Structural design envelope.
The applicant must determine the structural design envelope, which
describes the range and limits of airplane design and operational
parameters for which the applicant will show compliance with the
requirements of this subpart. The applicant must account for all
airplane design and operational parameters that affect structural
loads, strength, durability, and aeroelasticity, including:
(a) Structural design airspeeds and Mach numbers, including--
(1) The design maneuvering airspeed, VA, which may be no
less than the airspeed at which the airplane will stall at the maximum
design maneuvering load factor;
(2) The design cruising airspeed, VC or MC,
which may be no less than the maximum speed expected in normal
operations;
(3) The design dive airspeed, VD or MD, which
is the airspeed that will not be exceeded by inadvertent airspeed
increases when operating at VC or MC;
(4) Any other design airspeed limitations required for the
operation of high lift devices, landing gear, and other equipment or
devices; and
(5) For level 4 airplanes, a rough air penetration speed,
VB.
(b) Design maneuvering load factors not less than those, which
service history shows, may occur within the structural design envelope.
(c) Inertial properties including weight, center of gravity, and
mass moments of inertia, accounting for--
(1) All weights from the airplane empty weight to the maximum
weight; and
(2) The weight and distribution of occupants, payload, and fuel.
(d) Range of motion for control surfaces, high lift devices, or
other moveable surfaces, including tolerances.
(e) All altitudes up to the maximum altitude.
Sec. 23.305 Interaction of systems and structures.
For airplanes equipped with systems that affect structural
performance, either directly or as a result of failure or malfunction,
the applicant must account for the influence and failure conditions of
these systems when showing compliance with the requirements of this
subpart.
Structural Loads
Sec. 23.310 Structural design loads.
The applicant must:
(a) Determine structural design loads resulting from any externally
or internally applied pressure, force, or moment which may occur in
flight, ground and water operations, ground and water handling, and
while the airplane is parked or moored.
(b) Determine the loads required by paragraph (a) of this section
at all critical combinations of parameters, on and within the
boundaries of the structural design envelope.
(c) The magnitude and distribution of these loads must be based on
physical principles and may be no less than service history shows will
occur within the structural design envelope.
Sec. 23.315 Flight load conditions.
The applicant must determine the structural design loads resulting
from the following flight conditions:
[[Page 13520]]
(a) Vertical and horizontal atmospheric gusts where the magnitude
and gradient of these gusts are based on measured gust statistics.
(b) Symmetric and asymmetric maneuvers.
(c) For canted lifting surfaces, vertical and horizontal loads
acting simultaneously resulting from gust and maneuver conditions.
(d) For multiengine airplanes, failure of the powerplant unit which
results in the most severe structural loads.
Sec. 23.320 Ground and water load conditions.
The applicant must determine the structural design loads resulting
from the following ground and water operations:
(a) For airplanes intended for operation on land--taxi, takeoff,
landing, and ground handling conditions occurring in normal and adverse
attitudes and configurations.
(b) For airplanes intended for operation on water--taxi, takeoff,
landing, and water handling conditions occurring in normal and adverse
attitudes and configurations in the most severe sea conditions expected
in operation.
(c) Jacking and towing conditions.
Sec. 23.325 Component loading conditions.
The applicant must determine the structural design loads acting on:
(a) Each engine mount and its supporting structure resulting from
engine operation combined with gusts and maneuvers.
(b) Each flight control and high lift surface, their associated
system and supporting structure resulting from--
(1) The inertia of each surface and mass balance attachment;
(2) Gusts and maneuvers;
(3) Pilot or automated system inputs;
(4) System induced conditions, including jamming and friction; and
(5) Ground operations, including downwind taxi and ground gusts.
(c) A pressurized cabin resulting from the pressurization
differential--
(1) From zero up to the maximum relief valve setting combined with
gust and maneuver loads;
(2) From zero up to the maximum relief valve setting combined with
ground and water loads if the airplane may land with the cabin
pressurized; and
(3) At the maximum relief valve setting multiplied by 1.33,
omitting all other loads.
Sec. 23.330 Limit and ultimate loads.
Unless special or other factors of safety are necessary to meet the
requirements of this subpart, the applicant must determine--
(a) The limit loads, which are equal to the structural design
loads; and
(b) The ultimate loads, which are equal to the limit loads
multiplied by a 1.5 factor of safety.
Structural Performance
Sec. 23.400 Structural strength.
The applicant must demonstrate that the structure will support:
(a) Limit loads without--
(1) Interference with the operation of the airplane; and
(2) Detrimental permanent deformation.
(b) Ultimate loads.
Sec. 23.405 Structural durability.
(a) The applicant must develop and implement procedures to prevent
structural failures due to foreseeable causes of strength degradation,
which could result in serious or fatal injuries, loss of the airplane,
or extended periods of operation with reduced safety margins. The
Instructions for Continued Airworthiness must include procedures
developed under this section.
(b) If a pressurized cabin has two or more compartments separated
by bulkheads or a floor, the applicant must design the structure for a
sudden release of pressure in any compartment that has a door or
window, considering failure of the largest door or window opening in
the compartment.
(c) For airplanes with maximum operating altitude greater than
41,000 feet, the procedures developed for compliance to paragraph (a)
of this section must be capable of detecting damage to the pressurized
cabin structure before the damage could result in rapid decompression
that would result in serious or fatal injuries.
(d) The airplane must be capable of continued safe flight and
landing with structural damage caused by high-energy fragments from an
uncontained engine or rotating machinery failure.
Sec. 23.410 Aeroelasticity.
(a) The airplane must be free from flutter, control reversal, and
divergence--
(1) At all speeds within and sufficiently beyond the structural
design envelope;
(2) For any configuration and condition of operation;
(3) Accounting for critical degrees of freedom; and
(4) Accounting for any critical failures or malfunctions.
(b) The applicant must establish and account for tolerances for all
quantities that affect flutter.
Design
Sec. 23.500 Structural design.
(a) The applicant must design each part, article, and assembly for
the expected operating conditions of the airplane.
(b) Design data must adequately define the part, article, or
assembly configuration, its design features, and any materials and
processes used.
(c) The applicant must determine the suitability of each design
detail and part having an important bearing on safety in operations.
(d) The control system must be free from jamming, excessive
friction, and excessive deflection when--
(1) The control system and its supporting structure are subjected
to loads corresponding to the limit airloads;
(2) The primary controls are subjected to the lesser of the limit
airloads or limit pilot forces; and
(3) The secondary controls are subjected to loads not less than
those corresponding to maximum pilot effort.
Sec. 23.505 Protection of structure.
(a) The applicant must protect each part of the airplane, including
small parts such as fasteners, against deterioration or loss of
strength due to any cause likely to occur in the expected operational
environment.
(b) Each part of the airplane must have adequate provisions for
ventilation and drainage.
(c) For each part that requires maintenance, preventive
maintenance, or servicing, the applicant must incorporate a means into
the aircraft design to allow such actions to be accomplished.
Sec. 23.510 Materials and processes.
(a) The applicant must determine the suitability and durability of
materials used for parts, articles, and assemblies, the failure of
which could prevent continued safe flight and landing. The applicant
must account for the effects of likely environmental conditions
expected in service.
(b) The methods and processes of fabrication and assembly used must
produce consistently sound structures. If a fabrication process
requires close control to reach this objective, the applicant must
perform the process under an approved process specification.
(c) Except as provided in paragraphs (f) and (g) of this section,
the applicant must select design values that ensure material strength
with probabilities that account for the criticality of the structural
element. Design values must
[[Page 13521]]
account for the probability of structural failure due to material
variability.
(d) If material strength properties are required, a determination
of those properties must be based on sufficient tests of material
meeting specifications to establish design values on a statistical
basis.
(e) If thermal effects are significant on an essential component or
structure under normal operating conditions, the applicant must
determine those effects on allowable stresses used for design.
(f) Design values, greater than the minimums specified by this
section, may be used, where only guaranteed minimum values are normally
allowed, if a specimen of each individual item is tested before use to
determine that the actual strength properties of that particular item
will equal or exceed those used in the design.
(g) An applicant may use other material design values if approved
by the Administrator.
Sec. 23.515 Special factors of safety.
(a) The applicant must determine a special factor of safety for any
critical design value that is--
(1) Uncertain;
(2) Used for a part, article, or assembly that is likely to
deteriorate in service before normal replacement; or
(3) Subject to appreciable variability because of uncertainties in
manufacturing processes or inspection methods.
(b) The applicant must determine a special factor of safety using
quality controls and specifications that account for each--
(1) Structural application;
(2) Inspection method;
(3) Structural test requirement;
(4) Sampling percentage; and
(5) Process and material control.
(c) The applicant must apply any special factor of safety in the
design for each part of the structure by multiplying each limit load
and ultimate load by the special factor of safety.
Structural Occupant Protection
Sec. 23.600 Emergency conditions.
(a) The airplane, even when damaged in an emergency landing, must
protect each occupant against injury that would preclude egress when--
(1) Properly using safety equipment and features provided for in
the design;
(2) The occupant experiences ultimate static inertia loads likely
to occur in an emergency landing; and
(3) Items of mass, including engines or auxiliary power units
(APUs), within or aft of the cabin, that could injure an occupant,
experience ultimate static inertia loads likely to occur in an
emergency landing.
(b) The emergency landing conditions specified in paragraph (a) of
this section, must--
(1) Include dynamic conditions that are likely to occur with an
impact at stall speed, accounting for variations in aircraft mass,
flight path angle, flight pitch angle, yaw, and airplane configuration,
including likely failure conditions at impact; and
(2) Not exceed established human injury criteria for human
tolerance due to restraint or contact with objects in the airplane.
(c) The airplane must have seating and restraints for all
occupants. The airplane seating, restraints, and cabin interior must
account for likely flight and emergency landing conditions.
(d) Each occupant restraint system must consist of a seat, a method
to restrain the occupant's pelvis and torso, and a single action
restraint release. For all flight and ground loads during normal
operation and any emergency landing conditions, the restraint system
must perform its intended function and not create a hazard that could
cause a secondary injury to an occupant. The restraint system must not
prevent occupant egress or interfere with the operation of the airplane
when not in use.
(e) Each baggage and cargo compartment must--
(1) Be designed for its maximum weight of contents and for the
critical load distributions at the maximum load factors corresponding
to the flight and ground load conditions determined under this part;
(2) Have a means to prevent the contents of the compartment from
becoming a hazard by impacting occupants or shifting; and
(3) Protect any controls, wiring, lines, equipment, or accessories
whose damage or failure would affect operations.
Subpart D--Design and Construction
Sec. 23.700 Flight control systems.
(a) The applicant must design airplane flight control systems to:
(1) Prevent major, hazardous, and catastrophic hazards, including--
(i) Failure;
(ii) Operational hazards;
(iii) Flutter;
(iv) Asymmetry; and
(v) Misconfiguration.
(2) Operate easily, smoothly, and positively enough to allow normal
operation.
(b) The applicant must design trim systems to:
(1) Prevent inadvertent, incorrect, or abrupt trim operation.
(2) Provide a means to indicate--
(i) The direction of trim control movement relative to airplane
motion;
(ii) The trim position with respect to the trim range;
(iii) The neutral position for lateral and directional trim; and
(iv) For all airplanes, except simple airplanes, the range for
takeoff for all applicant requested center of gravity ranges and
configurations.
(3) Except for simple airplanes, provide control for continued safe
flight and landing when any one connecting or transmitting element in
the primary flight control system fails.
(4) Limit the range of travel to allow safe flight and landing, if
an adjustable stabilizer is used.
(c) For an airplane equipped with an artificial stall barrier
system, the system must--
(1) Prevent uncommanded control or thrust action; and
(2) Provide for a preflight check.
(d) For level 3 high-speed and all level 4 airplanes, an applicant
must install a takeoff warning system on the airplane unless the
applicant demonstrates the airplane, for each configuration, can
takeoff at the limits of the trim and flap ranges.
Sec. 23.705 Landing gear systems.
(a) For airplanes with retractable landing gear:
(1) The landing gear and retracting mechanism, including the wheel
well doors, must be able to withstand operational and flight loads.
(2) The airplane must have--
(i) A positive means to keep the landing gear extended;
(ii) A secondary means of extension for landing gear that cannot be
extended using the primary means;
(iii) A means to inform the pilot that each landing gear is secured
in the extended and retracted positions; and
(iv) Except for airplanes intended for operation on water, a
warning to the pilot if the thrust and configuration is selected for
landing and the landing gear is not fully extended and locked.
(3) If the landing gear bay is used as the location for equipment
other than the landing gear, that equipment must be designed and
installed to avoid damage from tire burst and from items that may enter
the landing gear bay.
(b) The design of each landing gear wheel, tire, and ski must
account for critical loads, including those experienced during landing
and rejected takeoff.
(c) A reliable means of stopping the airplane must provide kinetic
energy absorption within the airplane's design specifications for
landing.
[[Page 13522]]
(d) For levels 3 and 4 multiengine airplanes, the braking system
must provide kinetic energy absorption within the airplane's design
specifications for rejected takeoff.
Sec. 23.710 Buoyancy for seaplanes and amphibians.
Airplanes intended for operations on water, must--
(a) Provide buoyancy of 80 percent in excess of the buoyancy
required to support the maximum weight of the airplane in fresh water;
and
(b) Have sufficient watertight compartments so the airplane will
stay afloat at rest in calm water without capsizing if any two
compartments of any main float or hull are flooded.
Occupant System Design Protection
Sec. 23.750 Means of egress and emergency exits.
(a) The airplane cabin exit design must provide for evacuation of
the airplane within 90 seconds in conditions likely to occur following
an emergency landing. Likely conditions exclude ditching for all but
levels 3 and 4 multiengine airplanes.
(b) Each exit must have a means to be opened from both inside and
outside the airplane, when the internal locking mechanism is in the
locked and unlocked position. The means of opening must be simple,
obvious, and marked inside and outside the airplane.
(c) Airplane evacuation paths must protect occupants from serious
injury from the propulsion system.
(d) Each exit must not be obstructed by a seat or seat back, unless
the seat or seat back can be easily moved in one action to clear the
exit.
(e) Airplanes certified for aerobatics must have a means to egress
the airplane in flight.
(f) Doors, canopies, and exits must be protected from opening
inadvertently in flight.
Sec. 23.755 Occupant physical environment.
(a) The applicant must design the airplane to--
(1) Allow clear communication between the flightcrew and
passengers;
(2) Provide a clear, sufficiently undistorted external view to
enable the flightcrew to perform any maneuvers within the operating
limitations of the airplane;
(3) Protect the pilot from serious injury due to high energy
rotating failures in systems and equipment; and
(4) Protect the occupants from serious injury due to damage to
windshields, windows, and canopies.
(b) For level 4 airplanes, each windshield and its supporting
structure directly in front of the pilot must--
(1) Withstand, without penetration, the impact equivalent to a two-
pound bird when the velocity of the airplane is equal to the airplane's
maximum approach flap speed; and
(2) Allow for continued safe flight and landing after the loss of
vision through any one panel.
(c) The airplane must provide each occupant with air at a
breathable pressure, free of hazardous concentrations of gases and
vapors, during normal operations and likely failures.
(d) If an oxygen system is installed in the airplane, it must
include--
(1) A means to allow the flightcrew to determine the quantity of
oxygen available in each source of supply on the ground and in flight;
(2) A means to determine whether oxygen is being delivered; and
(3) A means to permit the flightcrew to turn on and shut off the
oxygen supply at any high-pressure source in flight.
(e) If a pressurization system is installed in the airplane, it
must include--
(1) A warning if an unsafe condition exists; and
(2) A pressurization system test.
Fire and High Energy Protection
Sec. 23.800 Fire protection outside designated fire zones.
Outside designated fire zones:
(a) The following materials must be self-extinguishing--
(1) Insulation on electrical wire and electrical cable;
(2) For levels 1, 2, and 3 airplanes, materials in the baggage and
cargo compartments inaccessible in flight; and
(3) For level 4 airplanes, materials in the cockpit, cabin,
baggage, and cargo compartments.
(b) The following materials must be flame resistant--
(1) For levels 1, 2 and 3 airplanes, materials in each compartment
accessible in flight; and
(2) Any electrical cable installation that would overheat in the
event of circuit overload or fault.
(c) Thermal acoustic materials, if installed, must not be a flame
propagation hazard.
(d) Sources of heat that are capable of igniting adjacent objects
must be shielded and insulated to prevent such ignition.
(e) For level 4 airplanes, each baggage and cargo compartment
must--
(1) Be located where a fire would be visible to the pilots, or
equipped with a fire detection system and warning system; and
(2) Be accessible for the manual extinguishing of a fire, have a
built-in fire extinguishing system, or be constructed and sealed to
contain any fire within the compartment.
(f) There must be a means to extinguish any fire in the cabin such
that--
(1) The pilot, while seated, can easily access the fire
extinguishing means; and
(2) For levels 3 and 4 airplanes, passengers have a fire
extinguishing means available within the passenger compartment.
(g) Each area where flammable fluids or vapors might escape by
leakage of a fluid system must--
(1) Be defined; and
(2) Have a means to make fluid and vapor ignition, and the
resultant hazard, if ignition occurs, improbable.
(h) Combustion heater installations must be protected from
uncontained fire.
Sec. 23.805 Fire protection in designated fire zones.
Inside designated fire zones:
(a) Flight controls, engine mounts, and other flight structures
within or adjacent to those zones must be capable of withstanding the
effects of a fire.
(b) Engines must remain attached to the airplane in the event of a
fire or electrical arcing.
(c) Terminals, equipment, and electrical cables used during
emergency procedures must be fire-resistant.
Sec. 23.810 Lightning protection of structure.
(a) For airplanes approved for instrument flight rules, no
structural failure preventing continued safe flight and landing may
occur from exposure to the direct effects of lightning.
(b) Airplanes approved only for visual flight rules must achieve
lightning protection by following FAA accepted design practices.
Subpart E--Powerplant
Sec. 23.900 Powerplant installation.
(a) For the purpose of this subpart, the airplane powerplant
installation must include each component necessary for propulsion,
affects propulsion safety, or provides auxiliary power to the airplane.
(b) The applicant must construct and arrange each powerplant
installation to account for likely hazards in operation and
maintenance.
(c) Except for simple airplanes, each aircraft power unit must be
type certificated.
Sec. 23.905 Propeller installation.
(a) Except for simple airplanes, each propeller must be type
certificated.
[[Page 13523]]
(b) Each pusher propeller must be marked so that it is conspicuous
under daylight conditions.
(c) Each propeller installation must account for vibration and
fatigue.
Sec. 23.910 Powerplant installation hazard assessment.
The applicant must assess each powerplant separately and in
relation to other airplane systems and installations to show that a
failure of any powerplant system component or accessory will not--
(a) Prevent continued safe flight and landing;
(b) Cause serious injury that may be avoided; and
(c) Require immediate action by crewmembers for continued operation
of any remaining powerplant system.
Sec. 23.915 Automatic power control systems.
A power or thrust augmentation system that automatically controls
the power or thrust on the operating powerplant, must--
(a) Provide indication to the flightcrew when the system is
operating;
(b) Provide a means for the pilot to deactivate the automatic
function; and
(c) Prevent inadvertent deactivation.
Sec. 23.920 Reversing systems.
The airplane must be capable of continued safe flight and landing
under any available reversing system setting.
Sec. 23.925 Powerplant operational characteristics.
(a) The powerplant must operate at any negative acceleration that
may occur during normal and emergency operation, within the airplane
operating limitations.
(b) The pilot must have the capability to stop and restart the
powerplant in flight.
(c) The airplane must have an independent power source for
restarting each powerplant following an in-flight shutdown.
Sec. 23.930 Fuel system
(a) Each fuel system must--
(1) Provide an independent fuel supply to each powerplant in at
least one configuration;
(2) Avoid ignition from unplanned sources;
(3) Provide the fuel required to achieve maximum power or thrust
plus a margin for likely variables, in all temperature and altitude
conditions within the airplane operating envelope;
(4) Provide a means to remove the fuel from the airplane;
(5) Be capable of retaining fuel when subject to inertia loads
under expected operating conditions; and
(6) Prevent hazardous contamination of the fuel supply.
(b) Each fuel storage system must--
(1) Withstand the loads and pressures under expected operating
conditions;
(2) Provide a means to prevent loss of fuel during any maneuver
under operating conditions for which certification is requested;
(3) Prevent discharge when transferring fuel;
(4) Provide fuel for at least one-half hour of operation at maximum
continuous power or thrust; and
(5) Be capable of jettisoning fuel if required for landing.
(c) If a pressure refueling system is installed, it must have a
means to--
(1) Prevent the escape of hazardous quantities of fuel;
(2) Automatically shut-off before exceeding the maximum fuel
quantity of the airplane; and
(3) Provide an indication of a failure at the fueling station.
Sec. 23.935 Powerplant induction and exhaust systems.
The air induction system for each power unit and its accessories
must--
(a) Supply the air required by that power unit and its accessories
under expected operating conditions; and
(b) Provide a means to discharge potential harmful material.
Sec. 23.940 Powerplant ice protection.
(a) The airplane design must prevent foreseeable accumulation of
ice or snow that adversely affects powerplant operation.
(b) The powerplant design must prevent any accumulation of ice or
snow that adversely affects powerplant operation, in those icing
conditions for which certification is requested.
Sec. 23.1000 Powerplant fire protection.
(a) A powerplant may only be installed in a designated fire zone.
(b) Each component, line, and fitting carrying flammable fluids,
gases, or air subject to fire conditions must be fire resistant, except
components storing concentrated flammable material must be fireproof or
enclosed by a fireproof shield.
(c) The applicant must provide a means to shut off fuel or
flammable material for each powerplant that must--
(1) Not restrict fuel to remaining units; and
(2) Prevent inadvertent operation.
(d) For levels 3 and 4 airplanes with a powerplant located outside
the pilot's view that uses combustible fuel, the applicant must install
a fire extinguishing system.
(e) For levels 3 and 4 airplanes, the applicant must install a fire
detection system in each designated fire zone.
(f) Each fire detection system must provide a means to alert the
flightcrew in the event of a detection of fire or failure of the
system.
(g) There must be a means to check the fire detection system in
flight.
Subpart F--Equipment
Sec. 23.1300 Airplane level systems requirements.
(a) The equipment and systems required for an airplane to operate
safely in the kinds of operations for which certification is requested
(Day VFR, Night VFR, IFR) must be designed and installed to--
(1) Meet the level of safety applicable to the certification and
performance level of the airplane; and
(2) Perform their intended function throughout the operating and
environmental limits specified by the applicant.
(b) Non[hyphen]required airplane equipment and systems, considered
separately and in relation to other systems, must be designed and
installed so their operation or failure does not have an adverse effect
on the airplane or its occupants.
Sec. 23.1305 Function and installation.
(a) Each item of installed equipment must--
(1) Perform its intended function;
(2) Be installed according to limitations specified for that
equipment; and
(3) Be labeled, if applicable, as to its identification, function
or operating limitations, or any combination of these factors.
(b) There must be a discernable means of providing system operating
parameters required to operate the airplane, including warnings,
cautions, and normal indications to the responsible crewmember.
(c) Information concerning an unsafe system operating condition
must be provided in a timely manner to the crewmember responsible for
taking corrective action. Presentation of this information must be
clear enough to avoid likely crewmember errors.
Sec. 23.1310 Flight, navigation, and powerplant instruments.
(a) Installed systems must provide the flightcrew member who sets
or monitors flight parameters for the flight, navigation, and
powerplant the information necessary to do so during each phase of
flight. This information must include--
[[Page 13524]]
(1) Parameters and trends, as needed for normal, abnormal, and
emergency operation; and
(2) Limitations, unless the applicant shows each limitation will
not be exceeded in all intended operations.
(b) Indication systems that integrate the display of flight or
powerplant parameters to operate the airplane or are required by the
operating rules of this chapter must--
(1) Not inhibit the primary display of flight or powerplant
parameters needed by any flightcrew member in any normal mode of
operation; and
(2) In combination with other systems, be designed and installed so
information essential for continued safe flight and landing will be
available to the flightcrew in a timely manner after any single failure
or probable combination of failures.
Sec. 23.1315 Equipment, systems, and installations.
For any airplane system or equipment whose failure or abnormal
operation has not been specifically addressed by another requirement in
this part, the applicant must:
(a) Examine the design and installation of airplane systems and
equipment, separately and in relation to other airplane systems and
equipment to determine--
(1) If a failure would prevent continued safe flight and landing;
and
(2) If any other failure would significantly reduce the capability
of the airplane or the ability of the flightcrew to cope with adverse
operating conditions.
(b) Design and install each system and equipment, examined
separately and in relation to other airplane systems and equipment,
such that--
(1) Each catastrophic failure condition is extremely improbable;
(2) Each hazardous failure condition is extremely remote; and
(3) Each major failure condition is remote.
Sec. 23.1320 Electrical and electronic system lightning protection.
For an airplane approved for IFR operations:
(a) Each electrical or electronic system that performs a function,
the failure of which would prevent the continued safe flight and
landing of the airplane, must be designed and installed such that--
(1) The airplane system level function continues to perform during
and after the time the airplane is exposed to lightning; and
(2) The system automatically recovers normal operation of that
function in a timely manner after the airplane is exposed to lightning
unless the system's recovery conflicts with other operational or
functional requirements of the system.
(b) Each electrical and electronic system that performs a function,
the failure of which would reduce the capability of the airplane or the
ability of the flightcrew to respond to an adverse operating condition,
must be designed and installed such that the function recovers normal
operation in a timely manner after the airplane is exposed to
lightning.
Sec. 23.1325 High-intensity Radiated Fields (HIRF) protection.
(a) Electrical and electronic systems that perform a function, the
failure of which would prevent the continued safe flight and landing of
the airplane, must be designed and installed such that--
(1) The airplane system level function is not adversely affected
during and after the time the airplane is exposed to the HIRF
environment; and
(2) The system automatically recovers normal operation of that
function in a timely manner after the airplane is exposed to the HIRF
environment, unless the system's recovery conflicts with other
operational or functional requirements of the system.
(b) For airplanes approved for IFR operations, the applicant must
design and install each electrical and electronic system that performs
a function, the failure of which would reduce the capability of the
airplane or the ability of the flightcrew to respond to an adverse
operating condition, so the function recovers normal operation in a
timely manner after the airplane is exposed to the HIRF environment.
Sec. 23.1330 System power generation, storage, and distribution.
The power generation, storage, and distribution for any system must
be designed and installed to--
(a) Supply the power required for operation of connected loads
during all likely operating conditions;
(b) Ensure no single failure or malfunction will prevent the system
from supplying the essential loads required for continued safe flight
and landing; and
(c) Have enough capacity, if the primary source fails, to supply
essential loads, including non-continuous essential loads for the time
needed to complete the function, for--
(1) At least 30 minutes for airplanes certificated with a maximum
altitude of 25,000 feet (7,620 meters) or less; and
(2) At least 60 minutes for airplanes certificated with a maximum
altitude over 25,000 feet (7,620 meters).
Sec. 23.1335 External and cockpit lighting.
(a) The applicant must design and install all lights to prevent
adverse effects on the performance of flightcrew duties.
(b) Any position and anti-collision lights, if required by part 91
of this chapter, must have the intensities, flash rate, colors, fields
of coverage, and other characteristics to provide sufficient time for
another aircraft to avoid a collision.
(c) Any position lights, if required by part 91 of this chapter,
must include a red light on the left side of the airplane, a green
light on the right side of the airplane, spaced laterally as far apart
as space allows, and a white light facing aft, located on an aft
portion of the airplane or on the wing tips.
(d) The applicant must design and install taxi and landing lights
so they provide sufficient light for night operations.
(e) For seaplanes or amphibian airplanes, riding lights must
provide a white light visible in clear atmospheric conditions.
Sec. 23.1400 Safety equipment.
Safety and survival equipment, required by the operating rules of
this chapter, must be reliable, readily accessible, easily
identifiable, and clearly marked to identify its method of operation.
Sec. 23.1405 Flight in icing conditions.
(a) If an applicant requests certification for flight in icing
conditions, the applicant must demonstrate that--
(1) The ice protection system provides for safe operation; and
(2) The airplane is protected from stalling when the autopilot is
operating in a vertical mode.
(b) The demonstration specified in paragraph (a) of this section,
must be conducted in atmospheric icing conditions specified in part 1
of appendix C to part 25 of this chapter, and any additional icing
conditions for which certification is requested.
Sec. 23.1410 Pressurized systems elements.
(a) The minimum burst pressure of hydraulic systems must be at
least 2.5 times the design operating pressure. The proof pressure must
be at least 1.5 times the maximum operating pressure.
(b) On multiengine airplanes, engine driven accessories essential
to safe operation must be distributed among multiple engines.
(c) The minimum burst pressure of cabin pressurization system
elements must be at least 2.0 times, and proof pressure must be at
least 1.5 times, the maximum normal operating pressure.
[[Page 13525]]
(d) The minimum burst pressure of pneumatic system elements must be
at least 3.0 times, and proof pressure must be at least 1.5 times, the
maximum normal operating pressure.
(e) Other pressurized system elements must have pressure margins
that take into account system design and operating conditions.
Sec. 23.1457 Cockpit voice recorders.
(a) Each cockpit voice recorder required by the operating rules of
this chapter must be approved and must be installed so that it will
record the following:
(1) Voice communications transmitted from or received in the
airplane by radio.
(2) Voice communications of flightcrew members on the flight deck.
(3) Voice communications of flightcrew members on the flight deck,
using the airplane's interphone system.
(4) Voice or audio signals identifying navigation or approach aids
introduced into a headset or speaker.
(5) Voice communications of flightcrew members using the passenger
loudspeaker system, if there is such a system and if the fourth channel
is available in accordance with the requirements of paragraph
(c)(4)(ii) of this section.
(6) If datalink communication equipment is installed, all datalink
communications, using an approved data message set. Datalink messages
must be recorded as the output signal from the communications unit that
translates the signal into usable data.
(b) The recording requirements of paragraph (a)(2) of this section
must be met by installing a cockpit-mounted area microphone, located in
the best position for recording voice communications originating at the
first and second pilot stations and voice communications of other
crewmembers on the flight deck when directed to those stations. The
microphone must be so located and, if necessary, the preamplifiers and
filters of the recorder must be so adjusted or supplemented, so that
the intelligibility of the recorded communications is as high as
practicable when recorded under flight cockpit noise conditions and
played back. Repeated aural or visual playback of the record may be
used in evaluating intelligibility.
(c) Each cockpit voice recorder must be installed so that the part
of the communication or audio signals specified in paragraph (a) of
this section obtained from each of the following sources is recorded on
a separate channel:
(1) For the first channel, from each boom, mask, or handheld
microphone, headset, or speaker used at the first pilot station.
(2) For the second channel from each boom, mask, or handheld
microphone, headset, or speaker used at the second pilot station.
(3) For the third channel--from the cockpit-mounted area
microphone.
(4) For the fourth channel from:
(i) Each boom, mask, or handheld microphone, headset, or speaker
used at the station for the third and fourth crewmembers.
(ii) If the stations specified in paragraph (c)(4)(i) of this
section are not required or if the signal at such a station is picked
up by another channel, each microphone on the flight deck that is used
with the passenger loudspeaker system, if its signals are not picked up
by another channel.
(5) And that as far as is practicable all sounds received by the
microphone listed in paragraphs (c)(1), (2), and (4) of this section
must be recorded without interruption irrespective of the position of
the interphone-transmitter key switch. The design shall ensure that
sidetone for the flightcrew is produced only when the interphone,
public address system, or radio transmitters are in use.
(d) Each cockpit voice recorder must be installed so that:
(1) (i) It receives its electrical power from the bus that provides
the maximum reliability for operation of the cockpit voice recorder
without jeopardizing service to essential or emergency loads.
(ii) It remains powered for as long as possible without
jeopardizing emergency operation of the airplane.
(2) There is an automatic means to simultaneously stop the recorder
and prevent each erasure feature from functioning, within 10 minutes
after crash impact.
(3) There is an aural or visual means for preflight checking of the
recorder for proper operation.
(4) Any single electrical failure external to the recorder does not
disable both the cockpit voice recorder and the flight data recorder.
(5) It has an independent power source--
(i) That provides 101 minutes of electrical power to
operate both the cockpit voice recorder and cockpit-mounted area
microphone;
(ii) That is located as close as practicable to the cockpit voice
recorder; and
(iii) To which the cockpit voice recorder and cockpit-mounted area
microphone are switched automatically in the event that all other power
to the cockpit voice recorder is interrupted either by normal shutdown
or by any other loss of power to the electrical power bus.
(6) It is in a separate container from the flight data recorder
when both are required. If used to comply with only the cockpit voice
recorder requirements, a combination unit may be installed.
(e) The recorder container must be located and mounted to minimize
the probability of rupture of the container as a result of crash impact
and consequent heat damage to the recorder from fire.
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (e)(2) of this section, the
recorder container must be located as far aft as practicable, but need
not be outside of the pressurized compartment, and may not be located
where aft-mounted engines may crush the container during impact.
(2) If two separate combination digital flight data recorder and
cockpit voice recorder units are installed instead of one cockpit voice
recorder and one digital flight data recorder, the combination unit
that is installed to comply with the cockpit voice recorder
requirements may be located near the cockpit.
(f) If the cockpit voice recorder has a bulk erasure device, the
installation must be designed to minimize the probability of
inadvertent operation and actuation of the device during crash impact.
(g) Each recorder container must--
(1) Be either bright orange or bright yellow;
(2) Have reflective tape affixed to its external surface to
facilitate its location under water; and
(3) Have an underwater locating device, when required by the
operating rules of this chapter, on or adjacent to the container, which
is secured in such manner that they are not likely to be separated
during crash impact.
Sec. 23.1459 Flight data recorders.
(a) Each flight recorder required by the operating rules of this
chapter must be installed so that--
(1) It is supplied with airspeed, altitude, and directional data
obtained from sources that meet the aircraft level system requirements
of Sec. 23.1300 and the functionality specified in Sec. 23.1305;
(2) The vertical acceleration sensor is rigidly attached, and
located longitudinally either within the approved center of gravity
limits of the airplane, or at a distance forward or aft of these limits
that does not exceed 25 percent of the airplane's mean aerodynamic
chord;
(3)(i) It receives its electrical power from the bus that provides
the
[[Page 13526]]
maximum reliability for operation of the flight data recorder without
jeopardizing service to essential or emergency loads;
(ii) It remains powered for as long as possible without
jeopardizing emergency operation of the airplane;
(4) There is an aural or visual means for preflight checking of the
recorder for proper recording of data in the storage medium;
(5) Except for recorders powered solely by the engine-driven
electrical generator system, there is an automatic means to
simultaneously stop a recorder that has a data erasure feature and
prevent each erasure feature from functioning, within 10 minutes after
crash impact;
(6) Any single electrical failure external to the recorder does not
disable both the cockpit voice recorder and the flight data recorder;
and
(7) It is in a separate container from the cockpit voice recorder
when both are required. If used to comply with only the flight data
recorder requirements, a combination unit may be installed. If a
combination unit is installed as a cockpit voice recorder to comply
with Sec. 23.1457(e)(2), a combination unit must be used to comply
with this flight data recorder requirement.
(b) Each non-ejectable record container must be located and mounted
so as to minimize the probability of container rupture resulting from
crash impact and subsequent damage to the record from fire. In meeting
this requirement, the record container must be located as far aft as
practicable, but need not be aft of the pressurized compartment, and
may not be where aft-mounted engines may crush the container upon
impact.
(c) A correlation must be established between the flight recorder
readings of airspeed, altitude, and heading and the corresponding
readings (taking into account correction factors) of the first pilot's
instruments. The correlation must cover the airspeed range over which
the airplane is to be operated, the range of altitude to which the
airplane is limited, and 360 degrees of heading. Correlation may be
established on the ground as appropriate.
(d) Each recorder container must--
(1) Be either bright orange or bright yellow;
(2) Have reflective tape affixed to its external surface to
facilitate its location under water; and
(3) Have an underwater locating device, when required by the
operating rules of this chapter, on or adjacent to the container, which
is secured in such a manner that they are not likely to be separated
during crash impact.
(e) Any novel or unique design or operational characteristics of
the aircraft shall be evaluated to determine if any dedicated
parameters must be recorded on flight recorders in addition to or in
place of existing requirements.
Subpart G--Flightcrew Interface and Other Information
Sec. 23.1500 Flightcrew interface.
(a) The pilot compartment and its equipment must allow each pilot
to perform his or her duties, including taxi, takeoff, climb, cruise,
descent, approach, landing, and perform any maneuvers within the
operating envelope of the airplane, without excessive concentration,
skill, alertness, or fatigue.
(b) The applicant must install flight, navigation, surveillance,
and powerplant controls and displays so qualified flightcrew can
monitor and perform all tasks associated with the intended functions of
systems and equipment. The system and equipment design must make the
possibility that a flightcrew error could result in a catastrophic
event highly unlikely.
Sec. 23.1505 Instrument markings, control markings, and placards.
(a) Each airplane must display in a conspicuous manner any placard
and instrument marking necessary for operation.
(b) The applicant must clearly mark each cockpit control, other
than primary flight controls, as to its function and method of
operation.
(c) The applicant must include instrument marking and placard
information in the Airplane Flight Manual.
Sec. 23.1510 Airplane flight manual.
The applicant must provide an Airplane Flight Manual that must be
delivered with each airplane that contains the following information--
(a) Operating limitations and procedures;
(b) Performance information;
(c) Loading information; and
(d) Any other information necessary for the operation of the
airplane.
Sec. 23.1515 Instructions for continued airworthiness.
The applicant must prepare Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness, in accordance with appendix A of this part, that are
acceptable to the Administrator prior to the delivery of the first
airplane or issuance of a standard certification of airworthiness,
whichever occurs later.
Appendix A to Part 23--Instructions for Continued Airworthiness
A23.1 General
(a) This appendix specifies requirements for the preparation of
Instructions for Continued Airworthiness as required by this part.
(b) The Instructions for Continued Airworthiness for each airplane
must include the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness for each
engine and propeller (hereinafter designated ``products''), for each
appliance required by this chapter, and any required information
relating to the interface of those appliances and products with the
airplane. If Instructions for Continued Airworthiness are not supplied
by the manufacturer of an appliance or product installed in the
airplane, the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness for the airplane
must include the information essential to the continued airworthiness
of the airplane.
(c) The applicant must submit to the FAA a program to show how
changes to the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness made by the
applicant or by the manufacturers of products and appliances installed
in the airplane will be distributed.
A23.2 Format
(a) The Instructions for Continued Airworthiness must be in the
form of a manual or manuals as appropriate for the quantity of data to
be provided.
(b) The format of the manual or manuals must provide for a
practical arrangement.
A23.3 Content
The contents of the manual or manuals must be prepared in the
English language. The Instructions for Continued Airworthiness must
contain the following manuals or sections and information:
(a) Airplane maintenance manual or section.
(1) Introduction information that includes an explanation of the
airplane's features and data to the extent necessary for maintenance or
preventive maintenance.
(2) A description of the airplane and its systems and installations
including its engines, propellers, and appliances.
(3) Basic control and operation information describing how the
airplane components and systems are controlled and how they operate,
including any special procedures and limitations that apply.
(4) Servicing information that covers details regarding servicing
points, capacities of tanks, reservoirs, types of fluids to be used,
pressures applicable
[[Page 13527]]
to the various systems, location of access panels for inspection and
servicing, locations of lubrication points, lubricants to be used,
equipment required for servicing, tow instructions and limitations,
mooring, jacking, and leveling information.
(b) Maintenance Instructions
(1) Scheduling information for each part of the airplane and its
engines, auxiliary power units, propellers, accessories, instruments,
and equipment that provides the recommended periods at which they
should be cleaned, inspected, adjusted, tested, and lubricated, and the
degree of inspection, the applicable wear tolerances, and work
recommended at these periods. However, the applicant may refer to an
accessory, instrument, or equipment manufacturer as the source of this
information if the applicant shows that the item has an exceptionally
high degree of complexity requiring specialized maintenance techniques,
test equipment, or expertise. The recommended overhaul periods and
necessary cross reference to the Airworthiness Limitations section of
the manual must also be included. In addition, the applicant must
include an inspection program that includes the frequency and extent of
the inspections necessary to provide for the continued airworthiness of
the airplane.
(2) Troubleshooting information describing probable malfunctions,
how to recognize those malfunctions, and the remedial action for those
malfunctions.
(3) Information describing the order and method of removing and
replacing products and parts with any necessary precautions to be
taken.
(4) Other general procedural instructions including procedures for
system testing during ground running, symmetry checks, weighing and
determining the center of gravity, lifting and shoring, and storage
limitations.
(c) Diagrams of structural access plates and information needed to
gain access for inspections when access plates are not provided.
(d) Details for the application of special inspection techniques
including radiographic and ultrasonic testing where such processes are
specified by the applicant.
(e) Information needed to apply protective treatments to the
structure after inspection.
(f) All data relative to structural fasteners such as
identification, discard recommendations, and torque values.
(g) A list of special tools needed.
(h) In addition, for level 4 airplanes, the following information
must be furnished--
(1) Electrical loads applicable to the various systems;
(2) Methods of balancing control surfaces;
(3) Identification of primary and secondary structures; and
(4) Special repair methods applicable to the airplane.
A23.4 Airworthiness limitations section
The Instructions for Continued Airworthiness must contain a section
titled Airworthiness Limitations that is segregated and clearly
distinguishable from the rest of the document. This section must set
forth each mandatory replacement time, structural inspection interval,
and related structural inspection procedure required for type
certification. If the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness consist
of multiple documents, the section required by this paragraph must be
included in the principal manual. This section must contain a legible
statement in a prominent location that reads ``The Airworthiness
Limitations section is FAA approved and specifies maintenance required
under Sec. Sec. 43.16 and 91.403 of Title 14 of the Code of Federal
Regulations unless an alternative program has been FAA approved.''
PART 35--AIRWORTHINESS STANDARDS: PROPELLERS
0
9. The authority citation for part 35 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, 44701-44702, 44704.
0
10. In Sec. 35.1, revise paragraph (c) to read as follows:
Sec. 35.1 Applicability.
* * * * *
(c) An applicant is eligible for a propeller type certificate and
changes to those certificates after demonstrating compliance with
subparts A, B, and C of this part. However, the propeller may not be
installed on an airplane unless the applicant has shown compliance with
either Sec. 23.905(c) or Sec. 25.907 of this chapter, as applicable,
or compliance is not required for installation on that airplane.
* * * * *
0
11. In Sec. 35.37, revise paragraph (c)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 35.37 Fatigue limits and evaluation.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(1) The intended airplane by complying with Sec. 23.905(c) or
Sec. 25.907 of this chapter, as applicable; or
* * * * *
PART 43--MAINTENANCE, PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE, REBUILDING, AND
ALTERATION
0
12. The authority citation for part 43 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7572; 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40105,
40113, 44701-44702, 44704, 44707, 44709, 44711, 44713, 44715, 45303.
0
13. In part 43, appendix E, revise the introductory text and paragraph
(a)(2) to read as follows:
Appendix E to Part 43--Altimeter System Test and Inspection
Each person performing the altimeter system tests and inspections
required by Sec. 91.411 must comply with the following:
(a) * * *
(2) Perform a proof test to demonstrate the integrity of the static
pressure system in a manner acceptable to the Administrator. For
airplanes certificated under part 25 of this chapter, determine that
leakage is within the tolerances established by Sec. 25.1325.
* * * * *
PART 91--GENERAL OPERATING AND FLIGHT RULES
0
14. The authority citation for part 91 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 1155, 40101, 40103, 40105,
40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44704, 44709, 44711, 44712,
44715, 44716, 44717, 44722, 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506-46507,
47122, 47508, 47528-47531, 47534, articles 12 and 29 of the
Convention on International Civil Aviation (61 Stat. 1180), (126
Stat. 11).
0
15. In Sec. 91.205, revise paragraphs (b)(13) and (b)(14), and remove
paragraph (b)(16) to read as follows:
Sec. 91.205 Powered civil aircraft with standard category U.S.
airworthiness certificates: Instrument and equipment requirements.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(13) An approved safety belt with an approved metal-to-metal
latching device, or other approved restraint system for each occupant 2
years of age or older.
(14) For small civil airplanes manufactured after July 18, 1978, an
approved shoulder harness or restraint system for each front seat. For
small civil airplanes manufactured after December 12, 1986, an approved
shoulder harness or restraint system for all seats. Shoulder harnesses
installed at flightcrew stations must permit the flightcrew member,
when seated and with the safety belt and shoulder harness fastened, to
perform all
[[Page 13528]]
functions necessary for flight operations. For purposes of this
paragraph--
(i) The date of manufacture of an airplane is the date the
inspection acceptance records reflect that the airplane is complete and
meets the FAA-approved type design data; and
(ii) A front seat is a seat located at a flightcrew member station
or any seat located alongside such a seat.
* * * * *
0
16. In Sec. 91.313, revise paragraph (g) introductory text to read as
follows:
Sec. 91.313 Restricted category civil aircraft: Operating
limitations.
* * * * *
(g) No person may operate a small restricted-category civil
airplane manufactured after July 18, 1978, unless an approved shoulder
harness or restraint system is installed for each front seat. The
shoulder harness or restraint system installation at each flightcrew
station must permit the flightcrew member, when seated and with the
safety belt and shoulder harness fastened or the restraint system
engaged, to perform all functions necessary for flight operation. For
purposes of this paragraph--
* * * * *
0
17. In Sec. 91.323, revise paragraph (b)(3) to read as follows:
Sec. 91.323 Increased maximum certificated weights for certain
airplanes operated in Alaska.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) The weight at which the airplane meets the positive maneuvering
load factor n, where n = 2.1 + (24,000/(W + 10,000)) and W = design
maximum takeoff weight, except that n need not be more than 3.8; or
* * * * *
0
18. In Sec. 91.531, revise paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(3) to read as
follows:
Sec. 91.531 Second in command requirements.
(a) * * *
(1) A large airplane or normal category level 4 airplane, except
that a person may operate an airplane certificated under SFAR 41
without a pilot who is designated as second in command if that airplane
is certificated for operation with one pilot.
* * *
(3) A commuter category airplane or normal category level 3
airplane, except that a person may operate those airplanes
notwithstanding paragraph (a)(1) of this section, that have a passenger
seating configuration, excluding pilot seats, of nine or less without a
pilot who is designated as second in command if that airplane is type
certificated for operations with one pilot.
* * * * *
PART 121--OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, AND SUPPLEMENTAL
OPERATIONS
0
19. The authority citation for part 121 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40119, 41706,
42301 preceding note added by Pub. L. 112-95, Sec. 412, 126 Stat.
89, 44101, 44701-44702, 44705, 44709-44711, 44713, 44716-44717,
44722, 44729, 44732; 46105; Pub. L. 111-216, 124 Stat. 2348 (49
U.S.C. 44701 note); Pub. L. 112-95, 126 Stat. 62 (49 U.S.C. 44732
note).
0
20. In Sec. 121.310, revise paragraph (b)(2)(iii) to read as follows:
Sec. 121.310 Additional emergency equipment.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) For a nontransport category turbopropeller powered airplane
type certificated after December 31, 1964, each passenger emergency
exit marking and each locating sign must be manufactured to meet the
requirements of Sec. 23.811(b) of this chapter in effect on June 16,
1994. On these airplanes, no sign may continue to be used if its
luminescence (brightness) decreases to below 100 microlamberts.
* * * * *
PART 135--OPERATING REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND ON DEMAND OPERATIONS
AND RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT
0
21. The authority citation for part 135 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 41706, 40113, 44701-44702,
44705, 44709, 44711-44713, 44715-44717, 44722, 44730, 45101-45105;
Pub. L. 112-95, 126 Stat. 58 (49 U.S.C. 44730).
0
22. In Sec. 135.169, revise paragraphs (b) introductory text, (b)(6),
and (b)(7), and add paragraph (b)(8) to read as follows:
Sec. 135.169 Additional airworthiness requirements.
* * * * *
(b) No person may operate a small airplane that has a passenger
seating configuration, excluding pilot seats, of 10 seats or more
unless it is type certificated--
* * * * *
(6) In the normal category and complies with section 1.(b) of
Special Federal Aviation Regulation No. 41;
(7) In the commuter category; or
(8) In the normal category, using a means of compliance accepted by
the Administrator equivalent to the airworthiness standards applicable
to the certification of airplanes in the commuter category found in
part 23 of this chapter through amendment 23-62, effective January 31,
2012.
* * * * *
Issued under authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 44701(a),
44703 and Pub. L. 113-53 (127 Stat. 584; 49 U.S.C. 44704 note) in
Washington, DC, on March 7, 2016.
Dorenda D. Baker,
Director, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-05493 Filed 3-9-16; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
