February 9, 2015 

Joseph Brennan 

Chief Program Pilot 

Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation 

P.O. Box 97291 Mail Stop S212A 

CT 06615-9129 

Dear Mr. Brennan: 

Exemption No. 11 030A 

Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2014-0040 

This letter is to infom1 you that we have granted, in part, your request to amend Exemption 

No. 11030. It transmits our explains its basis, and gives you the updated conditions 

and limitations of the including the date it ends. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated August 27, 2014, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) 

on behalf of Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (SAC) for amendments to SAC's exemption from 

§§ 61.3(a)(l) and 91.9(a) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). That exemption 

allows Sikorsky to conduct sales demonstration customer crew training and 

customer acceptance flights in the S-70i and sales demonstration flights in the S-92 aircraft. 

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register because the requested exemption would not set a and any 

delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to SAC. 

In your you requested several amendments to Exemption No. 11030: 

1) Exemption No. I as amended, allowed non-U.S. certificated pilots to manipulate 

the controls of the S-92 for sales demonstration flights provided they are accompanied 

by an appropriately certificated and rated pilot-in-command (PIC). This exemption 

expired on June 2014. Exemption No. 11030, issued on July retained the 

relief previously granted for operations conducted in the S-92. Exemption No. 11030 

also introduced allowance of sales demonstration, crew training and customer 

AFS-14-451-E 
allowing crew training and customer acceptance, in addition to sales demonstration 

flight, in the S-70i would also apply to operations in the S-92. Therefore, the FAA has 

amended condition and limitation No. 1 to include crew training and acceptance flights 

in the S-92. 

The FAA has made corresponding amendments to condition and limitation No. 3 

pertaining to the requirements for PICs operating the S-92. These requirements now 

mirror the previously established requirements for PICs conducting S-70i operations, and 

have 

been edited for clarity. The FAA finds that SAC's request would not 

substantially affect safety and that the relief would still be in the public interest. 

2) Previous condition and limitation No. 1 (d) required that operations be conducted in 

visual 

meteorolo

gical conditions (VMC) and between official sunrise and sunset. SAC 

requested that the FAA amend this text to allow operations at night. According to the petitioner, night flying operations are part of SAC's marketing and training syllabus 

provided to their customers. This includes night vision goggle (NV G) training. 

The FAA finds that pilots trained and experienced 

with NVG devices significantly 

enhance flight safety during periods of darkness. Further, we believe that the 

requirements listed in condition and limitation No. 3 for pilots acting as PIC, including the added requirement for the NVG endorsement described by§ 61.195(k), provide adequate experience necessary for night operations. The FAA does 

not envision any 

safety or public interest impact and has amended condition and limitation No. 1 (d) to 

allow flight operations at night and for operations using NVGs. 

3) SAC requested the FAA make amendments to the conditions and limitations 

describing who must be on board the aircraft during operations conducted under this 

exemption. SAC requested crew chiefs and flight engineers be permitted in the back 

(i.e., not in the cockpit) of the aircraft. In its petition, SAC indicated both the S-92 and 

S-70i aircraft can be sold with a search and rescue (SAR) option that includes a hoist 

and SAR console that is operated by a crew chief or flight engineer from the rear of the 

aircraft while in fli

g

ht. This configuration must have a qualified operator to 

demonstrate and train the customer's SAR personn

el. On flights that do not require demonstration of the SAR option, SAC noted that a crew chief or flight engineer could enhance safety by assisting in traffic and obstacle clearance. The FAA so

ught 

clarification of this request from SAC. In a telephone call on December 16,2014, the 

petitioner indicated it intends, at all times, to operate the aircraft with a person designated as a crew chief or flight engi

neer. 
4) Previous condition and limitation No.5 required, among other things that a second 

SAC pilot be on board who is not acting as PIC of the aircraft. In its petition, SAC 

asked for relief and removal of the requirement for a second SAC pi lot to be onboard. 

SAC stated that the rotorcraft flight manual only requires two pilot crewmembers. 

SAC further noted there is no reference to any regulation requiring an additional third 

pilot to be onboard. 

The FAA has considered this request and finds that there is no practical or necessary 

reason requiring a second SAC pilot to be on board, in large part because the aircraft is 

not designed to allow for an inflight pilot change. The second SAC pilot could never 

have access to the controls from the jump seat in the event the PIC or SIC became 

incapacitated in flight. Additionally, there is no rotorcraft flight manual (RFM) 

requiring a three pilot crew. The FAA has amended condition and limitation No.5 to 

eliminate the requirement for a second SAC pilot. The FAA finds this acceptable 

given the reasons above and in consideration of the requirement for a crew chief or 

flight engineer. 

However, the FAA does not seek to restrict SAC from including an additional 

company pilot if deemed appropriate by the PIC. Therefore, the FAA has amended 

condition and limitation No. 7 for clarity and to allow inclusion of a person that meets 

the requirements of former condition and limitation No. 5. 

5) Condition and limitation No.8 states that Exemption No. 11030 is not valid for 

operations outside the United States. SAC petitioned the FAA to remove the 

requirement if SAC were to conduct operations outside the U.S. 

The FAA reiterates that this exemption is limited to operations conducted within the 

U.S. in accordance with § 11.83. As previously noted, if SAC wishes to operate this 

exemption outside the United States, SAC must petition the FAA for such relief and 

include the reasons for the request. The FAA does not find that SAC has adequately 

provided reasons for such relief in its latest petition. Therefore, the FAA has not 

amended condition and limitation No. 8. 

6) The FAA has made other minor edits to the conditions and limitations for consistency 

and to clarify our intent. 
flights, customer crew training and customer acceptance flights in both the S-70i and the S-92, 

subject to the conditions and limitations described below. 

Conditions and Limitations 

1. All flight operations for the S-70i and S-92 using the privileges of this exemption are 

limited to: 

a. flights for sales demonstration purposes; 

b. customer crew training; 

c. customer acceptance purposes; 

d. operations conducted in: 

i. visual meteorological conditions (VMC) day; or, 

ii. VMC night (including under night vision goggles (NVG)); and 

e. operations that do not involve: 

i. delivery of an aircraft; 

ii. maintenance or manufacturing flight testing; or, 

iii. flights under a special airworthiness certificate in the experimental 

category other than for purpose of sales demonstration. 

2. SAC must be in full operational control of any aircraft operated using the privileges 

of this exemption. 

3. The pilot-in-command (PIC) of any flights operated using the privileges of this 

exemption must: 

a. hold a valid U.S. commercial pilot certificate or airline transport pilot 

(A TP) certificate, with rotorcraft category, helicopter class, and either an 

S-70 or S-92 type rating corresponding to the aircraft to be flown under 

the privileges ofthis exemption; 

b. hold an FAA flight instructor certificate with a rotorcraft category and 

helicopter class rating; 

c. be designated by SAC as an instructor pilot in the either the S-70i or S-92 

corresponding to the aircraft to be flown under the privileges of this 

exemption; 

d. hold a valid U.S. first or second class medical certificate; 
g. remain the PIC for the duration of the flight; and, 

h. for flights conducted between sunset and sunrise, have an NVG 

endorsement described by § 61.195(k) with rotorcraft category and 

helicopter class. 

4. The person acting as second-in-command (SIC) of any flight operated using the 

privileges of this exemption must: 

a. be able to speak and understand the English language; 

b. be an authorized representative of a branch of the U.S. or foreign military 

service, or be an authorized representative of a legitimate potential 

purchaser of an S-92 or S-70i aircraft, as applicable, from SAC; and, 

c. Meet one of the following: 

i. Hold a valid U.S. commercial pilot certificate or airline transport 

pilot certificate with rotorcraft category and helicopter class rating; or, 

a pilot certificate with rotorcraft category and helicopter privileges 

issued by an ICAO-member state; or, 

ii. Hold military orders or other documentation identifying the person as 

being rated as a helicopter pilot and a current member of a branch of 

the U.S. or foreign military service. 

5. All flight operations using the privilege ofthis exemption must be operated with at 

least one qualified crewmember on board, (other than the persons identified in 

Conditions and Limitations Nos. 3 and 4) who: 

a. is employed by SAC; 

b. SAC has found to be qualified to act as a crew chief or flight engineer in the S-92 

or S-70i, as applicable; and 

c. for flights conducted between sunset and sunrise, is current and qualified by SAC 

for NVG operations. 

6. For all flight operations using the privileges of this exemption, the PIC must conduct 

a preflight briefing with each pilot and additional crewmember, to include: 

a. a review of the conditions and limitations of this exemption; 

b. a review of the intended flight including all maneuvers to be performed; and, 

c. a review of all normal and emergency procedures for the S-92 or S-70i, as 

applicable. 
c. The crew chiefs and flight engineers identified by Condition and Limitation No. 5; 

d. If determined necessary for the conduct of the flight by the PIC, a person that 

meets the following requirements: 

i. is employed by SAC; 

ii. is not acting as PIC ofthe aircraft; 

iii. holds the appropriate U.S. airman and medical certificates to act as SIC in 

either the S-92 or S-70i, as applicable; and, 

iv. SAC has found to be qualified to serve as SIC in the S-92 or S-70i, as 

applicable. 

8. This exemption is not valid for operations outside of the United States. 

This exemption terminates on December 31, 2016, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. Si ncerely

~ 

bvjj~ 

John Barbagallo 

A cti.ng Deputy Du-ector, Flight Standards Service