800 Independence Ave., S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

AFS-09-393-P 

Dec 15 2010 

Mr. Jean-Pierre Harrison 

11835 Skyline Boulevard 

Los Gatos, CA 95033 

Dear Mr. Harrison: 

In your August 29, 2009 letter, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) to amend § 91.119(d) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) by 

changing “helicopter” to “rotorcraft.” This change would then include gyroplanes. 

You have made some good points. However, when the FAA responds to petitions for 

rulemaking, it must follow the requirements of 14 CFR part 11, particularly those 

guidelines for processing petitions for rulemaking found in § 11.73. As stated in that 

section, the FAA uses the following criteria when making a decision as to whether or not 

to amend current regulations based on a petition for rulemaking: 

1) the immediacy of the safety or security concerns the petition raises; 

2) the priority of other FAA issues; and 

3) the resources we have available to address these issues. 

Most gyroplanes flown in the United States are registered as “Experimental-Amateur 

Built” or as Light Sport Aircraft (LSA). Only a few are FAA certificated. Since 

§ 91.319 does not allow experimental aircraft to be operated over a densely populated 

area or in a congested airway, they would not be allowed to operate over a congested area 

at any altitude or exercise the privileges of § 91.119(b) or use helicopter routes which are 

normally considered to be heavily congested airways. 

Helicopters operate at lower altitudes in congested areas to perform aerial work such as: 

news gathering, security surveillance, construction, and transportation from one location 

to another within a congested area without requiring a waiver for each operation. This is 

not applicable to most gyroplanes since experimental aircraft may not be used for 

commercial purposes, and gyroplanes are not able to hover, which is a necessary part of a 

large portion of aerial work for helicopters. 
2

Normally, helicopter pilots are required to have more training and a higher certification 

level than gyroplane pilots since many gyroplanes are operated by LSA pilots while 

helicopter pilots must have at least a private pilot certificate. Accepting the proposed 

change in this rule would have an adverse affect on safety by allowing less skillful pilots 

to fly lower and closer to congested areas. 

The FAA continues to commit resources to develop helicopter routes over and through 

congested areas to channel helicopter traffic along flight paths to avoid the flow of 

airplanes. Safety of these routes could be compromised if the FAA allowed much less 

capable gyroplanes to fly on these routes. 

The FAA finds that the height-velocity (H/V) curve you referenced only applies to take 

offs and level flight with power. It is not appropriate to consider the H/V curve in an 

autorotative landing as a result of a powerplant failure which is the focus of § 91.119. 

Helicopters have the ability to vary their glide path during an autorotative landing to a 

greater degree using collective pitch applications, which can be used to complete an 

autorotative landing with very little or no ground run. Few gyroplanes are equipped with 

controllable collective pitch to use for autorotative landing where these collective pitch 

applications may be used. Since gyroplanes vary in design capabilities, it would not be 

prudent for the FAA to allow all gyroplanes to exercise the same privileges for which 

very few gyroplanes qualify. 

For the reasons above, we are unable to consider and thereby deny your petition for 

rulemaking in accordance with 14 CFR § 11.73. 

Accordingly, Docket No. FAA-2009-0838 is being closed. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Raymond Towles 

Acting Director, Flight Standards 

 Service