MAKE CHAPTER 288 YOUR AVIATION HOME! E-AB, TYPE CERTIFIED, VINTAGE, WARBIRD, ETC.
MAKE CHAPTER 288 YOUR AVIATION HOME! E-AB, TYPE CERTIFIED, VINTAGE, WARBIRD, ETC.
The FAA Registry is now offering limited online aircraft registration services at cares.faa.gov. Individual aircraft owners can complete self-guided aircraft registration applications, upload legal and supplemental documents, receive auto-generated notifications, request aircraft registration N- numbers, use modernized online payment options, receive instant notification of payment, and digitally sign Aircraft Registration Applications. Online services will be continuously improved and expanded to include corporations, LLCs, partnerships, and non-citizen trusts.
-From AOPA-
The FAA's Aviation Weather Handbook consolidates weather information from several advisory circulars into one place and operates as a technical reference for anyone flying in the national airspace system.
The handbook, published on December 20, is the result of a yearslong effort to streamline user access to aviation weather guidance.
Information in the handbook comes from the most-used weather products and information and meets the FAA's standards for pilot weather training and certification.
"Publication of the Aviation Weather Handbook is the culmination of 3+ years of hard work by Flight Standards and a host of others within the aviation weather community," FAA aviation safety manager, James Marks said. "The new handbook combines information and guidance from 6 separate weather related advisory circulars into a single source document to support pilots, dispatchers, and operators with flight planning and decision making."
The handbook is available for download from the FAA's website; however, the FAA says it is essential for users to be "familiar with and apply the pertinent parts of Title 14 CFR and the Aeronautical Information Manual."
The handbook is currently available online in PDF format. The 500-page document can be downloaded onto mobile devices and computers and can be viewed with a PDF reader app.
A bit of confusion regarding VFR charting rules going forward was subtly cleared up this week (Jan. 10) when the FAA issued a follow-up notice regarding a September publication.
That notice had said that “Effective November 3, 2022, Visual Flight Rules (VFR) aeronautical charts will no longer make reference to emergency value in private airport charting.” Worsening the news, it added that “Only private airports with landmark value will be retained and charted beyond February 23, 2023.” Many in the general aviation community took this to mean that private airports would largely be absent from future VFR charts, leaving out useful landmarks and safety options for aviators reliant on the maps for navigation. The EAA noted that nearly ¾ of the country’s airports are private. Without being able to locate them, the imperiled aviator is all the worse off.
In response, the FAA published a notice this week, clarifying that the only real, essential change noticed by the average pilot will be the removal of the term “emergency” from the chart legend when referring to private airfields. The FAA clarified that it determines the inclusion of such fields based on their use as a landmark, and those criteria will remain unchanged, leaving any previously charted private airports just as they were before the updated cycle. Airports are evaluated by operational status, airspace, length and surface of their runways, owner’s preference, satellite imagery, and airport remarks before adding them to VFR charts.
The updated notice states that “aeronautical charts users should not see a significant change to private airports depicted on VFR charts.”
The Eliminate Aviation Gasoline Lead Emissions program, known as EAGLE, has received $10 million in government funding to help reach its goal of phasing out leaded fuel for general aviation aircraft in the US by 2030. The funds allocated by Congress will support the EAGLE partnership and may be used to expedite fuel testing and evaluation for safe unleaded fuels being assessed in the Piston Aviation Fuels Initiative (PAFI) program, leading to an FAA fleet authorization.
In late October the FAA changed its standard on electrocardiogram (ECG) findings for medical applicants, decreasing the types of results that would lead to a medical deferral. While Class II and III medical holders are not subject to routine ECG testing, the FAA also mirrored the change in its protocol for heart arrhythmias, which all airmen are required to note if diagnosed.
The change allows airmen with a “First-degree AV (atrioventricular) block with PR interval less than 300 ms (0.30 sec)” to receive a medical certificate without deferral. This change was actually known informally to the aeromedical community as far back as 2018 but was formalized in the October change to the FAA’s list of 18 “normal abnormal” ECG findings that do not require medical deferral.
The FAA made this change because airmen with this abnormal – but benign – result almost never showed any concerning indications upon follow-up testing, so the FAA eliminated the deferral requirement.
This fits a pattern of recent reforms at the FAA’s Office of Aerospace Medicine, currently under the leadership of Federal Air Surgeon Dr. Susan Northrup, that is gradually making the application process easier for airmen. While EAA continues to work aggressively to reduce barriers to medical certification, Dr. Northrup – a GA and warbird pilot herself – and her team have been very receptive to change and community input.
Unfortunately, there have been recent allegations that the ECG change was due to an ulterior, political motive. This is absolutely false, and the associated personal attacks on Dr. Northrup, a career public servant and U.S. Air Force veteran, are inexcusable. Given the criticism, often warranted, that aeromedical certification is too difficult in the United States, it is ironic that a change that removed a medically unnecessary barrier to easy certification has garnered controversy.
Dr. Stephen Leonard, EAA Aeromedical Advisory Council chairman, explained, “rather than requiring AMEs to defer the exams of pilots showing those changes, and requiring the pilot to schedule consultation with a cardiologist and a few thousand dollars’ worth of testing, FAA authorizes us as physician examiners to question the pilot, verify that there are no associated symptoms or other conditions that might indicate a clinically significant cardiac issue, and go ahead and issue the medical certificate.”
Dr. Leonard further clarified that “we still send the EKG to FAA, their doctors still review it, and if they have any question, they follow up. Never, in 42 years as an AME, have I seen one of those ‘normal abnormals’ turn out to be clinically or aeromedically significant.”
Other recent FAA reforms include a new policy on situational depression and mild post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), two very positive steps as the FAA looks to overhaul its mental health policies. There is much more work to be done, but EAA looks forward to accomplishing it together with Dr. Northrup and the Office of Aerospace Medicine in the coming years.
**********************************
AND ANOTHER UPCOMING POLICY CHANGE AUTHORIZED BY THE FEDERAL AIR SURGEON
Vision limitations for corrective lenses/glasses have been reduced from 1,2,3,4,6,19, and 20 to ONE:
Vision Limitation #102:
Must use corrective lens(es) to meet vision standards at all required distances
1- Must have available glasses for near vision.
2- Must wear corrective lenses.
3- Must wear corrective lenses for near and distant vision.
4- Must wear corrective lenses for distant vision and have glasses for near vision.
6- Must wear prismatic correction
19- Must wear corrective lenses, and possess glasses for near / intermediate vision.
20- Holder shall possess glasses for near/intermediate vision.
102- Must use corrective lens (es) to meet vision standards at all required distances.
Note: 17- Not valid for night flying or by color signal control remains.
This was reflected in AMCS on December 28, 2022.
FROM AOPA:
The FAA concurred with AOPA and individuals who supported a rulemaking proposal that enables pilots who medically qualify under BasicMed to act as required crewmembers other than pilot in command—more specifically as safety pilots.
The FAA announced November 16 that Acting Administrator Billy Nolen has signed the final rule that will take effect 30 days after its forthcoming publication in the Federal Register. The rule brings significant change to the relatively small commercial balloon industry, establishing a medical certification requirement for the first time estimated to apply to just under 5,000 pilots. It also includes BasicMed provisions that now enable about 50,000 pilots (and counting) to take advantage of opportunities to fly as a safety pilot, as well as enabling pilots to act as pilot in command during a special medical flight test authorized under FAR Part 67 without holding a medical certificate.
The agency published a draft copy of the final rule online, a document in which most of the 71 pages are spent detailing the requirement for balloon pilots to hold a second class medical certificate when conducting commercial operations (flying for compensation or hire) other than flight training. The FAA estimates that just under 9 percent of the 4,869 certificated commercial balloon pilots have already been required to obtain a second class medical by their insurance carriers, requirements implemented following the fatal accident that prompted the creation of the final rule.
That accident happened on July 30, 2016, when the pilot and 15 passengers aboard a balloon operated by Heart of Texas Hot Air Balloon Rides were killed when the balloon descended through clouds into power lines. The NTSB determined that the pilot was impaired by prescription medications, and the FAA determined that a second class medical requirement could have prevented the pilot from making that flight. The FAA noted in the final rule that another accident in June 2021 in Albuquerque, New Mexico, in which the pilot and four passengers were killed, remains under investigation. Taken together, the accidents “demonstrate that ballooning is not insignificant, and the potential risk for catastrophic accidents is not insignificant.” While the number of commercial balloon operations is small as a percentage of total aeronautical operations, “the FAA notes that balloons are frequently used for carrying passengers for compensation and present a risk that justifies a level of medical oversight equivalent to that of pilots of powered aircraft for certain operations such as commercial sightseeing operations.”
AOPA focused its comments responding to the 2021 notice of proposed rulemaking on the “miscellaneous amendments” that affect about 50,000 pilots to date who have completed the requirements (an online course and a medical exam conducted by their personal physician) to fly powered aircraft under BasicMed, the alternative medical process enabled by a law in 2016. More than 75,000 pilots have completed the requirements of the BasicMed program since its inception, and an estimated 50,000 pilots are currently exercising these privileges.
The FAA noted that comments from AOPA and individuals were “generally supportive” of the miscellaneous amendments. “Accordingly, the FAA is implementing the amendments as proposed,” the agency stated in the final rule. Specifically, the final rule amends various provisions within Part 61 and Part 68 to make BasicMed pilots eligible to act as safety pilots (required crewmembers other than the PIC).
“AOPA appreciates the FAA’s amendment to allow persons who operate under BasicMed to serve as a required pilot flight-crewmember when not acting as PIC,” said AOPA Senior Director of Regulatory Affairs Christopher Cooper. “This change will allow for increased access and opportunities for training, proficiency, and experience for the entire pilot community. We also appreciate the FAA’s continued support for and expansion of BasicMed.”
The FAA rejected suggestions to extend BasicMed eligibility to commercial balloon pilots, along with other alternatives proposed by those who submitted comments related to medical certification of balloon pilots.
Over the past decade the FAA has increased its use of electronic communication methods substantially. The Agency use to view communicating electronically with aircraft owners, users, maintainers, and the general public as a convenient additional way to get its message out. In 2022, in appears, the FAA has decided to cross the electronic Rubicon to now rely solely on electronic communication methods. That is both great news for General Aviation and very big a problem for General Aviation. Its great news in that now aircraft owners and maintainers have near immediate access to the most current information available about the aircraft they operate and maintain. It’s a problem for some segments of General Aviation since not every owner checks the internet for maintenance updates before flying. For example, while I worked for the FAA’s Legal Office an oft debated question was the application to the facts of a case the phrase in §43.13, “current manufacturer’s maintenance manual or Instructions for Continued Airworthiness.” Does that phrase mean the most current manual or ICA the manufacturer has published or the latest version the owner or maintainer possesses? Owing to the time it takes for a design approval holder to mail a new manual update to “persons required … to comply with any of those instructions” (see, §21.50) which version of the ICA must be followed could materially affect whether the owner or maintainer complied with the rules. Now, with the advent of the FAA’s new Dynamic Regulatory System or DRS, the agency seems to want everyone to rely exclusively on the DRS for that information – no more mailing of important documents.
Just a couple of weeks ahead of the change, the FAA announced that effective in mid-August of 2022 it would no longer mail copies of Airworthiness Directives (AD’s) to registered owners, as had been the practice for many decades. Now owners and maintainers must check the DRS for updates to see if the FAA has published an AD that might affect the operation of the aircraft or require a maintainer to perform extra tasks before approving the aircraft for return to service. The FAA used to carefully consider that not every aircraft owner (particularly in some segments of General Aviation) even had a home computer much less access to high-speed internet service. Apparently, no longer. The FAA’s announcement that it will end mailing hard copies of AD’s to registered owners means that the agency is, in essence, requiring that to be an aircraft owner you must have a computer and internet access. Further, the burden is now shifted from the FAA to the owner. An aircraft owner cannot wait to get an AD in the mail, you must search the DRS for applicable AD’s. How often do you have to do that? Monthly? Weekly? Before each flight?
Some thoughts to remember going forward. If you are contemplating an aircraft purchase, part of your due diligence now must include the DRS. You cannot rely solely on the paper records the previous owner will give you at the time ownership transfers. If you are a maintenance provider, you are likely already use to searching the FAA’s Regulatory and Guidance Library or other electronic databases for applicable AD’s. Those other FAA databases are now subsumed into the DRS so get used to using the DRS. If you are already an aircraft owner, proactively check the DRS for new AD’s applicable to your aircraft and check them carefully for applicability and the time in which maintenance tasks are due so you can have your maintenance provider do what is necessary to keep your aircraft flying. I still believe the DRS is, on balance, a good tool. Just be aware that the FAA is now, to a greater and greater extent, relying on it as the agency’s exclusive method of communication.
This article is from AOPA: Author: Currently Of Counsel to the firm of Paul A. Lange, LLC, Mr. Christopher Poreda served as the FAA’s New England Regional Counsel from 2002 to 2015. A graduate of the US Air Force Academy in 1974, he flew F-4 Phantoms for the US Air Force in Europe and at Nellis AFB in Las Vegas, NV, before serving as a flight instructor for the Air Force. After leaving the Air Force, he earned a law degree from Northeastern University and clerked for the Massachusetts Appeals Court before working as an associate for Bingham, Dana & Gould in Boston until joining the FAA’s legal office in 1990. Attorney Poreda served as a staff attorney for the FAA and as the counsel to the Engine and Propeller Directorate at the FAA’s New England Region before assuming a management role for the FAA’s legal office in 2002. He retired from Federal service in 2015 after 37 years with the US Air Force and the FAA. He has taught Aviation Law to law students at New England Law, Boston, and undergraduates at Southern New Hampshire University. He remains an active flight instructor in the Boston area.
This is a listing of those parts the US Federal Aviation Administration - Lists as Suspected Unapproved Parts
GA Safety Enhancement Topics
Here's a list of topics for you to choose from. Just click on the one that interests you and you will be directed to that Fact Sheet.
The FAA manages the world’s safest and most complex aviation system. On an average day, we serve more than 45,000 flights and 2.9 million airline passengers across more than 29 million square miles of airspace. The National Airspace System is a dynamic organism that is constantly evolving. This interactive dashboard helps explain how it works.
AOPA's Pilot Information Center staff continues to hear from members who are caught in a bind by the ongoing gap between the supply of authorized FAA staff for processing aircraft registration renewal requests and the demand for those services. As of May 19, the FAA was processing registration applications received in the mail "on approximately December 30," the agency reported online. The processing time has hovered between four and four-and-a-half months for some time, and the longer processing time is the product of several factors. AOPA Vice President of Regulatory Affairs Murray Huling said recent conversations with FAA leadership have produced some encouraging news, though not the immediate relief AOPA members seek. "The aircraft registry received approval to increase the number of personnel processing aircraft registrations," Huling said, noting the extra staff will help reduce the processing time required for aircraft registration renewals—but it will take time for the change to become apparent. New personnel must be trained for aircraft registration work. While seemingly simple, aircraft registration has stringent personnel requirements with certain positions requiring authorization to examine legal documents, due to the title and ownership verification responsibilities that the FAA has. A key difference between aircraft and most other vehicles: An expired registration also invalidates an aircraft's airworthiness certificate, and that could have unwelcome consequences should an insurance claim arise involving an aircraft that the FAA does not deem airworthy. Huling said aircraft owners can help reduce the FAA’s processing times by paying careful attention to detail. FAA advised that the two most common causes of processing delay result from avoidable oversights: Aircraft owners move but forget to update their mailing address; a few presume (incorrectly) that the U.S. Postal Service will advise the FAA of the owner's new address. Regulations require aircraft owners to advise the registry directly of any address change within 30 days. Some registration applications are filed without all required documents, which can include submitting documents that are inaccurate, incomplete, or illegible. Such documents cannot be processed, and must be returned to the applicant for correction, and that can significantly delay processing. Online renewal tends to speed the process for all involved and is the preferred option for many aircraft owners, though not available to everyone. An online registration renewal requires waiting for a notice from the FAA that is timed to arrive (barring mail delay) at the registered owner's address six months before the current registration expires. The renewal notice contains an essential security code used to file the application online. Any aircraft owner who does not receive the notice, or misplaces it, must add their paperwork onto the pile of mail-in applications “Aircraft owners that receive the online renewal option with a code should use this preferred method as soon as that reminder is received and no later than five months before the expiration,” Huling said. The FAA advised Huling that renewal applicants who have not received their registration within 30 days of expiration should contact the FAA. While telephone was the method suggested for that, Huling said there is also an online form that can be used to get a message through to the branch. Another important form that is found on the main aircraft registration page allows applicants to check the status of their submitted registration application by N-number. "I'm glad to hear that they got approval to hire more staff," Huling said. He added that by submitting accurate, legible, and complete applications on time, and also ensuring that the owner's mailing address is up to date in the aircraft registry, aircraft owners can help reduce the FAA’s processing time for everyone.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is making it easier to research aviation safety guidance material from the Office of Aviation Safety (AVS).
The Dynamic Regulatory System (DRS) combines more than 65 document types from more than a dozen different repositories into a single searchable application. This comprehensive knowledge center centralizes the FAA’s aviation safety guidance material from the Flight Standards Information System (FSIMS) and the agency’s Regulatory Guidance System (RGL).
Each guidance document includes a link to the Code of Federal Regulations provision on which the document is based. DRS contains more than 2 million regulatory guidance documents, which can be browsed or searched. A search engine allows for basic or advanced searches and different ways to sort and view the results. The system includes pending and current versions of all documents along with their revision history. Information in the DRS is updated every 24 hours
Would Serve As A National, Independent Forum To Facilitate Collaboration And Cooperation Between All Sectors Of Aviation
U.S. Sens. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) and Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) have introduced S. 3360, a bill to establish the National Center for the Advancement of Aviation.
The National Center for the Advancement of Aviation would serve as a national, independent forum to facilitate collaboration and cooperation between all sectors of aviation and aerospace stakeholders and related partners, with a particular focus on aviation and aerospace workforce development. It would allow these sectors to coordinate, promote, and support the future of aviation and ensure that the United States remains a global aviation and aerospace leader.
“I am proud to introduce this bill to establish the National Center for the Advancement of Aviation with Sen. Duckworth,” Inhofe (pictured)said. “In the more than 100 years since Wilbur and Orville Wright conducted their historic flights at Kitty Hawk, our nation has seen aviation in the United States grow, powered by the individual passions of pilots, aviators and countless others. To continue this legacy, our bipartisan legislation would create an independent, stakeholder-led national center where all aviation and aviation-related stakeholders can work in concert to address the demands and challenges associated with a safe and vibrant national aviation system. As a national forum for cross-disciplinary collaboration, this center would: support aviation and aerospace education and curriculum efforts; leverage industry expertise to develop and deploy the needed workforce of trained and qualified pilots, engineers and maintainers; and serve as a central repository of economic and safety data for all stakeholders. The NCAA will advance a collaborative process to promote aviation in the United States and assist in the development of the next generation of aviation and aerospace workers. I appreciate all the input and support from stakeholders across the aviation community that have made today’s legislation possible.”
“As a pilot, I know that investing in aviation-focused education and workforce development programs helps attract and retain the best talent and keeps our nation at the forefront of global aviation innovation,” said Duckworth. “I’m proud to introduce the National Center for the Advancement of Aviation Act with Sen. Inhofe to support the development of next-generation aviators and foster collaboration in the aviation and aerospace industries to help meet the demands and challenges of tomorrow.”
This legislation is strongly supported by a large cross-section of stakeholders representing hundreds of thousands of individuals, companies, schools and other entities involved in all segments of aviation and aerospace.
NBAA joined with more than 130 aviation trade and advocacy groups, commercial airlines, fractional and charter operators, pilots unions, state and airport representatives and other aviation stakeholders, representing hundreds of thousands of individuals, companies, schools and other entities involved in all segments of aviation and aerospace, in a letter expressing their support for the measure.
“Sens. Inhofe and Duckworth are proven aviation champions, and their support for this important bill underscores their commitment to ensuring the industry’s future is bright,” said NBAA president and CEO Ed Bolen. “We are proud to support this legislation and look forward to doing all we can to ensure its passage.”
The FAA published its latest revision to Advisory Circular (AC) 90-114 (Revision B), Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast Operations which provides comprehensive guidance on ADS-B operations in the National Airspace System (NAS) in accordance with ADS-B regulations (14 CFR sections 91.225 and 91.227). Of note in this revision is the clarification of certain operational policies like aircraft that are exempt from 91.225 (Section 3.2), ADS-B Out operations during formation flying activities (Section 4.3.1) and during aerobatic flight (Section 4.3.2.6.2), and inoperative ADS-B procedures (Section 4.3.4.2).
The AC also provides a helpful overview of the ADS-B system architecture, the various forms of available equipment, broadcast services available to ADS-B users, and operational considerations with regard to equipment performance requirements and airspace restrictions.
By Mike Hodges, Air Safety Investigator, and Clint Crookshanks, Aerospace Engineer (Structures)
When an aircraft crashes, National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) air safety investigators and aerospace engineers must determine if the event can be classified as an accident or an incident, as defined by Title 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 830.
The FAA has announced the impending migration of Airworthiness Directives to the Dynamic Regulatory System, or DRS, that will result in all ADs being published on the new system from August 16th, 2022.
The change will allow the administration to simplify the record keeping and dissemination of documents contained within its Regulatory Guidance Library. Those referring to ADs should be familiar with the new system, as new directives will be available solely on the DRS. Current users with a subscription to AD and EAD alerts “may still receive notifications about ADs and EADs,” said the announcement, though new subscribers are advised to use the FAA GovDelivery Service. The FAA will continue to provide mailed copies of the AD Biweekly, since it is a paid subscription overseen by the Government Printing Office.
The migration includes Emergency Airworthiness Directives (EAD), Airworthiness Directives (AD), and Biweekly Airworthiness Directives (AD Biweekly). The DRS is a fresh addition to the regulatory ecosystem, being unveiled earlier this year as the replacement for the Flight Systems Information Management System (FSIMS). The FAA intends for the DRS to become a one-stop shop for all things compliance, a “comprehensive knowledge center of regulatory and guidance materials from the office of aviation safety”. Of course, as a single resource, any other service or office pertaining to flight will be included as well.
Section 61.65(d) contains the aeronautical experience requirements for a person applying for an instrument-airplane rating. Section 61.65(d)(2)(ii)(C) states, in relevant part, that an applicant must complete 40 hours of actual or simulated instrument time that includes at least one cross country flight that is performed under instrument flight rules and involves "three different kinds of approaches with the use of navigation systems." As noted, the FAA has previously issued two legal interpretations to address what constitutes "three different kinds of approaches with the use of navigation systems." The Glaser interpretation, issued in 2008, concluded that an applicant for an instrument rating must use three different kinds of navigation systems to meet § 61.65(d)(2)(ii)(C). The Pratte interpretation, issued in 2012, confirmed the conclusion in Glaser and further concluded that precision approach radars (PAR) and airport surveillance radars (ASR) are not considered navigation systems for the purpose of meeting the requirements in § 61.65(d)(2)(ii)(C). For the reasons provided in this memorandum, the Office of the Chief Counsel has decided to rescind the Glaser and Pratte interpretations.