FAA

July 21–How does an airport suddenly go from being 2,000 feet to more than a mile high? Barring a “Hollywood-style” seismic event at your airport, the answer is density altitude; in other words, how high an aircraft “thinks” it is. When density altitude is high as a result of temperatures above standard at a given altitude, the air is less dense than normal. This means an aircraft will perform as if at a higher altitude with degraded climb performance and acceleration; two pretty important factors on a hot, humid day with a short runway and 50-foot pine trees looming at the end.

The article “Climbing into Thin Air,” featured in the July/August issue of FAA Safety Briefing, offers more information on this “hot” topic.

“Density altitude is not just a concern for flying in the mountains,” says FAA’s Bryan Neville. “Hot temperatures can have an affect at any altitude.” Neville, a former adjunct aviation professor and flight instructor with experience at both high- and low-elevation airports, suggests becoming familiar with the weight-and-balance and the performance and limitations sections of your pilot’s operating handbook (POH) or airplane flight manual.

One the ways to keep your cool aloft on those hot summer days is to avoid takeoffs and landings at midday when temperatures are usually at their highest. Instead, take advantage of cooler mornings or evenings when the performance-robbing effects of high density altitude are not as pronounced.

For Immediate Release

WASHINGTON — The Federal Aviation Administration is proposing a $168,000 civil penalty against D & M Custom Injection Molding Corp. of Burlington, Ill., doing business as D & M Plastics, for alleged violations of Department of Transportation hazardous materials regulations.

D & M offered a five-piece shipment of approximately 2,000 Runyan Rapp E-Mysticks smokeless cigarettes to Federal Express for transportation by air from Indianapolis to Minneapolis-St. Paul, Aug. 14, 2009. Each smokeless cigarette contained alcohol, a flammable liquid, and a lithium battery, a hazardous material. Each box contained 400 E-Mysticks, including 7.6 kilograms of lithium batteries, exceeding the five-kilogram limit for shipment aboard passenger aircraft. Because the shipment was not packaged in accordance with regulations it was forbidden on all aircraft, including all-cargo flights.

As the flight approached Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, the FedEx flight crew received a fire warning on the instrument panel. The crew discharged the fire suppression system during the landing and taxied to the gate. The airport fire department responded and extinguished a fire in an LD3 cargo container. The fire was started by the lithium batteries in the shipment.

D & M offered the shipment for transportation by air when it was not packaged, marked, classed, described, labeled or in condition for shipment as required by regulations.

D&M has 30 days from receipt of the FAA letter to respond to the agency

July 6 – The FAA has reached an agreement with Georgia Tech to research how the increased sophistication on the flight deck under the Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) will affect flight crewmembers and controllers. The agreement is the first of several the FAA expects to announce in the coming months with universities that specialize in aviation-related human factors research. For the FAA, the work will be conducted by the Human Factors Research and Engineering Group, which is part of the Research and Technology Development Office.

Amy Pritchett, an associate professor in Georgia Tech’s School of Aerospace Engineering, will lead a study of pilot response to alerts from the Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance System (TCAS) under NextGen. TCAS warns pilots about potential mid-air collisions and gives specific instructions on evasive action to both pilots. Pritchett’s team will examine how pilots should respond to these alerts in the future, when the increased safety and efficiency that comes with NextGen’s satellite-based technologies means that aircraft may be operating closer together.

Frank Durso, an Engineering Psychology professor, will lead a team exploring how flight crews and controllers interact with automation. Specifically, Durso’s team will focus on how roles will evolve with NextGen technology. Durso will first lay the groundwork by examining how pilots and controllers work with today’s automation. His team will then see how pilots and controllers in the future can use automation to manage their workloads and to improve their situational awareness and performance. Research results will also help FAA develop guidance for aviation safety oversight of NextGen operations.

Georgia Tech, which has conducted important aviation-related human factors research for the FAA and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, was chosen after the FAA conducted a thorough market survey of schools with expertise in this area. In addition to an outstanding staff and students, the school has a wide range of aviation research capabilities including air traffic control simulators and an Airbus flight deck simulator.

The research done by Georgia Tech will be shared with the public through presentations of research findings at national and international symposia in order to foster a broad understanding of how NextGen will enhance the ability of pilots and controllers to effectively use new technologies and procedures.

For Immediate Release
June 29, 2010
Contact: Les Dorr or Alison Duquette
Phone: 202-267-3883

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is proposing a significant expansion of its icing certification standards, including a new requirement that manufacturers show airplanes can operate safely in freezing drizzle or freezing rain, conditions that constitute an icing environment known as “supercooled large drops” (SLDs).

The proposed regulations would improve safety by mandating that new transport category aircraft most affected by SLD icing conditions meet expanded safety standards, including additional airplane performance and handling qualities. The rule also would require all new transport category designs be able to fly in conditions where supercooled liquid and ice crystals exist.

The FAA is also proposing changes that would expand the icing certification requirements for engines, engine installations and some airplane components (for example, angle of attack and airspeed indicating systems). These systems would need to be able to perform in freezing rain, freezing drizzle, ice crystals and combinations of these icing phenomena.

“These new icing standards are part of our continuing effort to make the world’s safest aviation system even safer,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.

“These regulations will help ensure future aircraft can operate safely in some of the toughest icing conditions,” said FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt.

The proposed rule is based largely on recommendations from the FAA’s Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) and the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). The FAA tasked the ARAC to study how icing certification regulations should be expanded after the tragic 1994 icing-related accident in Roselawn, IL. The NTSB recommendations stemmed from the same accident.

Previously, the FAA issued 112 airworthiness directives for transport category aircraft related to icing. Of the 112 ADs, 21 were specifically related to SLD. The ADs require flight crews to exit icing conditions when they see visual cues indicating the conditions exceed the capabilities of the aircraft’s ice protection equipment.

December 9 – The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) welcomes the announcement by Secretary of Energy Steven Chu and Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack of more than $600 million in awards to advanced biofuel projects. At least four grant recipients are working on technologies to produce fuels including renewable jet fuels. A number of the awardees also have a long standing relationship with the FAA co-sponsored Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative (CAAFI) which coordinates public and private sector efforts to develop sustainable alternative jet fuels to help the aviation sector address energy and climate change challenges. .

“Renewable jet fuels are critical to building the cleaner, more sustainable Next Generation commercial aviation system in the United States,” said Nancy LoBue, FAA Acting Assistant Administrator for Aviation Policy, Planning and Environment. “This Administration is committed to establishing domestic renewable jet fuel production, address energy security, improve the environment and also create jobs in rural America.”

CAAFI seeks to enhance energy resources and environmental sustainability for aviation through alternative jet fuels. The initiative is a coalition of the U.S. commercial aviation community that acts as a focal point for engaging the emerging alternative fuels industry. It enables its diverse stakeholders to build relationships, share and collect needed data, identify resources, and direct research, development and deployment of alternative fuels.

CAAFI’s sponsors include the FAA office of Environment and Energy and three trade associations: Airports Council International of North America (ACI-NA) representing commercial airports, the Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) representing U.S. manufacturers, and the Air Transport Association representing U.S. airlines. CAAFI stakeholders are drawn from all elements of the international commercial aviation industry, fuel suppliers, universities, and multiple U.S. government agencies.

The FAA is soliciting bids from companies interested in competing for NextGen support contracts with an approximate combined value of $7 billion, the largest award in the agency’s history. Under the umbrella awards, called System Engineering 2020 (SE2020), the FAA will award as many as five separate contracts for research and development and systems engineering work that will help the agency deliver NextGen.

The SE2020 contracts will be awarded to teams of companies, up to three of which will perform research and development work and two of which will perform systems engineering work. This work will complement and enhance major NextGen initiatives already under way, such as Automatic Dependent Surveillance – Broadcast, System Wide Information Management and Data Communications. Contract teams will focus on a series of operational capabilities, including Trajectory Based Operations, Collaborative Air Traffic Management and Reduced Weather Impact. The goal is to achieve early NextGen successes to improve safety and bring greater efficiencies to the nation’s airspace system.

The team concept is designed to create competitive synergy within each group, driving innovation so that each team comes up with the best possible product. The FAA also structured the contracts, using market survey data, to encourage bids from teams that will include small companies as prime contractors as well as subcontractors. The agency is looking for the best and the brightest, regardless of size.

Five-year contracts will be awarded next summer, with subsequent three- and two-year options

For Immediate Release
November 30, 2009
Contact: Les Dorr, Jr. or Alison Duquette
Phone: (202) 267-3883

WASHINGTON — The Federal Aviation Administration is increasing the safety of winter flying by prohibiting takeoffs with “polished frost” — frost buffed to make it smooth — on the wings, stabilizers and control surfaces of several classes of aircraft.

The new rules are effective on January 30, 2010. There are 57 operators flying 188 aircraft affected by the rule changes. The FAA already prohibits major and regional air carriers from operating with polished frost.

Frost can affect the aerodynamics of wings and control surfaces, and the safest action is to completely remove it. Previous FAA guidance recommended removing all wing frost prior to takeoff, but allowed it to be polished smooth if the aircraft manufacturer’s recommended procedures were followed. But manufacturers never published standards of acceptable smoothness for polished frost, and the FAA has no data to determine exactly how to polish frost to satisfactory smoothness.

“The FAA has advised pilots not to take off with frost or ice contaminating their wings for years because it made good sense,” said FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt. “Now, it’s the law.”

The new rules include four alternatives to removing frost that operators may consider:

-using wing covers to prevent frost accumulation on wings
-waiting for frost to melt
-storing the aircraft in a heated hangar
-deicing the wing surface.
The new rules also clarify that affected aircraft must have functioning deicing or anti-icing equipment for flights under Instrument Flight Rules into known or forecast light or moderate icing conditions, or under Visual Flight Rules into known light or moderate icing conditions.

The final rule can be viewed at: http://www.federalregister.gov/OFRUpload/OFRData/2009-28431_PI.pdf

For Immediate Release
November 23, 2009
Contact: Alison Duquette or Les Dorr
Phone: (202) 267-3883

Ensuring that all pilots receive adequate rest is key to maintaining a safe aviation system. FAA Administrator Randy Babbitt has made the creation of new flight, duty, and rest rules based on fatigue science a high priority. The FAA is working on an aggressive timeline to issue a new proposal.

Airplanes operate globally in 24 time zones. Domestic short leg, multi-leg, and long-haul flights all present challenges. Engine technology has evolved enabling airplanes to fly much further than in the past. Since many air carriers fly non-stop ultra-long-range flights, the FAA continues to evaluate the latest research on the effects of time zone changes on circadian rhythm and time zone changes to mitigate pilot fatigue. The FAA continues to be at the forefront of raising awareness of fatigue and mitigation techniques.

The FAA last proposed updating the rules in 1995 but, based on industry comments, the rule was not adopted. Since then, the agency has reiterated the rules and kept pace with a changing industry by allowing airlines to use the latest fatigue mitigation techniques to enhance safety.

Overview of the Current Federal Aviation Regulations
Regulations limiting flight time and pilot rest have been in place since the 1940s. The rules for domestic flights do no explicitly address the amount of time a pilot can be on duty. Rather, the rules address flight time limitations and required rest periods. Current FAA regulations for domestic flights generally limit pilots to eight hours of flight time during a 24-hour period. This limit may be extended provided the pilot receives additional rest at the end of the flight. However, a pilot is not allowed to accept, nor is an airline allowed to assign, a flight if the pilot has not had at least eight continuous hours of rest during the 24-hour period. In other words, the pilot needs to be able to look back in any preceding 24-hour period and find that he/she has had an opportunity for at least eight hours of rest. If a pilot’s actual rest is less than nine hours in the 24-hour period, the next rest period must be lengthened to provide for the appropriate compensatory rest. Airline rules may be stricter than the FAA’s regulations if the issue is part of a collective bargaining agreement.

Flight time and rest rules for U.S. air carrier international flights are different from the rules for domestic flights. International flights can involve more than the standard two-pilot crew and are more complex due to the scope of the operations. For international flights that require more than 12 hours of flight time, air carriers must establish rest periods and provide adequate sleeping facilities outside of the cockpit for in-flight rest.

An air carrier may not schedule any pilot and no pilot may accept an assignment for flight time in scheduled air transportation or other commercial flying if that pilot’s total flight time will exceed the regulatory limits.

It is the responsibility of both the air carrier and the pilot to prevent fatigue, not only by following the regulations, but also by acting responsibly while serving the traveling public. This means taking into consideration weather conditions, air traffic, the health of each pilot, and any other personal circumstances that may affect a pilot’s performance. The FAA has recommended that air carriers include fatigue training as part of their crew resource management training programs.

FAA Actions
Withdrawal of the 1995 Proposal

In order to move forward with a new rule, the FAA formally withdrew the old proposal by publishing a notice in the Federal Register on November 23. The notice reiterated that the 1995 proposal was outdated and raised many significant issues.

Fatigue ARC

On June 24, Administrator Babbitt announced that the FAA would undertake an expedited review of flight and rest rules. This followed Administrator Babbitt and U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood’s June 15 meeting with airline safety executives and pilot unions to strategize on how to best reduce risk at regional airlines. The FAA chartered an Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ARC), which began work in July. The ARC, which consisted of representatives from FAA, industry, and labor organizations, was charged with producing recommendations for a science-based approach to fatigue management by September 1. The ARC met their deadline and provided the FAA with a broad framework for drafting the basis for a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM).

2008 FAA Fatigue Symposium

In June 2008, the FAA sponsored the Fatigue Symposium: Partnerships for Solutions to encourage the aviation community to proactively address aviation fatigue management issues. Participants included the National Transportation Safety Board, the Institutes for Behavior Resources, Inc., and many of the world’s leading authorities on sleep and human performance. The symposium provided attendees with the most current information on fatigue physiology, management, and mitigation alternatives; perspectives from aviation industry experts and scientists on fatigue management; and information on the latest fatigue mitigation initiatives and best practices.

Ultra Long-Range Flights

In 2006, the FAA worked with Delta Air Lines to develop and approve fatigue mitigation for flights between John F. Kennedy International Airport and Mumbai, India. The flights were operated for more than 16 hours with four pilots provided that the airline followed an FAA-approved plan to manage rest and mitigate the risk posed by fatigue. The mitigation, approved as an Operations Specification issued to Delta Air Lines, was specific for that city pair. Although that specific route is no longer flown by Delta, the FAA viewed Delta’s fatigue mitigation strategy as a model program.

As a result of Delta’s efforts, the FAA proposed in November 2008 to amend Delta’s, American’s, and Continental’s Operations Specifications to incorporate fatigue mitigation plans for their ultra long-range flights. Based on comments received from the three air carriers, the FAA withdrew the proposed amendments on March 12, 2009. The FAA is currently working with airlines to gather data that will help the agency enhance the safety requirements for ultra long-range flights. The agency believes that it is in the best interest of passenger and crew safety for airlines to use an FAA-approved fatigue mitigation program to reduce the risk of pilot fatigue.

2001 ATA/RAA Request

The FAA denied requests made on June 12, 2001 on behalf of the Air Transport Association (ATA) and Regional Airline Association (RAA) to stay all agency action regarding the November 20, 2000 Whitlow letter of interpretation and the May 17, 2001 Federal Register notice of the FAA’s enforcement policy regarding pilot flight time and rest. The FAA’s letter and Federal Register notice were consistent with the agency’s long-standing interpretation of the current rules. The documents were consistent with the statutory mandate to issue rules governing the maximum hours or periods of service, the use of plain language in regulations and the regulatory history of the rules. ATA subsequently petitioned for review of the Whitlow letter and the enforcement policy.

On Sept. 5, 2001 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia granted a motion by the ATA to stay the May 17, 2001 Federal Register notice. On May 31, 2002, the court denied ATA’s petition for review, ruling in favor of the FAA.

2001 Federal Register Notice

An FAA in the May 17, 2001 Federal Register reiterated the agency’s long-standing interpretation of pilot flight time and rest rules. The notice informed airlines and flight crews of the FAA’s intent to enforce its rules in accordance with the Whitlow letter. Each flight crewmember must have a minimum of eight hours of rest in any 24-hour period that includes flight time. That calculation must be based on the actual conditions on the day of departure regardless of whether the length of the flight is longer or shorter than the originally scheduled flight time. The FAA did not anticipate that the notice would result in major disruptions to airline schedules. Beginning November 2001, the FAA would review airline flight scheduling practices and deal stringently violations. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia granted a stay of the notice.

2000 FAA Letter

On November 20, 2000, the FAA responded to a letter from the Allied Pilots Association that set forth specific scenarios that could affect a very small number of all commercial pilots. The FAA’s response, known as the “Whitlow Letter,” was consistent with the agency’s long-standing interpretation of the current rules. In summary, the FAA reiterated that each flight crewmember must have a minimum of eight hours of rest in any 24-hour period that includes flight time. The scheduled flight time must be calculated using the actual conditions on the day of departure regardless of whether the length of the flight is longer or shorter than the originally scheduled flight time.

1999 Federal Register Notice

In response to concerns raised by the pilot community, the FAA Administrator notified the aviation community on June 15, 1999 that it had six months to ensure that it was in full compliance with the agency’s current flight time and rest requirements. Reviews of airline scheduling practices conducted in December 1999 and discussions with pilot unions and airlines confirmed that the vast majority of pilots are receiving the amount of rest required by the FAA’s rule.

1998 ARAC

In July 1998, the FAA tasked the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC) to work with the industry to reach a consensus and develop a new proposal. If no consensus could be reached, the FAA would subsequently enforce the current regulations. In February 1999, ARAC reported that there was no consensus. The group offered five different proposals to update the flight and rest regulations.

1995 Proposal for Pilots

In 1995, the FAA proposed a rule to change flight time and rest limits. The agency received more than 2,000 comments from the aviation community and the public. Most of those comments did not favor the rule as proposed, and there was no clear consensus on what the final rule should say. Highlights of the 1995 proposal:

Reduce the number of duty hours (the time a flight crewmember is on the job, available to fly) from the current 16 hours to 14 hours for two-pilot crews. It would have allowed up to 10 flight hours in the 14 duty hours. Current rules allow up to 16 hours continuous duty time.
Additional duty hours would be permitted only for unexpected operational problems, such as flight delays. In no event could such delays add more than two hours to the pilot’s duty day.
Airlines could no longer schedule pilots in advance that exceeds the duty time.

To ensure that pilots have an adequate opportunity to rest, off-duty time would be increased from eight hours to 10 hours under the proposal.

Pilots would have to be given at least one 36-hour off-duty period every seven days. Current rules call for a 24-hour period.
###