DOCSLIB.ORG

Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 218 / Friday, November 8, 1996 / Rules and Regulations

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 218 / Friday, November 8, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 57946 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 218 / Friday, November 8, 1996 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION substantive bearing on those proposed exits, are based on the assumption that in Notice 90±4; however, they also affect only half of the exits will be usable Federal Aviation Administration the editorial structure of those sections. during an actual emergency due to fire, Where pertinent, the effect of those structural damage or other adverse 14 CFR Part 25 amendments on the changes proposed circumstance. [Docket No. 26140; Amendment No. 25±88] in Notice 90±4 is discussed below. None Section 25.807(d) currently specifies of the other amendments adopted the type and number of emergency exits RIN 2120±AC43 during this period have any bearing on required for three ranges of passenger seating capacities. The first range, Type and Number of Passenger the proposals of Notice No. 90±4. passenger seating configurations of one Emergency Exits Required in Current Requirements of Part 25 to 179, is addressed in § 25.807(d)(1) in Transport Category Airplanes Part 25 currently defines seven types a table that outlines the specific type AGENCY: Federal Aviation of passenger emergency exits for and number of exits that must be Administration, DOT. transport category airplanesÐType A, provided. Those standards have been in ACTION: Final rule. Types I through IV, tail cone and effect for several decades and were ventral. As defined in § 25.807, exits in based more on industry practice during SUMMARY: This amendment defines two fuselage sides range in size from large the reciprocating-engine transport new types of passenger emergency exits Type A exits, which must be a airplane era than on any particular in transport category airplanes, provides minimum of 42 inches wide by 72 testing. more consistent standards with respect inches high, to Type IV exits, which For the second range, passenger to the passenger seating allowed for must be a minimum of 19 inches wide seating configurations of 180 to 299, each exit type and combination of exit by 26 inches high. Although an exit may § 25.807(d)(1) uses a different approach. types, and requires escape slides to be exceed the minimum dimensions Instead of specifying the type and erected in less time. These changes specified for a particular type, it is number of exits required for those allow more flexibility in the design of considered to be of that type unless it airplanes, a second table supplements emergency exits and reflect recent qualifies in all respects as one of the the first by specifying the number of improvements in escape slide larger exit types. Typically, the larger passenger seats, in addition to 179, that technology. They will enable more cost- exits are hinged or translating doors may be installed for various types of effective emergency exit arrangements while the smaller exits are typically additional exits. For example, the first and, in the case of escape slides, enable removable hatches. table specifies that an airplane with 179 more rapid egress of passengers under Section 25.809(b)(2) requires that each passenger seats must have two pairs of emergency conditions. emergency exit must be capable of being Type I exits and two pairs of Type III opened, when there is no fuselage EFFECTIVE DATE: December 9, 1996. exits. The second table specifies that the deformation, within 10 seconds seating may be increased by 45 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary measured from the time when the passengers for each additional pair of L. Killion, Manager, Regulations Branch opening means is actuated to the time Type I exits installed. An airplane with (ANM±114), Transport Standards Staff, when the exit if fully opened. three pairs of Type I exits and two pairs Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft It must be emphasized that, except for of Type III exits would, therefore, be Certification Service, FAA, 1601 Lind tail-cone or ventral exits, all references permitted, insofar as the type and Ave. SW., Renton, WA 98055±4056; to the types and numbers of required number of exits is concerned, to have a telephone (206) 227±2194. passenger emergency exits in part 25 passenger seating configuration of 224. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: and this final rule refer to the exits For the third range, passenger seating required in each side of the fuselage, not configurations greater than 299, Background the total for the airplane. Although they § 25.807(d)(2) simply states that each This amendment is based on Notice of are not required to be symmetrical, exit installed in the side of the fuselage Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) No. 90± corresponding exits on opposite sides of must be either a Type I or Type A exit 4 which was published in the Federal the fuselage are usually referred to as and that seating configurations of 45 Register on February 22, 1990 (55 FR ``exit pairs'' to preclude confusion and 110 are allowed for each pair of 6344). In that notice, the FAA proposed between the total number of exits and Type I exits and each pair of Type A amendments to 14 CFR part 25 that the number of exits on each side. The exits, respectively. would revise the current requirements number of additional passenger seats Section 25.807(d)(3) specifies the for the passenger emergency exits of that may be installed for each additional number of additional passenger seats transport category airplanes and define exit pair of a specific type is sometimes that may be provided when creditable two new exit types. In addition, the referred to as the ``exit rating'' for that ventral or tail-cone exits are installed. In FAA also proposed to require escape type. When an ``exit pair'' consists of order to receive any credit as a slides to be erected in less time, a two different types of exits, the exits are passenger emergency exit, a ventral or reflection of improvements in escape both considered to be of the type with tail-cone exit must provide the same slide state-of-the-art. the smaller exit rating. Generally, no rate of egress as a Type III exit with the Since the time Notice No. 90±4 was credit is given for an exit on one side airplane in the most adverse exit published, a number of amendments with no corresponding exit on the other opening condition that would result were adopted. The changes adopted side. (Even though no credit is given to from the collapse of one or more landing with Amendment 25±72 (55 FR 29781, such exits, they are required to meet all gear legs. July 20, 1990) are largely nonsubstantive applicable exit design requirements As amended recently by Amendment in nature; however, the editorial because they may be used by occupants 25±72, § 25.807(d)(5) provides flexibility structure of the sections involved in the under emergency conditions.) in the type and number of exits required proposals of Notice No. 90±4 was Note that the standards of part 25, by stating that an alternate emergency changed considerably. The changes including those for emergency exit configuration may be approved in adopted with Amendment 25±76 (57 FR evacuation demonstrations as well as lieu of that specified in either 19220, May 4, 1992) do not have any those concerning types and numbers of § 25.807(d) (1) or (2) provided the Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 218 / Friday, November 8, 1996 / Rules and Regulations 57947 overall evacuation capability is shown the ground must also be capable of additional pair of Type I exits. Thus the to be equal to or greater than that of the carrying two parallel lines of evacuees increase in the number of passenger specified emergency exit configuration. simultaneously. seats allowed, if one additional pair of This means, for example, that one pair Section 25.813(b) requires adequate Type I exits were installed, varies from of larger exits could be substituted in space next to one side of each 45 to 70, depending on the initial some cases for two pairs of smaller emergency exit, other than a Type A airplane exit configuration and the total exits. exit, that is required by § 25.810(a) to passenger seating capacity. Providing the type and number of have an assist means to allow The additional passenger seating exits specified for a given number of crewmembers to assist in the capacity gained by adding a pair of Type passenger seats does not, in itself, evacuation. Because there are two III exits varies in a similar manner. The ensure that an airplane can be approved parallel lines of evacuees to assist, each first table of § 25.807(d)(1) currently with that many seats. Other Type A emergency exit is required to allows 79 passenger seats if one pair of requirements, such as uniform have an assist space on each side of the Type I and one pair of Type III exits are distribution of passenger seats and exits exit. Unlike other exit types, Type A installed. If one more pair of Type III and the demonstrated emergency exits must have such assist space exits were installed, the allowable evacuation capability, may actually regardless of whether the exit is number of passenger seats would be limit seating to fewer passengers. required to have an assist means. At the increased by 30 to a total of 109 Part 25 specifies that a means must be time Notice 90±4 was issued, the latter passenger seats. In contrast, two pair of provided to assist passengers in requirement was contained in Type I exits and one pair of Type III descending to the ground for each exit, § 25.807(a)(7)(vii); however, it has since exits are currently required for a other than an overwing exit, that is more been consolidated with the former in maximum seating capacity of 139.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • TCDS A.064 ANNEX - Airbus A318, A319, A320, A321 - Special Conditions
    TCDS A.064 ANNEX - Airbus A318, A319, A320, A321 - Special Conditions This annex to the EASA TCDS A.064 was created to publish selected Special Conditions, Equivalent Safety Findings that are part of the applicable certification basis and particular Interpretative Material: Table of Content: D-0306-000: Application of Heat Release and Smoke Density Requirements to Seat Materials 2 D-0322-001: Installation of suite type seating .................................................................. 3 E10: High Altitude Airport Operations (up to 14,100 ft) ...................................................... 5 E-18: Improved flammability standards for thermal / acoustic insulation materials - ESF to JAR 25.853(b) and 25.855(d) ............................................................................ 6 E-2105: Type III Overwing Emergency Exit Access ............................................................ 7 E-2107: Passenger Extension to 180 ................................................................................ 9 E-34: Seats with Inflatable Restraints .............................................................................10 E-3002: Reclassification of doors 2 & 3 to type III ............................................................12 E-4001: Exit configuration .............................................................................................13 G-1006: ETOPS ............................................................................................................14 H-01: Enhanced Airworthiness Programme
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Accident Report: American Airlines, Inc., Mcdonnell Douglas
    Explosive decompression, American Airlines, Inc., McDonnell Douglas DC-10-10, N103AA, Near Windsor, Ontario, Canada, June 12, 1972 Micro-summary: On climb, this McDonnell Douglas DC-10-10 experienced an opening of a cargo door, explosive decompression, and a main cabin floor collapse, disrupting the flight control system. Event Date: 1972-06-12 at 1925 EST Investigative Body: National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), USA Investigative Body's Web Site: http://www.ntsb.gov/ Cautions: 1. Accident reports can be and sometimes are revised. Be sure to consult the investigative agency for the latest version before basing anything significant on content (e.g., thesis, research, etc). 2. Readers are advised that each report is a glimpse of events at specific points in time. While broad themes permeate the causal events leading up to crashes, and we can learn from those, the specific regulatory and technological environments can and do change. Your company's flight operations manual is the final authority as to the safe operation of your aircraft! 3. Reports may or may not represent reality. Many many non-scientific factors go into an investigation, including the magnitude of the event, the experience of the investigator, the political climate, relationship with the regulatory authority, technological and recovery capabilities, etc. It is recommended that the reader review all reports analytically. Even a "bad" report can be a very useful launching point for learning. 4. Contact us before reproducing or redistributing a report from this anthology. Individual countries have very differing views on copyright! We can advise you on the steps to follow.
    [Show full text]
  • Sensory Overload
    AeroSafety WORLD 1,500 HOURS Are you really experienced? FIRST RESPONDERS Flight attendants and safety SKY’S THE LIMIT Single European Sky lags FIGHTING FOR ATTENTION SENSORY OVERLOAD THE JOURNAL OF FLIGHT SAFETY FOUNDATION DECEMBER 2012–JANUARY 2013 AIR ad2 v1a.pdf 1 2012-11-16 12:55 PM The AIR Group Specializing in Safety Systems Product Development and Aircraft Accident Investigation Consultancy Affordably Priced - Highly Capable Flight Analysis System (FASET Animation) Our Animation System is based on over twenty years of R&D in the field of aircraft accident/incident, Flight Data Monitoring and flight simulation, flight visualization technology. It was developed by industry leaders in flight animation systems. Seamlessly integrate into existing third party flight analysis systems or as a stand alone product. FASET will meet your needs and exceed your expectations. C M Y CM MY CY Thinking of adding animation or upgrading your current system, think FASET CMY K Flight Data Monitoring (FDM/FOQA) Services The AIR Group can assist with: • Full implementation of a managed service, eliminating the need for highly specialized internal FDM technical expertise. • Customized service to suit client specific operations. • Investigative assistance for significant flight safety events. • Producing standard or customized reports • Highly qualified experts who can design new measurements and assist with staff training. Aircraft Accident and Serious Incident support services • Post-Accident and Incident Reconstruction • Data Integration and Reconstruction • Technical Reporting, Critical Commentary • Safety and Defect Analysis Applied Informatics and Research Inc. / Accident Investigation and Research Inc. All Operators believe they are safe; however, the AIR Group offers comprehensive safety tools and capabilities to help you to confirm that you are safe.
    [Show full text]
  • Where's the Exit?
    CABINSAFETY Despite a briefing and illustrated safety cards, passengers on an Embraer 195 were unsure of what to do while using an overwing exit. © Daniel Guerra/Airliners.net BY LINDA WERFELMAN he U.K. Air Accidents Investigation Man. Five of the 95 people in the air- concerned about the possibility of fire, Branch (AAIB) has recommended plane received minor injuries during declared an emergency and diverted to design reviews and modifica- the evacuation. Ronaldsway. The fumes and smoke in- tions of emergency exits on public About 10 minutes after takeoff on a tensified during the surveillance radar Ttransport aircraft following an emer- scheduled passenger flight from Man- approach, and the captain “considered gency landing in which passengers in chester, England, to Belfast, Northern that he would probably conduct an an Embraer 195 became confused about Ireland, the no. 1 air cycle machine evacuation on landing,” the report said. how to use an overwing exit. (ACM) failed, sending fumes onto the He did not notify the cabin crew or The AAIB issued the safety recom- flight deck. The cabin crew reported air traffic control because “he thought mendations as a result of its investiga- an unusual odor and a haze in parts of that to tell them anything at this late tion of the Aug. 1, 2008, incident that the cabin. stage of the flight might cause confu- prompted the emergency landing at The pilots donned oxygen masks sion should he decide not to order an Ronaldsway Airport on the Isle of and, because the commander was evacuation,” the report said.
    [Show full text]
  • Planned Ground Evacuation
    Cabin Operations Flight Operations Briefing Notes Planned Ground Evacuation Flight Operations Briefing Notes Cabin Operations Planned Ground Evacuation I Introduction A planned ground evacuation can be defined as an evacuation that enables the cabin crew to review procedures, and to inform and prepare passengers for an emergency landing. The cabin crew provide passengers with brace instructions, guidance on exit usage, and information on how and when exits should be operated. Effective communication between the crewmembers and the passengers is necessary for a timely, effective, and orderly response. II Background Information A safety study by the US NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) in 2000, entitled “Emergency Evacuation of Commercial Airplanes”, cites examples of planned evacuations where the cabin crewmembers were able to provide passengers with a detailed briefing. The cabin preparation and briefing resulted in an orderly, timely evacuation with few to no injuries. III Emergency Checklist Emergency checklists are useful tools that enable cabin crew to prepare the cabin for a planned emergency. It contains all the steps required to prepare the cabin for an emergency, and lists the steps to be completed in order of priority. Many Operators have developed checklists in the form of laminated cards that are distributed to each cabin crew, or are stowed near the cabin crew’s seats. These types of checklists should be readily accessible to the cabin crew. Page 1 of 12 Cabin Operations Flight Operations Briefing Notes Planned Ground Evacuation Emergency checklists are designed to provide support to cabin crewmembers in a planned emergency, and to help them complete all the necessary steps without forgetting anything.
    [Show full text]
  • Emergency Evacuation of Commercial Passenger Aeroplanes Second Edition 2020
    JUNE 2020 EMERGENCY EVACUATION OF COMMERCIAL PASSENGER AEROPLANES SECOND EDITION 2020 @aerosociety A specialist paper from the Royal Aeronautical Society www.aerosociety.com About the Royal Aeronautical Society (RAeS) The Royal Aeronautical Society (‘the Society’) is the world’s only professional body and learned society dedicated to the entire aerospace community. Established in 1866 to further the art, science and engineering of aeronautics, the Society has been at the forefront of developments in aerospace ever since. The Society seeks to; (i) promote the highest possible standards in aerospace disciplines; (ii) provide specialist information and act as a central forum for the exchange of ideas; and (iii) play a leading role in influencing opinion on aerospace matters. The Society has a range of specialist interest groups covering all aspects of the aerospace world, from airworthiness and maintenance, unmanned aircraft systems and aerodynamics to avionics and systems, general aviation and air traffic management, to name a few. These groups consider developments in their fields and are instrumental in providing industry-leading expert opinion and evidence from their respective fields. About the Honourable Company of Air Pilots (Incorporating Air Navigators) Who we are The Company was established as a Guild in 1929 in order to ensure that pilots and navigators of the (then) fledgling aviation industry were accepted and regarded as professionals. From the beginning, the Guild was modelled on the lines of the Livery Companies of the City of London, which were originally established to protect the interests and standards of those involved in their respective trades or professions. In 1956, the Guild was formally recognised as a Livery Company.
    [Show full text]
  • SYNOPTIC REPORT SERIOUS INCIDENT Airbus, A320-214, EI-GAL Cork Airport 2 November 2017
    Air Accident Investigation Unit Ireland SYNOPTIC REPORT SERIOUS INCIDENT Airbus, A320-214, EI-GAL Cork Airport 2 November 2017 Airbus, A320-214, EI-GAL Cork Airport (EICK) 2 November 2017 FINAL REPORT Foreword This safety investigation is exclusively of a technical nature and the Final Report reflects the determination of the AAIU regarding the circumstances of this occurrence and its probable causes. In accordance with the provisions of Annex 131 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation, Regulation (EU) No 996/20102 and Statutory Instrument No. 460 of 20093, safety investigations are in no case concerned with apportioning blame or liability. They are independent of, separate from and without prejudice to any judicial or administrative proceedings to apportion blame or liability. The sole objective of this safety investigation and Final Report is the prevention of accidents and incidents. Accordingly, it is inappropriate that AAIU Reports should be used to assign fault or blame or determine liability, since neither the safety investigation nor the reporting process has 1 been undertaken for that purpose. Extracts from this Report may be published providing that the source is acknowledged, the material is accurately reproduced and that it is not used in a derogatory or misleading context. 1 Annex 13: International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), Annex 13, Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation. 2 Regulation (EU) No 996/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 on the investigation and prevention of accidents and incidents in civil aviation. 3 Statutory Instrument (SI) No. 460 of 2009: Air Navigation (Notification and Investigation of Accidents, Serious Incidents and Incidents) Regulations 2009.
    [Show full text]
  • Survival on the Hudson Inattention to Safety Briefings, Life Vests and Life Lines Increased Risks After US Airways Flight 1549 Touched Down
    CABINSAFETY BY WAYNE ROSENKRANS Survival on the Hudson Inattention to safety briefings, life vests and life lines increased risks after US Airways Flight 1549 touched down. he public’s intuition that “fortuitous” cir- images of people without life vests or life lines cumstances contributed to all occupants standing on the wings, however, contain a less surviving the January 2009 ditching of an obvious message about shared responsibility for Airbus A320 in the Hudson River has been safety aboard aircraft. Rather than dwell on the Tseconded by the final accident report of the U.S. unusually favorable circumstances, the NTSB National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) took the opportunity to redirect the attention on US Airways Flight 1549.1 Now-famous of government, the airline industry and the 24 | FLIGHT SAFETY FOUNDATION | AEROSAFETYWORLD | JULY 2010 CABINSAFETY traveling public to the critical survival factors the Hudson River2 rather than attempting to land they do control. at an airport provided the highest probability that For example, noting that “only about 10 pas- the accident would be survivable. … Contribut- sengers [of 150] retrieved life vests themselves ing to the survivability of the accident was the after impact and evacuated with them” and that decision making of the flight crewmembers and only 77 retrieved flotation-type seat cushions, the their crew resource management during the ac- survival factors sections of the report essentially cident sequence; the fortuitous use of an airplane said that crewmembers and passengers disre- that was equipped for an extended-overwater gard at their peril the life-saving knowledge and [EOW]3 flight, including the availability of equipment provided.
    [Show full text]
  • Attachment 1.Pdf
    Enclosure to RA-16-01068 Petition for Exemption from 14 CFR 25.810(c) Amendments 25-72, 88 and 114, as Applicable of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations Petition for Exemption from 14 CFR 25.810(c) Amendments 25-72, 88 and 114, as Applicable, for Certain Model 737 Series Airplanes Name and Address of the Petitioner Douglas M. Lane, Director, Commercial Airplanes The Boeing Company PO Box 3707, M/S 03-52 Seattle, Washington 98124-2207 Section(s) of the Regulations from which Relief is Sought: 14 CFR 25.810(c) Amendment 25-72, 88 and 114, as applicable §25.810 Emergency egress assist means and escape routes. (c) An escape route must be established from each overwing emergency exit, and (except for flap surfaces suitable as slides) covered with a slip resistant surface. Except where a means for channeling the flow of evacuees is provided— (1) The escape route from each Type A or Type B passenger emergency exit, or any common escape route from two Type III passenger emergency exits, must be at least 42 inches wide; that from any other passenger emergency exit must be at least 24 inches wide; and (2) The escape route surface must have a reflectance of at least 80 percent, and must be defined by markings with a surface-to-marking contrast ratio of at least 5:1. The Extent of Relief Sought and Reason(s): Regulation Requires: Relief is Necessary because: §25.810(c) An escape route must Certain Boeing Model 737 series airplanes Amendment 25- be established from are delivered without an interior installed and 72, 88 and 114, each overwing certified for zero (0) occupancy in the main as applicable emergency exit, and cabin.
    [Show full text]
  • Cabin Safety Harmonization Working Group Task 3 – Compliance Reflectance Measurements Overwing Escape Route
    Federal Aviation Administration Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee Occupant Safety Issue Area Cabin Safety Harmonization Working Group Task 3 – Compliance Reflectance Measurements Overwing Escape Route Task Assignment [Federal Register: November 26, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 227)] [Notices] [Page 66522-66524] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr26no99-123] ======================================================================= ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Federal Aviation Administration Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee; Transport Airplane and Engine Issues--New and Revised Tasks AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. ACTION: Notice of new and revised task assignments for the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC). ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: Notice is given of new tasks assigned to and accepted by the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) and of revisions to a number of existing tasks. This notice informs the public of the activities of ARAC. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dorenda Baker, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service (ANM-110), 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, WA 98055; phone (425) 227-2109; fax (425) 227- 1320. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background The FAA has established an Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee to provide advice and recommendations to the FAA Administrator, through the Associate Administrator
    [Show full text]
  • 3 —Research and Technologies for Evacuation Systems
    Chapter 3 RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGIES FOR EVACUATION SYSTEMS CHAPTER 3 Research and Technologies for Evacuation Systems The aircraft evacuation system has three key In 1980, FAA’s Special Aviation Fire and elements: exits and slides, efficient means of Explosion Reduction (SAFER) Advisory reaching the exits, and the crew and passengers Committee published several recommendations who use them. To be able to leave one’s seat, to improve fire safety and survivability.2 FAA move toward an exit door or hatch, and escape used the committee’s recommendations to di- from the aircraft depends on the passenger’s rect its research and development (R&D) physical and mental condition, and tolerance to efforts, and produced new and modified regu- crash and fire hazards. These hazards, in turn, lations in a number of areas.3 The success of depend on the strength of seat attachments and FAA’s programs rests primarily on the devel- restraints, airframe energy absorption, and the opment of representative fire scenarios and test fire resistance of the cabin lining and seating methods. Currently, research is concentrated in materials. two categories: in-flight fires, where safety is measured by the ability to prevent, detect, and Evacuation performance thus requires en- contain a fire in the immediate vicinity of igni- hanced cabin safety to preclude incapacitation tion as well as discriminate from false alarms; from impact, smoke, heat, and toxic gases be- and postcrash fires, which in turn involve either fore egress can be achieved. Evacuation per- making the environment inhabitable for a formance also depends on the design and longer time or evacuating passengers more operation of emergency equipment and flight 4 quickly.
    [Show full text]
  • Legislators Press for GA Focus in Plane
    PUBLICATIONS Vol.50 | No.9 $9.00 SEPTEMBER 2019 | ainonline.com Conventions LABACE 2019 Business aviation put on a show at LABACE Industry Deliveries up for bizjets, down for t-props page 10 Government Senator defends ODA process page 30 eVTOL Vahana offers glimpse at future page 56 Air Transport INTOSH c Rolls Trent 1000 DAVID M DAVID improving page 58 Aircraft Read Our SPECIAL REPORT Legislators press for Longitude clears hurdle Product Support for FAA nod page 6 GA focus in Plane Act AIN readers rate the support they received in the last 12 months for flight deck avionics and cabin electronics. by Kerry Lynch Perennial favorites topped the list. Sen. James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) is con- economically,” King added. “This legislation page 48 tinuing his long-running campaign to boost would make important investments in this pilot rights and address issues affecting the pillar of our nation’s transportation system U.S. general aviation (GA) community. and would cut through bureaucratic burdens.” Together with Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), Notably, the bill would roll back the “fuel he has jointly introduced new legislation, fraud” tax measure imposed in 2005 as an the Promoting the Launch of Aviation’s attempt to discourage truck drivers from Next Era (Plane) Act of 2019. purchasing aviation jet fuel to avoid paying Announced during the most recent Exper- the 2.5-cent per gallon higher tax levy on imental Aircraft Association AirVenture, the highway diesel fuel. Plane Act, S.2198, is designed to foster air- That law requires noncommercial jet fuel port infrastructure, strengthen pilot legal to be treated as highway diesel fuel: taxed at protections, and address a host of other the same rate with the dollars deposited into issues.
    [Show full text]