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 petitione d the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to amend § 91.119(d) of Title 14, C ode of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) by changing “helicopter” to “rotor craft.” 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 rule making found in § 11.73. As stated in that section, the FAA uses the following criteria wh en 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 secu rity concerns the petition raises;

2) the priority of ot her 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 ove r 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 helic opter routes which are normally considered to be heavily congested airways.

Helicopters operate at lower alt itudes in congested areas to perform aerial work such as: news gathering, security surv eillance, constructio n, and transportation from one location to another within a congested area without re quiring a waiver for each operation. This is not applicable to most gyroplanes since e xperimental aircraft may not be used for commercial purposes, and gyroplanes are not able to hover, whic h is a necessary part of a large portion of aerial work for helicopters.2

Normally, helicopter pilots are required to ha ve more training and a higher certification level than gyroplane pilots since many gyr oplanes are operated by LSA pilots while helicopter pilots must have at least a priv ate 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 traffi c 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 refere nced 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 power plant failure which is the focus of § 91.119. Helicopters have the ability to vary their g lide 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 capabiliti es, 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 c onsider 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