Airworthiness Criteria: Special Class Airworthiness Criteria for the Flytrex, Inc. FTX-M600P, 74622-74627 [2020-25659]
Download as PDF
74622
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 226 / Monday, November 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules
A to Part 23, as appropriate, that are
acceptable to the FAA. The ICA may be
incomplete at type certification if a
program exists to ensure their
completion prior to delivery of the first
UAS or issuance of a standard
airworthiness certificate, whichever
occurs later.
Testing
UAS.300
Durability and Reliability
The UAS must be designed to be
durable and reliable commensurate to
the maximum population density
specified in the operating limitations.
The durability and reliability must be
demonstrated by flight test in
accordance with the requirements of
this section and completed with no
failures that result in a loss of flight, loss
of control, loss of containment, or
emergency landing outside the
operator’s recovery area.
(a) Once a UAS has begun testing to
show compliance with this section, all
flights for that UA must be included in
the flight test report.
(b) Tests must include an evaluation
of the entire flight envelope across all
phases of operation and must address, at
a minimum, the following:
(1) Flight distances;
(2) Flight durations;
(3) Route complexity;
(4) Weight;
(5) Center of gravity;
(6) Density altitude;
(7) Outside air temperature;
(8) Airspeed;
(9) Wind;
(10) Weather;
(11) Operation at night, if requested;
(12) Energy storage system capacity;
and
(13) Aircraft to pilot ratio.
(c) Tests must include the most
adverse combinations of the conditions
and configurations in paragraph (b) of
this section.
(d) Tests must show a distribution of
the different flight profiles and routes
representative of the type of operations
identified in the CONOPS.
(e) Tests must be conducted in
conditions consistent with the expected
environmental conditions identified in
the CONOPS, including electromagnetic
interference (EMI) and High Intensity
Radiated Fields (HIRF).
(f) Tests must not require exceptional
piloting skill or alertness.
(g) Any UAS used for testing must be
subject to the same worst-case ground
handling, shipping, and transportation
loads as those allowed in service.
(h) Any UAS used for testing must be
maintained and operated in accordance
with the ICA and UAS Flight Manual.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Nov 20, 2020
Jkt 253001
No maintenance beyond the intervals
established in the ICA will be allowed
to show compliance with this section.
(i) If cargo operations or external-load
operations are requested, tests must
show, throughout the flight envelope
and with the cargo or external-load at
the most critical combinations of weight
and center of gravity, that—
(1) the UA is safely controllable and
maneuverable; and
(2) the cargo or external-load are
retainable and transportable.
UAS.305 Probable Failures
The UAS must be designed such that
a probable failure will not result in a
loss of containment or control of the
UA. This must be demonstrated by test.
(a) Probable failures related to the
following equipment, at a minimum,
must be addressed.
(1) Propulsion systems;
(2) C2 link;
(3) Global Positioning System (GPS);
(4) Critical flight control components
with a single point of failure;
(5) Control station; and
(6) Any other equipment identified by
the applicant.
(b) Any UAS used for testing must be
operated in accordance with the UAS
Flight Manual.
(c) Each test must occur at the critical
phase and mode of flight, and at the
highest aircraft-to-pilot ratio.
UAS.310 Capabilities and Functions
(a) All of the following required UAS
capabilities and functions must be
demonstrated by test:
(1) Capability to regain command and
control of the UA after the C2 link has
been lost.
(2) Capability of the electrical system
to power all UA systems and payloads.
(3) Ability for the pilot to safely
discontinue the flight.
(4) Ability for the pilot to dynamically
re-route the UA.
(5) Ability to safely abort a takeoff.
(6) Ability to safely abort a landing
and initiate a go-around.
(b) The following UAS capabilities
and functions, if requested for approval,
must be demonstrated by test:
(1) Continued flight after degradation
of the propulsion system.
(2) Geo-fencing that contains the UA
within a designated area, in all
operating conditions.
(3) Positive transfer of the UA
between control stations that ensures
only one control station can control the
UA at a time.
(4) Capability to release an external
cargo load to prevent loss of control of
the UA.
(5) Capability to detect and avoid
other aircraft and obstacles.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(c) The UAS must be designed to
safeguard against inadvertent
discontinuation of the flight and
inadvertent release of cargo or externalload.
UAS.315 Fatigue
The structure of the UA must be
shown to be able to withstand the
repeated loads expected during its
service life without failure. A life limit
for the airframe must be established,
demonstrated by test, and included in
the ICA.
UAS.320 Verification of Limits
The performance, maneuverability,
stability, and control of the UA within
the flight envelope described in the
UAS Flight Manual must be
demonstrated at a minimum of 5% over
maximum gross weight with no loss of
control or loss of flight.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on
November 16, 2020.
Patrick R. Mullen,
Manager, Small Airplane Standards Branch,
Policy and Innovation Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2020–25668 Filed 11–20–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 21
[Docket No. FAA–2020–1090]
Airworthiness Criteria: Special Class
Airworthiness Criteria for the Flytrex,
Inc. FTX–M600P
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed
airworthiness criteria.
AGENCY:
The FAA announces the
availability of and requests comments
on proposed airworthiness criteria for
the Flytrex, Inc. Model FTX–M600P
unmanned aircraft system (UAS). This
document proposes airworthiness
criteria the FAA finds to be appropriate
and applicable for the UAS design.
DATES: Send comments on or before
December 23, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Send comments identified
by docket number FAA–2020–1090
using any of the following methods:
b Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov and follow
the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
b Mail: Send comments to Docket
Operations, M–30, U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\23NOP1.SGM
23NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 226 / Monday, November 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Avenue SE, Room W12–140, West
Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC
20590–0001.
b Hand Delivery of 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.
b Fax: Fax comments to Docket
Operations at 202–493–2251.
Privacy: The FAA will post all
comments it receives, without change,
to https://regulations.gov, including any
personal information the commenter
provides. Using the search function of
the docket website, anyone can find and
read the electronic form of all comments
received into any FAA docket,
including the name of the individual
sending the comment (or signing the
comment for an association, business,
labor union, etc.). DOT’s complete
Privacy Act Statement can be found in
the Federal Register published on April
11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–19478), as well
as at https://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
Docket: Background documents or
comments received may be read at
https://www.regulations.gov at any time.
Follow the online instructions for
accessing the docket or go to the Docket
Operations in Room W12–140 of the
West Building Ground Floor at 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Hieu Nguyen, AIR–692, Federal
Aviation Administration, Policy and
Innovation Division, Small Airplane
Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification
Service, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas
City, MO 64106, telephone (816) 329–
4123, facsimile (816) 329–4090.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
The FAA invites interested people to
take part in the development of these
airworthiness criteria by sending
written comments, data, or views. The
most helpful comments reference a
specific portion of the airworthiness
criteria, explain the reason for any
recommended change, and include
supporting data. Comments on
operational, pilot certification, and
maintenance requirements would
address issues that are beyond the scope
of this document.
Except for Confidential Business
Information as described in the
following paragraph, and other
information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will file in the docket all
comments received, as well as a report
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Nov 20, 2020
Jkt 253001
summarizing each substantive public
contact with FAA personnel concerning
these proposed airworthiness criteria.
Before acting on this proposal, the FAA
will consider all comments received on
or before the closing date for comments.
The FAA will consider comments filed
late if it is possible to do so without
incurring delay. The FAA may change
these airworthiness criteria based on
received comments.
Confidential Business Information
Confidential Business Information
(CBI) is commercial or financial
information that is both customarily and
actually treated as private by its owner.
Under the Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552), CBI is exempt
from public disclosure. If your
comments responsive to this NPRM
contain commercial or financial
information that is customarily treated
as private, that you actually treat as
private, and that is relevant or
responsive to this notice, it is important
that you clearly designate the submitted
comments as CBI. Please mark each
page of your submission containing CBI
as ‘‘PROPIN.’’ The FAA will treat such
marked submissions as confidential
under the FOIA, and they will not be
placed in the public docket of this
notice. Submissions containing CBI
should be sent to the individual listed
under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT. Any commentary that the FAA
receives which is not specifically
designated as CBI will be placed in the
public docket for this notice.
Background
Flytrex, Inc., (Flytrex) applied to the
FAA on March 18, 2019, for a special
class type certificate under Title 14,
Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
21.17(b) for the Model FTX–M600P
UAS.
The Model FTX–M600P consists of an
unmanned aircraft (UA) and its
associated elements that include
communication links and the
components that control the UA. The
Model FTX–M600P UA has a maximum
gross takeoff weight of 34 pounds. It is
approximately 53 inches in width, 53
inches in length, and 31 inches in
height. The Model FTX–M600P UA is
battery powered using electric motors
for vertical takeoff, landing, and forward
flight. The UAS operations would rely
on high levels of automation and may
include multiple UA operated by a
single pilot, up to a ratio of 20 UA to
1 pilot. Flytrex anticipates operators
will use the Model FTX–M600P for
delivering packages. The proposed
concept of operations for the Model
FTX–M600P identifies a maximum
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
74623
operating altitude of 230 feet above
ground level, a maximum cruise speed
of 30 knots (34 mph), operations beyond
visual line of sight of the pilot, and
operations over human beings. Flytrex
has not requested type certification for
flight into known icing for the Model
FTX–M600P.
Discussion
The FAA establishes airworthiness
criteria to ensure the safe operation of
aircraft in accordance with 49 U.S.C.
44701(a) and 44704. UAS are type
certificated by the FAA as special class
aircraft for which airworthiness
standards have not been established by
regulation. Under the provisions of 14
CFR 21.17(b), the airworthiness
standards for special class aircraft are
those the FAA finds to be appropriate
and applicable to the specific type
design.
The applicant has proposed a design
with constraints upon its operations and
an unusual design characteristic: The
pilot is remotely located. The FAA
developed existing airworthiness
standards to establish an appropriate
level of safety for each product and its
intended use. The FAA’s existing
airworthiness standards did not
envision aircraft with no pilot in the
cockpit and the technologies associated
with that capability.
The FAA has reviewed the proposed
design and assessed the potential risk to
the National Airspace System. The FAA
considered the size of the proposed
aircraft, its maximum airspeed and
altitude, and operational limitations to
address the number of unmanned
aircraft per operator and to address
operations in which the aircraft would
operate beyond the visual line of sight
of the pilot. These factors allowed the
FAA to assess the potential risk the
aircraft could pose to other aircraft and
to human beings on the ground. Using
these parameters, the FAA developed
airworthiness criteria to address those
potential risks to ensure the aircraft
remains reliable, controllable, safe, and
airworthy.
The proposed criteria focus on
mitigating hazards by establishing safety
outcomes that must be achieved, rather
than by establishing prescriptive
requirements that must be met. This is
in contrast to many current
airworthiness standards, used to
certificate traditional aircraft systems,
which prescribe specific indicators and
instruments for a pilot in a cockpit that
would be inappropriate for UAS. The
FAA finds that the proposed criteria are
appropriate and applicable for the UAS
design, based on the intended
E:\FR\FM\23NOP1.SGM
23NOP1
74624
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 226 / Monday, November 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules
operational concepts for the UAS as
identified by the applicant.
The FAA selected the particular
airworthiness criteria proposed by this
notice for the following reasons:
General: In order to determine
appropriate and applicable
airworthiness standards for UAS as a
special class of aircraft, the FAA
determined that the applicant must
provide information describing the
characteristics and capabilities of the
UAS and how it will be used.
UAS.001 Concept of Operations: To
assist the FAA in identifying and
analyzing the risks and impacts
associated with integrating the proposed
UAS design into the National Airspace
System, the applicant would be required
to submit a Concept of Operations
(CONOPS). The proposed criteria would
require the applicant’s CONOPS to
identify the intended operational
concepts for the UAS and describe the
UAS and its operation. The information
in the CONOPS would determine
parameters and extent of testing, as well
as operating limitations that will be
placed in the UAS Flight Manual.
Design and Construction: The FAA
selected the design and construction
criteria in this section to address
airworthiness requirements where the
flight testing demonstration alone may
not be sufficient to demonstrate an
appropriate level of safety.
UAS.100 Control Station: The
control station, which is located
separately from the UA, is a unique
feature to UAS. As a result, no
regulatory airworthiness standards exist
that directly apply to this part of the
system. The FAA based some of the
proposed criteria on existing regulations
that address the information that must
be provided to a pilot in the cockpit of
a manned aircraft, and modified them as
appropriate to this UAS. Thus, to
address the risks associated with loss of
control of the UAS, the applicant would
be required to design the control station
to provide the pilot with the
information necessary for continued
safe flight and operation. The proposed
criteria contain the specific minimum
types of information the FAA finds are
necessary for this requirement; however,
the applicant must determine whether
additional parameters are necessary.
UAS.110 Software: Software for
manned aircraft is certified under the
regulations applicable to systems,
equipment, and installations (e.g.,
§§ 23.2510, 25.1309, 27.1309, or
29.1309). There are two regulations that
specifically prescribe airworthiness
standards for software: Engine
airworthiness standards (§ 33.28) and
propeller airworthiness standards
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Nov 20, 2020
Jkt 253001
(§ 35.23). The proposed UAS software
criteria was based on these regulations
and tailored for the risks posed by UAS
software.
UAS.115 Cyber Security: The
location of the pilot separate from the
UA requires a continuous wireless
connection (command and control link)
with the UA for the pilot to monitor and
control it. Because the purpose of this
link is to control the aircraft, this makes
the UAS susceptible to cyber security
threats in a unique way.
The current regulations for the
certification of systems, equipment, and
installations (e.g., §§ 23.2510, 25.1309,
27.1309, and 29.1309) do not adequately
address potential security
vulnerabilities that could be exploited
by unauthorized access to aircraft
systems, data buses, and services. For
manned aircraft, the FAA therefore
issues special conditions for particular
designs with network security
vulnerabilities.
To address the risks to the UAS
associated with intentional
unauthorized electronic interactions,
the applicant would be required to
design the UAS’s systems and networks
to protect against intentional
unauthorized electronic interactions
and mitigate potential adverse effects.
The FAA based the language for the
proposed criteria on recommendations
in the final report dated August 22,
2016, from the Aircraft System
Information Security/Protection (ASISP)
working group, under the FAA’s
Aviation Rulemaking Advisory
Committee. Although the
recommendations pertained to manned
aircraft, the FAA has reviewed the
report and determined the
recommendations are also appropriate
for UAS. The wireless connections used
by UAS make these aircraft susceptible
to the same cyber security risks, and
therefore require similar criteria, as
manned aircraft.
UAS.120 Contingency Planning: The
location of the pilot and the controls for
the UAS, separate from the UA, is a
unique feature to UAS. As a result, no
regulatory airworthiness standards exist
that directly apply to this feature of the
system.
To address the risks associated with
loss of communication between the
pilot and the UA, and thus the pilot’s
inability to control the UA, the
proposed criteria would require that the
UAS be designed to automatically
execute a predetermined action.
Because the pilot needs to be aware of
the particular predetermined action the
UA will take when there is a loss of
communication between the pilot and
the UA, the proposed criteria would
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
require that the applicant identify the
predetermined action in the UAS Flight
Manual. The proposed criteria would
also include requirements for
preventing takeoff when quality of
service is inadequate.
UAS.125 Lightning: Because of the
size and physical limitations of this
UAS, it would be unlikely that this UAS
would incorporate traditional lightning
protection features. To address the risks
that would result from a lightning strike,
the proposed criteria would require an
operating limitation in the UAS Flight
Manual that prohibits flight into
weather conditions conducive to
lightning. The proposed criteria would
also allow design characteristics to
protect the UAS from lightning as an
alternative to the prohibition.
UAS.130 Adverse Weather
Conditions: Because of the size and
physical limitations of this UAS,
adverse weather such as rain, snow, and
icing pose a greater hazard to the UAS
than to manned aircraft. For the same
reason, it would be unlikely that this
UAS would incorporate traditional
protection features from icing. The FAA
based the proposed criteria on the icing
requirements in 14 CFR 23.2165(b) and
(c), and applied them to all of these
adverse weather conditions. The
proposed criteria would allow design
characteristics to protect the UAS from
adverse weather conditions. As an
alternative, the proposed criteria would
require an operating limitation in the
UAS Flight Manual that prohibits flight
into known adverse weather conditions,
and either also prevent inadvertent
flight into adverse weather or provide a
means to detect and to avoid or exit
adverse weather conditions.
UAS.135 Critical Parts: The
proposed criteria for critical parts are
substantively the same as that in
§ 27.602, with changes to reflect UAS
terminology and failure condition.
Operating Limitations and
Information: Similar to manned aircraft,
the FAA determined that the UAS
applicant must provide airworthiness
instructions, operating limitations, and
flight and performance information
necessary for the safe operation and
continued operational safety of the
UAS.
UAS.200 Flight Manual: The
proposed criteria for the UAS Flight
Manual are substantively the same as
that in § 23.2620, with minor changes to
reflect UAS terminology.
UAS.205 Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness: The proposed criteria for
the Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness (ICA) are substantively
the same as that in § 23.1529, with
E:\FR\FM\23NOP1.SGM
23NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 226 / Monday, November 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules
minor changes to reflect UAS
terminology.
Testing: Traditional certification
methodologies for manned aircraft are
based on design requirements verified at
the component level by inspection,
analysis, demonstration, or test. Due to
the difference in size and complexity,
the FAA determined testing
methodologies that demonstrate
reliability at the aircraft (UAS) level, in
addition to the design and construction
criteria identified in this proposal, will
achieve the same safety objective. The
proposed testing criteria in sections
UAS.300 through UAS.320 utilize these
methodologies.
UAS.300 Durability and Reliability:
The FAA intends the proposed testing
criteria in this section to cover key
design aspects and prevent unsafe
features at an appropriate level tailored
for this UAS. The proposed durability
and reliability testing would require the
applicant to demonstrate safe flight of
the UAS across the entire operational
envelope and up to all operational
limitations, for all phases of flight and
all aircraft configurations. The UAS
would only be certificated for
operations within the limitations, and
for flight over the maximum population
density, as demonstrated by test. The
proposed criteria would require that all
flights during the testing be completed
with no failures that result in a loss of
flight, loss of control, loss of
containment, or emergency landing
outside of the operator’s recovery zone.
For some aircraft design requirements
imposed by existing airworthiness
standards (e.g., §§ 23.2135, 23.2600,
25.105, 25.125, 27.141, 27.173, 29.51,
29.177) the aircraft must not require
exceptional piloting skill or alertness.
These rules recognize that pilots have
varying levels of ability and attention. In
a similar manner, the proposed criteria
would require that the durability and
reliability flight testing be performed by
a pilot with average skill and alertness.
Flight testing will be used to
determine the aircraft’s ability to
withstand flight loads across the range
of operating limits and the flight
envelope. Because small UAS may be
subjected to significant ground loads
when handled, lifted, carried, loaded,
maintained, and transported physically
by hand, the proposed criteria would
require that the aircraft used for testing
endure the same worst-case ground
loads as those the UAS will experience
in operation after type certification.
UAS.305 Probable Failures: The
FAA intends the proposed testing
criteria to evaluate how the UAS
functions after failures that are probable
to occur. The applicant will test the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Nov 20, 2020
Jkt 253001
UAS by inducing certain failures and
demonstrating that the failure will not
result in a loss of containment or control
of the UA. The proposed criteria contain
the minimum types of failures the FAA
finds are probable; however, the
applicant must determine the probable
failures related to any other equipment
that will be addressed for this
requirement.
UAS.310 Capabilities and
Functions: The proposed criteria for this
section address the minimum
capabilities and functions the FAA finds
are necessary in the design of the UAS
and would require the applicant to
demonstrate these capabilities and
functions by test. Due to the location of
the pilot and the controls for UAS,
separate from the UA, communication
between the pilot and the UA is
significant to the design. Thus, the
proposed criteria would require the
applicant to demonstrate the capability
of the UAS to regain command and
control after a loss. As with manned
aircraft, the electrical system of the UAS
must have a capacity sufficient for all
anticipated loads; the proposed criteria
would require the applicant to
demonstrate this by test.
The proposed criteria contain
functions that would allow the pilot to
command the UA to deviate from its
flight plan or from its pre-programmed
flight path. For example, in the event
the pilot needs to deconflict the
airspace, the UA must be able to
respond to pilot inputs that override any
pre-programming.
In the event an applicant requests
approval for certain features, such as
geo-fencing or external cargo, the
proposed criteria contain requirements
to address the associated risks. The
proposed criteria in this section would
also require design of the UAS to
safeguard against an unintended
discontinuation of flight or release of
cargo, whether by human action or
malfunction.
UAS.315 Fatigue: The FAA intends
the proposed criteria in this section to
address the risks from reduced
structural integrity and structural failure
due to fatigue. The proposed criteria
would require the applicant to establish
an airframe life limit and demonstrate
that loss of flight or loss of control due
to structural failure will be avoided
throughout the operational life of the
UA. These proposed criteria would
require the applicant to demonstrate
this by test, while maintaining the UA
in accordance with the ICA.
UAS.320 Verification of Limits: This
section would evaluate structural safety
and address the risks associated with
inadequate structural design. While the
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
74625
proposed criteria in UAS.300 address
testing to demonstrate that the UAS
structure adequately supports expected
loads throughout the flight and
operational envelopes, the proposed
criteria in this section would require an
evaluation of the performance,
maneuverability, stability, and control
of the UA with a factor of safety.
Proposed Airworthiness Criteria
The FAA proposes to establish the
following airworthiness criteria for type
certification of the Flytrex Model FTX–
M600P. The FAA proposes that
compliance with the following would
mitigate the risks associated with the
proposed design and Concept of
Operations appropriately and would
provide an equivalent level of safety to
existing rules:
General
UAS.001
Concept of Operations
The applicant must define and submit
to the FAA a concept of operations
(CONOPS) proposal describing the
Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS)
operation in the National Airspace
System for which certification is
requested. The CONOPS proposal must
include, at a minimum, a description of
the following information.
(a) The intended type of operations;
(b) Unmanned aircraft (UA)
specifications;
(c) Meteorological conditions;
(d) Operators, pilots, and personnel
responsibilities;
(e) Control station and support
equipment;
(f) Command, control, and
communication functions; and
(g) Operational parameters, such as
population density, geographic
operating boundaries, airspace classes,
launch and recovery area, congestion of
proposed operating area,
communications with air traffic control,
line of sight, and aircraft separation.
Design and Construction
UAS.100
Control Station
The control station must be designed
to provide the pilot with all information
required for continued safe flight and
operation. This information includes, at
a minimum, the following:
(a) Alerts, such as an alert following
the loss of the command and control
(C2) link and function.
(b) The status of all critical parameters
for all energy storage systems.
(c) The status of all critical parameters
for all propulsion systems.
(d) Flight and navigation information
as appropriate, such as airspeed,
heading, altitude, and location.
E:\FR\FM\23NOP1.SGM
23NOP1
74626
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 226 / Monday, November 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(e) C2 link signal strength, quality, or
status.
UAS.110
Software
To minimize the existence of errors,
the applicant must:
(a) Verify by test all software that may
impact the safe operation of the UAS;
(b) Utilize a configuration
management system that tracks,
controls, and preserves changes made to
software throughout the entire life cycle;
and
(c) Implement a problem reporting
system that captures and records defects
and modifications to the software.
UAS.115
Cyber Security
(a) UAS equipment, systems, and
networks, addressed separately and in
relation to other systems, must be
protected from intentional unauthorized
electronic interactions that may result in
an adverse effect on the security or
airworthiness of the UAS. Protection
must be ensured by showing that the
security risks have been identified,
assessed, and mitigated as necessary.
(b) When required by paragraph (a) of
this section, procedures and
instructions to ensure security
protections are maintained must be
included in the Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness (ICA).
UAS.120
Contingency Planning
(a) The UAS must be designed so that,
in the event of a loss of the C2 link, the
UA will automatically and immediately
execute a safe predetermined flight,
loiter, landing, or termination.
(b) The applicant must establish the
predetermined action in the event of a
loss of the C2 link and include it in the
UAS Flight Manual.
(c) The UAS Flight Manual must
include the minimum performance
requirements for the C2 data link
defining when the C2 link is degraded
to a level where remote active control of
the UA is no longer ensured. Takeoff
when the C2 link is degraded below the
minimum link performance
requirements must be prevented by
design or prohibited by an operating
limitation in the UAS Flight Manual.
UAS.125
Lightning
(a) Except as provided in paragraph
(b) of this section, the UAS must have
design characteristics that will protect
the UAS from loss of flight or loss of
control due to lightning.
(b) If the UAS has not been shown to
protect against lightning, the UAS Flight
Manual must include an operating
limitation to prohibit flight into weather
conditions conducive to lightning
activity.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Nov 20, 2020
Jkt 253001
UAS.130
Adverse Weather Conditions
(a) For purposes of this section,
‘‘adverse weather conditions’’ means
rain, snow, and icing.
(b) Except as provided in paragraph
(c) of this section, the UAS must have
design characteristics that will allow the
UAS to operate within the adverse
weather conditions specified in the
CONOPS without loss of flight or loss of
control.
(c) For adverse weather conditions for
which the UAS is not approved to
operate, the applicant must develop
operating limitations to prohibit flight
into known adverse weather conditions
and either:
(1) Develop operating limitations to
prevent inadvertent flight into adverse
weather conditions; or
(2) Provide a means to detect any
adverse weather conditions for which
the UAS is not certificated to operate
and show the UAS’s ability to avoid or
exit those conditions.
UAS.135
Critical Parts
(a) A critical part is a part, the failure
of which could result in a loss of flight
or unrecoverable loss of UAS control.
(b) If the type design includes critical
parts, the applicant must establish a
critical parts list. The applicant must
develop and define mandatory
maintenance instructions or life limits,
or a combination of both, to prevent
failures of critical parts. Each of these
mandatory actions must be included in
the Airworthiness Limitations Section
of the ICA.
Operating Limitations and Information
UAS.200
Flight Manual
The applicant must provide a UAS
Flight Manual with each UAS.
(a) The UAS Flight Manual must
contain the following information:
(1) UAS operating limitations;
(2) UAS normal and emergency
operating procedures;
(3) Performance information;
(4) Loading information; and
(5) Other information that is necessary
for safe operation because of design,
operating, or handling characteristics.
(b) Those portions of the UAS Flight
Manual containing the information
specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through
(4) of this section must be approved by
the FAA.
UAS.205 Instructions for Continued
Airworthiness
The applicant must prepare ICA for
the UAS in accordance with Appendix
A to Part 23, as appropriate, that are
acceptable to the FAA. The ICA may be
incomplete at type certification if a
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
program exists to ensure their
completion prior to delivery of the first
UAS or issuance of a standard
airworthiness certificate, whichever
occurs later.
Testing
UAS.300
Durability and Reliability
The UAS must be designed to be
durable and reliable commensurate to
the maximum population density
specified in the operating limitations.
The durability and reliability must be
demonstrated by flight test in
accordance with the requirements of
this section and completed with no
failures that result in a loss of flight, loss
of control, loss of containment, or
emergency landing outside the
operator’s recovery area.
(a) Once a UAS has begun testing to
show compliance with this section, all
flights for that UA must be included in
the flight test report.
(b) Tests must include an evaluation
of the entire flight envelope across all
phases of operation and must address, at
a minimum, the following:
(1) Flight distances;
(2) Flight durations;
(3) Route complexity;
(4) Weight;
(5) Center of gravity;
(6) Density altitude;
(7) Outside air temperature;
(8) Airspeed;
(9) Wind;
(10) Weather;
(11) Operation at night, if requested;
(12) Energy storage system capacity;
and
(13) Aircraft to pilot ratio.
(c) Tests must include the most
adverse combinations of the conditions
and configurations in paragraph (b) of
this section.
(d) Tests must show a distribution of
the different flight profiles and routes
representative of the type of operations
identified in the CONOPS.
(e) Tests must be conducted in
conditions consistent with the expected
environmental conditions identified in
the CONOPS, including electromagnetic
interference (EMI) and High Intensity
Radiated Fields (HIRF).
(f) Tests must not require exceptional
piloting skill or alertness.
(g) Any UAS used for testing must be
subject to the same worst-case ground
handling, shipping, and transportation
loads as those allowed in service.
(h) Any UAS used for testing must be
maintained and operated in accordance
with the ICA and UAS Flight Manual.
No maintenance beyond the intervals
established in the ICA will be allowed
to show compliance with this section.
E:\FR\FM\23NOP1.SGM
23NOP1
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 226 / Monday, November 23, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(i) If cargo operations or external-load
operations are requested, tests must
show, throughout the flight envelope
and with the cargo or external-load at
the most critical combinations of weight
and center of gravity, that—
(1) the UA is safely controllable and
maneuverable; and
(2) the cargo or external-load are
retainable and transportable.
UAS.305
Probable Failures
The UAS must be designed such that
a probable failure will not result in a
loss of containment or control of the
UA. This must be demonstrated by test.
(a) Probable failures related to the
following equipment, at a minimum,
must be addressed.
(1) Propulsion systems;
(2) C2 link;
(3) Global Positioning System (GPS);
(4) Critical flight control components
with a single point of failure;
(5) Control station; and
(6) Any other equipment identified by
the applicant.
(b) Any UAS used for testing must be
operated in accordance with the UAS
Flight Manual.
(c) Each test must occur at the critical
phase and mode of flight, and at the
highest aircraft-to-pilot ratio.
UAS.310
Capabilities and Functions
(a) All of the following required UAS
capabilities and functions must be
demonstrated by test:
(1) Capability to regain command and
control of the UA after the C2 link has
been lost.
(2) Capability of the electrical system
to power all UA systems and payloads.
(3) Ability for the pilot to safely
discontinue the flight.
(4) Ability for the pilot to dynamically
re-route the UA.
(5) Ability to safely abort a takeoff.
(6) Ability to safely abort a landing
and initiate a go-around.
(b) The following UAS capabilities
and functions, if requested for approval,
must be demonstrated by test:
(1) Continued flight after degradation
of the propulsion system.
(2) Geo-fencing that contains the UA
within a designated area, in all
operating conditions.
(3) Positive transfer of the UA
between control stations that ensures
only one control station can control the
UA at a time.
(4) Capability to release an external
cargo load to prevent loss of control of
the UA.
(5) Capability to detect and avoid
other aircraft and obstacles.
(c) The UAS must be designed to
safeguard against inadvertent
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:27 Nov 20, 2020
Jkt 253001
discontinuation of the flight and
inadvertent release of cargo or externalload.
74627
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Fax: 202–493–2251.
• Mail: U.S. Department of
Transportation, Docket Operations, M–
30, West Building Ground Floor, Room
W12 140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC 20590.
• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail
address above between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m., Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
• For service information identified
in this NPRM, contact Pilatus Aircraft
Ltd., CH–6371 Stans, Switzerland;
telephone: +41 848 24 7 365; email:
techsupport.ch@pilatus-aircraft.com;
internet: https://www.pilatusaircraft.com/. You may view this service
information at the FAA, Airworthiness
Products Section, Operational Safety
Branch, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO
64106. For information on the
availability of this material at the FAA,
call 816–329–4148. It is also available
on the internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2020–
0885.
Federal Aviation Administration
Examining the AD Docket
UAS.315
Fatigue
The structure of the UA must be
shown to be able to withstand the
repeated loads expected during its
service life without failure. A life limit
for the airframe must be established,
demonstrated by test, and included in
the ICA.
UAS.320
Verification of Limits
The performance, maneuverability,
stability, and control of the UA within
the flight envelope described in the
UAS Flight Manual must be
demonstrated at a minimum of 5% over
maximum gross weight with no loss of
control or loss of flight.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on
November 16, 2020.
Patrick R. Mullen,
Manager, Small Airplane Standards Branch,
Policy and Innovation Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2020–25659 Filed 11–20–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA–2020–0885; Project
Identifier MCAI–2020–00997–A]
RIN 2120–AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Pilatus
Aircraft Ltd. Airplanes
Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking
(NPRM).
AGENCY:
The FAA proposes to adopt a
new airworthiness directive (AD) for
certain Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. (Pilatus)
Model PC–24 airplanes. This proposed
AD results from mandatory continuing
airworthiness information (MCAI)
originated by an aviation authority of
another country to identify and correct
an unsafe condition on an aviation
product. The MCAI identifies the unsafe
condition as improperly manufactured
cockpit and cabin evaporator filters
installed during production on some
PC–24 airplanes. The FAA is proposing
this AD to address the unsafe condition
on these products.
DATES: The FAA must receive comments
on this proposed AD by January 7, 2021.
ADDRESSES: You may send comments,
using the procedures found in 14 CFR
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
You may examine the AD docket on
the internet at https://
www.regulations.gov by searching for
and locating Docket No. FAA–2020–
0885; or in person at Docket Operations
between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
The AD docket contains this NPRM, the
MCAI, any comments received, and
other information. The street address for
Docket Operations is listed above.
Comments will be available in the AD
docket shortly after receipt.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Doug Rudolph, Aerospace Engineer,
FAA, General Aviation & Rotorcraft
Section, International Validation
Branch, 901 Locust, Room 301, Kansas
City, Missouri 64106; telephone: (816)
329–4059; fax: (816) 329–4090; email:
doug.rudolph@faa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
The FAA invites you to send any
written relevant data, views, or
arguments about this proposal. Send
your comments to an address listed
under ADDRESSES. Include ‘‘Docket No.
FAA–2020–0885; Project Identifier
MCAI–2020–00997–A’’ at the beginning
of your comments. The most helpful
comments reference a specific portion of
the proposal, explain the reason for any
E:\FR\FM\23NOP1.SGM
23NOP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 226 (Monday, November 23, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 74622-74627]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-25659]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 21
[Docket No. FAA-2020-1090]
Airworthiness Criteria: Special Class Airworthiness Criteria for
the Flytrex, Inc. FTX-M600P
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed airworthiness criteria.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The FAA announces the availability of and requests comments on
proposed airworthiness criteria for the Flytrex, Inc. Model FTX-M600P
unmanned aircraft system (UAS). This document proposes airworthiness
criteria the FAA finds to be appropriate and applicable for the UAS
design.
DATES: Send comments on or before December 23, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Send comments identified by docket number FAA-2020-1090
using any of the following methods:
[square] Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov and follow the online instructions for sending your
comments electronically.
[square] Mail: Send comments to Docket Operations, M-30, U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey
[[Page 74623]]
Avenue SE, Room W12-140, West Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC
20590-0001.
[square] Hand Delivery of 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.
[square] Fax: Fax comments to Docket Operations at 202-493-2251.
Privacy: The FAA will post all comments it receives, without
change, to https://regulations.gov, including any personal information
the commenter provides. Using the search function of the docket
website, anyone can find and read the electronic form of all comments
received into any FAA docket, including the name of the individual
sending the comment (or signing the comment for an association,
business, labor union, etc.). DOT's complete Privacy Act Statement can
be found in the Federal Register published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR
19477-19478), as well as at https://DocketsInfo.dot.gov.
Docket: Background documents or comments received may be read at
https://www.regulations.gov at any time. Follow the online instructions
for accessing the docket or go to the Docket Operations in Room W12-140
of the West Building Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE,
Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday,
except Federal holidays.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Hieu Nguyen, AIR-692, Federal Aviation
Administration, Policy and Innovation Division, Small Airplane
Standards Branch, Aircraft Certification Service, 901 Locust, Room 301,
Kansas City, MO 64106, telephone (816) 329-4123, facsimile (816) 329-
4090.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
The FAA invites interested people to take part in the development
of these airworthiness criteria by sending written comments, data, or
views. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion of the
airworthiness criteria, explain the reason for any recommended change,
and include supporting data. Comments on operational, pilot
certification, and maintenance requirements would address issues that
are beyond the scope of this document.
Except for Confidential Business Information as described in the
following paragraph, and other information as described in 14 CFR
11.35, the FAA will file in the docket all comments received, as well
as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA
personnel concerning these proposed airworthiness criteria. Before
acting on this proposal, the FAA will consider all comments received on
or before the closing date for comments. The FAA will consider comments
filed late if it is possible to do so without incurring delay. The FAA
may change these airworthiness criteria based on received comments.
Confidential Business Information
Confidential Business Information (CBI) is commercial or financial
information that is both customarily and actually treated as private by
its owner. Under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) (5 U.S.C. 552),
CBI is exempt from public disclosure. If your comments responsive to
this NPRM contain commercial or financial information that is
customarily treated as private, that you actually treat as private, and
that is relevant or responsive to this notice, it is important that you
clearly designate the submitted comments as CBI. Please mark each page
of your submission containing CBI as ``PROPIN.'' The FAA will treat
such marked submissions as confidential under the FOIA, and they will
not be placed in the public docket of this notice. Submissions
containing CBI should be sent to the individual listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Any commentary that the FAA receives which
is not specifically designated as CBI will be placed in the public
docket for this notice.
Background
Flytrex, Inc., (Flytrex) applied to the FAA on March 18, 2019, for
a special class type certificate under Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations (14 CFR) 21.17(b) for the Model FTX-M600P UAS.
The Model FTX-M600P consists of an unmanned aircraft (UA) and its
associated elements that include communication links and the components
that control the UA. The Model FTX-M600P UA has a maximum gross takeoff
weight of 34 pounds. It is approximately 53 inches in width, 53 inches
in length, and 31 inches in height. The Model FTX-M600P UA is battery
powered using electric motors for vertical takeoff, landing, and
forward flight. The UAS operations would rely on high levels of
automation and may include multiple UA operated by a single pilot, up
to a ratio of 20 UA to 1 pilot. Flytrex anticipates operators will use
the Model FTX-M600P for delivering packages. The proposed concept of
operations for the Model FTX-M600P identifies a maximum operating
altitude of 230 feet above ground level, a maximum cruise speed of 30
knots (34 mph), operations beyond visual line of sight of the pilot,
and operations over human beings. Flytrex has not requested type
certification for flight into known icing for the Model FTX-M600P.
Discussion
The FAA establishes airworthiness criteria to ensure the safe
operation of aircraft in accordance with 49 U.S.C. 44701(a) and 44704.
UAS are type certificated by the FAA as special class aircraft for
which airworthiness standards have not been established by regulation.
Under the provisions of 14 CFR 21.17(b), the airworthiness standards
for special class aircraft are those the FAA finds to be appropriate
and applicable to the specific type design.
The applicant has proposed a design with constraints upon its
operations and an unusual design characteristic: The pilot is remotely
located. The FAA developed existing airworthiness standards to
establish an appropriate level of safety for each product and its
intended use. The FAA's existing airworthiness standards did not
envision aircraft with no pilot in the cockpit and the technologies
associated with that capability.
The FAA has reviewed the proposed design and assessed the potential
risk to the National Airspace System. The FAA considered the size of
the proposed aircraft, its maximum airspeed and altitude, and
operational limitations to address the number of unmanned aircraft per
operator and to address operations in which the aircraft would operate
beyond the visual line of sight of the pilot. These factors allowed the
FAA to assess the potential risk the aircraft could pose to other
aircraft and to human beings on the ground. Using these parameters, the
FAA developed airworthiness criteria to address those potential risks
to ensure the aircraft remains reliable, controllable, safe, and
airworthy.
The proposed criteria focus on mitigating hazards by establishing
safety outcomes that must be achieved, rather than by establishing
prescriptive requirements that must be met. This is in contrast to many
current airworthiness standards, used to certificate traditional
aircraft systems, which prescribe specific indicators and instruments
for a pilot in a cockpit that would be inappropriate for UAS. The FAA
finds that the proposed criteria are appropriate and applicable for the
UAS design, based on the intended
[[Page 74624]]
operational concepts for the UAS as identified by the applicant.
The FAA selected the particular airworthiness criteria proposed by
this notice for the following reasons:
General: In order to determine appropriate and applicable
airworthiness standards for UAS as a special class of aircraft, the FAA
determined that the applicant must provide information describing the
characteristics and capabilities of the UAS and how it will be used.
UAS.001 Concept of Operations: To assist the FAA in identifying and
analyzing the risks and impacts associated with integrating the
proposed UAS design into the National Airspace System, the applicant
would be required to submit a Concept of Operations (CONOPS). The
proposed criteria would require the applicant's CONOPS to identify the
intended operational concepts for the UAS and describe the UAS and its
operation. The information in the CONOPS would determine parameters and
extent of testing, as well as operating limitations that will be placed
in the UAS Flight Manual.
Design and Construction: The FAA selected the design and
construction criteria in this section to address airworthiness
requirements where the flight testing demonstration alone may not be
sufficient to demonstrate an appropriate level of safety.
UAS.100 Control Station: The control station, which is located
separately from the UA, is a unique feature to UAS. As a result, no
regulatory airworthiness standards exist that directly apply to this
part of the system. The FAA based some of the proposed criteria on
existing regulations that address the information that must be provided
to a pilot in the cockpit of a manned aircraft, and modified them as
appropriate to this UAS. Thus, to address the risks associated with
loss of control of the UAS, the applicant would be required to design
the control station to provide the pilot with the information necessary
for continued safe flight and operation. The proposed criteria contain
the specific minimum types of information the FAA finds are necessary
for this requirement; however, the applicant must determine whether
additional parameters are necessary.
UAS.110 Software: Software for manned aircraft is certified under
the regulations applicable to systems, equipment, and installations
(e.g., Sec. Sec. 23.2510, 25.1309, 27.1309, or 29.1309). There are two
regulations that specifically prescribe airworthiness standards for
software: Engine airworthiness standards (Sec. 33.28) and propeller
airworthiness standards (Sec. 35.23). The proposed UAS software
criteria was based on these regulations and tailored for the risks
posed by UAS software.
UAS.115 Cyber Security: The location of the pilot separate from the
UA requires a continuous wireless connection (command and control link)
with the UA for the pilot to monitor and control it. Because the
purpose of this link is to control the aircraft, this makes the UAS
susceptible to cyber security threats in a unique way.
The current regulations for the certification of systems,
equipment, and installations (e.g., Sec. Sec. 23.2510, 25.1309,
27.1309, and 29.1309) do not adequately address potential security
vulnerabilities that could be exploited by unauthorized access to
aircraft systems, data buses, and services. For manned aircraft, the
FAA therefore issues special conditions for particular designs with
network security vulnerabilities.
To address the risks to the UAS associated with intentional
unauthorized electronic interactions, the applicant would be required
to design the UAS's systems and networks to protect against intentional
unauthorized electronic interactions and mitigate potential adverse
effects. The FAA based the language for the proposed criteria on
recommendations in the final report dated August 22, 2016, from the
Aircraft System Information Security/Protection (ASISP) working group,
under the FAA's Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee. Although the
recommendations pertained to manned aircraft, the FAA has reviewed the
report and determined the recommendations are also appropriate for UAS.
The wireless connections used by UAS make these aircraft susceptible to
the same cyber security risks, and therefore require similar criteria,
as manned aircraft.
UAS.120 Contingency Planning: The location of the pilot and the
controls for the UAS, separate from the UA, is a unique feature to UAS.
As a result, no regulatory airworthiness standards exist that directly
apply to this feature of the system.
To address the risks associated with loss of communication between
the pilot and the UA, and thus the pilot's inability to control the UA,
the proposed criteria would require that the UAS be designed to
automatically execute a predetermined action. Because the pilot needs
to be aware of the particular predetermined action the UA will take
when there is a loss of communication between the pilot and the UA, the
proposed criteria would require that the applicant identify the
predetermined action in the UAS Flight Manual. The proposed criteria
would also include requirements for preventing takeoff when quality of
service is inadequate.
UAS.125 Lightning: Because of the size and physical limitations of
this UAS, it would be unlikely that this UAS would incorporate
traditional lightning protection features. To address the risks that
would result from a lightning strike, the proposed criteria would
require an operating limitation in the UAS Flight Manual that prohibits
flight into weather conditions conducive to lightning. The proposed
criteria would also allow design characteristics to protect the UAS
from lightning as an alternative to the prohibition.
UAS.130 Adverse Weather Conditions: Because of the size and
physical limitations of this UAS, adverse weather such as rain, snow,
and icing pose a greater hazard to the UAS than to manned aircraft. For
the same reason, it would be unlikely that this UAS would incorporate
traditional protection features from icing. The FAA based the proposed
criteria on the icing requirements in 14 CFR 23.2165(b) and (c), and
applied them to all of these adverse weather conditions. The proposed
criteria would allow design characteristics to protect the UAS from
adverse weather conditions. As an alternative, the proposed criteria
would require an operating limitation in the UAS Flight Manual that
prohibits flight into known adverse weather conditions, and either also
prevent inadvertent flight into adverse weather or provide a means to
detect and to avoid or exit adverse weather conditions.
UAS.135 Critical Parts: The proposed criteria for critical parts
are substantively the same as that in Sec. 27.602, with changes to
reflect UAS terminology and failure condition.
Operating Limitations and Information: Similar to manned aircraft,
the FAA determined that the UAS applicant must provide airworthiness
instructions, operating limitations, and flight and performance
information necessary for the safe operation and continued operational
safety of the UAS.
UAS.200 Flight Manual: The proposed criteria for the UAS Flight
Manual are substantively the same as that in Sec. 23.2620, with minor
changes to reflect UAS terminology.
UAS.205 Instructions for Continued Airworthiness: The proposed
criteria for the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA) are
substantively the same as that in Sec. 23.1529, with
[[Page 74625]]
minor changes to reflect UAS terminology.
Testing: Traditional certification methodologies for manned
aircraft are based on design requirements verified at the component
level by inspection, analysis, demonstration, or test. Due to the
difference in size and complexity, the FAA determined testing
methodologies that demonstrate reliability at the aircraft (UAS) level,
in addition to the design and construction criteria identified in this
proposal, will achieve the same safety objective. The proposed testing
criteria in sections UAS.300 through UAS.320 utilize these
methodologies.
UAS.300 Durability and Reliability: The FAA intends the proposed
testing criteria in this section to cover key design aspects and
prevent unsafe features at an appropriate level tailored for this UAS.
The proposed durability and reliability testing would require the
applicant to demonstrate safe flight of the UAS across the entire
operational envelope and up to all operational limitations, for all
phases of flight and all aircraft configurations. The UAS would only be
certificated for operations within the limitations, and for flight over
the maximum population density, as demonstrated by test. The proposed
criteria would require that all flights during the testing be completed
with no failures that result in a loss of flight, loss of control, loss
of containment, or emergency landing outside of the operator's recovery
zone.
For some aircraft design requirements imposed by existing
airworthiness standards (e.g., Sec. Sec. 23.2135, 23.2600, 25.105,
25.125, 27.141, 27.173, 29.51, 29.177) the aircraft must not require
exceptional piloting skill or alertness. These rules recognize that
pilots have varying levels of ability and attention. In a similar
manner, the proposed criteria would require that the durability and
reliability flight testing be performed by a pilot with average skill
and alertness.
Flight testing will be used to determine the aircraft's ability to
withstand flight loads across the range of operating limits and the
flight envelope. Because small UAS may be subjected to significant
ground loads when handled, lifted, carried, loaded, maintained, and
transported physically by hand, the proposed criteria would require
that the aircraft used for testing endure the same worst-case ground
loads as those the UAS will experience in operation after type
certification.
UAS.305 Probable Failures: The FAA intends the proposed testing
criteria to evaluate how the UAS functions after failures that are
probable to occur. The applicant will test the UAS by inducing certain
failures and demonstrating that the failure will not result in a loss
of containment or control of the UA. The proposed criteria contain the
minimum types of failures the FAA finds are probable; however, the
applicant must determine the probable failures related to any other
equipment that will be addressed for this requirement.
UAS.310 Capabilities and Functions: The proposed criteria for this
section address the minimum capabilities and functions the FAA finds
are necessary in the design of the UAS and would require the applicant
to demonstrate these capabilities and functions by test. Due to the
location of the pilot and the controls for UAS, separate from the UA,
communication between the pilot and the UA is significant to the
design. Thus, the proposed criteria would require the applicant to
demonstrate the capability of the UAS to regain command and control
after a loss. As with manned aircraft, the electrical system of the UAS
must have a capacity sufficient for all anticipated loads; the proposed
criteria would require the applicant to demonstrate this by test.
The proposed criteria contain functions that would allow the pilot
to command the UA to deviate from its flight plan or from its pre-
programmed flight path. For example, in the event the pilot needs to
deconflict the airspace, the UA must be able to respond to pilot inputs
that override any pre-programming.
In the event an applicant requests approval for certain features,
such as geo-fencing or external cargo, the proposed criteria contain
requirements to address the associated risks. The proposed criteria in
this section would also require design of the UAS to safeguard against
an unintended discontinuation of flight or release of cargo, whether by
human action or malfunction.
UAS.315 Fatigue: The FAA intends the proposed criteria in this
section to address the risks from reduced structural integrity and
structural failure due to fatigue. The proposed criteria would require
the applicant to establish an airframe life limit and demonstrate that
loss of flight or loss of control due to structural failure will be
avoided throughout the operational life of the UA. These proposed
criteria would require the applicant to demonstrate this by test, while
maintaining the UA in accordance with the ICA.
UAS.320 Verification of Limits: This section would evaluate
structural safety and address the risks associated with inadequate
structural design. While the proposed criteria in UAS.300 address
testing to demonstrate that the UAS structure adequately supports
expected loads throughout the flight and operational envelopes, the
proposed criteria in this section would require an evaluation of the
performance, maneuverability, stability, and control of the UA with a
factor of safety.
Proposed Airworthiness Criteria
The FAA proposes to establish the following airworthiness criteria
for type certification of the Flytrex Model FTX-M600P. The FAA proposes
that compliance with the following would mitigate the risks associated
with the proposed design and Concept of Operations appropriately and
would provide an equivalent level of safety to existing rules:
General
UAS.001 Concept of Operations
The applicant must define and submit to the FAA a concept of
operations (CONOPS) proposal describing the Unmanned Aircraft System
(UAS) operation in the National Airspace System for which certification
is requested. The CONOPS proposal must include, at a minimum, a
description of the following information.
(a) The intended type of operations;
(b) Unmanned aircraft (UA) specifications;
(c) Meteorological conditions;
(d) Operators, pilots, and personnel responsibilities;
(e) Control station and support equipment;
(f) Command, control, and communication functions; and
(g) Operational parameters, such as population density, geographic
operating boundaries, airspace classes, launch and recovery area,
congestion of proposed operating area, communications with air traffic
control, line of sight, and aircraft separation.
Design and Construction
UAS.100 Control Station
The control station must be designed to provide the pilot with all
information required for continued safe flight and operation. This
information includes, at a minimum, the following:
(a) Alerts, such as an alert following the loss of the command and
control (C2) link and function.
(b) The status of all critical parameters for all energy storage
systems.
(c) The status of all critical parameters for all propulsion
systems.
(d) Flight and navigation information as appropriate, such as
airspeed, heading, altitude, and location.
[[Page 74626]]
(e) C2 link signal strength, quality, or status.
UAS.110 Software
To minimize the existence of errors, the applicant must:
(a) Verify by test all software that may impact the safe operation
of the UAS;
(b) Utilize a configuration management system that tracks,
controls, and preserves changes made to software throughout the entire
life cycle; and
(c) Implement a problem reporting system that captures and records
defects and modifications to the software.
UAS.115 Cyber Security
(a) UAS equipment, systems, and networks, addressed separately and
in relation to other systems, must be protected from intentional
unauthorized electronic interactions that may result in an adverse
effect on the security or airworthiness of the UAS. Protection must be
ensured by showing that the security risks have been identified,
assessed, and mitigated as necessary.
(b) When required by paragraph (a) of this section, procedures and
instructions to ensure security protections are maintained must be
included in the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA).
UAS.120 Contingency Planning
(a) The UAS must be designed so that, in the event of a loss of the
C2 link, the UA will automatically and immediately execute a safe
predetermined flight, loiter, landing, or termination.
(b) The applicant must establish the predetermined action in the
event of a loss of the C2 link and include it in the UAS Flight Manual.
(c) The UAS Flight Manual must include the minimum performance
requirements for the C2 data link defining when the C2 link is degraded
to a level where remote active control of the UA is no longer ensured.
Takeoff when the C2 link is degraded below the minimum link performance
requirements must be prevented by design or prohibited by an operating
limitation in the UAS Flight Manual.
UAS.125 Lightning
(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, the UAS
must have design characteristics that will protect the UAS from loss of
flight or loss of control due to lightning.
(b) If the UAS has not been shown to protect against lightning, the
UAS Flight Manual must include an operating limitation to prohibit
flight into weather conditions conducive to lightning activity.
UAS.130 Adverse Weather Conditions
(a) For purposes of this section, ``adverse weather conditions''
means rain, snow, and icing.
(b) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, the UAS
must have design characteristics that will allow the UAS to operate
within the adverse weather conditions specified in the CONOPS without
loss of flight or loss of control.
(c) For adverse weather conditions for which the UAS is not
approved to operate, the applicant must develop operating limitations
to prohibit flight into known adverse weather conditions and either:
(1) Develop operating limitations to prevent inadvertent flight
into adverse weather conditions; or
(2) Provide a means to detect any adverse weather conditions for
which the UAS is not certificated to operate and show the UAS's ability
to avoid or exit those conditions.
UAS.135 Critical Parts
(a) A critical part is a part, the failure of which could result in
a loss of flight or unrecoverable loss of UAS control.
(b) If the type design includes critical parts, the applicant must
establish a critical parts list. The applicant must develop and define
mandatory maintenance instructions or life limits, or a combination of
both, to prevent failures of critical parts. Each of these mandatory
actions must be included in the Airworthiness Limitations Section of
the ICA.
Operating Limitations and Information
UAS.200 Flight Manual
The applicant must provide a UAS Flight Manual with each UAS.
(a) The UAS Flight Manual must contain the following information:
(1) UAS operating limitations;
(2) UAS normal and emergency operating procedures;
(3) Performance information;
(4) Loading information; and
(5) Other information that is necessary for safe operation because
of design, operating, or handling characteristics.
(b) Those portions of the UAS Flight Manual containing the
information specified in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4) of this section
must be approved by the FAA.
UAS.205 Instructions for Continued Airworthiness
The applicant must prepare ICA for the UAS in accordance with
Appendix A to Part 23, as appropriate, that are acceptable to the FAA.
The ICA may be incomplete at type certification if a program exists to
ensure their completion prior to delivery of the first UAS or issuance
of a standard airworthiness certificate, whichever occurs later.
Testing
UAS.300 Durability and Reliability
The UAS must be designed to be durable and reliable commensurate to
the maximum population density specified in the operating limitations.
The durability and reliability must be demonstrated by flight test in
accordance with the requirements of this section and completed with no
failures that result in a loss of flight, loss of control, loss of
containment, or emergency landing outside the operator's recovery area.
(a) Once a UAS has begun testing to show compliance with this
section, all flights for that UA must be included in the flight test
report.
(b) Tests must include an evaluation of the entire flight envelope
across all phases of operation and must address, at a minimum, the
following:
(1) Flight distances;
(2) Flight durations;
(3) Route complexity;
(4) Weight;
(5) Center of gravity;
(6) Density altitude;
(7) Outside air temperature;
(8) Airspeed;
(9) Wind;
(10) Weather;
(11) Operation at night, if requested;
(12) Energy storage system capacity; and
(13) Aircraft to pilot ratio.
(c) Tests must include the most adverse combinations of the
conditions and configurations in paragraph (b) of this section.
(d) Tests must show a distribution of the different flight profiles
and routes representative of the type of operations identified in the
CONOPS.
(e) Tests must be conducted in conditions consistent with the
expected environmental conditions identified in the CONOPS, including
electromagnetic interference (EMI) and High Intensity Radiated Fields
(HIRF).
(f) Tests must not require exceptional piloting skill or alertness.
(g) Any UAS used for testing must be subject to the same worst-case
ground handling, shipping, and transportation loads as those allowed in
service.
(h) Any UAS used for testing must be maintained and operated in
accordance with the ICA and UAS Flight Manual. No maintenance beyond
the intervals established in the ICA will be allowed to show compliance
with this section.
[[Page 74627]]
(i) If cargo operations or external-load operations are requested,
tests must show, throughout the flight envelope and with the cargo or
external-load at the most critical combinations of weight and center of
gravity, that--
(1) the UA is safely controllable and maneuverable; and
(2) the cargo or external-load are retainable and transportable.
UAS.305 Probable Failures
The UAS must be designed such that a probable failure will not
result in a loss of containment or control of the UA. This must be
demonstrated by test.
(a) Probable failures related to the following equipment, at a
minimum, must be addressed.
(1) Propulsion systems;
(2) C2 link;
(3) Global Positioning System (GPS);
(4) Critical flight control components with a single point of
failure;
(5) Control station; and
(6) Any other equipment identified by the applicant.
(b) Any UAS used for testing must be operated in accordance with
the UAS Flight Manual.
(c) Each test must occur at the critical phase and mode of flight,
and at the highest aircraft-to-pilot ratio.
UAS.310 Capabilities and Functions
(a) All of the following required UAS capabilities and functions
must be demonstrated by test:
(1) Capability to regain command and control of the UA after the C2
link has been lost.
(2) Capability of the electrical system to power all UA systems and
payloads.
(3) Ability for the pilot to safely discontinue the flight.
(4) Ability for the pilot to dynamically re-route the UA.
(5) Ability to safely abort a takeoff.
(6) Ability to safely abort a landing and initiate a go-around.
(b) The following UAS capabilities and functions, if requested for
approval, must be demonstrated by test:
(1) Continued flight after degradation of the propulsion system.
(2) Geo-fencing that contains the UA within a designated area, in
all operating conditions.
(3) Positive transfer of the UA between control stations that
ensures only one control station can control the UA at a time.
(4) Capability to release an external cargo load to prevent loss of
control of the UA.
(5) Capability to detect and avoid other aircraft and obstacles.
(c) The UAS must be designed to safeguard against inadvertent
discontinuation of the flight and inadvertent release of cargo or
external-load.
UAS.315 Fatigue
The structure of the UA must be shown to be able to withstand the
repeated loads expected during its service life without failure. A life
limit for the airframe must be established, demonstrated by test, and
included in the ICA.
UAS.320 Verification of Limits
The performance, maneuverability, stability, and control of the UA
within the flight envelope described in the UAS Flight Manual must be
demonstrated at a minimum of 5% over maximum gross weight with no loss
of control or loss of flight.
Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on November 16, 2020.
Patrick R. Mullen,
Manager, Small Airplane Standards Branch, Policy and Innovation
Division, Aircraft Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2020-25659 Filed 11-20-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P