[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 181 (Tuesday, September 17, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 48862-48864]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-23815]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Part 25
[Docket No. NM-132, Notice No. SC-96-5-NM]
Special Conditions: Lockheed Martin Aerospace Corp. Model L382J
Airplane
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.
ACTION: Notice of proposed special conditions.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document proposes special conditions for the Lockheed
Martin Aerospace Corp. Model L382J airplane. This airplane will have a
novel or unusual design feature(s) associated with the installation of
a dual head up display (HUD) to be used as a primary flight display
(PFD) for all regimes of normal operation. The HUD will satisfy the
basic requirements of Sec. 25.1321 and serve as the primary source of
flight director command information. This document contains the
additional safety standards which the Administrator considers necessary
to establish a level of safety equivalent to that established by the
airworthiness standards of Part 25 of the federal Aviation Regulations
(FAR).
DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 1, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments on this proposal may be mailed in duplicate to:
Federal Aviation Administration, Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel,
Attention: Rules Docket (ANM-7), Docket No. NM-132, 1601 Lind Avenue
SW, Renton, Washington 98055-4056; or delivered in duplicate to the
Office of the Assistant Chief Counsel at the above address. Comments
must be marked: Docket No. NM-132. Comments may be inspected in the
Rules Docket weekdays, except Federal holidays, between 7:30 a.m. and
4:00 p.m.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dale Dunford, FAA, Flight Test and Systems Branch, ANM-111, Transport
Standards Staff, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service, 1601 Lind Avenue SW, Renton, Washington, 98055-4056; telephone
206-227-2239.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Comments Invited
Interested persons are invited to participate in the making of
these proposed special conditions by submitting such written data,
views, or augments as they may desire. Communications should identify
the regulatory docket or notice number and be submitted in duplicate to
the address specified above. All communications received on or before
the closing date for comments will be considered by the Administrator
before further rulemaking action on this proposal is taken. The
proposals contained in this notice may be changed in light of the
comments received. All comments received will be available, both before
and after the closing date for comments, in the Rules Docket for
examination by interested parties. A report summarizing each
substantive public contact with FAA personnel concerning this
rulemaking will be filed in the docket. Commenters wishing the FAA to
acknowledge receipt of their comments submitted in response to this
notice must include a self-addressed, stamped postcard on which the
following statement is made: ``Comments to Docket No. NM-132.'' The
postcard will be date/time stamped and returned to the commenter.
[[Page 48863]]
Background
On August 2, 1992, Lockheed Martin Aerospace Co. applied for an
amendment to their Type Certificate No. A1SO to include their new Model
L382J. The Model L382J is a derivative of the L382B/E/G currently
approved under Type Certificate No. A1SO, and features a new engine
(with approximately the same rated horsepower, but heavily flat-rated)
and propeller, both of which are controlled by a full authority digital
engine control. Additionally, the flight deck is substantially modified
by the installation of four liquid crystal flight displays, dual head-
up displays, and Mil-Std 1553 data buses. The flight engineer position
is deleted, requiring automation of some functions as well as redesign
of the front and overhead panels. Some structure has been modified but
the aerodynamics of the airplane are essentially unchanged. The latest
part 25 requirement will be used for all significantly modified
portions of the Model 382J (as compared to the present L382), and, for
the unmodified portions of the airplane, the applicable certification
standard will be the Part 25 rules that were effective on February 1,
1965.
The existing rule, Sec. 25.1321, did not anticipate the design
features, symbology, chromatic limitations, and pilot view constraints
associated with most HUDs. This particular HUD application is the first
attempt to qualify the HUD as a PFD. Current head down displays (HDD)
provide all primary and other information without requiring the
flightcrew to transition from one lighting and information display
format to another and are very tolerant of pilot head position
regarding acquiring primary flight data. This HUD application would
require the flight crewmember using the HUD to limit head position in
order to ensure the ability to acquire the necessary flight information
and to frequently transition to a different lighting condition and
display format to acquire flight mode and navigation information. These
proposed special conditions provide all the necessary requirements to
determine acceptability of the HUD as a PFD. A proof of concept effort
is required to substantiate that for the particular application there
are no unsafe features.
Type Certification Basis
Under the provisions of Sec. 21.101, Lockheed Martin Aerospace
Corp. must show that the Model L382J meets the applicable provisions of
the regulations incorporated by reference in Type Certificate No. A1SO
or the applicable regulations in effect on the date of application for
the changes to the Model L382. In addition, the certification basis
includes certain special conditions and later amended sections of Part
25 that are not relevant to these proposed special conditions.
If the Administrator finds that the applicable airworthiness
regulations (i.e., Part 25 as amended) do not contain adequate or
appropriate safety standards for the Model L382J because of a novel or
unusual design feature, special conditions are prescribed under the
provisions of Sec. 21.16.
Special conditions, as appropriate, are issued in accordance with
Sec. 11.49 of the FAR after public notice, as required by Secs. 11.28
and 11.29(b), and become part of the type certification basis in
accordance with Sec. 21.101(b)(2).
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 novel or
unusual design feature, the special conditions would also apply to the
other model under the provisions of Sec. 21.101(a)(1).
Novel or Unusual Design Features
The Model L382J will incorporate a novel or unusual design feature
which is a dual head up display of primary flight information in a
monochromatic format using appropriate symbology that may be different
from similar information provided in the head down display.
As discussed above, these special conditions are applicable to the
L382J. Should Lockheed Martin Aerospace Corp. 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 under the provisions of Sec. 21.101(a)(1).
Conclusion
This action affects only certain novel or unusual design features
on one model of airplanes. It is not a rule of general applicability,
and it affects only the manufacturer who applied to the FAA for
approval of these features on the airplane.
List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 25
Air Transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Safety.
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 the Lockheed Martin Aerospace Corp. L382J airplanes.
1. Display Requirements
a. The HUD must provide adequate information to permit rapid
evaluation of the airplane's flight state and position during all
phases of flight. This must be shown to be adequate for manually
controlling the airplane, and for monitoring the performance of the
automatic flight control system. The monochrome HUD must be
compliant with the display criteria contained in Advisory Circular
25-11, except for the color criteria. Demonstration of the HUD
system adequacy for manually controlling the airplane shall be in
accordance with the methodology outlined in the FAA Handling
Qualities Rating Method (HQRM). This demonstration requirement is
extended to all HUD display formats, unless use of specific formats
is prohibited for specific phases of flight.
b. Symbols must appear clean-shaped, clear, and explicit. Lines
must be narrow, sharp-edged, and without halo or aliasing. Symbols
must be stable with no discernible flicker or jitter.
c. For all phases of flight, the HUD must update the positions
and motions of primary control symbols with sufficient rates and
latencies to support satisfactory manual control performance.
d. The HUD display must present all information in a clear and
unambiguous manner. Display clutter must be minimized. The HUD
symbology must not excessively interfere with pilots' forward view,
ability to visually maneuver the airplane, acquire opposing traffic,
and see the runway environment. Some data elements of primary flight
displays are essential or critical, and must not be removed by an
declutter function. Changes in the display format and primary flight
data arrangement should be minimized to prevent confusion and to
enhance the pilots' ability to interpret vital data.
e. The arrangement and format of the information must be
sufficiently compatible with the head down displays to preclude
pilot confusion, misinterpretation, or excessive cognitive workload.
Immediate transition between the two displays, whether required by
navigation duties, failure conditions, unusual airplane attitudes,
or other reasons, must not present difficulties in data
interpretation or delays/interruptions in the crew's ability to
manually control the airplane or to monitor the automatic flight
controls system.
f. If a wind shear detection system, a ground proximity warning
system (GPWS), or a traffic alert and collision avoidance system
(TCAS), as installed, the guidance, warnings, and annunciations
required to be a part of these systems, and normally required to be
in the pilot's primary field of view, must be displayed on the HUD.
g. The HUD display must be demonstrated to be adequate for
airplane recovery from
[[Page 48864]]
unusual attitudes. This capability must be shown for all foreseeable
modes of upset, including crew mishandling, autopilot failure
(including ``slowovers''), and turbulence/gust encounters.
2. Installation Requirements
a. The arrangement of HUD display controls must be visible to
and within reach of the pilot from any normal seated position. The
position and movement of the controls must not lead to inadvertent
operation. The HUD controls must be adequately illuminated for all
normal background lighting conditions, and must not create any
objectionable reflections on the HUD or other flight instruments.
b. The display brightness must be satisfactory in the presence
of dynamically changing background (ambient) lighting conditions. If
automatic control is not provided, it must be shown that a single
setting is satisfactory. When the brightness level is altered, the
relative luminance of each displayed symbol, character, or data
shall vary smoothly. In no case shall any selectable brightness
level allow any information to be invisible while other data remains
discernible. There shall be no objectionable brightness transients
when transitioning between manual and automatic control. The HUD
data shall be visible in lighting conditions from 0 fL to 10,000 fL.
If certain lighting conditions prevent the crew to adequately seeing
and interpreting HUD data (for example, flying directly toward the
sun), accommodation must be provided to permit the crew to make a
ready transition to the head down displays.
c. To the greatest extent practicable, the HUD controls must be
integrated with other controls, including the flight director, to
minimize the crew workload associated with HUD operation and to
ensure flightcrew awareness of engaged flight guidance modes.
d. The installation of the HUD system must not interfere or
restrict other installed equipment such as emergency oxygen masks,
headsets, or microphones. The installation of the HUD must not
adversely affect the emergency egress provisions for the flightcrew,
or significantly interfere with crew access. The system also must
not hinder the crew's movement while conducting any flight
procedures.
e. The installation of the HUD system must not present the crew
with any objectionable glare or reflection in any lighting
conditions. This is equally applicable from glare or reflections
visible on the HUD system itself, or that originating from the HUD
system and visible in other ares such as the windshield. The
installation of the HUD system must not significantly obstruct
either pilot's external field of view when both combiners are
deployed. The external view requirements of Sec. 25.773 must be
retained with both combiners deployed.
f. The HUD system must be designed and installed to prevent the
possibility of pilot injury in the event of an accident or any other
foreseeable circumstance such as turbulence encounter, hard landing,
bird strike, etc. The installation of the HUD, including overhead
unit and combiner, must comply with the head injury criteria of
Sec. 25.562, Amendment 25-64.
g. The design eyebox shall be centered around each pilot's
design eye position, and must be large enough that the minimum
monocular field of view is visible at the following minimum
displacements from the cockpit Design Eye Position:
Lateral: 1.5 inches left and right
Vertical: 1.0 inches up and down
Longitudinal: 2.0 inches fore and aft
These requirements must be met for pilots from 5'2'' to 6'3''
tall, while seated with seat belts fastened and with the pilot
positioned at the design eye position (ref. Sec. 25.777(c)). Larger
eyebox dimensions may be required for meeting operational
requirements for use as a full time primary flight display.
h. The HUD system combiner must not create any objectionable
distortion of the pilot's external view. The optical qualities
(accommodation, luminance, vergence) of the HUD shall be uniform
across the entire field of view. When viewed by both eyes from any
off-center position within the eyebox, non-uniformities shall not
produce perceivable differences in binocular view. Notwithstanding
compliance with these minimum eyebox dimensions, the HUD eyebox must
be large enough to adequately serve as a primary flight display
without inducing adverse effects on pilot vision and fatigue.
3. System Requirements
a. The HUD system must be shown to perform its intended function
as a primary flight display during all phases of flight. The normal
operation of the HUD system cannot adversely affect, or be adversely
affected by other airplane systems. Malfunctions of the HUD system
which cause loss of all primary flight displays, including both HUDs
and HDDs, shall be extremely improbable.
b. The criticality of the HUD system's function to display
flight and navigation data, including the potential to display
hazardously misleading information, must be assessed according to
Secs. 25.1309 and 25.1333, Advisory Circular (AC) 25-11 paragraph
4.a., and AC 25.1309-1A. All alleviating flightcrew actions that are
considered in the HUD safety analysis must be validated during
testing for incorporation in the airplane flight manual procedures
section or for inclusion in type-specific training.
c. Since the display of hazardously misleading information on
more than one primary flight display must be extremely improbable,
HUD system software shall be developed to Level A requirements, as
specified by RTCA Document DO-178B, ``Software Considerations in
Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification.''
d. The HUD system must monitor the position of the combiner and
provide a warning to the crew when the combiner position is such
that conformal symbols will be hazardously misaligned.
e. The HUD system must be shown adequate for airplane control
and guidance during an engine failure any phase of flight.
f. There must be no adverse physiological effects of long term
use of the HUD system, such as fatigue or eye strain, that cause the
pilot to have to revert to the HDD. Use of the HUD system also
cannot require excessive cognitive workload or unreasonable
limitations on head position.
g. The current mode of the flight guidance/automatic flight
control system, shall be clearly annunciated in the HUD unless there
are compensating features.
i. The HUD system must be shown to comply with the high
intensity radiated fields certification requirements specified in
another special condition, not yet finalized.
Issued in Renton, Washington, on September 9, 1996.
James V. Devany,
Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification
Service, ANM-100.
[FR Doc. 96-23815 Filed 9-16-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
