Special Conditions: Cranfield Aerospace Limited, Cessna Aircraft Company Model 525; Tamarack Load Alleviation System and Cranfield Winglets-Interaction of Systems and Structures, 1163-1169 [2016-31819]
Download as PDF
1163
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
Vol. 82, No. 3
Thursday, January 5, 2017
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER
contains regulatory documents having general
applicability and legal effect, most of which
are keyed to and codified in the Code of
Federal Regulations, which is published under
50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by
the Superintendent of Documents. Prices of
new books are listed in the first FEDERAL
REGISTER issue of each week.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 23
[Docket No.FAA–2016–9409; Special
Conditions No. 23–279–SC]
Special Conditions: Cranfield
Aerospace Limited, Cessna Aircraft
Company Model 525; Tamarack Load
Alleviation System and Cranfield
Winglets—Interaction of Systems and
Structures
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final special conditions.
AGENCY:
These special conditions are
issued for the Cessna Aircraft Company
model 525 airplane. This airplane as
modified by Cranfield Aerospace
Limited will have a novel or unusual
design feature associated with the
installation of a Tamarack Active
Technology Load Alleviation System
and Cranfield Winglets. The applicable
airworthiness regulations do not contain
adequate or appropriate safety standards
for this design feature. These special
conditions contain the additional safety
standards the Administrator considers
necessary to establish a level of safety
equivalent to that established by the
existing airworthiness standards.
DATES: These special conditions are
effective January 5, 2017 and are
applicable on December 23, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mike Reyer, Continued Operational
Safety, ACE–113, Small Airplane
Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service, 901 Locust; Kansas City,
Missouri 64106; telephone (816) 329–
4131; facsimile (816) 329–4090.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
Background
On January 25, 2016, Cranfield
Aerospace Limited (CAL) applied for a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jan 04, 2017
Jkt 241001
supplemental type certificate to install
winglets on the Cessna Aircraft
Company (Cessna) model 525. The
Cessna model 525 twin turbofan engine
airplane is certified in the normal
category for eight seats, including a
pilot, a maximum gross weight of 10,700
pounds, and a maximum altitude of
41,000 feet mean sea level.
Special conditions have been applied
on past 14 CFR part 25 airplane
programs in order to consider the effects
of systems on structures. The regulatory
authorities and industry developed
standardized criteria in the Aviation
Rulemaking Advisory Committee
(ARAC) forum based on the criteria
defined in Advisory Circular 25.672–1,
dated November 15, 1983. The ARAC
recommendations have been
incorporated in the European Aviation
Safety Agency Certification
Specifications (CS) 25.302 and CS 25,
appendix K. The special conditions
used for part 25 airplane programs, can
be applied to part 23 airplane programs
in order to require consideration of the
effects of systems on structures.
However, some modifications to the part
25 special conditions are necessary to
address differences between parts 23
and 25 as well as differences between
parts 91 and 121 operating
environments.
Winglets increase aerodynamic
efficiency. However, winglets also
increase wing design static loads,
increase the severity of the wing fatigue
spectra, and alter the wing fatigue stress
ratio, which under limit gust and
maneuvering loads factors, may exceed
the certificated wing design limits. The
addition of the Tamarack Active
Technology Load Alleviation System
(ATLAS) mitigates the winglet’s adverse
structural effects by reducing the
aerodynamic effectiveness of the
winglet when ATLAS senses gust and
maneuver loads above a predetermined
threshold.
The ATLAS functions as a load-relief
system. This is accomplished by
measuring airplane loading via an
accelerometer and moving an aileronlike device called a Tamarack Active
Control Surface (TACS) that reduces lift
at the tip of the wing. The TACS are
located outboard and adjacent to the left
and right aileron control surfaces. The
TACS movement reduces lift at the tip
of the wing, resulting in the wing
spanwise center of pressure moving
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
inboard, thus reducing bending stresses
along the wing span. Because the
ATLAS compensates for the increased
wing root bending at elevated load
factors, the overall effect of this
modification is that the required
reinforcement of the existing Cessna
wing structure due to the winglet
installation is reduced. The applicable
airworthiness regulations do not contain
adequate or appropriate safety standards
for this design feature.
The ATLAS is not a primary flight
control system, a trim device, or a wing
flap. However, several regulations under
Part 23, Subpart D—Design and
Construction—Control Systems, have
applicability to ATLAS, which might
otherwise be considered ‘‘Not
Applicable’’ under a strict interpretation
of the regulations. These Control System
regulations include §§ 23.672, 23.675,
23.677, 23.681, 23.683, 23.685, 23.693,
23.697, and 23.701.
An airplane designed with a loadrelief system must provide an
equivalent level of safety to an airplane
with similar characteristics designed
without a load-relief system. In the
following special conditions, an
equivalent level of safety is provided by
relating the required structural safety
factor to the probability of load-relief
system failure and the probability of
exceeding the frequency of design limit
and ultimate loads.
These special conditions address
several issues with the operation and
failure of the load-relief system. These
issues include the structural
requirements for the system in the fully
operational state; evaluation of the
effects of system failure, both at the
moment of failure and continued safe
flight and landing with the failure
annunciated to the pilot; and the
potential for failure of the failure
monitoring/pilot annunciation function.
The structural requirements for the
load-relief system in the fully
operational state are stated in special
condition 2(e) of these special
conditions. In this case, the structure
must meet the full requirements of part
23, subparts C and D with full credit
given for the effects of the load-relief
system.
In the event of a load-relief system
failure in-flight, the effects on the
structure at the moment of failure must
be considered as described in special
condition 2(f)(l) of these special
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
1164
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 3 / Thursday, January 5, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
conditions. These effects include, but
are not limited to the structural loads
induced by a hard-over failure of the
load-relief control surface and
oscillatory system failures that may
excite the structural dynamic modes. In
evaluating these effects, pilot corrective
actions may be considered and the
airplane may be assumed to be in 1g
(gravitation force) flight prior to the
load-relief system failure. These special
conditions allows credit, in the form of
reduced structural factors of safety,
based on the probability of failure of the
load-relief system. Effects of an in-flight
failure on flutter and fatigue and
damage tolerance must also be
evaluated.
Following the initial in-flight failure,
the airplane must be capable of
continued safe flight and landing.
Special condition 2(f)(2) in these special
conditions assumes that a properly
functioning, monitoring, and
annunciating system has alerted the
pilot to the load-relief failure. Since the
pilot has been made aware of the loadrelief failure, appropriate flight
limitations, including speed restrictions,
may be considered when evaluating
structural loads, flutter, and fatigue and
damage tolerance. These special
conditions allows credit, in the form of
reduced structural factors of safety,
based on the probability of failure of the
load-relief system and the flight time
remaining on the failure flight.
Special condition 2(g) of these special
conditions addresses the failure of the
load-relief system to annunciate a
failure to the pilot. These special
conditions address this concern with
maintenance actions and requirements
for monitoring and annunciation
systems.
These special conditions have been
modified from previous, similar part 25
special conditions because of the
differences between parts 23 and 25 as
well as to address the part 91 operating
and maintenance environment.
Paragraph (c)(3) of the part 25 special
condition 1 is removed from these
special conditions. Special condition
2(h) of these special conditions is
modified to require a ferry permit for
additional flights after an annunciated
failure or obvious system failure.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Type Certification Basis
Under the provisions of § 21.101,
Cranfield Aerospace Limited must show
that the Cessna model 525, as changed,
continues to meet the applicable
1 Special Condition No. 25–164–SC, ‘‘Boeing
Model 737–700 IGW, Interaction of Systems and
Structures,’’ Effective August 30, 2000 (65 FR
55443).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jan 04, 2017
Jkt 241001
provisions of the regulations
incorporated by reference in Type
Certificate No. A1WI, revision 24, or the
applicable regulations in effect on the
date of application for the change. The
regulations incorporated by reference in
the type certificate are commonly
referred to as the ‘‘original type
certification basis.’’ The regulations
incorporated by reference in Type
Certificate No. A1WI, revision 24 are 14
CFR part 23 effective February 1, 1965,
amendments 23–1 through 23–38 and
23–40.
If the Administrator finds the
applicable airworthiness regulations
(i.e., 14 CFR part 23) do not contain
adequate or appropriate safety standards
for the Cessna model 525 because of a
novel or unusual design feature, special
conditions are prescribed under the
provisions of § 21.16.
In addition to the applicable
airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Cessna 525 must comply
with the fuel vent and exhaust emission
requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and the
noise certification requirements of 14
CFR part 36.
The FAA issues special conditions, as
defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in accordance
with § 11.38, and they become part of
the type-certification basis under
§ 21.101.
Special conditions are initially
applicable to the model for which they
are issued. Should the applicant apply
for a supplemental type certificate to
modify any other model included on the
same type certificate to incorporate the
same or similar novel or unusual design
feature, the FAA would apply these
special conditions to the other model
under § 21.101.
Novel or Unusual Design Features
The Cessna model 525 will
incorporate the following novel or
unusual design features: Cranfield
winglets with a Tamarack Active
Technology Load Alleviation System.
Discussion
For airplanes equipped with systems
that affect structural performance, either
directly or as a result of a failure or
malfunction, the applicant must take
into account the influence of these
systems and their failure conditions
when showing compliance with the
requirements of part 23, subparts C and
D.
The applicant must use the following
criteria for showing compliance with
these special conditions for airplanes
equipped with flight control systems,
autopilots, stability augmentation
systems, load alleviation systems, flutter
control systems, fuel management
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
systems, and other systems that either
directly or as a result of failure or
malfunction affect structural
performance. If these special conditions
are used for other systems, it may be
necessary to adapt the criteria to the
specific system.
Discussion of Comments
Notice of proposed special conditions
No. 23–16–03–SC for the Cessna model
525 airplane was published in the
Federal Register on November 22, 2016
(81 FR 83737). No comments were
received, and the special conditions are
adopted as proposed.
Applicability
As discussed above, these special
conditions are applicable to the Cessna
model 525. Should Cranfield Aerospace
Limited apply at a later date for a
supplemental type certificate to modify
any other model included on A1WI,
revision 24 to incorporate the same
novel or unusual design feature, the
FAA would apply these special
conditions to that model as well.
Under standard practice, the effective
date of final special conditions would
be 30 days after the date of publication
in the Federal Register; however, as the
supplemental type certification date for
the Cessna model 525 is imminent, the
FAA finds that good cause exists to
make these special conditions effective
upon issuance.
Conclusion
This action affects only certain novel
or unusual design features on one model
of airplanes. It is not a rule of general
applicability and it affects only the
applicant who applied to the FAA for
approval of these features on the
airplane.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 23
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Signs and
symbols.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701,
44702, 14 CFR 21.16, 21.101; and 14 CFR
11.38 and 11.19.
The Special Conditions
Accordingly, pursuant to the
authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special
conditions are issued as part of the type
certification basis for Cessna Aircraft
Company 525 airplanes modified by
Cranfield Aerospace Limited.
1. Active Technology Load Alleviation
System (ATLAS)
SC 23.672
Load Alleviation System
The load alleviation system must
comply with the following:
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 3 / Thursday, January 5, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
(a) A warning, which is clearly
distinguishable to the pilot under
expected flight conditions without
requiring the pilot’s attention, must be
provided for any failure in the load
alleviation system or in any other
automatic system that could result in an
unsafe condition if the pilot was not
aware of the failure. Warning systems
must not activate the control system.
(b) The design of the load alleviation
system or of any other automatic system
must permit initial counteraction of
failures without requiring exceptional
pilot skill or strength, by either the
deactivation of the system or a failed
portion thereof, or by overriding the
failure by movement of the flight
controls in the normal sense.
(1) If deactivation of the system is
used to counteract failures, the control
for this initial counteraction must be
readily accessible to each pilot while
operating the control wheel and thrust
control levers.
(2) If overriding the failure by
movement of the flight controls is used,
the override capability must be
operationally demonstrated.
(c) It must be shown that, after any
single failure of the load alleviation
system, the airplane must be safely
controllable when the failure or
malfunction occurs at any speed or
altitude within the approved operating
limitations that is critical for the type of
failure being considered;
(d) It must be shown that, while the
system is active or after any single
failure of the load alleviation system—
(1) The controllability and
maneuverability requirements of part
23, subpart D, are met within a practical
operational flight envelope (e.g., speed,
altitude, normal acceleration, and
airplane configuration) that is described
in the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM);
and
(2) The trim, stability, and stall
characteristics are not impaired below a
level needed to permit continued safe
flight and landing.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SC 23.677 Load Alleviation Active
Control Surface
(a) Proper precautions must be taken
to prevent inadvertent or improper
operation of the load alleviation system.
It must be demonstrated that with the
load alleviation system operating
throughout its operational range, a pilot
of average strength and skill level is able
to continue safe flight with no
objectionable increased workload.
(b) The load alleviation system must
be designed so that, when any one
connecting or transmitting element in
the primary flight control system fails,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jan 04, 2017
Jkt 241001
adequate control for safe flight and
landing is available.
(c) The load alleviation system must
be irreversible unless the control surface
is properly balanced and has no unsafe
flutter characteristics. The system must
have adequate rigidity and reliability in
the portion of the system from the
control surface to the attachment of the
irreversible unit to the airplane
structure.
(d) It must be demonstrated the
airplane is safely controllable and a
pilot can perform all maneuvers and
operations necessary to affect a safe
landing following any load alleviation
system runaway not shown to be
extremely improbable, allowing for
appropriate time delay after pilot
recognition of the system runaway. The
demonstration must be conducted at
critical airplane weights and center of
gravity positions.
SC 23.683
Operation Tests
(a) It must be shown by operation
tests that, when the flight control system
and the load alleviation systems are
operated and loaded as prescribed in
paragraph (c) of this section, the flight
control system and load alleviation
systems are free from—
(1) Jamming;
(2) Excessive friction; and
(3) Excessive deflection.
(b) The operation tests in paragraph
(a) of this section must also show the
load alleviation system and associated
surfaces do not restrict or prevent
aileron control surface movements, or
cause any adverse response of the
ailerons, under the loading prescribed
in paragraph (c) of this section that
would prevent continued safe flight and
landing.
(c) The prescribed test loads are for
the entire load alleviation and flight
control systems, loads corresponding to
the limit air loads on the appropriate
surfaces.
Note: Advisory Circular (AC) 23–17C
‘‘Systems and Equipment Guide to
Certification of Part 23 Airplanes’’ provides
guidance on potential methods of compliance
with this section and other regulations
applicable to this STC project.
SC 23.685
Control System Details
(a) Each detail of the load alleviation
system and related moveable surfaces
must be designed and installed to
prevent jamming, chafing, and
interference from cargo, passengers,
loose objects, or the freezing of
moisture.
(b) There must be means in the
cockpit to prevent the entry of foreign
objects into places where they would
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
1165
jam any one connecting or transmitting
element of the load alleviation system.
(c) Each element of the load
alleviation system must have design
features, or must be distinctively and
permanently marked, to minimize the
possibility of incorrect assembly that
could result in malfunctioning of the
control system.
SC 23.697
Controls
Load Alleviation System
(a) The load alleviation control
surface must be designed so that during
normal operation, when the surface has
been placed in any position, it will not
move from that position unless the
control is adjusted or is moved by the
operation of a load alleviation system.
(b) The rate of movement of the
control surface in response to the load
alleviation system controls must give
satisfactory flight and performance
characteristics under steady or changing
conditions of airspeed, engine power,
attitude, flap configuration, speedbrake
position, and during landing gear
extension and retraction.
SC 23.701 Load Alleviation System
Interconnection
(a) The load alleviation system and
related movable surfaces as a system
must—
(1) Be synchronized by a mechanical
interconnection between the movable
surfaces or by an approved equivalent
means; or
(2) Be designed so the occurrence of
any failure of the system that would
result in an unsafe flight characteristic
of the airplane is extremely improbable;
or
(b) The airplane must be shown to
have safe flight characteristics with any
combination of extreme positions of
individual movable surfaces.
(c) If an interconnection is used in
multiengine airplanes, it must be
designed to account for unsymmetrical
loads resulting from flight with the
engines on one side of the plane of
symmetry inoperative and the
remaining engines at takeoff power. For
single-engine airplanes, and
multiengine airplanes with no
slipstream effects on the load alleviation
system, it may be assumed that 100
percent of the critical air load acts on
one side and 70 percent on the other.
Sections 23.675, ‘‘Stops;’’ 23.681, ‘‘Limit
Load Static Tests;’’ and 23.693, ‘‘Joints’’
The load alleviation system must
comply with §§ 23.675, 23.681, and
23.693 as written and no unique special
condition will be required for these
regulations.
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
1166
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 3 / Thursday, January 5, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
Applicability of Control System
Regulations to Other Control Systems
If applicable, other control systems
used on the Cessna 525 may require a
showing of compliance to §§ 23.672,
23.675, 23.677, 23.681, 23.683, 23.685,
23.693, 23.697 and 23.701 as written for
this STC project.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
2. Interaction of Systems and Structures
(a) The criteria defined herein only
address the direct structural
consequences of the system responses
and performances and cannot be
considered in isolation but should be
included in the overall safety evaluation
of the airplane. These criteria may in
some instances duplicate standards
already established for this evaluation.
These criteria are only applicable to
structure whose failure could prevent
continued safe flight and landing.
Specific criteria that define acceptable
limits on handling characteristics or
stability requirements when operating
in the system degraded or inoperative
mode are not provided in this special
condition.
(b) Depending upon the specific
characteristics of the airplane,
additional studies may be required that
go beyond the criteria provided in this
special condition in order to
demonstrate the capability of the
airplane to meet other realistic
conditions such as alternative gust or
maneuver descriptions for an airplane
equipped with a load alleviation system.
(c) The following definitions are
applicable to this special condition.
(1) Structural performance: Capability
of the airplane to meet the structural
requirements of 14 CFR part 23.
(2) Flight limitations: Limitations that
can be applied to the airplane flight
conditions following an in-flight
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jan 04, 2017
Jkt 241001
occurrence and that are included in the
flight manual (e.g., speed limitations,
avoidance of severe weather conditions,
etc.).
(3) [Reserved]
(4) Probabilistic terms: The
probabilistic terms (probable,
improbable, extremely improbable) used
in this special condition are the same as
those used in § 23.1309. For the
purposes of this special condition,
extremely improbable for normal,
utility, and acrobatic category airplanes
is defined as 10¥8 per hour. For
commuter category airplanes, extremely
improbable is defined as 10¥9 per hour.
(5) Failure condition: The term failure
condition is the same as that used in
§ 23.1309, however this special
condition applies only to system failure
conditions that affect the structural
performance of the airplane (e.g., system
failure conditions that induce loads,
change the response of the airplane to
inputs such as gusts or pilot actions, or
lower flutter margins).
(d) General. The following criteria
(paragraphs (e) through (i)) will be used
in determining the influence of a system
and its failure conditions on the
airplane structure.
(e) System fully operative. With the
system fully operative, the following
apply:
(1) Limit loads must be derived in all
normal operating configurations of the
system from all the limit conditions
specified in subpart C (or defined by
special condition or equivalent level of
safety in lieu of those specified in
subpart C), taking into account any
special behavior of such a system or
associated functions or any effect on the
structural performance of the airplane
that may occur up to the limit loads. In
particular, any significant nonlinearity
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(rate of displacement of control surface,
thresholds or any other system
nonlinearities) must be accounted for in
a realistic or conservative way when
deriving limit loads from limit
conditions.
(2) The airplane must meet the
strength requirements of part 23 (static
strength and residual strength for
failsafe or damage tolerant structure),
using the specified factors to derive
ultimate loads from the limit loads
defined above. The effect of
nonlinearities must be investigated
beyond limit conditions to ensure the
behavior of the system presents no
anomaly compared to the behavior
below limit conditions. However,
conditions beyond limit conditions
need not be considered when it can be
shown that the airplane has design
features that will not allow it to exceed
those limit conditions.
(3) The airplane must meet the
aeroelastic stability requirements of
§ 23.629.
(f) System in the failure condition. For
any system failure condition not shown
to be extremely improbable, the
following apply:
(1) At the time of occurrence. Starting
from 1-g level flight conditions, a
realistic scenario, including pilot
corrective actions, must be established
to determine the loads occurring at the
time of failure and immediately after
failure.
(i) For static strength substantiation,
these loads, multiplied by an
appropriate factor of safety that is
related to the probability of occurrence
of the failure, are ultimate loads to be
considered for design. The factor of
safety is defined in figure 1.
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 3 / Thursday, January 5, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jan 04, 2017
Jkt 241001
(2) For the continuation of the flight.
For the airplane, in the system failed
state and considering any appropriate
reconfiguration and flight limitations,
the following apply:
(i) The loads derived from the
following conditions (or defined by
special condition or equivalent level of
safety in lieu of the following
conditions) at speeds up to VC/MC, or
the speed limitation prescribed for the
remainder of the flight, must be
determined:
(A) The limit symmetrical
maneuvering conditions specified in
§§ 23.321, 23.331, 23.333, 23.345,
23.421, 23.423, and 23.445.
(B) The limit gust and turbulence
conditions specified in §§ 23.341,
23.345, 23.425, 23.443, and 23.445.
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(C) The limit rolling conditions
specified in § 23.349 and the limit
unsymmetrical conditions specified in
§§ 23.347, 23.427, and 23.445.
(D) The limit yaw maneuvering
conditions specified in §§ 23.351,
23.441, and 23.445.
(E) The limit ground loading
conditions specified in §§ 23.473 and
23.493.
(ii) For static strength substantiation,
each part of the structure must be able
to withstand the loads in paragraph
(f)(2)(i) of this special condition
multiplied by a factor of safety
depending on the probability of being in
this failure state. The factor of safety is
defined in figure 2.
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
ER05JA17.316
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
(ii) For residual strength
substantiation, the airplane must be able
to withstand two thirds of the ultimate
loads defined in subparagraph (f)(1)(i).
(iii) For pressurized cabins, these
loads must be combined with the
normal operating differential pressure.
(iv) Freedom from aeroelastic
instability must be shown up to the
speeds defined in § 23.629(f). For failure
conditions that result in speeds beyond
VD/MD, freedom from aeroelastic
instability must be shown to increased
speeds, so that the margins intended by
§ 23.629(f) are maintained.
(v) Failures of the system that result
in forced structural vibrations
(oscillatory failures) must not produce
loads that could result in detrimental
deformation of primary structure.
1167
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 3 / Thursday, January 5, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
(iii) For residual strength
substantiation, the airplane must be able
to withstand two thirds of the ultimate
loads defined in paragraph (f)(2)(ii) of
this special condition. For pressurized
cabins, these loads must be combined
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jan 04, 2017
Jkt 241001
with the normal operating pressure
differential.
(iv) If the loads induced by the failure
condition have a significant effect on
fatigue or damage tolerance then their
effects must be taken into account.
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
(v) Freedom from aeroelastic
instability must be shown up to a speed
determined from figure 3. Flutter
clearance speeds V′ and V″ may be
based on the speed limitation specified
for the remainder of the flight using the
margins defined by § 23.629.
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
ER05JA17.317
1168
(vi) Freedom from aeroelastic
instability must also be shown up to V′
in figure 3 above, for any probable
system failure condition combined with
any damage required or selected for
investigation by §§ 23.571 through
23.574.
(3) Consideration of certain failure
conditions may be required by other
sections of 14 CFR part 23 regardless of
calculated system reliability. Where
analysis shows the probability of these
failure conditions to be less than 10¥8
for normal, utility, or acrobatic category
airplanes or less than 10¥9 for
commuter category airplanes, criteria
other than those specified in this
paragraph may be used for structural
substantiation to show continued safe
flight and landing.
(g) Failure indications. For system
failure detection and indication, the
following apply:
(1) The system must be checked for
failure conditions, not extremely
improbable, that degrade the structural
capability below the level required by
part 23 or significantly reduce the
reliability of the remaining system. As
far as reasonably practicable, the
flightcrew must be made aware of these
failures before flight. Certain elements
of the control system, such as
mechanical and hydraulic components,
may use special periodic inspections,
and electronic components may use
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:22 Jan 04, 2017
Jkt 241001
daily checks, in lieu of detection and
indication systems to achieve the
objective of this requirement. These
certification maintenance requirements
must be limited to components that are
not readily detectable by normal
detection and indication systems and
where service history shows that
inspections will provide an adequate
level of safety.
(2) The existence of any failure
condition, not extremely improbable,
during flight that could significantly
affect the structural capability of the
airplane and for which the associated
reduction in airworthiness can be
minimized by suitable flight limitations,
must be signaled to the flightcrew. The
probability of not annunciating these
failure conditions must be extremely
improbable (unannunciated failure). For
example, failure conditions that result
in a factor of safety between the airplane
strength and the loads of subpart C
below 1.25, or flutter margins below V″,
must be signaled to the flightcrew
during flight.
(h) Further flights with known loadrelief system failure. Additional flights
after an annunciated failure of the loadrelief system or obvious failure of the
load-relief system are permitted with a
ferry permit only. In these cases, ferry
permits may be issued to allow moving
the airplane to an appropriate
maintenance facility. Additional flights
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 9990
1169
are defined as, further flights after
landing on a flight where an
annunciated or obvious failure of the
load-relief system has occurred or after
an annunciated or obvious failure of the
load-relief system occurs during
preflight preparation.
(i) Fatigue and damage tolerance. If
any system failure would have a
significant effect on the fatigue or
damage evaluations required in
§§ 23.571 through 23.574, then these
effects must be taken into account.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on
December 23, 2016.
Barry Ballenger,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate,
Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2016–31819 Filed 1–4–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
E:\FR\FM\05JAR1.SGM
05JAR1
ER05JA17.318
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 3 / Thursday, January 5, 2017 / Rules and Regulations
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 3 (Thursday, January 5, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 1163-1169]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-31819]
========================================================================
Rules and Regulations
Federal Register
________________________________________________________________________
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER contains regulatory documents
having general applicability and legal effect, most of which are keyed
to and codified in the Code of Federal Regulations, which is published
under 50 titles pursuant to 44 U.S.C. 1510.
The Code of Federal Regulations is sold by the Superintendent of Documents.
Prices of new books are listed in the first FEDERAL REGISTER issue of each
week.
========================================================================
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 3 / Thursday, January 5, 2017 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 1163]]
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 23
[Docket No.FAA-2016-9409; Special Conditions No. 23-279-SC]
Special Conditions: Cranfield Aerospace Limited, Cessna Aircraft
Company Model 525; Tamarack Load Alleviation System and Cranfield
Winglets--Interaction of Systems and Structures
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Final special conditions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: These special conditions are issued for the Cessna Aircraft
Company model 525 airplane. This airplane as modified by Cranfield
Aerospace Limited will have a novel or unusual design feature
associated with the installation of a Tamarack Active Technology Load
Alleviation System and Cranfield Winglets. The applicable airworthiness
regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards for
this design feature. These special conditions contain the additional
safety standards the Administrator considers necessary to establish a
level of safety equivalent to that established by the existing
airworthiness standards.
DATES: These special conditions are effective January 5, 2017 and are
applicable on December 23, 2016.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mike Reyer, Continued Operational
Safety, ACE-113, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service, 901 Locust; Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone (816) 329-
4131; facsimile (816) 329-4090.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On January 25, 2016, Cranfield Aerospace Limited (CAL) applied for
a supplemental type certificate to install winglets on the Cessna
Aircraft Company (Cessna) model 525. The Cessna model 525 twin turbofan
engine airplane is certified in the normal category for eight seats,
including a pilot, a maximum gross weight of 10,700 pounds, and a
maximum altitude of 41,000 feet mean sea level.
Special conditions have been applied on past 14 CFR part 25
airplane programs in order to consider the effects of systems on
structures. The regulatory authorities and industry developed
standardized criteria in the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee
(ARAC) forum based on the criteria defined in Advisory Circular 25.672-
1, dated November 15, 1983. The ARAC recommendations have been
incorporated in the European Aviation Safety Agency Certification
Specifications (CS) 25.302 and CS 25, appendix K. The special
conditions used for part 25 airplane programs, can be applied to part
23 airplane programs in order to require consideration of the effects
of systems on structures. However, some modifications to the part 25
special conditions are necessary to address differences between parts
23 and 25 as well as differences between parts 91 and 121 operating
environments.
Winglets increase aerodynamic efficiency. However, winglets also
increase wing design static loads, increase the severity of the wing
fatigue spectra, and alter the wing fatigue stress ratio, which under
limit gust and maneuvering loads factors, may exceed the certificated
wing design limits. The addition of the Tamarack Active Technology Load
Alleviation System (ATLAS) mitigates the winglet's adverse structural
effects by reducing the aerodynamic effectiveness of the winglet when
ATLAS senses gust and maneuver loads above a predetermined threshold.
The ATLAS functions as a load-relief system. This is accomplished
by measuring airplane loading via an accelerometer and moving an
aileron-like device called a Tamarack Active Control Surface (TACS)
that reduces lift at the tip of the wing. The TACS are located outboard
and adjacent to the left and right aileron control surfaces. The TACS
movement reduces lift at the tip of the wing, resulting in the wing
spanwise center of pressure moving inboard, thus reducing bending
stresses along the wing span. Because the ATLAS compensates for the
increased wing root bending at elevated load factors, the overall
effect of this modification is that the required reinforcement of the
existing Cessna wing structure due to the winglet installation is
reduced. The applicable airworthiness regulations do not contain
adequate or appropriate safety standards for this design feature.
The ATLAS is not a primary flight control system, a trim device, or
a wing flap. However, several regulations under Part 23, Subpart D--
Design and Construction--Control Systems, have applicability to ATLAS,
which might otherwise be considered ``Not Applicable'' under a strict
interpretation of the regulations. These Control System regulations
include Sec. Sec. 23.672, 23.675, 23.677, 23.681, 23.683, 23.685,
23.693, 23.697, and 23.701.
An airplane designed with a load-relief system must provide an
equivalent level of safety to an airplane with similar characteristics
designed without a load-relief system. In the following special
conditions, an equivalent level of safety is provided by relating the
required structural safety factor to the probability of load-relief
system failure and the probability of exceeding the frequency of design
limit and ultimate loads.
These special conditions address several issues with the operation
and failure of the load-relief system. These issues include the
structural requirements for the system in the fully operational state;
evaluation of the effects of system failure, both at the moment of
failure and continued safe flight and landing with the failure
annunciated to the pilot; and the potential for failure of the failure
monitoring/pilot annunciation function.
The structural requirements for the load-relief system in the fully
operational state are stated in special condition 2(e) of these special
conditions. In this case, the structure must meet the full requirements
of part 23, subparts C and D with full credit given for the effects of
the load-relief system.
In the event of a load-relief system failure in-flight, the effects
on the structure at the moment of failure must be considered as
described in special condition 2(f)(l) of these special
[[Page 1164]]
conditions. These effects include, but are not limited to the
structural loads induced by a hard-over failure of the load-relief
control surface and oscillatory system failures that may excite the
structural dynamic modes. In evaluating these effects, pilot corrective
actions may be considered and the airplane may be assumed to be in 1g
(gravitation force) flight prior to the load-relief system failure.
These special conditions allows credit, in the form of reduced
structural factors of safety, based on the probability of failure of
the load-relief system. Effects of an in-flight failure on flutter and
fatigue and damage tolerance must also be evaluated.
Following the initial in-flight failure, the airplane must be
capable of continued safe flight and landing. Special condition 2(f)(2)
in these special conditions assumes that a properly functioning,
monitoring, and annunciating system has alerted the pilot to the load-
relief failure. Since the pilot has been made aware of the load-relief
failure, appropriate flight limitations, including speed restrictions,
may be considered when evaluating structural loads, flutter, and
fatigue and damage tolerance. These special conditions allows credit,
in the form of reduced structural factors of safety, based on the
probability of failure of the load-relief system and the flight time
remaining on the failure flight.
Special condition 2(g) of these special conditions addresses the
failure of the load-relief system to annunciate a failure to the pilot.
These special conditions address this concern with maintenance actions
and requirements for monitoring and annunciation systems.
These special conditions have been modified from previous, similar
part 25 special conditions because of the differences between parts 23
and 25 as well as to address the part 91 operating and maintenance
environment. Paragraph (c)(3) of the part 25 special condition \1\ is
removed from these special conditions. Special condition 2(h) of these
special conditions is modified to require a ferry permit for additional
flights after an annunciated failure or obvious system failure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Special Condition No. 25-164-SC, ``Boeing Model 737-700 IGW,
Interaction of Systems and Structures,'' Effective August 30, 2000
(65 FR 55443).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Type Certification Basis
Under the provisions of Sec. 21.101, Cranfield Aerospace Limited
must show that the Cessna model 525, as changed, continues to meet the
applicable provisions of the regulations incorporated by reference in
Type Certificate No. A1WI, revision 24, or the applicable regulations
in effect on the date of application for the change. The regulations
incorporated by reference in the type certificate are commonly referred
to as the ``original type certification basis.'' The regulations
incorporated by reference in Type Certificate No. A1WI, revision 24 are
14 CFR part 23 effective February 1, 1965, amendments 23-1 through 23-
38 and 23-40.
If the Administrator finds the applicable airworthiness regulations
(i.e., 14 CFR part 23) do not contain adequate or appropriate safety
standards for the Cessna model 525 because of a novel or unusual design
feature, special conditions are prescribed under the provisions of
Sec. 21.16.
In addition to the applicable airworthiness regulations and special
conditions, the Cessna 525 must comply with the fuel vent and exhaust
emission requirements of 14 CFR part 34 and the noise certification
requirements of 14 CFR part 36.
The FAA issues special conditions, as defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in
accordance with Sec. 11.38, and they become part of the type-
certification basis under Sec. 21.101.
Special conditions are initially applicable to the model for which
they are issued. Should the applicant apply for a supplemental type
certificate to modify any other model included on the same type
certificate to incorporate the same or similar novel or unusual design
feature, the FAA would apply these special conditions to the other
model under Sec. 21.101.
Novel or Unusual Design Features
The Cessna model 525 will incorporate the following novel or
unusual design features: Cranfield winglets with a Tamarack Active
Technology Load Alleviation System.
Discussion
For airplanes equipped with systems that affect structural
performance, either directly or as a result of a failure or
malfunction, the applicant must take into account the influence of
these systems and their failure conditions when showing compliance with
the requirements of part 23, subparts C and D.
The applicant must use the following criteria for showing
compliance with these special conditions for airplanes equipped with
flight control systems, autopilots, stability augmentation systems,
load alleviation systems, flutter control systems, fuel management
systems, and other systems that either directly or as a result of
failure or malfunction affect structural performance. If these special
conditions are used for other systems, it may be necessary to adapt the
criteria to the specific system.
Discussion of Comments
Notice of proposed special conditions No. 23-16-03-SC for the
Cessna model 525 airplane was published in the Federal Register on
November 22, 2016 (81 FR 83737). No comments were received, and the
special conditions are adopted as proposed.
Applicability
As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
Cessna model 525. Should Cranfield Aerospace Limited apply at a later
date for a supplemental type certificate to modify any other model
included on A1WI, revision 24 to incorporate the same novel or unusual
design feature, the FAA would apply these special conditions to that
model as well.
Under standard practice, the effective date of final special
conditions would be 30 days after the date of publication in the
Federal Register; however, as the supplemental type certification date
for the Cessna model 525 is imminent, the FAA finds that good cause
exists to make these special conditions effective upon issuance.
Conclusion
This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features
on one model of airplanes. It is not a rule of general applicability
and it affects only the applicant who applied to the FAA for approval
of these features on the airplane.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 23
Aircraft, Aviation safety, Signs and symbols.
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 44702, 14 CFR 21.16,
21.101; and 14 CFR 11.38 and 11.19.
The Special Conditions
Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the
Administrator, the following special conditions are issued as part of
the type certification basis for Cessna Aircraft Company 525 airplanes
modified by Cranfield Aerospace Limited.
1. Active Technology Load Alleviation System (ATLAS)
SC 23.672 Load Alleviation System
The load alleviation system must comply with the following:
[[Page 1165]]
(a) A warning, which is clearly distinguishable to the pilot under
expected flight conditions without requiring the pilot's attention,
must be provided for any failure in the load alleviation system or in
any other automatic system that could result in an unsafe condition if
the pilot was not aware of the failure. Warning systems must not
activate the control system.
(b) The design of the load alleviation system or of any other
automatic system must permit initial counteraction of failures without
requiring exceptional pilot skill or strength, by either the
deactivation of the system or a failed portion thereof, or by
overriding the failure by movement of the flight controls in the normal
sense.
(1) If deactivation of the system is used to counteract failures,
the control for this initial counteraction must be readily accessible
to each pilot while operating the control wheel and thrust control
levers.
(2) If overriding the failure by movement of the flight controls is
used, the override capability must be operationally demonstrated.
(c) It must be shown that, after any single failure of the load
alleviation system, the airplane must be safely controllable when the
failure or malfunction occurs at any speed or altitude within the
approved operating limitations that is critical for the type of failure
being considered;
(d) It must be shown that, while the system is active or after any
single failure of the load alleviation system--
(1) The controllability and maneuverability requirements of part
23, subpart D, are met within a practical operational flight envelope
(e.g., speed, altitude, normal acceleration, and airplane
configuration) that is described in the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM);
and
(2) The trim, stability, and stall characteristics are not impaired
below a level needed to permit continued safe flight and landing.
SC 23.677 Load Alleviation Active Control Surface
(a) Proper precautions must be taken to prevent inadvertent or
improper operation of the load alleviation system. It must be
demonstrated that with the load alleviation system operating throughout
its operational range, a pilot of average strength and skill level is
able to continue safe flight with no objectionable increased workload.
(b) The load alleviation system must be designed so that, when any
one connecting or transmitting element in the primary flight control
system fails, adequate control for safe flight and landing is
available.
(c) The load alleviation system must be irreversible unless the
control surface is properly balanced and has no unsafe flutter
characteristics. The system must have adequate rigidity and reliability
in the portion of the system from the control surface to the attachment
of the irreversible unit to the airplane structure.
(d) It must be demonstrated the airplane is safely controllable and
a pilot can perform all maneuvers and operations necessary to affect a
safe landing following any load alleviation system runaway not shown to
be extremely improbable, allowing for appropriate time delay after
pilot recognition of the system runaway. The demonstration must be
conducted at critical airplane weights and center of gravity positions.
SC 23.683 Operation Tests
(a) It must be shown by operation tests that, when the flight
control system and the load alleviation systems are operated and loaded
as prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section, the flight control
system and load alleviation systems are free from--
(1) Jamming;
(2) Excessive friction; and
(3) Excessive deflection.
(b) The operation tests in paragraph (a) of this section must also
show the load alleviation system and associated surfaces do not
restrict or prevent aileron control surface movements, or cause any
adverse response of the ailerons, under the loading prescribed in
paragraph (c) of this section that would prevent continued safe flight
and landing.
(c) The prescribed test loads are for the entire load alleviation
and flight control systems, loads corresponding to the limit air loads
on the appropriate surfaces.
Note: Advisory Circular (AC) 23-17C ``Systems and Equipment
Guide to Certification of Part 23 Airplanes'' provides guidance on
potential methods of compliance with this section and other
regulations applicable to this STC project.
SC 23.685 Control System Details
(a) Each detail of the load alleviation system and related moveable
surfaces must be designed and installed to prevent jamming, chafing,
and interference from cargo, passengers, loose objects, or the freezing
of moisture.
(b) There must be means in the cockpit to prevent the entry of
foreign objects into places where they would jam any one connecting or
transmitting element of the load alleviation system.
(c) Each element of the load alleviation system must have design
features, or must be distinctively and permanently marked, to minimize
the possibility of incorrect assembly that could result in
malfunctioning of the control system.
SC 23.697 Load Alleviation System Controls
(a) The load alleviation control surface must be designed so that
during normal operation, when the surface has been placed in any
position, it will not move from that position unless the control is
adjusted or is moved by the operation of a load alleviation system.
(b) The rate of movement of the control surface in response to the
load alleviation system controls must give satisfactory flight and
performance characteristics under steady or changing conditions of
airspeed, engine power, attitude, flap configuration, speedbrake
position, and during landing gear extension and retraction.
SC 23.701 Load Alleviation System Interconnection
(a) The load alleviation system and related movable surfaces as a
system must--
(1) Be synchronized by a mechanical interconnection between the
movable surfaces or by an approved equivalent means; or
(2) Be designed so the occurrence of any failure of the system that
would result in an unsafe flight characteristic of the airplane is
extremely improbable; or
(b) The airplane must be shown to have safe flight characteristics
with any combination of extreme positions of individual movable
surfaces.
(c) If an interconnection is used in multiengine airplanes, it must
be designed to account for unsymmetrical loads resulting from flight
with the engines on one side of the plane of symmetry inoperative and
the remaining engines at takeoff power. For single-engine airplanes,
and multiengine airplanes with no slipstream effects on the load
alleviation system, it may be assumed that 100 percent of the critical
air load acts on one side and 70 percent on the other.
Sections 23.675, ``Stops;'' 23.681, ``Limit Load Static Tests;'' and
23.693, ``Joints''
The load alleviation system must comply with Sec. Sec. 23.675,
23.681, and 23.693 as written and no unique special condition will be
required for these regulations.
[[Page 1166]]
Applicability of Control System Regulations to Other Control Systems
If applicable, other control systems used on the Cessna 525 may
require a showing of compliance to Sec. Sec. 23.672, 23.675, 23.677,
23.681, 23.683, 23.685, 23.693, 23.697 and 23.701 as written for this
STC project.
2. Interaction of Systems and Structures
(a) The criteria defined herein only address the direct structural
consequences of the system responses and performances and cannot be
considered in isolation but should be included in the overall safety
evaluation of the airplane. These criteria may in some instances
duplicate standards already established for this evaluation. These
criteria are only applicable to structure whose failure could prevent
continued safe flight and landing. Specific criteria that define
acceptable limits on handling characteristics or stability requirements
when operating in the system degraded or inoperative mode are not
provided in this special condition.
(b) Depending upon the specific characteristics of the airplane,
additional studies may be required that go beyond the criteria provided
in this special condition in order to demonstrate the capability of the
airplane to meet other realistic conditions such as alternative gust or
maneuver descriptions for an airplane equipped with a load alleviation
system.
(c) The following definitions are applicable to this special
condition.
(1) Structural performance: Capability of the airplane to meet the
structural requirements of 14 CFR part 23.
(2) Flight limitations: Limitations that can be applied to the
airplane flight conditions following an in-flight occurrence and that
are included in the flight manual (e.g., speed limitations, avoidance
of severe weather conditions, etc.).
(3) [Reserved]
(4) Probabilistic terms: The probabilistic terms (probable,
improbable, extremely improbable) used in this special condition are
the same as those used in Sec. 23.1309. For the purposes of this
special condition, extremely improbable for normal, utility, and
acrobatic category airplanes is defined as 10-\8\ per hour.
For commuter category airplanes, extremely improbable is defined as
10-\9\ per hour.
(5) Failure condition: The term failure condition is the same as
that used in Sec. 23.1309, however this special condition applies only
to system failure conditions that affect the structural performance of
the airplane (e.g., system failure conditions that induce loads, change
the response of the airplane to inputs such as gusts or pilot actions,
or lower flutter margins).
(d) General. The following criteria (paragraphs (e) through (i))
will be used in determining the influence of a system and its failure
conditions on the airplane structure.
(e) System fully operative. With the system fully operative, the
following apply:
(1) Limit loads must be derived in all normal operating
configurations of the system from all the limit conditions specified in
subpart C (or defined by special condition or equivalent level of
safety in lieu of those specified in subpart C), taking into account
any special behavior of such a system or associated functions or any
effect on the structural performance of the airplane that may occur up
to the limit loads. In particular, any significant nonlinearity (rate
of displacement of control surface, thresholds or any other system
nonlinearities) must be accounted for in a realistic or conservative
way when deriving limit loads from limit conditions.
(2) The airplane must meet the strength requirements of part 23
(static strength and residual strength for failsafe or damage tolerant
structure), using the specified factors to derive ultimate loads from
the limit loads defined above. The effect of nonlinearities must be
investigated beyond limit conditions to ensure the behavior of the
system presents no anomaly compared to the behavior below limit
conditions. However, conditions beyond limit conditions need not be
considered when it can be shown that the airplane has design features
that will not allow it to exceed those limit conditions.
(3) The airplane must meet the aeroelastic stability requirements
of Sec. 23.629.
(f) System in the failure condition. For any system failure
condition not shown to be extremely improbable, the following apply:
(1) At the time of occurrence. Starting from 1-g level flight
conditions, a realistic scenario, including pilot corrective actions,
must be established to determine the loads occurring at the time of
failure and immediately after failure.
(i) For static strength substantiation, these loads, multiplied by
an appropriate factor of safety that is related to the probability of
occurrence of the failure, are ultimate loads to be considered for
design. The factor of safety is defined in figure 1.
[[Page 1167]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR05JA17.316
(ii) For residual strength substantiation, the airplane must be
able to withstand two thirds of the ultimate loads defined in
subparagraph (f)(1)(i).
(iii) For pressurized cabins, these loads must be combined with the
normal operating differential pressure.
(iv) Freedom from aeroelastic instability must be shown up to the
speeds defined in Sec. 23.629(f). For failure conditions that result
in speeds beyond VD/MD, freedom from aeroelastic
instability must be shown to increased speeds, so that the margins
intended by Sec. 23.629(f) are maintained.
(v) Failures of the system that result in forced structural
vibrations (oscillatory failures) must not produce loads that could
result in detrimental deformation of primary structure.
(2) For the continuation of the flight. For the airplane, in the
system failed state and considering any appropriate reconfiguration and
flight limitations, the following apply:
(i) The loads derived from the following conditions (or defined by
special condition or equivalent level of safety in lieu of the
following conditions) at speeds up to VC/MC, or
the speed limitation prescribed for the remainder of the flight, must
be determined:
(A) The limit symmetrical maneuvering conditions specified in
Sec. Sec. 23.321, 23.331, 23.333, 23.345, 23.421, 23.423, and 23.445.
(B) The limit gust and turbulence conditions specified in
Sec. Sec. 23.341, 23.345, 23.425, 23.443, and 23.445.
(C) The limit rolling conditions specified in Sec. 23.349 and the
limit unsymmetrical conditions specified in Sec. Sec. 23.347, 23.427,
and 23.445.
(D) The limit yaw maneuvering conditions specified in Sec. Sec.
23.351, 23.441, and 23.445.
(E) The limit ground loading conditions specified in Sec. Sec.
23.473 and 23.493.
(ii) For static strength substantiation, each part of the structure
must be able to withstand the loads in paragraph (f)(2)(i) of this
special condition multiplied by a factor of safety depending on the
probability of being in this failure state. The factor of safety is
defined in figure 2.
[[Page 1168]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR05JA17.317
(iii) For residual strength substantiation, the airplane must be
able to withstand two thirds of the ultimate loads defined in paragraph
(f)(2)(ii) of this special condition. For pressurized cabins, these
loads must be combined with the normal operating pressure differential.
(iv) If the loads induced by the failure condition have a
significant effect on fatigue or damage tolerance then their effects
must be taken into account.
(v) Freedom from aeroelastic instability must be shown up to a
speed determined from figure 3. Flutter clearance speeds V' and V'' may
be based on the speed limitation specified for the remainder of the
flight using the margins defined by Sec. 23.629.
[[Page 1169]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR05JA17.318
(vi) Freedom from aeroelastic instability must also be shown up to
V' in figure 3 above, for any probable system failure condition
combined with any damage required or selected for investigation by
Sec. Sec. 23.571 through 23.574.
(3) Consideration of certain failure conditions may be required by
other sections of 14 CFR part 23 regardless of calculated system
reliability. Where analysis shows the probability of these failure
conditions to be less than 10-\8\ for normal, utility, or
acrobatic category airplanes or less than 10-\9\ for
commuter category airplanes, criteria other than those specified in
this paragraph may be used for structural substantiation to show
continued safe flight and landing.
(g) Failure indications. For system failure detection and
indication, the following apply:
(1) The system must be checked for failure conditions, not
extremely improbable, that degrade the structural capability below the
level required by part 23 or significantly reduce the reliability of
the remaining system. As far as reasonably practicable, the flightcrew
must be made aware of these failures before flight. Certain elements of
the control system, such as mechanical and hydraulic components, may
use special periodic inspections, and electronic components may use
daily checks, in lieu of detection and indication systems to achieve
the objective of this requirement. These certification maintenance
requirements must be limited to components that are not readily
detectable by normal detection and indication systems and where service
history shows that inspections will provide an adequate level of
safety.
(2) The existence of any failure condition, not extremely
improbable, during flight that could significantly affect the
structural capability of the airplane and for which the associated
reduction in airworthiness can be minimized by suitable flight
limitations, must be signaled to the flightcrew. The probability of not
annunciating these failure conditions must be extremely improbable
(unannunciated failure). For example, failure conditions that result in
a factor of safety between the airplane strength and the loads of
subpart C below 1.25, or flutter margins below V'', must be signaled to
the flightcrew during flight.
(h) Further flights with known load-relief system failure.
Additional flights after an annunciated failure of the load-relief
system or obvious failure of the load-relief system are permitted with
a ferry permit only. In these cases, ferry permits may be issued to
allow moving the airplane to an appropriate maintenance facility.
Additional flights are defined as, further flights after landing on a
flight where an annunciated or obvious failure of the load-relief
system has occurred or after an annunciated or obvious failure of the
load-relief system occurs during preflight preparation.
(i) Fatigue and damage tolerance. If any system failure would have
a significant effect on the fatigue or damage evaluations required in
Sec. Sec. 23.571 through 23.574, then these effects must be taken into
account.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on December 23, 2016.
Barry Ballenger,
Acting Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service.
[FR Doc. 2016-31819 Filed 1-4-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P