Row44 Exemption Request

B767 - 3 00

820 Springer Drive Lombard, IL 60148 Page 1 U.S. Department of Transportation Docket Operations We st Building, Room W1 2 - 140 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Wa shington, D.C. 20590 - 0001 June 17 , 201 4 **Re: Petition of Row 44 for**  **Time Limited Exemption from**  **§ 25.571(e)(1) of Title 14, Code of Federal**  **Regulations (CFR)**  **. Project ODA** **- GED**  **- P066**  **, Row 44 Wireless Broadband System A ntenna**  **Provisions I**  **nstallation in Boeing 777**  **- 200**  **Series A ircraft**  In accordance with 14 CFR Part 11, Row 44 hereby petitions for an exemption from 14 CFR § 25.571(e)(1) (Amendment 25 - 132 ) as it relates to the above referenced certification project. For the reasons detailed below, Row 44 requests an immediate exemption from this rule and that it remain in effect for a period of one ye ar from the date of Supplemental T ype Certificate ( STC ) issuance. This twelve - mo nth exemption from the FAA bird - strike damage tolerance requirements is required to ensure that Row 44 has time to develop a means of full compliance with § 25.571(e)(1) that is acceptable to the FAA. The specific regulation, § 25.571(e)(1) is as follows: Section 25.571(e)(1)

– Damage tolerance (discrete source) evaluation. The airplane must be capable of successfully completing a flight during which likely structural damage occurs as a result of

– (1) Impact with a 4 - pound bird when the velocity of the airplane relative to the bird along the airplane’s flight path is equal to Vc at sea level or 0.85 Vc at 8,000 feet, whichever is more critical. This section defines required structural requirements for damage to the airframe from a bird strike. Safety and the Public Interest This petition for exemption would not adversely affect safety because of two primary factors. First, there have never been any documented bird strikes for large fuselage mounted satellite antenna radomes installed on Part 25 Trans port Category A ircraft. Second ly , in the normal operational flight envelope , the fuselage shadows the radome and a bird strike is not possible due to the positive angle of attack of the airplane. Row 44 c urrently has approximately 4 6 0 satellite antenna radomes installed on Southwest’s 737 aircraft fleet. These aircraft are accumulating over 1 million flight hours per year with no reported bird strikes to the radome. Additionally, t he following table below lists all the exemptions gran ted for § 25.571(e)(1) for calendar ye ar 2013.Row44 Exemption Request

B7 7 7 -2 00

820 Springer Drive Lombard, IL 60148 Page 2 **Exemption No. Ap**  **plicant Ai**  **rcraft type Regulatory Docket No.**  10760 Live TV Airbus A321 Series FAA- 2013 - 0373 10761 Live TV Boeing 757 - 300 Series FAA- 2013 - 0372 10762 Live TV Airbus A320 Series FAA- 2013 - 0336 10763 Live TV Boeing 737 - 100 thru - 900 Series FAA- 2013 - 0338 10814 Plane Antennas and

Security Systems Boeing 737 - 900 Series FAA- 2013 - 0433 10817 Gogo LLC Boeing 767 - 200 thru -400 Series FAA- 2013 - 0562 10845 Standard Aero Airbus A330 Series FAA- 2013 - 0563 10847 Standard Aero Boeing 757 - 200, - 300 Series FAA- 2013 - 0564 10848 Gogo LLC Boeing 767 - 200 thru -400 Series FAA- 2013 - 0567 10849 Gogo LLC Boeing 777 - 200, - 300, F Series FAA- 2013 - 0569 10850 DRB Av i ation

Consultants Boeing 777 - 200, - 300, F Series FAA- 2013 - 0660 10851 Star Aviation Airbus A320 Series FAA- 2013 - 0570 In each exemption case listed above, the applicant has presented data that indicates on satellite antenna radome installations, which are similar to the satellite radome installe d by Row 44 in both size and installation location, there has never been a documented bird strike to the radome. This includes over 10 million flight hours with satellite antenna radomes installed on all types of Part 25 Transport C ategory A ircraft

. In previous efforts to substantiate the Row 44 satellite antenna radome installation for bird strike, i t was shown analytically that for normal flight operations below 10,000 feet, the fuselage shadows the radome and a bird strike was not possible

. Per 14 CFR 91.117(a), aircraft are not to fly beyond 250 Knots at an altitude below 10,000 feet. This project expected to use this “normal flight envelope” velocity when showing com pliance to § 25.571(e)(1). It has recently been clarified by the FAA th at the cruise velocity should be used for the flight envelope when investigating the potential for bird strike. This increased the speed used in the analysis from 250 Knots to Vc (Aprox. 360 Knots ) . This clarification changes the attitude of the aircraft when investigating the radome for bird strike potential. Under the operational rule for max velocity below 10,000 feet ( § 91.117(a)), the aircraft would fly in a “nose up” attitude thus shielding the satellite antenna radome from a bird strike. Howeve r, under the language of § 25.571(e)(1), the aircraft design speed at sea level is used. This changes the attitude of the aircraft to level thus exposing the satellite antenna radome to a potential bird strike. This project’s STC mo dification is expecte d to be complete in October 2014 and the updated analysis and/or testing or design changes required to show compliance to § 25.571(e)(1) may not be in place. The public interest is served in granting this exemption for the following reasons. Th ere i s keen interest, by the flying public, in having connectivity services while flying, particularly on long domestic and international flights. These services enable business travelers to remain engaged in their trade while flying , thus enhancing efficiency and productivity. The connectivity services are also of great benefit to the leisure trave ler by providing valuable connectivity and entertainment options. Bird Strike Substantiation: Row 44 has been reviewing § 25.571(e)(1) compli ance options with the Chicago Aircraft Certification Office (ACO ) and the Transport Aircraft Directorate (TAD) for the past seven mo nths. A coordination meeting held in early November resulted in a method of showing compliance to § 25.571(e)(1) that was tentatively agreed to by

all parties present and is summarized below.Row44 Exemption Request

B7 7 7 -2 00

820 Springer Drive Lombard, IL 60148 Page 3 Row 44 is developing an analytical model to predict the effects of bird strikes on our satellite antenna radome and antenna installation methodology . The model will be developed by creating a mo deled (digital simulation) and performing an actual bird strike test on a satellite antenna ra dom e and antenna installed on a rigid instrumented test fixture. After testing, the digital mo del response will be updated to incorpo rate the results obtained from the physical test. Next, the updated mo del will be validated by performing a bird strike analysis on a second ( simulated ) satellite antenna radome and antenna installation (different from the initial testing) and comparing t his result with actual results of a second physical test of the actual structure with the satellite antenna radome and antenna mounted. Once the model is validated, the simulation data will be used in the future to show compliance to § 25.571(e)(1) on n ew FAA STC projects em ploying this particular satellite antenna radome and antenna installation methodology

. At this time the digital test simulations have been completed, providing guidance on the highest potential im pact zone vs. antenna position. T he initial physical test fixture is complete , required to validate/predict the com posite response characteristic , however during installation of the validation fixture on a physical section from a B767 - 300 aircraft , a problem was encountered on the B767 ad apter ring. This problem was identified as a tooling error on the mold for adapter ring. The fix for this tooling error has been identified and corrective action is underway. The corrected parts will not be available until late July with test and valida tion schedule com pletion until late September or early November 2014. International Operations: Per § 11.81(h), Row 44 requests that the privileges of this Exemption be extended outside of the United States. This extension of privileges is necessary for operations based within foreign countries having bilateral agreements with the United States accepting FAA 14 CFR Part 25 as their airworthiness standards for transport category aircraft. The Boeing 777 - 2 00 aircraft is intended for the global ma rketplace. The initial aircraft to be modified has China regist ration . However, they are insistent that the United States airworthiness standards along with the CAAC airworthiness standards be followed for all modifications. Commercial Impact: Row 44 will incur significant loss of revenue as a result of a delay in obtaining FAA approval of the Satellite System Installation on Boeing 777 - 2 00 series aircraft operated by China Airlines

. Good Cause Exists to Issue the Exemption without Notice and Comment: Row 44 requests that the FAA issue the exemption without publication for comment in the Federal Register. Section 11.87 lists four factors considered by the FAA in deciding whether or not to publish a summary of the petition and request comments. Row 44 ’ s response to each condition is shown below in italics. (a) Wh ether granting the petition would set a precedent. According to the FAA’s Exemption database, 12 exemptions have been granted to § 25.571(e)(1) in calendar year 2013 which allows aircraft to operate for a limited period of time pending the successful resolution of a compliance issue discovered late in the certification process.Row44 Exemption Request

B7 7 7 -2 00

820 Springer Drive Lombard, IL 60148 Page 4 (b) Wh ether the relief requested is identical to exemptions granted previously. The majority of the exemptions granted in 2013 were for the same reason as stated in requesting this exemption. The applicant, Row 44 needs additional time to analyze and/or test and/or modify the existing radome to be fully compliant with the provisions of § 25.571(e) (1). This exemption request is identical to a previous (granted) exemption request by Row44 based on FAA Project ST08257CH- T

. (c) Wh ether our (FAA) delaying action on your (Row 44) petition would affect y ou (Row 44) adversely. The importance of the SATCOM Antenna radome installation to R ow 44’s core business cannot be overstated

. Due to t

he rapidly changing technology involved in this modification, coupled with the project’ s advanced stage and the disruption to operators that have contracted for the Row 44 system, any delay would adversely affect Row 44. (d) Wh ether you (Row 44) filed your petition in a timely manner. The petition is timely filed. Row 44 and our agent have had discussions on this subject with the New York ACO and are planning additional discussions with the ACO and Transport Airplane Directorate over the next several months. In light of the above considerations, Row 44 submits that good cause exists not to delay action on this request. Summary

of Exemption Request: In accordance with 14 CFR § 11. 81(f), Row 44 offers the following summary suitable for publication in the Federal Register in the event the FAA believes that good cause to waive publication has not been established. Row 44 petitions the FAA for an exemption from the discrete source damage tolerance (bird strike) requirements of 14 CFR § 25.571(e)(1) for a period of one year based on data that a bird strike encounter on a fuselage mounted satellite antenna radome is ex tremely remote. Please feel free to contact me by phone or email if additional information is required

. Respectively,

Mr. Kreg Doerr Manager, Aircraft Installation Design and Certification Row 44 ( 732) - 710 - 6414 kdoerr@row44.com