75066 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

2.802(c). The petitioner has specified 

the regulations that it would like 

revoked. Additionally, the petitioner 

has stated its grounds for and interest in 

this action. Lastly, the petition sets forth 

the specific issues involved, provides 

views and arguments in favor of the 

petitioner’s position, and provides 

relevant data to support the request to 

rescind 10 CFR 51.71(d) and 10 CFR 

part 51 subpart A, appendix B. Because 

the petitioner has satisfied the 

acceptance criteria in 10 CFR 2.802(c), 

the NRC has accepted, and will review 

the petition for rulemaking. The NRC is 

not requesting public comment on this 

petition at this time. 

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 13th day 

of December 2012. 

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

Annette L. Vietti-Cook, 

Secretary of the Commission. 

[FR Doc. 2012–30528 Filed 12–18–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 25 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–1207; Notice No. 25– 

12–09–SC] 

Special Conditions: Airbus, A350–900 

Series Airplane; Flight Envelope 

Protection (Icing and Non-Icing 

Conditions); High Incidence Protection 

and Alpha-Floor Systems 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed special 

conditions. 

SUMMARY: This action proposes special 

conditions for Airbus A350–900 series 

airplanes. These airplanes will have 

novel or unusual design features 

associated with flight envelope 

protection in icing and non-icing 

conditions that use low speed incidence 

protection and an alpha-floor function 

that automatically advances throttles 

whenever the airplane angle of attack 

reaches a predetermined value. The 

applicable airworthiness regulations do 

not contain adequate or appropriate 

safety standards for this design feature. 

These proposed special conditions 

contain the additional safety standards 

that the Administrator considers 

necessary to establish a level of safety 

equivalent to that established by the 

existing airworthiness standards. 

DATES: Send your comments on or 

before February 4, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified 

by docket number FAA–2012–1207 

using any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov and follow 

the online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Send comments to Docket 

Operations, M–30, U.S. Department of 

Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Room W12–140, West 

Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery of Courier: Take 

comments to Docket Operations in 

Room W12–140 of the West Building 

Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 8 

a.m., and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except Federal holidays. 

• Fax: Fax comments to Docket 

Operations at 202–493–2251. 

Privacy: The FAA will post all 

comments it receives, without change, 

to http://regulations.gov, including any 

personal information the commenter 

provides. Using the search function of 

the docket Web site, anyone can find 

and read the electronic form of all 

comments received into any FAA 

docket, including the name of the 

individual sending the comment (or 

signing the comment for an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement can be 

found in the Federal Register published 

on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–19478), 

as well as at http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov. 

Docket: Background documents or 

comments received may be read at 

http://www.regulations.gov at any time. 

Follow the online instructions for 

accessing the docket or go to the Docket 

Operations in Room W12–140 of the 

West Building Ground Floor at 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except Federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joe 

Jacobsen, FAA, Airframe and Flightcrew 

Interface, ANM–111, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification 

Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, Washington 98057–3356; 

telephone (425) 227–2011; facsimile 

(425) 227–1320. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite interested people to take 

part in this rulemaking by sending 

written comments, data, or views. The 

most helpful comments reference a 

specific portion of the special 

conditions, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. 

We will consider all comments we 

receive on or before the closing date for 

comments. We will consider comments 

filed late if it is possible to do so 

without incurring expense or delay. We 

may change these special conditions 

based on the comments we receive. 

Background 

On August 25, 2008, Airbus applied 

for a type certificate for their new A350– 

900 series airplane. Later, Airbus 

requested and the FAA approved an 

extension to the application for FAA 

type certification to June 28, 2009. The 

A350–900 series airplane has a 

conventional layout with twin wingmounted Rolls-Royce Trent engines. It 

features a twin aisle 9-abreast economy 

class layout, and accommodates side-byside placement of LD–3 containers in 

the cargo compartment. The basic 

A350–900 series airplane configuration 

accommodates 315 passengers in a 

standard two-class arrangement. The 

design cruise speed is Mach 0.85 with 

a Maximum Take-Off Weight of 602,000 

lbs. Airbus proposes the A350–900 

series airplane to be certified for 

extended operations (ETOPS) beyond 

180 minutes at entry into service. 

Type Certification Basis 

Under title 14, Code of Federal 

Regulations (14 CFR) 21.17, Airbus must 

show that the A350–900 series airplane 

meets the applicable provisions of 14 

CFR part 25, as amended by 

Amendments 25–1 through 25–128. 

If the Administrator finds that the 

applicable airworthiness regulations 

(i.e., part 25) do not contain adequate or 

appropriate safety standards for the 

A350–900 series airplanes because of a 

novel or unusual design feature, special 

conditions are prescribed under the 

provisions of § 21.16. 

Special conditions are initially 

applicable to the model for which they 

are issued. Should the type certificate 

for that model be amended later to 

include any other model that 

incorporates the same or similar novel 

or unusual design feature, the special 

conditions would also apply to the other 

model under § 21.101. 

In addition to the applicable 

airworthiness regulations and special 

conditions, A350–900 series airplanes 

must comply with the fuel vent and 

exhaust emission requirements of 14 

CFR part 34 and the noise certification 

requirements of 14 CFR part 36 and the 

FAA must issue a finding of regulatory 

adequacy under section 611 of Public 

Law 92–574, the ‘‘Noise Control Act of 

1972.’’ 

The FAA issues special conditions, as 

defined in 14 CFR 11.19, in accordance 

with § 11.38, and they become part of 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with 
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules 75067 

the type-certification basis under 

§ 21.17(a)(2). 

The current airworthiness standards 

do not contain adequate safety 

standards for the unique features of the 

high incidence protection system and 

the alpha-floor system proposed for the 

Airbus A350–900 series airplanes. Part 

I of the following proposed special 

conditions are in lieu of §§ 25.103, 

25.145(a), 25.145(b)(6), 25.201, 25.203, 

25.207, and 25.1323(d). Part II is in lieu 

of §§ 25.21(g), 25.105, 25.107, 25.121, 

25.123, 25.125, and 25.143. 

Novel or Unusual Design Features 

The Airbus A350–900 series airplanes 

will incorporate the following novel or 

unusual design features: Low speed 

high incidence protection and alphafloor systems. 

The A350–900 series airplanes will 

have a novel or unusual feature to 

accommodate the unique features of the 

high incidence protection and the 

alpha-floor systems. The high incidence 

protection system replaces the stall 

warning system during normal 

operating conditions by prohibiting the 

airplane from stalling. The high 

incidence protection system limits the 

angle of attack at which the airplane can 

be flown during normal low speed 

operation, impacts the longitudinal 

airplane handling characteristics, and 

cannot be over-ridden by the crew. The 

existing regulations do not provide 

adequate criteria to address this system. 

The function of the alpha-floor system 

is to increase automatically the thrust 

on the operating engines under unusual 

circumstances where the airplane 

pitches to a predetermined high angle of 

attack or bank angle. The regulations do 

not provide adequate criteria to address 

this system. 

Discussion 

The current airworthiness standards 

do not contain adequate safety 

standards for the unique features of the 

high incidence protection system and 

the alpha-floor system proposed for 

Airbus A350–900 series airplanes. 

Special conditions are needed to 

account for these features. The high 

incidence protection system prevents 

the airplane from stalling and therefore, 

the stall warning system is not needed 

during normal flight conditions. 

However, during failure conditions 

(which are not shown to be extremely 

improbable), the requirements of Title 

14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 

§§ 25.203 and 25.207 apply, although 

slightly modified (i.e. the flight 

characteristics at the angle of attack for 

CLMAX must be suitable in the 

traditional sense, and stall warning 

must be provided in a conventional 

manner). 

The alpha-floor function 

automatically advances the throttles on 

the operating engines under flight 

circumstances of low speed if the 

airplane reaches a predetermined high 

angle of attack. This function is 

intended to provide increased climb 

capability. 

These proposed special conditions are 

harmonized with the EASA Certification 

Review Items. 

Applicability 

As discussed above, these special 

conditions are applicable to Airbus 

A350–900 series airplanes. Should 

Airbus apply at a later date for a change 

to the type certificate to include another 

model incorporating the same novel or 

unusual design feature, the special 

conditions would apply to that model as 

well. 

Conclusion 

This action affects only certain novel 

or unusual design features on the Airbus 

A350–900 series airplane. It is not a rule 

of general applicability. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25 

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

The authority citation for these 

special conditions is as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, 

44702, 44704. 

The Proposed Special Conditions 

Accordingly, the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) proposes the 

following special conditions as part of 

the type certification basis for Airbus 

A350–900 series airplanes. 

The current airworthiness standards 

do not contain adequate safety 

standards for the unique features of the 

high incidence protection system and 

the alpha-floor system proposed for the 

Airbus A350. Part I of the following 

proposed special conditions are in lieu 

of §§ 25.103, 25.145(a), 25.145(b)(6), 

25.201, 25.203, 25.207, and 25.1323(d). 

Part II are in lieu of §§ 25.21(g), 25.105, 

25.107, 25.121, 25.123, 25.125, and 

25.143. 

Special Conditions Part I—Stall 

Protection and Scheduled Operating 

Speeds—Note: In the following 

paragraphs, ‘‘In icing conditions’’ means 

with the ice accretions (relative to the 

relevant flight phase) as defined in 14 

CFR part 25, amendment 121 appendix 

C. 

Special Conditions Part I—Stall 

Protection and Scheduled Operating 

Speeds 

Foreword 

In the following paragraphs, ‘‘In icing 

conditions’’ means with the ice 

accretions (relative to the relevant flight 

phase) as defined in 14 CFR part 25, 

amendment 121 appendix C. 

1. Definitions 

These Special Conditions addresses 

novel features of the A350–900 series 

airplane and uses terminology that does 

not appear in 14 CFR part 25. 

These terms for the novel features 

addressed by these special conditions 

are the following: 

—High incidence protection system: A 

system that operates directly and 

automatically on the airplane’s flying 

controls to limit the maximum angle 

of attack that can be attained to a 

value below that at which an 

aerodynamic stall would occur. 

—Alpha-floor system: A system that 

automatically increases thrust on the 

operating engines when angle of 

attack increases through a particular 

value. 

—Alpha-limit: The maximum angle of 

attack at which the airplane stabilizes 

with the high incidence protection 

system operating and the longitudinal 

control held on its aft stop. 

—Vmin: The minimum steady flight 

speed in the airplane configuration 

under consideration with the high 

incidence protection system 

operating. See paragraph 3 of these 

Special Conditions. 

—Vmin1g: Vmin corrected to 1g 

conditions. See paragraph 3 of these 

Special Conditions. It is the minimum 

calibrated airspeed at which the 

airplane can develop a lift force 

normal to the flight path and equal to 

its weight when at an angle of attack 

not greater than that determined for 

Vmin. 

2. Capability and Reliability of the High 

Incidence Protection System 

Those paragraphs of 14 CFR part 25 

quoted in reference may be amended in 

accordance with these Special 

Conditions provided that acceptable 

capability and reliability of the high 

incidence protection system can be 

established by flight test, simulation, 

and analysis as appropriate. The 

capability and reliability required are as 

follows: 

1—It shall not be possible during pilot 

induced maneuvers to encounter a stall 

and handling characteristics shall be 

acceptable, as required by section 5 of 

these Special Conditions. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with 
75068 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

2—The airplane shall be protected 

against stalling due to the effects of 

wind-shears and gusts at low speeds as 

required by section 6 of these Special 

Conditions. 

3—The ability of the high incidence 

protection system to accommodate any 

reduction in stalling incidence must be 

verified in icing conditions. 

4—The high incidence protection 

system must be provided in each 

abnormal configuration of the high lift 

devices that is likely to be used in flight 

following system failures. 

5—The reliability of the system and 

the effects of failures must be acceptable 

in accordance with § 25.1309. 

3. Minimum Steady Flight Speed and 

Reference Stall Speed 

In lieu of § 25.103, Minimum steady 

flight speed and Reference stall speed, 

we propose the following requirements: 

(a) The minimum steady flight speed, 

Vmin, is the final stabilized calibrated 

airspeed obtained when the airplane is 

decelerated until the longitudinal 

control is on its stop in such a way that 

the entry rate does not exceed 1 knot per 

second. 

(b) The minimum steady flight speed, 

Vmin, must be determined in icing and 

non-icing conditions with: 

(1) The high incidence protection 

system operating normally. 

(2) Idle thrust and alpha-floor system 

inhibited; 

(3) All combinations of flaps setting 

and, landing gear position for which 

Vmin is required to be determined; 

(4) The weight used when VSR is 

being used as a factor to determine 

compliance with a required 

performance standard; 

(5) The most unfavorable center of 

gravity allowable; and 

(6) The airplane trimmed for straight 

flight at a speed achievable by the 

automatic trim system. 

(c) The one-g minimum steady flight 

speed, Vmin1g, is the minimum 

calibrated airspeed at which the 

airplane can develop a lift force (normal 

to the flight path) equal to its weight, 

while at an angle of attack not greater 

than that at which the minimum steady 

flight speed of sub-paragraph (a) was 

determined. It must be determined in 

icing and non icing conditions. 

(d) The reference stall speed, VSR, is 

a calibrated airspeed defined by the 

applicant. VSR may not be less than a 1- 

g stall speed. VSR must be determined in 

non icing conditions and expressed as: 

(1) Engines idling, or, if that resultant 

thrust causes an appreciable decrease in 

stall speed, not more than zero thrust at 

the stall speed; 

(2) The airplane in other respects 

(such as flaps and landing gear) in the 

condition existing in the test or 

performance standard in which VSR is 

being used; 

(3) The weight used when VSR is 

being used as a factor to determine 

compliance with a required 

performance standard; 

(4) The center of gravity position that 

results in the highest value of reference 

stall speed; 

(5) The airplane trimmed for straight 

flight at a speed achievable by the 

automatic trim system, but not less than 

1.13 VSR and not greater than 1.3 VSR; 

(6) Alpha-floor system inhibited; and 

(7) The High Incidence Protection 

System adjusted, at the option of the 

applicant, to allow higher incidence 

than is possible with the normal 

production system. 

(8) Starting from the stabilized trim 

condition, apply the longitudinal 

control to decelerate the airplane so that 

the speed reduction does not exceed one 

knot per second. 

4. Stall Warning 

In lieu of § 25.207 we propose the 

following requirements: 

4.1 Normal Operation 

If the capabilities of the high 

incidence protection system are met, 

then the conditions of paragraph 2 are 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with EP19DE12.016</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules 75069 

satisfied. These conditions are 

equivalent safety to the intent of 

§ 25.207, Stall Warning, so the provision 

of an additional, unique warning device 

is not required. 

4.2 High Incidence Protection System 

Failure 

Following failures of the high 

incidence protection system, not shown 

to be extremely improbable, such that 

the capability of the system no longer 

satisfies items 1, 2 and 3 of paragraph 

2, stall warning must be provided and 

must protect against encountering 

unacceptable characteristics and against 

encountering stall. 

(a) Stall warning with the flaps and 

landing gear in any normal position 

must be clear and distinctive to the pilot 

and meet the requirements specified in 

paragraphs (d) and (e) below. 

(b) Stall warning must also be 

provided in each abnormal 

configuration of the high lift devices 

that is likely to be used in flight 

following system failures. 

(c) The warning may be furnished 

either through the inherent aerodynamic 

qualities of the airplane or by a device 

that will give clearly distinguishable 

indications under expected conditions 

of flight. However a visual stall warning 

device that requires the attention of the 

crew within the cockpit is not 

acceptable by itself. If a warning device 

is used, it must provide a warning in 

each of the airplane configurations 

prescribed in paragraph (a) above and 

for the conditions prescribed below in 

paragraphs (d) and (e) below. 

(d) In non icing conditions stall 

warning must meet the following 

requirements: Stall warning must 

provide sufficient margin to prevent 

encountering unacceptable 

characteristics and encountering stall in 

the following conditions: 

(1) In power off straight deceleration 

not exceeding one knot per second to a 

speed 5 knots or 5 per cent CAS, 

whichever is greater, below the warning 

onset. 

(2) In turning flight stall deceleration 

at entry rates up to 3 knots per second 

when recovery is initiated not less than 

one second after the warning onset. 

(e) In icing conditions stall warning 

must provide sufficient margin to 

prevent encountering unacceptable 

characteristics and encountering stall, in 

power off straight and turning flight 

decelerations not exceeding one knot 

per second, when the pilot starts a 

recovery maneuver not less than three 

seconds after the onset of stall warning. 

(f) An airplane is considered stalled 

when the behavior of the airplane gives 

the pilot a clear and distinctive 

indication of an acceptable nature that 

the airplane is stalled. Acceptable 

indications of a stall, occurring either 

individually or in combination are: 

(1) A nose-down pitch that cannot be 

readily arrested 

(2) Buffeting, of a magnitude and 

severity that is strong and effective 

deterrent to further speed reduction; or 

(3) The pitch control reaches the aft 

stop and no further increase in pitch 

attitude occurs when the control is held 

full aft for a short time before recovery 

is initiated 

(g) An aircraft exhibits unacceptable 

characteristics during straight or turning 

flight decelerations if it is not always 

possible to produce and to correct roll 

and yaw by unreversed use of aileron 

and rudder controls, or abnormal noseup pitching occurs. 

5. Handling Characteristics at High 

Incidence 

In lieu of both § 25.201 and § 25.203 

we propose the following requirements: 

5.1 High Incidence Handling 

Demonstrations 

In lieu of § 25.201: High incidence 

handling demonstration in icing and 

non icing conditions. 

(a) Maneuvers to the limit of the 

longitudinal control, in the nose up 

sense, must be demonstrated in straight 

flight and in 30° banked turns with: 

(1) The high incidence protection 

system operating normally. 

(2) Initial power conditions of: 

I: Power off. 

II: The power necessary to maintain 

level flight at 1.5 VSR1, where VSR1 is the 

reference stall speed with flaps in 

approach position, the landing gear 

retracted and maximum landing weight. 

(3) Alpha-floor system operating 

normally unless more severe conditions 

are achieved with inhibited alpha floor. 

(4) Flaps, landing gear and 

deceleration devices in any likely 

combination of positions. 

(5) Representative weights within the 

range for which certification is 

requested; and 

(6) The airplane trimmed for straight 

flight at a speed achievable by the 

automatic trim system. 

(b) The following procedures must be 

used to show compliance in non-icing 

and icing conditions: 

(1) Starting at a speed sufficiently 

above the minimum steady flight speed 

to ensure that a steady rate of speed 

reduction can be established, apply the 

longitudinal control so that the speed 

reduction does not exceed one knot per 

second until the control reaches the 

stop; 

(2) The longitudinal control must be 

maintained at the stop until the airplane 

has reached a stabilized flight condition 

and must then be recovered by normal 

recovery techniques; 

(3) Maneuvers with increased 

deceleration rates; 

(i) In non icing conditions, the 

requirements must also be met with 

increased rates of entry to the incidence 

limit, up to the maximum rate 

achievable. 

(ii) In icing conditions, with the antiice system working normally, the 

requirements must also be met with 

increased rates of entry to the incidence 

limit, up to 3kt/s. 

(4) Maneuver with ice accretion prior 

to operation of the normal anti-ice 

system 

With the ice accretion prior to 

operation of the normal anti-ice system, 

the requirement must also be met in 

deceleration at 1kt/s up to FBS (with 

and without alpha floor). 

5.2 Characteristics in High Incidence 

Maneuvers 

In lieu of § 25.203: Characteristics in 

High Incidence. 

In icing and non icing conditions: 

(a) Throughout maneuvers with a rate 

of deceleration of not more than 1 knot 

per second, both in straight flight and in 

30° banked turns, the airplane’s 

characteristics shall be as follows: 

(1) There shall not be any abnormal 

nose-up pitching. 

(2) There shall not be any 

uncommanded nose-down pitching, 

which would be indicative of stall. 

However reasonable attitude changes 

associated with stabilizing the incidence 

at Alpha limit as the longitudinal 

control reaches the stop would be 

acceptable. 

(3) There shall not be any 

uncommanded lateral or directional 

motion and the pilot must retain good 

lateral and directional control, by 

conventional use of the controls, 

throughout the maneuver. 

(4) The airplane must not exhibit 

buffeting of a magnitude and severity 

that would act as a deterrent from 

completing the maneuver specified in 

5.1.(a). 

(b) In maneuvers with increased rates 

of deceleration some degradation of 

characteristics is acceptable, associated 

with a transient excursion beyond the 

stabilized Alpha-limit. However the 

airplane must not exhibit dangerous 

characteristics or characteristics that 

would deter the pilot from holding the 

longitudinal control on the stop for a 

period of time appropriate to the 

maneuver. 

(c) It must always be possible to 

reduce incidence by conventional use of 

the controls. 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with 
75070 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules 

(d) The rate at which the airplane can 

be maneuvered from trim speeds 

associated with scheduled operating 

speeds such as V2 and VREF up to Alphalimit shall not be unduly damped or be 

significantly slower than can be 

achieved on conventionally controlled 

transport airplanes. 

5.3 Characteristics up to Maximum 

Lift Angle of Attack 

(a) In non-icing conditions: 

Maneuvers with a rate of deceleration 

of not more than 1 knot per second up 

to the angle of attack at which 

was obtained as defined in paragraph 3 

must be demonstrated in straight flight 

and in 30° banked turns with: 

(1) The high incidence protection 

deactivated or adjusted, at the option of 

the applicant, to allow higher incidence 

than is possible with the normal 

production system. 

(2) Automatic thrust increase system 

inhibited 

(3) Engines idling 

(4) Flaps and landing gear in any 

likely combination of positions 

(5) The airplane trimmed for straight 

flight at a speed achievable by the 

automatic trim system. 

(b) In icing conditions: 

Maneuvers with a rate of deceleration 

of not more than 1 knot per second up 

to the maximum angle of attack reached 

during maneuvers from 5.1(b)(3)(ii) 

must be demonstrated in straight flight 

with: 

(1) The high incidence protection 

deactivated or adjusted, at the option of 

the applicant, to allow higher incidence 

than is possible with the normal 

production system. 

(2) Automatic thrust increase system 

inhibited. 

(3) Engines idling. 

(4) Flaps and landing gear in any 

likely combination of positions. 

(5) The airplane trimmed for straight 

flight at a speed achievable by the 

automatic trim system. 

(c) During the maneuvers used to 

show compliance with paragraphs (a) 

(b) above, the airplane must not exhibit 

dangerous characteristics and it must 

always be possible to reduce angle of 

attack by conventional use of the 

controls. The pilot must retain good 

lateral and directional control, by 

conventional use of the controls, 

throughout the maneuver. 

6. Atmospheric Disturbances 

Operation of the high incidence 

protection system must not adversely 

affect aircraft control during expected 

levels of atmospheric disturbances, nor 

impede the application of recovery 

procedures in case of wind-shear. This 

shall be demonstrated in non icing and 

icing conditions. 

7. Alpha Floor 

In icing and non icing conditions, the 

Alpha-floor setting must be such that 

the airplane can be flown at the speeds 

and bank angles specified in § 25.143(h). 

It also must be shown that the alpha 

floor setting does not interfere with 

normal maneuvering of the airplane. In 

addition there must be no alpha-floor 

triggering unless appropriate when the 

aircraft is flown in usual operational 

maneuvers and in turbulence. 

8. Proof of Compliance 

We propose that the following 

requirement be made in addition to 

those in § 25.21(b): 

(b) The flying qualities will be 

evaluated at the most unfavorable CG 

position. 

9. For These Regulations, §§ 25.145(a), 

25.145(b)(6) and 25.1323(d), We Propose 

the Following Requirements 

§ 25.145(a) Vmin in lieu of ‘‘stall 

identification’’ 

§ 25.145(b)(6) Vmin in lieu of VSW

§ 25.1323(d) ‘‘From 1.23 VSR to Vmin’’ 

in lieu of ‘‘1.23 VSR to stall warning 

speed’’ and ‘‘speeds below Vmin’’ in 

lieu of ‘‘speeds below stall warning’’ 

Special Conditions Part II—Credit for 

Robust Envelope Protection in Icing 

Conditions 

1. Define the stall speed as provided 

in SC Part I in lieu of § 25.103. 

2. We propose the following 

requirements in lieu of § 25.105(a)(2)(i): 

In lieu of § 25.105(a)(2)(i) Take-off. 

(i) The V2 speed scheduled in non 

icing conditions does not provide the 

maneuvering capability specified in 

§ 25.143(h) for the takeoff configuration, 

or 

3. In lieu of § 25.107(c) (g) we propose 

the following requirements, with 

additional sections (c’) and (g’): 

In lieu of § 25.107(c) and (g) Take-off 

speeds. 

(c) In non icing conditions V2, in 

terms of calibrated airspeed, must be 

selected by the applicant to provide at 

least the gradient of climb required by 

§ 25.121(b) but may not be less than— 

(1) V2MIN; 

(2) VR plus the speed increment 

attained (in accordance with 

§ 25.111(c)(2)) before reaching a height 

of 35 feet above the takeoff surface; and 

(3) A speed that provides the 

maneuvering capability specified in 

§ 25.143(h). 

(c) In icing conditions with the ‘‘takeoff ice’’ accretion defined in Appendix 

C, V2 may not be less than— 

(1) The V2 speed determined in non 

icing conditions 

(2) A speed that provides the 

maneuvering capability specified in 

§ 25.143(h). 

(g) In non icing conditions, VFTO, in 

terms of calibrated airspeed, must be 

selected by the applicant to provide at 

least the gradient of climb required by 

§ 25.121(c), but may not be less than— 

(1) 1.18 VSR; and 

(2) A speed that provides the 

maneuvering capability specified in 

§ 25.143(h). 

(g) In icing conditions with the ‘‘Final 

take-off ice’’ accretion defined in 

Appendix C, VFTO, may not be less 

than— 

(1) The VFTO speed determined in non 

icing conditions. 

(2) A speed that provides the 

maneuvering capability specified in 

§ 25.143(h). 

4. In lieu of § 25.121(b)(2)(ii)(A), 

§ 25.121(c)(2)(ii)(A), § 25.121(d)(2)(ii), 

we propose the following requirements: 

In lieu of § 25.121(b)(2)(ii)(A) Climb: 

One-engine inoperative: 

(A) The V2 speed scheduled in non 

icing conditions does not provide the 

maneuvering capability specified in 

§ 25.143(h) for the take-off 

configuration; or 

In lieu of § 25.121(c)(2)(ii)(A) Climb: 

One-engine inoperative: 

(A) The VFTO speed scheduled in non 

icing conditions does not provide the 

maneuvering capability specified in 

§ 25.143(h) for the en-route 

configuration; or 

In lieu of § 25.121(d)(2)(ii) Climb: 

One-engine inoperative: 

(d)(2) The requirements of subparagraph (d)(1) of this paragraph must 

be met: 

(ii) In icing conditions with the 

approach Ice accretion defined in 

Appendix C, in a configuration 

corresponding to the normal all-enginesoperating procedure in which Vmin1g for 

this configuration does not exceed 

110% of the Vmin1g for the related allengines-operating landing configuration 

in icing, with a climb speed established 

with normal landing procedures, but not 

more than 1.4 VSR (VSR determined in 

non icing conditions). 

5. In lieu of § 25.123(b)(2)(i) we 

propose the following requirements: 

In lieu of § 25.123(b)(2)(i) En-route 

flight paths: 

(i) The minimum en-route speed 

scheduled in non icing conditions does 

not provide the maneuvering capability 

specified in § 25.143(h) for the en-route 

configuration, or 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with EP19DE12.019</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 244 / Wednesday, December 19, 2012 / Proposed Rules 75071 

6. In lieu of § 25.125(b)(2)(ii)(B), we 

propose paragraph § 25.125(b)(2)(ii)(C) 

be removed and replaced by the 

following requirements: 

In lieu of § 25.125(b)(2)(ii)(B) and 

§ 25.125(b)(2)(ii)(C) Landing. 

(B) A speed that provides the 

maneuvering capability specified in 

§ 25.143(h) with the landing ice 

accretion defined in appendix C. 

7. In lieu of, § 25.143(j)(2)(i) we 

propose the following requirements for 

controllability and maneuverability: 

In lieu of § 25.143(j)(2)(i) General. 

(i) The airplane is controllable in a 

pull-up maneuver up to 1.5 g load factor 

or lower if limited by AOA protection; 

and 

8. In lieu of § 25.207, Stall warning, to 

read as the requirements defined in SC 

Part I., Section 4. 

Ali Bahrami, 

Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, 

Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–30441 Filed 12–18–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 25 

[Docket No. FAA–2012–1292; Notice No. 25– 

12–17–SC] 

Special Conditions: Embraer S.A., 

Model EMB–550 Airplanes; Electrical/ 

Electronic Equipment Bay Fire 

Detection and Smoke Penetration 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed special 

conditions. 

SUMMARY: This action proposes special 

conditions for the Embraer S.A. Model 

EMB–550 airplane. This airplane will 

have novel or unusual design features, 

specifically distributed electrical and 

electronic equipment bays in 

pressurized areas of the airplane. Older 

transport category airplane electrical/ 

electronic equipment bay installations 

are located in the lower lobe where the 

flightcrew could determine the origin of 

smoke or fire by a straightforward 

airplane flight manual procedure. In 

distributed electrical/electronic bay 

installations it is not as straightforward. 

The FAA has no requirement for smoke 

and/or fire detection in the electrical/ 

electronic equipment bays. To ensure 

effective mitigation of fires, the FAA 

proposes these special conditions. The 

applicable airworthiness regulations do 

not contain adequate or appropriate 

safety standards for this design feature. 

These proposed special conditions 

contain the additional safety standards 

that the Administrator considers 

necessary to establish a level of safety 

equivalent to that established by the 

existing airworthiness standards. 

DATES: Send your comments on or 

before February 4, 2013. 

ADDRESSES: Send comments identified 

by docket number FAA–2012–XXXX 

using any of the following methods: 

• Federal eRegulations Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov/and follow 

the online instructions for sending your 

comments electronically. 

• Mail: Send comments to Docket 

Operations, M–30, U.S. Department of 

Transportation (DOT), 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Room W12–140, West 

Building Ground Floor, Washington, DC 

20590–0001. 

• Hand Delivery or Courier: Take 

comments to Docket Operations in 

Room W12–140 of the West Building 

Ground Floor at 1200 New Jersey 

Avenue SE., Washington, DC, between 8 

a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, except federal holidays. 

• Fax: Fax comments to Docket 

Operations at 202–493–2251. 

Privacy: The FAA will post all 

comments it receives, without change, 

to http://www.regulations.gov/, 

including any personal information the 

commenter provides. Using the search 

function of the docket Web site, anyone 

can find and read the electronic form of 

all comments received into any FAA 

docket, including the name of the 

individual sending the comment (or 

signing the comment for an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). DOT’s 

complete Privacy Act Statement can be 

found in the Federal Register published 

on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–19478), 

as well as at 

http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov/. 

Docket: Background documents or 

comments received may be read at 

http://www.regulations.gov/ at any time. 

Follow the online instructions for 

accessing the docket or go to the Docket 

Operations in Room W12–140 of the 

West Building Ground Floor at 1200 

New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, 

DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except federal holidays. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robert C. Jones, FAA, Propulsion and 

Mechanical Systems Branch, ANM–112, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 

Certification Service, 1601 Lind Avenue 

SW., Renton, Washington 98057–3356; 

telephone 425–227–1234; facsimile 

425–227–1149. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite interested people to take 

part in this rulemaking by sending 

written comments, data, or views. The 

most helpful comments reference a 

specific portion of the special 

conditions, explain the reason for any 

recommended change, and include 

supporting data. 

We will consider all comments we 

receive on or before the closing date for 

comments. We may change these special 

conditions based on the comments we 

receive. 

Background 

On May 14, 2009, Embraer S.A. 

applied for a type certificate for their 

new Model EMB–550 airplane. The 

Model EMB–550 airplane is the first of 

a new family of jet airplanes designed 

for corporate flight, fractional, charter, 

and private owner operations. The 

aircraft has a conventional configuration 

with a low wing and T-tail empennage. 

The primary structure is metal with 

composite empennage and control 

surfaces. The Model EMB–550 airplane 

is designed for 8 passengers, with a 

maximum of 12 passengers. It is 

equipped with two Honeywell 

HTF7500–E medium bypass ratio 

turbofan engines mounted on aft 

fuselage pylons. Each engine produces 

approximately 6,540 pounds of thrust 

for normal takeoff. The primary flight 

controls consist of hydraulically 

powered fly-by-wire elevators, aileron 

and rudder, controlled by the pilot or 

copilot sidestick. 

The Model EMB–550 airplane has 

electrical/electronic equipment bays 

distributed throughout the airplane; 

three of them are in the pressurized 

area. The current airworthiness 

requirements do not contain adequate or 

appropriate safety standards regarding 

smoke/fire detection and protection 

against penetration of hazardous 

quantities of smoke from equipment 

bays into occupied areas of the airplane 

for this type of airplane configuration. 

Type Certification Basis 

Under the provisions of Title 14, Code 

of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) 21.17, 

Embraer S.A. must show that the Model 

EMB–550 airplane meets the applicable 

provisions of part 25, as amended by 

Amendments 25–1 through 25–127 

thereto. 

If the Administrator finds that the 

applicable airworthiness regulations 

(i.e., 14 CFR part 25) do not contain 

adequate or appropriate safety standards 

for the Model EMB–550 airplane 

because of a novel or unusual design 

feature, special conditions are 


wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with