97-27504. Special Conditions; Ballistic Recovery Systems Cirrus SR-20 Installation  

  • [Federal Register Volume 62, Number 200 (Thursday, October 16, 1997)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 53733-53737]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 97-27504]
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
    
    Federal Aviation Administration
    
    14 CFR Part 23
    
    [Docket No. 136CE, Special Condition 23-ACE-88]
    
    
    Special Conditions; Ballistic Recovery Systems Cirrus SR-20 
    Installation
    
    AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
    
    ACTION: Final special conditions.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: These special conditions are being issued to become part of 
    the type certification basis for the Ballistic Recovery Systems, Inc., 
    (BRS) parachute recovery system installed in the Cirrus SR-20 Model 
    airplane. This system is referred to as the General Aviation Recovery 
    Device (GARD). Airplanes modified to use this system will incorporate 
    novel or unusual design features for which the applicable airworthiness 
    regulations do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards. 
    These special conditions contain the additional airworthiness standards 
    that the Administrator considers necessary to establish a level of 
    safety equivalent to the original certification basis for these 
    airplanes.
    
    EFFECTIVE DATE: November 17, 1997.
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lowell Foster, Aerospace Engineer, 
    Standards Office (ACE-110), Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft 
    Certification Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 601 East 12th 
    Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106; telephone (816) 426-5688.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    
    Background
    
        On March 7, 1996, Cirrus Design, 4515 Taylor Circle, Duluth, MN 
    55811, filed an application for a type certificate (TC). Included in 
    this TC application was the provision to install the BRS GARD parachute 
    recovery system as standard equipment on each Cirrus Model SR-20 
    airplane. The parachute recovery system is intended to recover an 
    airplane in emergency situations such as mid-air collision, loss of 
    engine power, loss of airplane control, severe structural failure, 
    pilot disorientation, or pilot incapacitation with a passenger on 
    board. The GARD system, which is only used as a last resort, is 
    intended to prevent serious injuries to the airplane occupants by 
    parachuting the airplane to the ground.
        The parachute recovery system consists of a parachute packed in a 
    canister mounted on the airframe. A solid propellant rocket motor 
    deploys the canopy and is located on the side of the canister. A door 
    positioned above the canister seals the canister, parachute canopy, and 
    rocket motor from the elements and provides free exit when the canopy 
    is deployed. The system is deployed by a mechanical pull handle mounted 
    so that the pilot and passenger can reach it. At least two separate and
    
    [[Page 53734]]
    
    independent actions are required to deploy the system.
        A multi-cable bridle attaches the canopy bridle to the airplane 
    primary structure. The cable lengths are sized to provide the best 
    airplane touchdown attitude. The cables are routed from the parachute 
    canister thru the fuselage and run externally to the fuselage attach 
    points. The external portion of these cables are covered with small 
    frangible fairings.
    
    Type Certification Basis
    
        The type certification basis for the Cirrus Model SR-20 is as 
    follows: 14 CFR part 23, effective February 1, 1965, including 
    Amendments 23-1 through 23-47; 14 CFR part 36, effective December 1, 
    1969, including Amendments 36-1 through the amendment in effect at the 
    time of U.S. certification; Equivalent Level of Safety Findings; 
    Exemptions approved by the FAA (14 CFR part 11, Sec. 11.27; Section 
    611(b) of the FAA Action of 1958 (49 U.S.C. 44715); and the special 
    conditions adopted by this rulemaking action.
    
    Discussion
    
        Special conditions may be issued and amended, as necessary, as part 
    of the type certification basis if the Administrator finds that the 
    airworthiness standards designated in accordance with 14 CFR part 21, 
    Sec. 21.16 do not contain adequate or appropriate safety standards 
    because of the novel and unusual design features of the airplane 
    modification. Special conditions, as appropriate, are issued after 
    public notice in accordance with Sec. 11.49 (as amended September 25, 
    1989), as required by Secs. 11.28 and 11.29(b). The special conditions 
    become part of the type certification basis, as provided by 
    Sec. 21.17(a)(2).
        The installation of parachute recovery systems in 14 CFR part 23 
    airplanes was not envisioned when the certification basis for these 
    airplanes was established. In addition, the Administrator has 
    determined that current regulations do not contain adequate or 
    appropriate safety standards for a parachute recovery system; 
    therefore, this system is considered a novel and unusual design 
    feature. The flight test demonstration requirements will ensure that 
    the parachute recovery system will perform its intended function 
    without exceeding its strength capabilities. Demonstrations will be 
    required to show that the parachute will deploy in specified flight 
    conditions. These conditions are a minimum of maneuvering speed, 
    VO or higher, and deployment during a one-turn spin entry. 
    If the airplane does not depart , the condition is the maneuver that 
    results from pro-spin control inputs held for one turn, or three 
    seconds, whichever comes first.
        Occupant restraint requirements will ensure that the airplane is 
    equipped with a restraint system designed to protect the occupants from 
    injury during parachute deployment and ground impact. Each occupant 
    seat must meet the requirements of 14 CFR part 23, Sec. 23.562 as part 
    of the original certification basis.
        Requirements for parachute performance will ensure all of the 
    following: (a) The parachute complies with the applicable section of 
    TSO-C23c (SAE AS8015A) at the maximum airplane weights. (b) The 
    parachute deployment loads do not exceed the structural strength of the 
    airplane. (c) The system will provide a ground impact that does not 
    result in serious injury of the passengers. (d) The system will operate 
    in adverse weather conditions.
        The requirements for the functions and operations of the parachute 
    recovery system will ensure all of the following: (a) There is no fire 
    hazard associated with the system. (b) The installation of this system 
    allows relief from another part 23 requirement, spins. For this reason, 
    it will need to be operational for all flights. (c) That the system 
    will work in all weather conditions that the airplane is approved to 
    operate in, including the IFR and icing environments. (d) The sequence 
    of arming and activating the system will prevent inadvertent 
    deployment. (e) The system can be activated from either the pilot's or 
    the copilot's position by various sized people. (f) The system will be 
    labeled to show its identification function and operating limitations. 
    (g) A warning placard will be located on the fuselage near the rocket 
    motor to warn rescue crews of the ballistic system. (h) The FAA-
    approved flight manual will include a thorough explanation of system's 
    operation and limitations as well as the safe deployment envelope. (i) 
    The occupants are protected from serious injury after touchdown in 
    adverse weather.
        Requirements for protection of the parachute recovery system will 
    ensure the following: the system is protected from deterioration due to 
    weathering, corrosion, and abrasion; provisions are made to provide 
    adequate ventilation and drainage of the airplane structure that houses 
    the parachute canister.
        Requirements for a system inspection provision will ensure that 
    adequate means are available to permit examination of the parachute 
    recovery system components and that instructions for continued 
    airworthiness are provided.
        Requirements for operating limitations of the parachute recovery 
    system will ensure that the system operating limitations and deployment 
    envelope are prescribed, including inspection, repacking, and replacing 
    the system's parachute deployment mechanism at approved intervals.
    
    Discussion of Comments
    
        Notice of Proposed Special Conditions, Notice No. 23-ACE-88, Docket 
    No. 136CE was published in the Federal Register on February 6, 1997, 
    and the comment period closed March 10, 1997. Following is a summary of 
    the comments received and a response to each comment.
        Only one commenter responded to the notice and that was Cirrus 
    Design. They offered five comments, all of which are addressed below.
        1. Comment. Paragraph 1(a). Proposed Special Condition, Docket No. 
    136CE, 23-ACE-88 does not contain provisions for the flight test 
    demonstration to be conducted on an aircraft having similar 
    characteristics as was accepted for Docket No. 118CE, 23-ACE-76, 
    Special Conditions: Ballistic Recovery Systems, Modified for Small 
    General Aviation Aircraft. Cirrus proposes to modify the current 
    language of 1(a) to include: ``The system may be demonstrated on an 
    aircraft having similar characteristics (such as configuration, weight, 
    and speed) and similar installation.'' The crucial elements here are 
    the mass distribution of the aircraft and center of gravity (moment of 
    inertia), the location of the riser attachments relative to the c.g., 
    and the riser configurations. The flight demonstration is conclusive if 
    these elements are similar. An example of this situation would be that 
    of demonstrating the operation of the recovery system in a development 
    prototype aircraft similar to that of the type design aircraft. It is 
    only a matter of necessary conformity and degree of similarity. The 
    allowance for ``similar'' aircraft flight demonstration is a logical 
    inclusion and will require a case by case review. This provision was 
    found acceptable for 23-ACE-76 and, therefore, is acceptable for any 
    STC installations. A TC application should not, by law, require more 
    stringent conditions.
        FAA Response. The special conditions for BRS installations referred 
    to by Cirrus; 23-ACE-76, Docket No. 118CE, were originally intended for 
    airplanes similar to the Quicksilver GT-500 and they were intended for 
    general applicability for certificated small
    
    [[Page 53735]]
    
    airplanes. The Cirrus special conditions do not include this provision 
    because they are unique to the model SR-20. On a model specific special 
    condition, general applicability items are not appropriate. This does 
    not imply that minor design variations in the model would require 
    additional testing.
        The FAA agrees that the crucial elements are mass distribution, 
    moment of inertia, riser attachments and configurations. If these 
    crucial elements remain essentially constant with minor design 
    variation, then credit for GARD testing should apply to both airplanes. 
    This issue has been adequately addressed in this preamble and no change 
    in the special conditions is necessary.
        2. Comment. Paragraph 1(b)(2). It is recommended that item 1(b)(2) 
    be changed to: ``maximum allowable deployment speed with 1g normal 
    load.'' The use of this type of safety equipment is in its infancy and 
    analytical predictions of deployment dynamics are challenging. Based on 
    this, the loads used in the design phase are estimations based on the 
    best information available. The actual loads are determined during 
    flight testing and fix the maximum allowable deployment speed that the 
    designed structure can withstand. A requirement for a system to be 
    deployed at VNE not only offers extreme risk within a 
    development and certification program, but also extends beyond that 
    which is necessary to offer increased safety to the pilot and 
    passengers for the portion of the flight envelope reflecting the 
    largest numbers of accidents. This equipment is provided to give the 
    pilot an additional option for recovery in a critical situation. The 
    deployment envelope should be clearly placarded; beyond which point 
    system operation is prohibited/not recommended. However, the mere 
    presence of the equipment does offer a certain increase in safety. This 
    option to the pilot should not be totally withdrawn because of the 
    potential inability of the system to be deployed at VNE. In 
    order to use the GARD system for the spin ELOS, the system need only be 
    safely deployed in a spin situation. Deployments at any other time are 
    an increase in safety above that which is required by FARs.
        This requirement also significantly affects customer value. Not all 
    aircraft [especially high performance] can offer this equipment with 
    V5NE envelope capability while maintaining an overall 
    aircraft value/utility, due to the severe structural requirements 
    (energy as the square of the velocity). Should pilots of these aircraft 
    be denied the use of this equipment when in a critical low speed 
    situation? As a final note, a maximum deployment speed other than 
    VNE was found to be acceptable for the GARD 150 program, 
    which also began with a VNE requirement, 23-ACE-33, Special 
    Conditions: Ballistic Recovery System, Inc., Modified Cessna 150/A150 
    Series Airplanes and 152/A152 Model Airplanes to Incorporate the GARD-
    150 System.
        FAA Response. The FAA developed the original special conditions for 
    the Ballistic Recovery System GARD-150 System based on what was 
    believed to be appropriate at that time. Ideally, it is desirable for 
    any safety device to operate over the entire flight envelope of the 
    airplane it is installed in. Based on this ideal, the original special 
    conditions were intended to cover operation from stall to 
    VNE. Prior to the Cessna 150 STC installing the GARD-150, 
    the typical airplanes that installed a ballistic parachute recovery 
    system could use the system over the entire flight envelope because 
    they were very light, low performance vehicles. The Cirrus SR-20 is a 
    heavy, high performance airplane by comparison. There are challenging 
    technical issues to address with this installation, one of them is the 
    maximum demonstrated deployment speed.
        Cirrus is installing the BRS GARD system not only for general 
    safety improvements but also for relief from the spin recovery 
    demonstrations required by part 23. The FAA agrees with Cirrus that a 
    requirement for deployment at VNE is not relative to a 
    requirement for an equivalent safety finding for spin recovery. The 
    FAA, however, disagrees with Cirrus's recommended change because it is 
    open ended, allowing any speed above stall to meet the special 
    condition.
        The introduction of innovative safety devices, such as ballistic 
    parachute recovery systems, is important to the FAA's goal of reducing 
    fatal accidents. For this reason, the FAA met with representatives from 
    Cirrus to discuss the maximum deployment demonstration issue. Cirrus' 
    concern, as expressed in their comments, focuses on the risk of 
    developing the system that will safely deploy throughout most of the 
    airplane's speed range, falling just short of VNE and, 
    hence, not receiving approval to install the system in their airplane. 
    Furthermore, Cirrus argues that the mere presence of the GARD system 
    offers a certain increase in safety; therefore, specifying a maximum 
    deployment speed that may not be achievable risks negating the GARD 
    system installation. This action would not be in the best interest of 
    safety.
        It is important to understand that this issue does not concern 
    operational deployment by pilots directly. It addresses the deployment 
    tests required by this special condition for certification. The test 
    airplane used for the GARD system deployments must be safely used for 
    multiple deployments. This means that the airplane must remain 
    airworthy after GARD system deployment so that the parachute can be cut 
    away and the airplane safely landed. In operational use, the airplane 
    does not need to remain airworthy after parachute deployment because it 
    is committed to returning to the ground. Once the parachute is deployed 
    in operation, the airplane is going to the ground and probably will not 
    be in an airworthy condition after the landing. Moreover, the FAA 
    should be clear that our concern is that of occupant safety. If the 
    initial opening shock of the GARD system fails parts of the airframe, 
    that is acceptable as long as the occupants meet the safety 
    requirements of these special conditions. The point of this discussion 
    is that an acceptable operational deployment of the GARD system may not 
    be acceptable in the flight test deployment case because the airplane 
    could sustain serious damage, preventing the completion of the flight 
    test program.
        After discussing all technical points and positions, the FAA agreed 
    that the appropriate course was to require a maximum deployment speed 
    based on the equivalent safety finding. The equivalent safety finding 
    provides relief from the spin recovery demonstration requirements of 
    Sec. 23.221. The entry requirement for a spin is a stall; therefore, 
    the FAA determined that an acceptable maximum demonstrated deployment 
    speed for the GARD system must be at least VO, the maximum 
    speed at which, with a full deflection control input, the airplane will 
    stall before reaching limit load on the airframe. This will provide 
    adequate margin for the safe application of the equivalent safety 
    finding and reduce Cirrus' concern that their GARD system installation 
    would not be approved. The FAA also acknowledges that it is Cirrus' 
    goal to push the GARD system deployment speed as high as possible 
    within practical constraints.
        3. Comment. Paragraph 3(b). It is suggested that this paragraph 
    include ``and the parachute assembly.''
        FAA Response. The FAA agrees and will incorporate the comment.
        4. Comment. Paragraph 4(b). This paragraph states that a ``system 
    failure must be shown to be extremely improbable.'' Previous 
    requirements for this type of system, reference 23-ACE-
    
    [[Page 53736]]
    
     76, cited that the system, ``must be shown to function reliably and to 
    perform its intended function.''
        The previous requirements were appropriate for equipment that 
    increases the level of safety of the airplane. Reliability of 
    ``extremely improbable,'' as defined in AC 23-1309, cannot be 
    reasonably shown quantitatively. The system, as designed, can deliver 
    functional reliability. The testing required on incipient spin recovery 
    will not quantify a demonstration of ``extremely improbable.''
        The critical firing system is designed with similar methodology as 
    redundant load path structure. There are two firing primers, where only 
    one is necessary for ignition of the rocket. The remainder of the 
    system is mechanical in nature with few parts. The following is offered 
    as a possible change to the wording: ``activation system must be shown 
    to function reliably [such as redundant ignition sources] and to 
    perform its intended function.''
        FAA Response. The FAA agrees in principle with Cirrus' comments 
    concerning reliability. The following changes are included in these 
    special conditions.
        ``Discussion'' section:
        The probability that the system will operate as designed is very 
    high.
        ``Special Conditions'' section:
        The system must be shown to perform its intended function with a 
    high probability that it will operate as designed.
        5. Comment. Paragraph 7(b). Based on the comments of Paragraph 
    1(b)(2) above, it is also recommended that 7(b) be removed from this 
    special condition. Again, the ELOS does not maintain applicability to 
    the high speed portion of the flight envelope and, therefore, the 
    equipment should not be required to operate in this speed range.
        FAA Response. Addressed in the earlier discussion concerning 
    deployment demonstration at VNE.
    
    Conclusion
    
        The following special conditions are issued for the Cirrus SR-20 
    airplane. This action affects only novel and unusual design features on 
    specified model/series airplanes. It is not a rule of general 
    applicability and affects only those applicants who apply to the FAA 
    for approval of these features on these airplanes.
    
    List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 23
    
        Aircraft, Aviation safety, and Signs and Symbols.
    
    Citation
    
        The authority citation for this special condition is as follows:
    
        Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113 and 44701; 14 CFR 21.16 and 
    101; and 14 CFR 11.28 and 11.49.
    
    Adoption of Special Conditions
    
        Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the 
    Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration issues the following 
    special conditions as part of the type certification basis for the 
    Cirrus Model SR-20 airplanes:
    
    1. Flight Test Demonstration
    
        (a) The system must be demonstrated in flight to satisfactorily 
    perform its intended function, without exceeding the system deployment 
    design loads, for the critical flight conditions.
        (b) Satisfactory deployment of the parachute must be demonstrated, 
    at the most critical airplane weight and balance, for the following 
    flight conditions:
        (1) One of the two maneuvers, (i) or (ii), must be performed for 
    the low speed end of the flight envelope;
        (i) Spin with deployment at one turn or 3 seconds, whichever is 
    longer; or
        (ii) Deployment immediately following the maneuver that results 
    from a pro-spin control input held for one turn or 3 seconds, whichever 
    is longer.
        (2) A minimum of maneuvering speed, VO or higher;
    
    2. Occupant Restraint.
    
        Each seat in the airplane must be equipped with a restraint system, 
    consisting of a seat belt and shoulder harness, that will protect the 
    occupants from head and upper torso injuries during parachute 
    deployment and ground impact at the critical load conditions.
    
    3. Parachute Performance
    
        (a) The parachute must comply with the applicable requirements of 
    TSO-C23c, or an approved equivalent, for the maximum airplane weight at 
    paragraph 1(b)(2).
        (b) The loads during deployment must not exceed 80 percent of the 
    ultimate design load for the attaching structure, the cabin structure 
    surrounding the occupants, and any interconnecting structure of the 
    airplane.
        (c) It must be shown that, although the airplane structure may be 
    damaged, the airplane impact during touchdown will result in an 
    occupant environment in which serious injury to the occupants is 
    improbable.
        (d) It must be shown that, with the parachute deployed, the 
    airplane can impact the ground in various adverse weather conditions, 
    including winds up to 15 knots, without endangering the airplane 
    occupants.
    
    4. System Function and Operations
    
        (a) It must be shown that there is no fire hazard associated with 
    activation of the system.
        (b) The system must be shown to perform its intended function with 
    a high probability that it will operate as designed.
        (c) It must be shown that reliable and functional deployment in the 
    adverse weather conditions that the airplane is approved for have been 
    considered. For example, if the aircraft is certified for flight into 
    known icing, and flight test in actual icing reveals that ice may cover 
    the deployment area, then the possible adverse effects of ice or an ice 
    layer covering the parachute deployment area should be analyzed.
        (d) It must be shown that arming and activating the system can only 
    be accomplished in a sequence that makes inadvertent deployment 
    extremely improbable.
        (e) It must be demonstrated that the system can be activated 
    without difficulty by various sized people, from a 10th percentile 
    female to a 90th percentile male, while sitting in the pilot or copilot 
    seat.
        (f) The system must be labeled to show its identification, 
    function, and operating limitations.
        (g) A warning placard must be located on the fuselage near the 
    rocket motor warning of the rocket.
        (h) The FAA-approved flight manual must include a thorough 
    explanation of operation and limitations as well as the safe deployment 
    envelope.
        (i) It must be shown that the occupants will be protected from 
    serious injury after touchdown under various adverse weather 
    conditions, including high winds.
    
    5. System Protection
    
        (a) All components of the system must provide protection against 
    deterioration due to weathering, corrosion, and abrasion.
        (b) Adequate provisions must be made for ventilation and drainage 
    of the parachute canister and associated structure to ensure the sound 
    condition of the system.
    
    6. System Inspection Provisions
    
        (a) Instructions for continued airworthiness must be prepared for 
    the system that meet the requirements of Sec. 23.1529.
        (b) Adequate means must be provided to permit the close examination 
    of the parachute and other system components to ensure proper 
    functioning, alignment,
    
    [[Page 53737]]
    
    lubrication, and adjustment during the required inspection of the 
    system.
    
    7. Operating Limitations
    
        (a) Operating limitations must be prescribed to ensure proper 
    operation of the system within its deployment envelope. A detailed 
    discussion of the system, including operation, limitations and 
    deployment envelope must be included in the Airplane Flight Manual.
        (b) The deployment envelope of the GARD system must be possible at 
    speeds up to VO or higher.
        (c) Operating limitations must be prescribed for inspecting, 
    repacking, and replacing the parachute and deployment mechanism at 
    approved intervals.
    
        Issued in Kansas City, Missouri on September 30, 1997.
    Michael Gallagher,
    Manager, Small Airplane Directorate Aircraft Certification Service.
    [FR Doc. 97-27504 Filed 10-15-97; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
    
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
11/17/1997
Published:
10/16/1997
Department:
Federal Aviation Administration
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Final special conditions.
Document Number:
97-27504
Dates:
November 17, 1997.
Pages:
53733-53737 (5 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket No. 136CE, Special Condition 23-ACE-88
PDF File:
97-27504.pdf
CFR: (3)
14 CFR 21.17(a)(2)
14 CFR 21.16
14 CFR 23.221