10338 Miller Road 

Dallas, TX 75238 

Phone: 214-343-3811 ■ Fax: 214-343-3812 

www.esi-website.com 

This report and its contents are the Work Product of Engineering Systems Inc. (ESI). This report should only be 

duplicated or distributed in its entirety. This report may contain confidential or court protected information; please 

contact an authorized entity prior to distributing. Conclusions reached and opinions offered in this report are based upon 

the data and information available to ESI at the time of this report, and may be subject to revision as additional 

information or data becomes available after the date of publication. 

Copyright 2012 Engineering Systems Inc. 

Investigative Report

Bell Model 429: Analysis of  

Compliance with FAR Part 29

ESI File 39465C

Report Prepared for:

Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Ltd.

12,800 rue de l’Avenir

Mirabel, Québec

Canada   J7J 1R4

Submitted by:

_______________________________________                          September 27, 2012

Mark Allen Lewis, M.E., P.E.                

Senior Consultant  

Texas P.E. License Expires:  September 30, 2013

Technical Review by:

_______________________________________                September 27, 2012

Robert C. Winn, Ph.D., P.E.   

Chairman of the Board, Principal & Director‐ Aviation

Colorado P.E. License Expires:  October 31, 2013
Bell 429 Compliance Analysis Page 2 of 6

ESI Project No. 39465C September 27, 2012

Introduction  

Engineering Systems Inc. (ESI) was retained on behalf of Bell Helicopter Textron Canada Ltd. to 

provide technical support relating to a Petition for Exemption to increase the gross weight of the Bell 

429 Helicopter. 

Support Provided  

The technical support provided by ESI consisted of providing an independent determination of those 

requirements of Part 29 applicable to the Bell 429 and, of those applicable requirements, which were 

met by the existing rotorcraft. 

Resources

The analysis performed was based on FAR Part 29 with Amendment 29-0 through 29-51, excluding 

29-50 - CV/FDR. Compliance of the existing rotorcraft with each applicable Part 29 requirement was 

determined by a combination of consultation with BHT engineers and review of BHT-provided 

documents pertinent to certification of the 429. None of the conclusions expressed in this report 

regarding compliance of the existing rotorcraft with the requirements of Part 29 were based on 

examination of exemplar rotorcraft. 

Process

Each requirement of Part 29 was reviewed and determined to be either applicable or inapplicable to the 

Bell 429. The applicable subset of Part 29 requirements was then compared to the requirements of FAR 

Part 27, the Normal Category Rotorcraft part of the FARs to which the Bell 429 was certified by the 

Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in 2009. Those applicable requirements of Part 29 that were 

either textually identical to the corresponding requirements of Part 27 or were identical in the required 

characteristics or performance communicated by the corresponding requirements of Part 27 were 

deemed complied with by the existing rotorcraft by virtue of its current certification by the FAA to 

Part 27. 

For the applicable requirements of Part 29 that were not determined to be equivalent to corresponding 

requirements in Part 27 by textual inspection, compliance or non-compliance of the existing rotorcraft 

with those requirements was determined by review of documents provided by BHT, by consultation 

with BHT engineers, or both. 

The materials provided by BHT and consultations with BHT engineers yielded one of three different 

conclusions regarding compliance of the existing rotorcraft with each and every applicable requirement 

of Part 29; compliant, partially-compliant, or non-compliant. Absent definitive documentation or 

confirmation by BHT that the existing Model 429 met a particular Part 29 requirement, the rotorcraft 

was assumed to be non-compliant with the requirement in question. Only those requirements with which 

the rotorcraft was determined to be compliant were considered in calculation of the percentage of the 

Part 29 requirements met by the existing rotorcraft. 
Bell 429 Compliance Analysis Page 3 of 6

ESI Project No. 39465C September 27, 2012

Conclusions

The results of the assessment procedure described above indicated that the Bell 429, as it currently 

exists, is compliant with 97.9% of the requirements of FAR Part 29 (Amendment 29-0 through 29-51, 

excluding 29-50 - CV/FDR). That percentage is based on compliance with 1734 of the 1772 Part 29 

requirements applicable to the subject rotorcraft. Those requirements of Part 29 with which the Bell 429 

as it currently exists was determined to be non-compliant are listed in table form in Figures 1a-1c. 

Similarly, those requirements of Part 29 for which the rotorcraft was found to be partially-compliant are 

listed in table form in Figure 2. Where the title of the section applicable to the requirement addressed 

lacked sufficient detail to convey the sense of the requirement, the total text of the section was included 

in the table entry. Taken together, the requirements identified in Figures 1a-1c and 2 constitute a 

complete list of those requirements of Part 29 with which the foregoing analysis found the existing 

rotorcraft to be less than fully compliant. 

Figure 1a:   Non‐Compliant

§ 29.341 Gust loads. Each rotorcraft must be designed to withstand, at each critical airspeed including 

hovering, the loads resulting from vertical and horizontal gusts of 30 feet per second. 

§ 29.631 Bird strike. The rotorcraft must be designed to ensure capability of continued safe flight and 

landing (for Category A) or safe landing (for Category B) after impact with a 2.2-lb (1.0 kg) bird when the 

velocity of the rotorcraft (relative to the bird along the flight path of the rotorcraft) is equal to VNEor 

VH(whichever is the lesser) at altitudes up to 8,000 feet. Compliance must be shown by tests or by analysis 

based on tests carried out on sufficiently representative structures of similar design. 

§ 29.671 General. (c) A means must be provided to allow full control movement of all primary flight 

controls prior to flight, or a means must be provided that will allow the pilot to determine that full control 

authority is available prior to flight. 

§ 29.783 Doors. (e) There must be means for direct visual inspection of the locking mechanism by 

crewmembers to determine whether the external doors (including passenger, crew, service, and cargo doors) 

are fully locked. There must be visual means to signal to appropriate crewmembers when normally used 

external doors are closed and fully locked. 

§ 29.783 Doors. (h) Nonjettisonable doors used as ditching emergency exits must have means to enable 

them to be secured in the open position and remain secure for emergency egress in sea state conditions 

prescribed for ditching. 

§ 29.811 Emergency exit marking. (d) Each passenger emergency exit marking and each locating sign 

must have white letters 1 inch high on a red background 2 inches high, be self or electrically illuminated, and 

have a minimum luminescence (brightness) of at least 160 microlamberts. The colors may be reversed if this 

will increase the emergency illumination of the passenger compartment. 

§ 29.811 Emergency exit marking. (f) Each emergency exit, and its means of opening, must be marked 

on the outside of the rotorcraft. In addition, the following apply: 

§ 29.811 Emergency exit marking. (1) There must be a 2-inch colored band outlining each passenger 

emergency exit, except small rotorcraft with a maximum weight of 12,500 pounds or less may have a 2-inch 

colored band outlining each exit release lever or device of passenger emergency exits which are normally 

used doors. 
Bell 429 Compliance Analysis Page 4 of 6

ESI Project No. 39465C September 27, 2012

Figure 1b:   Non‐Compliant (continued)

§ 29.812 Emergency lighting. For transport Category A rotorcraft, the following apply: (b) Exterior 

emergency lighting must be provided at each emergency exit. The illumination may not be less than 0.05 footcandle (measured normal to the direction of incident light) for minimum width on the ground surface, with 

landing gear extended, equal to the width of the emergency exit where an evacuee is likely to make first 

contact with the ground outside the cabin. The exterior emergency lighting may be provided by either interior 

or exterior sources with light intensity measurements made with the emergency exits open. 

§ 29.812 Emergency lighting. For transport Category A rotorcraft, the following apply: (c) Each light 

required by paragraph (a) or (b) of this section must be operable manually from the cockpit station and from a 

point in the passenger compartment that is readily accessible. The cockpit control device must have an “on,” 

“off,” and “armed” position so that when turned on at the cockpit or passenger compartment station or when 

armed at the cockpit station, the emergency lights will either illuminate or remain illuminated upon interruption 

of the rotorcraft's normal electric power. 

§ 29.812 Emergency lighting. (d) Any means required to assist the occupants in descending to the ground 

must be illuminated so that the erected assist means is visible from the rotorcraft. 

§ 29.812 Emergency lighting. For transport Category A rotorcraft, the following apply: (d) (1) The assist 

means must be provided with an illumination of not less than 0.03 foot-candle (measured normal to the 

direction of the incident light) at the ground end of the erected assist means where an evacuee using the 

established escape route would normally make first contact with the ground, with the rotorcraft in each of the 

attitudes corresponding to the collapse of one or more legs of the landing gear. 

§ 29.812 Emergency lighting. For transport Category A rotorcraft, the following apply: (d) (2) If the 

emergency lighting subsystem illuminating the assist means is independent of the rotorcraft's main emergency 

lighting system, it— (i) Must automatically be activated when the assist means is erected; 

§ 29.812 Emergency lighting. For transport Category A rotorcraft, the following apply: (d) (2) If the 

emergency lighting subsystem illuminating the assist means is independent of the rotorcraft's main emergency 

lighting system, it— (ii) Must provide the illumination required by paragraph (d)(1); and 

§ 29.812 Emergency lighting. For transport Category A rotorcraft, the following apply: (d) (2) If the 

emergency lighting subsystem illuminating the assist means is independent of the rotorcraft's main emergency 

lighting system, it— (iii) May not be adversely affected by stowage. 

§ 29.812 Emergency lighting. For transport Category A rotorcraft, the following apply: (e) The energy 

supply to each emergency lighting unit must provide the required level of illumination for at least 10 minutes at 

the critical ambient conditions after an emergency landing. 

§ 29.812 Emergency lighting. For transport Category A rotorcraft, the following apply: (f) If storage 

batteries are used as the energy supply for the emergency lighting system, they may be recharged from the 

rotorcraft's main electrical power system provided the charging circuit is designed to preclude inadvertent 

battery discharge into charging circuit faults. 

§ 29.853 Compartment interiors. For each compartment to be used by the crew or passengers— (b) In 

addition to meeting the requirements of paragraph (a)(2), seat cushions, except those on flight crewmember 

seats, must meet the test requirements of Part II of appendix F of Part 25 of this chapter, or equivalent. 

§ 29.855 Cargo and baggage compartments. (d) Each cargo and baggage compartment that is not sealed 

so as to contain cargo compartment fires completely without endangering the safety of a rotorcraft or its 

occupants must be designed, or must have a device, to ensure detection of fires or smoke by a crewmember 

while at his station and to prevent the accumulation of harmful quantities of smoke, flame, extinguishing 

agents, and other noxious gases in any crew or passenger compartment. This must be shown in flight. 

§ 29.923 Rotor drive system and control mechanism tests. (a) Endurance tests, general. Each rotor drive 

system and rotor control mechanism must be tested, as prescribed in paragraphs (b) through (n) and (p) of 

this section, for at least 200 hours plus the time required to meet the requirements of paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(3), 

and (k) of this section. These tests must be conducted as follows: 
Bell 429 Compliance Analysis Page 5 of 6

ESI Project No. 39465C September 27, 2012

Figure 1c:   Non‐Compliant (continued)

§ 29.923 Rotor drive system and control mechanism tests. (a) Endurance tests, general. Each rotor drive 

system and rotor control mechanism must be tested, as prescribed in paragraphs (b) through (n) and (p) of 

this section, for at least 200 hours plus the time required to meet the requirements of paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(3), 

and (k) of this section. These tests must be conducted as follows: (1) Ten-hour test cycles must be used, 

except that the test cycle must be extended to include the OEI test of paragraphs (b)(2) and (k), of this section 

if OEI ratings are requested. 

§ 29.923 Rotor drive system and control mechanism tests. (a) Endurance tests, general. Each rotor drive 

system and rotor control mechanism must be tested, as prescribed in paragraphs (b) through (n) and (p) of 

this section, for at least 200 hours plus the time required to meet the requirements of paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(3), 

and (k) of this section. These tests must be conducted as follows: (2) The tests must be conducted on the 

rotorcraft. 

§ 29.923 Rotor drive system and control mechanism tests. (a) Endurance tests, general. Each rotor drive 

system and rotor control mechanism must be tested, as prescribed in paragraphs (b) through (n) and (p) of 

this section, for at least 200 hours plus the time required to meet the requirements of paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(3), 

and (k) of this section. These tests must be conducted as follows: (3) The test torque and rotational speed 

must be— (i) Determined by the powerplant limitations 

§ 29.923 Rotor drive system and control mechanism tests. (a) Endurance tests, general. Each rotor drive 

system and rotor control mechanism must be tested, as prescribed in paragraphs (b) through (n) and (p) of 

this section, for at least 200 hours plus the time required to meet the requirements of paragraphs (b)(2), (b)(3), 

and (k) of this section. These tests must be conducted as follows: (3) The test torque and rotational speed 

must be— (ii) Absorbed by the rotors to be approved for the rotorcraft. 

Safety Equipment § 29.1411 General. (e) Long-range signaling device. The stowage provisions for the 

long-range signaling device required by §29.1415 must be near an exit available during an unplanned ditching.

Appendix B to Part 29—Airworthiness Criteria for Helicopter Instrument Flight VIII. Equipment, systems, and 

installation. The basic equipment and installation must comply with Subpart F of Part 29 through Amendment 

29–14, with the following exceptions and additions: (a) Flight and navigation instruments. (2) A standby 

attitude indicator which meets the requirements of §§29.1303(g)(1) through (7), instead of a rate-of-turn 

indicator required by §29.1303(g). If standby batteries are provided, they may be charged from the aircraft 

electrical system if adequate isolation is incorporated. The system must be designed so that the standby 

batteries may not be used for engine starting. 
Bell 429 Compliance Analysis Page 6 of 6

ESI Project No. 39465C September 27, 2012

Figure 2:   Partially Compliant

§ 29.571 Fatigue evaluation of structure. (b) Fatigue tolerance evaluation (including tolerance to flaws). 

The structure must be shown by analysis supported by test evidence and, if available, service experience to 

be of fatigue tolerant design. The fatigue tolerance evaluation must include the requirements of either 

paragraph (b)(1), (2), or (3) of this section, or a combination thereof, and also must include a determination of 

the probable locations and modes of damage caused by fatigue, considering environmental effects, 

intrinsic/discrete flaws, or accidental damage. Compliance with the flaw tolerance requirements of paragraph 

(b)(1) or (2) of this section is required unless the applicant establishes that these fatigue flaw tolerant methods 

for a particular structure cannot be achieved within the limitations of geometry, inspectability, or good design 

practice. Under these circumstances, the safe-life evaluation of paragraph (b)(3) of this section is required. 

§ 29.571 Fatigue evaluation of structure. (b) Fatigue tolerance evaluation (including tolerance to flaws). 

(1) Flaw tolerant safe-life evaluation. It must be shown that the structure, with flaws present, is able to 

withstand repeated loads of variable magnitude without detectable flaw growth for the following time 

intervals— (i) Life of the rotorcraft. 

§ 29.571 Fatigue evaluation of structure. (b) Fatigue tolerance evaluation (including tolerance to flaws). 

(2) Fail-safe (residual strength after flaw growth) evaluation. 

§ 29.571 Fatigue evaluation of structure. (b) Fatigue tolerance evaluation (including tolerance to flaws). 

(2) Fail-safe (residual strength after flaw growth) evaluation. (i) The residual strength evaluation must show 

that the remaining structure after flaw growth is able to withstand design limit loads without failure within its 

operational life. 

§ 29.571 Fatigue evaluation of structure. (b) Fatigue tolerance evaluation (including tolerance to flaws). 

(2) Fail-safe (residual strength after flaw growth) evaluation. (ii) Inspection intervals and methods must be 

established as necessary to ensure that failures are detected prior to residual strength conditions being 

reached. 

§ 29.571 Fatigue evaluation of structure. (b) Fatigue tolerance evaluation (including tolerance to flaws). 

(2) Fail-safe (residual strength after flaw growth) evaluation. (iii) If significant changes in structural stiffness or 

geometry, or both, follow from a structural failure or partial failure, the effect on flaw tolerance must be further 

investigated. 

§ 29.853 Compartment interiors. For each compartment to be used by the crew or passengers— (a) The 

materials (including finishes or decorative surfaces applied to the materials) must meet the following test 

criteria as applicable: (2) Floor covering, textiles (including draperies and upholstery), seat cushions, padding, 

decorative and non-decorative coated fabrics, leather, trays and galley furnishings, electrical conduit, thermal 

and acoustical insulation and insulation covering, air ducting, joint and edge covering, cargo compartment 

liners, insulation blankets, cargo covers, and transparencies, molded and thermoformed parts, air ducting 

joints, and trim strips (decorative and chafing) that are constructed of materials not covered in paragraph (a)(3) 

of this section, must be self-extinguishing when tested vertically in accordance with the applicable portion of 

appendix F of Part 25 of this chapter, or other approved equivalent methods. The average burn length may not 

exceed 8 inches and the average flame time after removal of the flame source may not exceed 15 seconds. 

Drippings from the test specimen may not continue to flame for more than an average of 5 seconds after 

falling. 

§ 29.1331 Instruments using a power supply. For category A rotorcraft—(a) Each required flight instrument 

using a power supply must have— (3) A visual means integral with each instrument to indicate when the 

power adequate to sustain proper instrument performance is not being supplied. The power must be 

measured at or near the point where it enters the instrument. For electrical instruments, the power is 

considered to be adequate when the voltage is within the approved limits