DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Register/Vol. 70, No. 213/Friday, November 4, 2005

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Register/Vol. 70, No. 213/Friday, November 4, 2005 67278 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 213 / Friday, November 4, 2005 / Proposed Rules DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, will stamp the date on the postcard and SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. mail it to you. Federal Aviation Administration and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, Availability of Rulemaking Documents except Federal holidays. 14 CFR Part 25 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Don You can get an electronic copy using the Internet by: [Docket No. 2005–22840; Notice No. 05–10] Stimson, FAA, Airplane & Flight Crew Interface Branch, ANM–111, Transport (1) Searching the Department of RIN 2120–AI14 Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Transportation’s electronic Docket Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue Management System (DMS) Web page Airplane Performance and Handling (http://dms.dot.gov/search); Qualities in Icing Conditions SW., Renton, WA 98055–4056; telephone: (425) 227–1129; fax: (425) (2) Visiting the Office of Rulemaking’s Web page at http://www.faa.gov/avr/ AGENCY: Federal Aviation 227–1149, e-mail: [email protected]. Administration (FAA), DOT. arm/index.cfm; or SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: (3) Accessing the Government ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking Comments Invited Printing Office’s Web page at http:// (NPRM). www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. The FAA invites interested persons to You can also get a copy by sending a SUMMARY: This action proposes to participate in this rulemaking by introduce new airworthiness standards request to the Federal Aviation submitting written comments, data, or Administration, Office of Rulemaking, to evaluate the performance and views. We also invite comments relating handling characteristics of transport ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue to the economic, environmental, energy, SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by category airplanes in icing conditions. or federalism impacts that might result This proposed action would improve calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to from adopting the proposals in this identify the docket number, notice the level of safety for new airplane document. The most helpful comments designs when operating in icing number, or amendment number of this reference a specific portion of the rulemaking. conditions, and would harmonize the proposal, explain the reason for any U.S. and European airworthiness recommended change, and include Authority for This Rulemaking standards for flight in icing conditions. supporting data. We ask that you send The FAA’s authority to issue rules DATES: Send your comments on or us two copies of written comments. regarding aviation safety is found in before February 2, 2006. We will file in the docket all Title 49 of the United States Code. ADDRESSES: You may send comments comments we receive, as well as a Subtitle I, section 106 describes the identified by Docket Number FAA– report summarizing each substantive authority of the FAA Administrator. 2005–22840 using any of the following public contact with FAA personnel Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, methods: concerning this proposed rulemaking. describes in more detail the scope of the • DOT Docket Web site: Go to http:// The docket is available for public agency’s authority. dms.dot.gov and follow the instructions inspection before and after the comment This rulemaking is promulgated for sending your comments closing date. If you wish to review the under the authority described in subtitle electronically. docket in person, go to the address in VII, part A, subpart III, section 44701, • Government-wide Regulations and the ADDRESSES section of this preamble ‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that Policies Web site: Go to http:// between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday section, the FAA is charged with www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/ and through Friday, except Federal holidays. promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in follow the instructions for sending your You may also review the docket using air commerce by prescribing minimum comments electronically. the Internet at the Web address in the standards required in the interest of • Mail: Docket Management Facility; ADDRESSES section. safety for the design and performance of U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Privacy Act: Using the search function aircraft. This regulation is within the Seventh Street, SW., Nassif Building, of our docket Web site, anyone can find scope of that authority because it Room PL–401, Washington, DC 20590– and read the comments received into prescribes new safety standards for the 001. any of our dockets, including the name design of transport category airplanes. • Fax: 1–202–493–2251. of the individual sending the comment • Hand Delivery: Room PL–401 on (or signing the comment of behalf of an Organization of This NPRM the plaza level of the Nassif Building, association, business, labor union, etc.). Discussion of this proposal is 400 Seventh Street, SW., Washington, You may review DOT’s complete organized under the headings listed DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday Privacy Act statement in the Federal below. Whenever there is a reference to through Friday, except Federal holidays. Register published on April 11, 2000 a document being included in the For more information on the (65 FR 19477–78) or you may visit docket for this NPRM, the docket rulemaking process, see the http://dms.dot.gov. referred to is Docket Number FAA– SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of Before acting on this proposal, we 2005–22840. A list of acronyms used is this document. will consider all comments we receive included in an appendix located at the Privacy: We will post all comments on or before the closing date for end of the preamble material, between we receive, without change, to http:// comments. We will consider comments the regulatory evaluation and the text of dms.dot.gov, including any personal filed late if it is possible to do so the proposed amendments. Unless information you provide. For more without incurring expense or delay. We stated otherwise, rule sections information, see the Privacy Act may change this proposal in light of the referenced in this NPRM are part of discussion in the SUPPLEMENTARY comments we receive. Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations INFORMATION section of this document. If you want the FAA to acknowledge (14 CFR). Docket: To read background receipt of your comments on this documents or comments received, go to proposal, include with your comments I. Executive Summary http://dms.dot.gov at any time or to a pre-addressed, stamped postcard on If adopted, this rulemaking would Room PL–401 on the plaza level of the which the docket number appears. We revise certain sections of part 25 of Title VerDate Aug<31>2005 19:06 Nov 03, 2005 Jkt 208001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\04NOP3.SGM 04NOP3 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 213 / Friday, November 4, 2005 / Proposed Rules 67279 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 icing conditions and the operation of A. Past Regulatory Approach CFR). Part 25 contains the airworthiness the ice protection system. Currently, § 25.1419, ‘‘Ice protection,’’ standards for type certification of Service history shows that flight in requires transport category airplanes transport category airplanes, but it does icing conditions may be a safety risk for with approved ice protection features be not currently include specific transport category airplanes. There have capable of operating safely within the requirements for airplane performance been nine accidents since 1983 that may icing conditions identified in appendix or handling qualities for flight in icing have been prevented if this proposed C of part 25. This section also requires 1 conditions. Although part 25 requires rule had been in effect. The service flight testing and analyses to be airplanes with approved ice protection history that we examined includes performed to make this determination. features to be able to operate safely in airplanes certificated to part 25, to its Although an airplane’s performance icing conditions, there is no standard set predecessor, the Civil Air Regulations capability and handling qualities are of criteria defining what ‘‘to safely (CAR) 4b, or to part 25 icing standards important in determining whether an operate’’ in icing conditions means in when the airplane was certified under airplane can operate safely, part 25 does terms of airplane performance and part 23. In evaluating the potential for not have specific airplane performance handling qualities. Further, because the this rulemaking to avoid future or handling qualities requirements for existing icing regulations only address accidents, we only considered past flight in icing conditions, nor does the airplanes with ice protection provisions, accidents involving tailplane stall or FAA have a standard set of criteria it is unclear what requirements apply in potential airframe ice accretion effects defining what ‘‘to safely operate’’ in cases where the applicant is seeking to on drag or controllability. Accidents icing conditions means in terms of have an airplane without an ice related to ground deicing were not airplane performance and handling protection system certificated for flight considered. qualities. The proposed revisions to part in icing conditions. The NTSB has issued several safety 25 would provide a comprehensive set This notice proposes to amend part 25 recommendations related to airframe of harmonized requirements for airplane by adding a comprehensive set of icing, some of which are addressed, at performance and handling qualities to airworthiness requirements that must
Load more

Recommended publications
  • In-Flight Icing Encounter and Uncontrolled Collision with Terrain Comair Flight 3272 Embraer Emb-120Rt, N265ca Monroe, Michigan January 9, 1997
    PB98-910404 ‘I NTSB/AAR-98/04 DCA97MA017 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 20594 AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT REPORT IN-FLIGHT ICING ENCOUNTER AND UNCONTROLLED COLLISION WITH TERRAIN COMAIR FLIGHT 3272 EMBRAER EMB-120RT, N265CA MONROE, MICHIGAN JANUARY 9, 1997 6997A/B/C The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent Federal agency dedicated to promoting aviation, railroad, highway, marine, pipeline, and hazardous materials safety. Established in 1967, the agency is mandated by Congress through the Independent Safety Board Act of 1974 to investigate transportation accidents, determine the probable causes of the accidents, issue safety recommendations, study transportation safety issues, and evaluate the safety effectiveness of government agencies involved in transportation. The Safety Board makes public its actions and decisions through accident reports, safety studies, special investigation reports, safety recommendations, and statistical reviews. Recent publications are available in their entirety on the Web at http://www.ntsb.gov/. Other information about available publications may be obtained from the Web site or by contacting: National Transportation Safety Board Public Inquiries Section, RE-51 490 L’Enfant Plaza, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20594 (202)382-6735 (800)877-6799 Safety Board publications may be purchased, by individual copy or by subscription, from: National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, Virginia 22161 (703)605-6000 (800)553-6847 NTSB/AAR-98/04 PB98-910404 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 20594 AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT REPORT IN-FLIGHT ICING ENCOUNTER AND UNCONTROLLED COLLISION WITH TERRAIN COMAIR FLIGHT 3272 EMBRAER EMB-120RT, N265CA MONROE, MICHIGAN JANUARY 9, 1997 Adopted: November 4, 1998 Notation 6997A/B/C Abstract: This report explains the accident involving an EMB-120RT, operated by COMAIR Airlines, Inc., as flight 3272, that crashed during a rapid descent after an uncommanded roll excursion near Monroe, Michigan, on January 9, 1997.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Root Causes of Accidents Due to Design
    EUROPEAN ORGANISATION FOR THE SAFETY OF AIR NAVIGATION EUROCONTROL EUROCONTROL EXPERIMENTAL CENTRE REVIEW OF ROOT CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS DUE TO DESIGN EEC Note No. 14/04 Project Safbuild Issued: October 2004 The information contained in this document is the property of the EUROCONTROL Agency and no part should be reproduced in any form without the Agency’s permission. The views expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the official views or policy of the Agency. REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Reference: Security Classification: EEC Note No. 14/04 Unclassified Originator: Originator (Corporate Author) Name/Location: EEC – SAS EUROCONTROL Experimental Centre (Safety Analysis and Scientific) Centre de Bois des Bordes B.P.15 F - 91222 Brétigny-sur-Orge CEDEX FRANCE Telephone : +33 (0)1 69 88 75 00 Sponsor: Sponsor (Contract Authority) Name/Location: EATM EUROCONTROL Agency Rue de la Fusée, 96 B -1130 BRUXELLES Telephone : +32 2 729 9011 TITLE: REVIEW OF ROOT CAUSES OF ACCIDENTS DUE TO DESIGN Authors Date Pages Figures Tables Appendix References Alfred Roelen, (NLR) Steve Kinnersly, (AEA) 10/04 viii+41 1 1 3 43 Fabrice Drogoul EEC Contact Project Task No. Sponsor Period 120000-SRD-3-E1- Fabrice Drogoul Safbuild 2003 0000 Distribution Statement: (a) Controlled by: Head of SRT (b) Special Limitations: None Descriptors (keywords): Design, root causes of accidents, ATM, nuclear, rail, aviation Abstract: This document gives the results of a study of the proportion of accidents that have their root causes in design. In particular, it investigates the validity of the claim that 60% of the root causes of accidents arise in the design stages.
    [Show full text]
  • Cockpit Automation, Flight Systems Complexity, and Aircraft Certification: Background and Issues for Congress
    Cockpit Automation, Flight Systems Complexity, and Aircraft Certification: Background and Issues for Congress October 3, 2019 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R45939 SUMMARY R45939 Cockpit Automation, Flight Systems October 3, 2019 Complexity, and Aircraft Certification: Bart Elias Background and Issues for Congress Specialist in Aviation Policy The increasing complexity and automation of flight control systems pose a challenge to federal policy regarding aircraft certification and pilot training. Despite significant commercial aviation safety improvements over the past two decades, flight control automation and aircraft complexity have been cited as contributing factors in a number of major airline accidents, including two high-profile crashes overseas involving the recently introduced Boeing 737 Max variant in 2018 and 2019. These crashes have directed attention to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) oversight of aircraft type certification and pilot training practices for transport category aircraft, particularly as they pertain to complex automated flight control systems. As aircraft systems have evolved over the past three decades to incorporate new technologies, Congress has mandated FAA to streamline certification processes, with the primary motivation being to facilitate the development of new safety-enhancing technologies. Modern commercial aircraft rely on “fly-by-wire” flight control technologies, under which pilots’ flight control inputs are sent to computers rather than through direct mechanical linkages to flight control systems. The fly-by-wire software contains flight control laws and logic that, in addition to optimizing performance efficiency, protect the aircraft from commanded actions that could put the airplane in an unsafe state. Automated flight control systems have largely been viewed as having a positive effect on safety, and accident rates have improved considerably over the past two decades.
    [Show full text]
  • Accident Prevention March 1999
    FLIGHT SAFETY FOUNDATION Accident Prevention Vol. 56 No. 3 For Everyone Concerned with the Safety of Flight March 1999 Thin, Rough Ice Accumulation Causes Twin-turboprop Aircraft Upset The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board said that the absence of adequate aircraft-certification standards and operating procedures for flight in icing conditions was a probable cause of the accident, and that the flight crew’s acceptance of a relatively low airspeed restriction while operating in icing conditions was a contributing factor. FSF Editorial Staff On Jan. 9, 1997, an Empresa Brasileira de “Contributing to the accident were the flight crew’s Aeronautica (Embraer) EMB-120RT Brasilia decision to operate in icing conditions near the lower operated by COMAIR Airlines (Comair) was in a left margin of the operating-airspeed envelope (with flaps turn at 4,000 feet when the autopilot disconnected. retracted) and Comair’s failure to establish and The airplane rolled into a nearly inverted attitude adequately disseminate unambiguous minimum- and descended rapidly to the ground near Monroe, airspeed values for flap configurations and for flight Michigan, U.S. The 29 occupants were killed, and in icing conditions,” said the report. the airplane was destroyed. The airplane was on a scheduled passenger flight The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (Flight 3272) from Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky (NTSB) said, in its final report, that the probable International Airport in Covington, Kentucky, U.S., causes of the accident were: “the Federal Aviation to Detroit (Michigan, U.S.) Metropolitan/Wayne Administration’s (FAA) failure to establish adequate County Airport. aircraft-certification standards for flight in icing conditions, the FAA’s failure to ensure that a Centro Tecnico Comair was founded in April 1977 as a commuter airline and Aeroespacial/FAA-approved procedure for the accident became a Delta Connection air carrier in 1984.
    [Show full text]
  • Crash During Approach to Landing Circuit City Stores, Inc. Cessna Citation 560, N500AT Pueblo, Colorado February 16, 2005
    Crash During Approach to Landing Circuit City Stores, Inc. Cessna Citation 560, N500AT Pueblo, Colorado February 16, 2005 aviationACCIDENT REPORT NTSB/AAR-07/02 PB2007-910403 Aircraft Accident Report Crash During Approach to Landing Circuit City Stores, Inc. Cessna Citation 560, N500AT Pueblo, Colorado February 16, 2005 RAN S P T O L R A T LUR IBUS N P UNUM A E O T I I O T A N N S A D FE R T Y B OA NTSB/AAR-07/02 PB2007-910403 National Transportation Safety Board Notation 7713C 490 L’Enfant Plaza, S.W. Adopted January 23, 2007 Washington, D.C. 20594 National Transportation Safety Board. 2007. Crash During Approach to Landing, Circuit City Stores, Inc., Cessna Citation 560, N500AT, Pueblo, Colorado, February 16, 2005, Aircraft Accident Report NTSB/AAR-07/02. Washington, DC. Abstract: This report explains the accident involving a Cessna Citation 560, N500AT, operated by Martinair, Inc., for Circuit City Stores, Inc., which crashed about 4 nautical miles east of Pueblo Memorial Airport, Pueblo, Colorado, while on an instrument landing system approach to runway 26R. The safety issues discussed in this report include inadequate training on operations in icing conditions, inadequate deice boot system operational guidance, the need for automatic deice boot systems, inadequate certification requirements for flight into icing conditions, and inadequate stall warning margins in icing conditions. The National Transportation Safety Board is an independent Federal agency dedicated to promoting aviation, railroad, highway, marine, pipeline, and hazardous materials safety. Established in 1967, the agency is mandated by Congress through the Independent Safety Board Act of 1974 to investigate transportation accidents, determine the probable causes of the accidents, issue safety recommendations, study transportation safety issues, and evaluate the safety effectiveness of government agencies involved in transportation.
    [Show full text]
  • HISTORY of the NIGERIAN PETROLEUM INDUSTRY Oil Was Discovered in Nigeria in 1956 at Oloibiri in the Niger Delta After Half a Century of Exploration
    HISTORY OF THE NIGERIAN PETROLEUM INDUSTRY Oil was discovered in Nigeria in 1956 at Oloibiri in the Niger Delta after half a century of exploration. The discovery was made by Shell-BP, at the time the sole concessionaire. Nigeria joined the ranks of oil producers in 1958 when its first oil field came on stream producing 5,100 bpd. After 1960, exploration rights in onshore and offshore areas adjoining the Niger Delta were extended to other foreign companies. In 1965 the EA field was discovered by Shell in shallow water southeast of Warri. In 1970, the end of the Biafran war coincided with the rise in the world oil price, and Nigeria was able to reap instant riches from its oil production. Nigeria joined the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) in 1971 and established the Nigerian National Petroleum Company (NNPC) in 1977, a state owned and controlled company which is a major player in both the upstream and downstream sectors. Following the discovery of crude oil by Shell D’Arcy Petroleum, pioneer production began in 1958 from the company’s oil field in Oloibiri in the Eastern Niger Delta. By the late sixties and early seventies, Nigeria had attained a production level of over 2 million barrels of crude oil a day. Although production figures dropped in the eighties due to economic slump, 2004 saw a total rejuvenation of oil production to a record level of 2.5 million barrels per day. Current development strategies are aimed at increasing production to 4million barrels per day by the year 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Recent Developments in Regional Air Carrier Litigation and the Carriers' Exposure to Punitive Damages Under Supreme Court Precedent Michel F
    Journal of Air Law and Commerce Volume 75 | Issue 2 Article 2 2010 Recent Developments in Regional Air Carrier Litigation and the Carriers' Exposure to Punitive Damages under Supreme Court Precedent Michel F. Baumeister Dorothea M. Capone Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc Recommended Citation Michel F. Baumeister et al., Recent Developments in Regional Air Carrier Litigation and the Carriers' Exposure to Punitive Damages under Supreme Court Precedent, 75 J. Air L. & Com. 323 (2010) https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc/vol75/iss2/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at SMU Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Air Law and Commerce by an authorized administrator of SMU Scholar. For more information, please visit http://digitalrepository.smu.edu. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN REGIONAL AIR CARRIER LITIGATION AND THE CARRIERS' EXPOSURE TO PUNITIVE DAMAGES UNDER SUPREME COURT PRECEDENT MICHEL F. BAUMEISTER* DOROTHEA M. CAPONE** I. INTRODUCTION carri- crashes involving domestic air S EVENers that OF resulted THE last in passengereight fatalities involved commuter or regional airlines.' Although the Federal Aviation Administra- tion (FAA) called for "a single level of safety across the aviation industry in 1997,"2 in reality, the operational differences be- * A renowned trial attorney for more than 35 years, Mitch Baumeister has concentrated his practice in the field of aviation accident and complex tort litigation. Mitch's career has been dedicated to helping air crash victims and their families receive proper and adequate compensation, as well as to making improvements in aviation safety.
    [Show full text]