TO: U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management Facility 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE West Building Ground Floor Room W12

- 140 Washington, DC 20590

PETITION FOR EXEMPTION FROM FEDERAL AVIATION REGULATION SECTION 91.319(c) TO PERMIT STADIUM AND SPORTING EVENT OVERFLIGHTS IN EXPERIMENTAL , EXPERIMENTAL EXHIBITION OR AIRCRAFT WITH SIMILAR SFA RESTRICTIONS/LIMITATIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF AIR SHOWS AND THE EAA WARBIRDS OF AMERICA

PETITIONERS: International Council of Air Shows

748 Miller Drive SE, Suite G

- 3 Leesburg, Virginia 20175

EAA Warbirds of America 3000 Poberezny Road Oshkosh, WI 54902

Dated: March 26 , 20152 PETITION SUMMARY

The International Council of Air Sho ws (“ICAS”), and the EAA Warbirds of America (“Warbirds”) seek an exemption from Federal Aviation Regulation (“FAR”) Section 91.319(c). The relief sought under the exemption is to permit over flights of stadiums and sporting events by their members in cert ain aircraft certified in the experimental , experimental exhibition categories or aircraft with similar SFA restrictions/limitations

.

REASON FOR PETITION
As a result of government budget sequestration, activities relating to military over flights of profe ssional and college sporting events, racing events, baseball games and
other stadium

- based events have either been completely curtailed or severely limited. As a result of those actions, ICAS and Warbirds members have been asked to conduct over flights at stadiums and other sporting events

. During 2013 and 2014, numerous over flights at stadiums and sporting events were accomplished by members of ICAS and Warbirds in experimental and experimental exhibition certificated aircraft. The flights that ICAS and Warbirds are aware of were coordinated with the responsible Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) Flight Standards District Office (“FSDO”) and the Transportation Security Administration (“TSA”). There were, in fact, some requests for stadium over fligh ts that were not conducted due to the inability to ensure proper flight path ingress and egress over areas that might have been considered to be congested, densely populated, and/or concern3

regarding safe access to an appropriate location in the event of a n engine failure. The stadium over flights were conducted without incident, and served as a viable substitute for traditional military flight formation pre

- event, and other stadium over

- flight activities.
FAR section 91.319(c) prohibits aircraft having ex perimental certificates from operating “over a densely populated area

. ” Although it is still not clear whether crowds
at stadiums and other sporting events are truly densely populated areas, c o nsidering the various subjective definitions of what constitute s a densely populated area among airmen, as well as various interpretations from individual FAA FSDO inspectors, and at times from inspectors within the same FSDO, the Petitioners wish to mitigate the potential effects of these interpretations through this Petition for Exemption.

Based upon Petitioners’ communications with their members, the stadium over flights that they conducted did not involve operations over densely populated areas, and the stadium over flights’ ingress and egress were along corridors that the FSDOs found to be compliant with the FARs. Further, the actual over flights were conducted at an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft, and with consideration for the ability to , in the event of an engine failure, conduct an emergency landing without endangering persons or property on the surface.
The number of experimental and experimental exhibition stadium over flights came under the scrutiny of FAA Headquarters. Headquarters personnel were apparently concerned that the stadium over flights might have been conducted in contradiction to experimental and experimental exhibition aircraft operating limitations.
Rece ntly, the responsible FAA FSDOs that would have otherwise approved of well

-4

planned and safely conducted stadium over flights were purportedly instructed by FAA
h eadquarters not to approve those operations. Therefore, ICAS and Warbirds are requesting an exemption from FAR 91.319(c).

BACKGROUND

ICAS and Warbirds members w ho conduct over flights of stadiums and sporting
events are flying aircraft that are well recognized for their safe operation. For example,
the Aero L

- 39 Albatros (“L

- 39”) is the aircraft that the Black Diamond Jet Team and Patriots Jet Team have chosen fo r air show performances around the country, as well as stadium over flights. The L

- 39 is reported to be the most utilized trainer in the world. It has also served as a light

- attack aircraft. The North American T

- 28 aircraft (“T

- 28”) was selected by the Tro jan Horsemen Warbird Formation Acrobatic Team for their air show activities, and stadium over flights. It is worth noting that Hamilton Aircraft Company modified former Air Force T

- 28As to a civilian aircraft known as the Nomad III. It received an FAA type certificate in1962, but was not a successful commercial venture.
Further, some ICAS members operate the Vans RV experimental aircraft (“RV”)
in stadium over

- flight activities. The RV is the most commonly built experimental aircraft
in the world. The reli ef sought under this Request for Exemption would permit the use of those aircraft, as well as other experimental and experimental exhibition aircraft, that meet the performance specifications contained in the ICAS Stadium Over

- Flight Training Program. (Exh ibit “A”).5

ICAS and Warbirds would like to underscore the point that, if this Petition is approved, their members who would conduct stadium over flights would have completed FAA approved formation flight training. Surprisingly, that same training and qual ification would not be required of individuals flying standard airworthiness aircraft conducting stadium over flights. In fact, a stadium or sporting event over flight could be conducted pursuant to the FARs, in a standard airworthiness aircraft, without t he pilots having any formation flight training whatsoever, and simply agreeing among themselves to conduct the over flight. Clearly, the stadium over

- flight activities that would occur as a result of the granting of this Petition would embody a much greate r level of safety.
Approval of this Petition for Exemption would bring a formal, and even more thoughtful process to approval of stadium and sporting event over flights. To date, the previous system of approval of these flights by the responsible FSDO, ba sed upon consideration of the ability to conduct the operation safely, worked well. The process set forth in this Petition for Exemption only improves upon what was already a viable approach to these types of operations.

INTERESTS OF THE PETITIONERS

ICAS was founded by air show industry professionals in 1968 as a trade and
p rofessional association to protect and promote their interests in the growing North American air show marketplace. At the time, this small group of air show event organizers and perform ers recognized the need for standardization of industry practi ces in key areas such as safety that could only be achieved collectively.6

When the organization was incorporated in July of 1976, ICAS’s stated mission was, “To provide information to air show sponsors and pilots; to promote safety at all aviation events; and to work with government agencies to develop air show safety standards.” Today, the organization’s mission statement has evolved, but still focuses on the core principles around which the o rganization was created: 1) to maintain safety; 2) to serve as an information resource on air show issues for those within and outside the industry; 3) to provide for the training and continuing education needs of ICAS
members and air sh ow professionals ge nerally; and 4) to promote the air show industry to the media, Corporate North America, and the general public. ICAS’s intention is to bring the same elements of safety, informational resources, training, and positive promotion to stadium over

- flight opera tions.
In Reno, Nevada, in 1964, the concept of a club for warbird (former military aircraft) owners, whose members could discuss mutual problems in keeping their airplanes airborne, was conceived. Others, on the west coast, formed the Warbirds of America, Inc., which was incorporated on March 25, 1966. The original intent was an organization for owners and operators of World War II combat aircraft only.

In 1967 , the Warbirds became a division of the Experimental Aircraft Association.
It was also in 1967 t hat the Warbirds began to include the T

- 6/SNJ/Harvard aircraft, increasing organizational membership dramatically. As the years progressed, warbird enthusiasts became members, and additional ex

- military aircraft types entered the picture as they were surpl used by the armed forces, and as warbirds were recovered from all over the world, and made flyable again. Additional training aircraft were7

eventually welcomed into Warbirds, and within the past decade, a major influx of jet aircraft has swelled the ranks. The Warbirds’ motto is, “Keep ‘Em Flying ,” with its stated mission, “to promote and encourage the preservation and safe operation of former military aircraft”.

In additi on to honoring military history and educating generation after generation of enthusias ts about warbird aircraft, pursuant to its IRS 501(c)(3) mission, Warbirds is also committed to educating warbird pilots, through its individual programs, and in many instances with programs conducted in cooperation with FAA and ICAS. For example,
Warbirds has worked with FAA to organize a cadre of Specialty Aircraft Designated Pilot Examiners (SAE) to administer check rides in aircraft including historic warbird single

engine fighters to jet

- warbird aircraft.
With the retirement of many veteran FAA Inspec tors and FAA Designated Examiners, Warbirds wanted to ensure that pilots and flight engineers needing type ratings in rare, his toric aircraft and warbirds would be able to continue to be examined for proficiency in these aircraft. Work ing in conjunction wi th the FAA and the EAA Government and Industry Relations Department, Warbirds established the National Designated Pilot Examiner (NDPER), and the National Designated Flight Engineer Examiner Registry (NDFEER) program. Under this program, select FAA Designa ted Pilot Examiners and Flight Engineer Examiners, all with a wide range of experience in these vintage aircraft, were authorized by the FAA to provide check rides on a national basis in large, multi

- engine aircraft. As a "National Resource ," these highly experienced8

F AA Designated Examiners have their activities coordinated by a single FAA Manager. The administrative support functions of these examiners are managed by EAA.
In the early 1990s, at the request of the FAA, ICAS developed its Aerobatic Compete ncy Evaluator (“ACE”) program to provide check rides for members' Statement of Aerobatic Competency. Shortly thereafter, Warbirds developed a similar program tailored to the specific needs of warbird pilots who fly aerobatics at public air shows. Although the pilots and aerobatic maneuvers evaluated by ICAS and Warbirds on behalf of the FAA would never be conducted as part of a stadium fly

- over, the responsibility vested by the FAA in both ICAS and Warbirds is indicative of the Petitioners’ l ong standing in terest in safety and coordination with the FAA.

Similar to the interests of co

- petitioner ICAS, it is Warbirds’ intention to bring the same elements of safety, informational resources, training, and positive promotion, as well as cooperation with the FAA, to stadium and sporting event over - flight operations. Accordingly, ICAS and the Warbirds seek the grant of exemption from FAR 91.319(c).

PUBLIC INTEREST
Certainly, one of the great traditions of our country is the over flight of military aircraft prior to professional and college sporting events, racing events, baseball games
and other stadium

- based events. These over flights generally occur following the playing of the national anthem, or on occasion, at a break in the event in conjunction with a performa nce of “America t he Beautiful .” Unfortunately, as a result of government budget sequestration, military over flights of stadium

- based events have either been9

completely curtailed or severely limited. As a result of sequestration, ICAS and
Warbirds members have been asked to conduct stadium over flights in warbird aircraft or in formations of RV aircraft.
Some may question the viability of stadium over flights by aircraft other than F

16s, F

- 18s, other cur rent military aircraft, or U.S.

- made warbirds. This is an argument without merit. For the American public in attendance at a stadium event, the complete experience of the aircraft over flight, with “smoke on ,” the sound of the aircraft, and the precision of the formation flight, are the attraction. Event at tendees are impacted by the complete experience. They are not there to witness an over flight by a particular aircraft type. They appreciate the various elements mentioned above that together create the patriotic experience. Further evidence of enhancement of the public interest by stadium over flights is underscored by the letter signed by Congressional leaders in support of this Petition. (Exhibit “B”).
The Petitioners have stated in this Petition that their members’ over flights that
have occurred to da te have been conducted without incident. Further, those operations were conducted pursuant to the review of local FSDOs. The Petitioners contend that their members can safely carry this national tradition of stadium over flights forward, as they have done so far, and as a grant of this Petition would permit, based upon the level of safety set forth in the following section. Simply considering the demand for stadium over flights from the NFL, universities, NASCAR, MLB and others, it is clearly in the public interest that FAA grants this Petition for Exemption.10 SAFETY ISSUES

Based upon the safety record of the stadium over

- flight operations that have occurred during the last two years, there is no question that Petitioners’ members can
continue to conduct th ese flights in a safe manner. Considering the fact that pilots flying aircraft certified in the standard category, without any FAA approved formation flying training whatsoever could conduct stadium over flights, illustrates that the formal
formation train ing that Petitioners’ members utilize in stadium over flights provides a superior level of safety over the aforementioned operation. Further, the training that would be required pursuant to this grant of exemption, specific to over flights of
stadiums and sporting events , as well as the mandated aircraft maintenance, provide a level of safety that is appropriate for the granting of this Petition.
Any of Petitioners’ members desiring to participate in stadium over flights will be required to complete two sp ecific training activities. First, formation pilots must have participated in, and il lustrate successful completion of, an FAA

- approved formation

- flight program. Second, participants must complete the ICAS Stadium Over

- Flight Training Program. (Exhibit “A” ). That training includes, but is not limited to, topics such as pre

flight requirements, pilot and aircraft requirements, minimum safe altitudes, flight contingencies, risk mitigation, divert contingencies, and example s of stadium over flight models. A pr e - operational checklist, covering these topics, and coordination with Federal and other governmental agencies is part of the ICAS Stadium Over

- Flight Training Program. (Exhibit “C”).11

To be eligible for an exemption under th e conditions specified in this P etition, individual pilots and teams of pilots are obligated to pre

- coordinate a number of specific issues related to airports, routes, holding restrictions, aircraft performance data, aircraft maintenance history, and pilot training and credentials to pre vent potential conflicts during the flyover flight and mitigate potential risk. Further, all aircraft receiving relief
under this Petition must submit a plan to the local FSDO that specifies safe ingress and egress routes, minimizes time over densely popul ated areas, and provides for emergency routes and procedures to allow aircraft to egress to sparsely populated areas at every point in the proposed flight profile. The flight must also be conducted with ceilings of 2,000

- feet or more, visibility of five st atute miles or more, and during daylight hours only. And, any aircraft that experiences an abnormal condition or indication along the planned route of flight must immediately notify ATC and instead proceed along a route that avoids densely populated areas until landing.
The Petitioners recognize the importance of the maintenance of aircraft that will be utilized in stadium over flights. All of the experimental exhibition warbirds that will be flown in these operations will receive, as required by the FARs, an annual condition inspection conducted by an FAA certified airframe and power plant mechanic (“A&P). Further, each aircraft will be returned to service with appropriate inspections and logbook entries by an A &P . Those same requirements will be applied t o experimental aircraft that will be flown in stadium or sporting event over flights.

The objective data illustrate that stadium and sporting event over flights can be conducted in a safe manner. The Petitioners are not aware of any incidents or accident s12

that have occurred in stadium over

- flight operations to date. Granted, the frequency of stadium over flights has only become more significant over the last two years. However, experimental aircraft operations at air shows have been common for more than 5 0 years. ICAS estimates that since 1965 there have been between 200,000 and 225,000 individual performances by experimental aircraft at public air shows in the United States. During that time, there has not been a single spectator fatality involving perfor ming aircraft. Clearly, stadium over flights present a significantly lower risk than an air show performances since they do not require abrupt maneuvers or aerobatics, and present an insignificant G load on the performing aircraft. 1 Clearly, the training , safety and maintenance elements that are part and parcel to this Petition merit granting of the Exemption.

DESCRIPTION OF THE RELIEF SOUGHT
There are a great number of reasons that support the Petitioners’ request for the relief they seek. The Petition ers have illustrated that, considering the effect upon military stadium over flights by recent government budget sequestration, as well as the desire of college and professional sports organizations, competitive auto racing, and other
stadium

- based events for stadium and sporting event over flights, there is a need to organize and conduct these activities in a safe manner, ensuring adherence to the

1 ICAS statistics illustrate that there have been approximately 300 air shows in the United States ever y year for the past 50 years, totaling 15,000 air shows. Considering that there are generally three performance days per air show, there have been 45,000 performance days since 1965. With the norm of approximately ten performers per show per day, a safe estimate is that two thirds of the aircraft that are flown are experimental. Esti mating on the conservative side, that half of the aircraft that are flown are experimental, yields a total of 225,000 operations by experimental aircraft at U.S. air shows during the last 50 years.13

FARs. The Petitioners have vast experience in working with the FAA on matters of aviation safety, as well as a erobatic and formation flying operations. The public interest in continuing stadium over flights is well illustrated by various organizations’ requests for stadium over flights conducted by Petitioners’ members. This is a tradition that should
continue in spite of the military’s inability to conduct these activities. It is also an activity that can continue, based upon the Petitioners’ members’ abilities to carry the tradition forward in a safe manner. The Petitioners have shown the fundamental safety of th eir members’ over

- flight activities based upon the requirement for FAA approved formation training, specific training for stadium and sporting event over

- flights , aircraft maintenance requirements, and a n o ver - flight check list that covers all relevant asp ects to conduct the operation safely and pursuant to the FARs. Considering these factors, the Petitioners request for an exemption from FAR section 91.319(c) should be granted.

International Council of Air Shows EAA Warbirds of America

By: B y:

John Cu dahy, President Bill Fischer, Executive Director

Dated: March 2 6 , 2015

# Exhibit A

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide Stadium Flyover in Experimental Aircraft

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide 

# Objective

• Conduct event flyovers in experimental or experimental exhibition aircraft that provide level of safety equivalent to or greater than event flyovers conducted in standard category aircraft

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide 

# Preflight Requirements

• Site suitability survey r Airport location(s)
s Point of origination


# s Divert locations
s Provide distance, heading, frequencies and runway length for all possible divert airports r Flyovers may be conducted over congested airways or densely populated areas if sufficient altitude/airspeed are maintained 

# to effect a safe emergency landing in the event of power failure, without hazard to persons or property on the ground. r Ensure that there are suitable divert and/or forced landing areas during every part of take

- off, ingress, flyover, egress 

# and landing

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide 

# Preflight Requirements

• TSA approval (if stadium TFR in affect) r Requires letter from event sponsor
s On company letterhead
s Letter must state pilots have been invited to conduct flyover by the event coordinator(s)
s Letter must state date and time of flyover


# s Letter must be attached electronically to waiver request r Minimum 30 days required for approval r Required crew members only submitted for flyover approval; Passengers not allowed 

# r TSA waiver information, application and instructions can be found at http://www.tsa.gov/stakeholders/airspace

- waivers

- 0

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide 

# Preflight Requirements

• FSDO coordination r FSDO inspector may, but is not required to, review pilot documents, aircraft documents and/or aircraft airworthiness



# • ATC coordination r Hold plan, ingress, egress, altitudes and speed r Clear frequency to use



# • Event location coordination r Ground personnel access 

# r Expected schedule, timeline

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide 

# Pilot Requirements

• Commercial pilot certificate

• Appropriate type rating (if required)

• Class II medical

• Valid formation card r FAST, FFI or ICAS SAC 

# r Lead pilot must possess lead qualification



# • Proficient for the planned flight

• Within preceding 90 days, all participating pilots musts have completed at least three takeoffs and landings, to a full stop, 

# in the specific type of aircraft they will be operating under the exemption.

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide 

# Aircraft Requirements

• Valid experimental airworthiness certificate (with associated 

# operating limitations) r Operating limitations of each aircraft must be reviewed to ensure the planned flight will not violate a limitation beyond those limitations that are addressed with the exemption



# • Valid registration certificate

• Current program letter (that includes flyover event)

• Current annual condition inspection (must be conducted by A&P or IA)



# • Current pitot/static inspection (if any portion of the flight will be operated under IFR rules)

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide 

# Flight Considerations

• Weather r Must maintain minimum safe altitudes and separation with 

# clouds for VFR flight as per FAR 91.119 r Participating aircraft must observe at least a 2,000

- foot ceiling and five (5) statue miles of flight visibility at all points on the route. If, at any time, the weather deteriorates below these 

# minimums, flight over densely populated areas is prohibited until weather conditions allow. r Winds aloft r Obstacles along route may dictate higher weather minimums

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide 

# Flight Considerations

• Flight composition r All pilots current and capable of safe execution r Formation r Similar or dissimilar aircraft r Maximum aircraft in formation: six (6)



# • Day VFR operations only

• Any aircraft that experiences an abnormal condition or indication along the planned route of flight must immediately notify ATC and instead proceed along a route that avoids 

# densely populated areas until landing.

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide 

# Flight Considerations

• Minimum Safe Altitudes r Remain in compliance with 14 CFR 91.119 throughout ingress, flyover and egress: t Speed and altitude that will allow, in the event of a power failure, an emergency landing (including a 90

- 

# degree change of heading) without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface. t Glide performance for each participating aircraft must be provided as part of risk mitigation plan. PIC must provide this data to FAA on request. t An altitude not less than 1,000 feet AGL over congested areas.

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide 

# Flight Considerations

• Ingress route r Timing updates/communications flow with ground personnel r Speed and altitude r Smoke on/off points (if applicable) 

# r Formation must be set one (1) minute from stadium

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide 

# Flight Considerations

• Hold area r Speed and altitude r Proximity to stadium r Proximity to suitable landing areas/airports 

# r Obstacles r Maneuvering pattern in hold r ATC communications/frequencies r Ground personnel communications/line of sight to stadium

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide 

# Flight Considerations

• Flyover r Scheduled time on target r Speed and altitude r Obstacles in vicinity of stadium 

# r No maneuvering during flyover r No aerobatics during flyover

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide 

# Flight Considerations

• Egress/return to base r Speed and altitude r Planned “off

- target” heading/altitude r ATC coordination and expected routing

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide 

# Contingencies

• Aircraft fall

- out r Alternate lead if lead aborts r Formation changes



# • Loss of communications (NORDO) r Continue or abort



# • Aircraft emergencies r Nearest divert location r Chase procedures (if necessary) r ATC coordination

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide 

# Contingencies

• Mid

- air collision avoidance during flight r Lead techniques r Atmospheric conditions r Proficiency 

# r Adjust to conditions r Fly to least common denominator



# • Bird strike r Helmets on, visors down r Get separation, zoom climb r Chase coordinate with ATC r Divert (if necessary)

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide 

# Contingencies

• Loss of thrust r Get separation, zoom climb to best glide speed r Turn to divert location r Glide distances (nm) from 1,000 feet AGL at flyover speeds (straight ahead, 90 degree turn, 180 degree turn)



# • Risk mitigation/divert planning r Every proposed flyover conducted under this exemption must include a written risk mitigation/divert plan that demonstrates how all participating aircraft may effect a safe emergency landing in the event of a power failure at any point in the proposed flyover (see following three slides for samples) 

# r If safe emergency landing cannot be made at every point in proposed route of flight, site is not appropriate for flyover

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide

Sample #1, Risk Mitigation/Divert Planning Levi Stadium, San Francisco, CA

Levi Stadium Moffett Airfield

San Jose Int’l Airport Entire flight never more than 

## 3.3 nautical miles from divert airfields and/or non

- densely populated emergency divert area, well within aircraft’s glide distance at planned altitude and speed of flyover Hold area

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide

Everbank Field Craig Airport

NAS Jax



## Sample #2,

Risk Mitigation/Divert Planning Everbank Field, Jacksonville, FL Hold Area Entire flight never more than 8.0

nautical miles from divert airfields 

## and/or waterways suitable for forced landing, within aircraft’s glide distance at planned altitude and speed of flyover Route of Flyover Flight 2.7 nm

# Training Syllabus and Preflight Briefing Guide

Sun Life Stadium 

## North Perry Airport

Opa Locka Executive Airport 6.5 nm to ocean 2.7 nm 

## Hold Area

Route of Flyover Flight



## Sample #3, Risk Mitigation/Divert Planning Sun Life Stadium, Miami, FL Entire flight never more than 6.5 nautical miles from divert airfields and/or waterways 

## suitable for forced landing, well within aircraft’s glide distance at planned altitude and speed of flyover

# Exhibit C

# Preflight Coordination Checklist Stadium Flyover in Experimental Aircraft

# Preflight Coordination Checklist 

# Preflight Coordination Checklist  Site

- suitability survey  Event organizer (football/baseball team owner, car race organizer) letter of invitation/authorization  TSA approval ( www.tsa.gov/stakeholders/airspace

- waivers

- 0 )  FAA FSDO coordination  FAA ATC coordination 

#  Individual pilot requirement/credential coordination  Aircraft requirements  Flight Considerations  Written risk mitigation/in

- flight emergency divert plan