Flight manual requirements for amateur-built experimental aircraft

CASA response to Safety Recommendation SR-008

Safety Recommendation AO-2014-163-SR-008 is for CASA to address the safety issue and take action to address the lack of regulatory requirements for builders of amateur built experimental aircraft to produce a flight manual, or equivalent, for their aircraft following flight testing.

On this occasion CASA does not accept the ATSB recommendation. CASA currently recommends a flight manual be produced for experimental amateur built aircraft, noting they operate to a different standard to other categories of aircraft. In the case of experimental  amateur built aircraft, the necessary flight restrictions and information about the aircraft, such as weight and balance, are established as part of the flight test programme and are included on the experimental certificate, or other appropriate method such as placards or a flight manual. Therefore, CASA considers that subsequent owners and pilots other than the original owner/builder/pilot should still be able to access necessary information through these sources. CASA does not believe this incident in isolation provides sufficient justification for CASA to mandate the documentation of the relevant information referred to in the recommendation, given the other safety protections that are already established.

CASA clarification to their response to Safety Recommendation SR-008

Following a query from the ATSB, CASA provided the following clarification:

...The authority to grant an experimental certificate subject to a condition is specified in paragraph 11.056(1 )(ac) of the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (CASR), which provides that CASA must be satisfied that such a condition is necessary 'in the interests of the safety of other airspace users or persons on the ground or water'

Subregulation 262AP(3) of the Civil Aviation Regulation 1988 restricts the operation of an experimental aircraft to an assigned area and limits the carriage of persons other than essential crew members until it has been demonstrated that the aircraft:
(a) is controllable throughout its normal range of speeds and throughout all manoeuvres to be executed; and
(b) has no hazardous operating characteristics or design features.

To be eligible for an experimental certificate of airworthiness, an applicant is required to provide, amongst other things: upon inspection of the aircraft, any information reasonably needed by CASA or the authorised person or relevant approved design organisation to enable it to impose any conditions, including operational limitations, necessary in the interests of the safety of other airspace users and persons on the ground or water. [CASR 21.193( c)]

On this basis, an aircraft manufacturer or designer may require operating information to be displayed on a placard or in some other manner (e.g., in a flight manual). However, there is no regulatory requirement or explicit authority in the regulations for these performance figures or critical speeds for an amateur built aircraft issued with a Special Certificate of Airworthiness under CASR 21.191 (g) to be similarly displayed.

After review, it is more appropriate that CASA's statement be modified to read: 'In the case of experimental amateur built aircraft, the necessary flight restrictions and information about the aircraft, such as weight and balance, are established as part of the flight test programme.

Operational Limitations under CASR 11.056 may be included in the annex to the experimental certificate.'

ATSB letter to CASA

The ATSB considers that the combined CASA responses to safety recommendation AO-2014-163-SR-008 do not adequately address the safety issue. The ATSB considers that CASA's responses do not provide adequate assurance that the builder, other pilots, and in particular subsequent owners, of amateur-built aircraft will have valid, reliable and enduring reference to operational and performance data sufficient to safely operate their aircraft.

Following discussion between senior staff at the ATSB/CASA biannual meeting of 16 December, a consensus was reached that the ATSB write to CASA again suggesting that CASA might reconsider its response to safety issue AO-2014-163-Sl-01 in the context of the United States (US) National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) safety study AAR-1 2-01 on amateur-built aircraft.

This study resulted in the NTSB releasing two safety recommendations to the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The recommendations (A-12-029 and A-12-032) related to mandating flight manuals for US amateur-built aircraft. These recommendations highlight similar safety concerns identified in ATSB safety issue AO-2014-163-Sl-01.

In response to the NTSB safety recommendations, the FAA undertook to set up a working group to address the issue. In September 2016, the Administration updated their response to the recommendations indicating that the FAA did not have the resources to conduct rule changes. The FAA indicated that instead it would update the relevant Advisory Circular to provide for a requirements-based Phase 1 flight test that would result in flight test data being documented.

On 17 October 2016 the NTSB accepted that the FAA's update of the relevant Advisory Circular had the potential to ensure that US amateur-built aircraft flight test data would be documented. As a result, the NTSB set the status of safety recommendations A-12-029 and A-12-032 to 'Open-acceptable alternate response' pending a review of the FAA's actions.

The ATSB remains of the view that ensuring operators of amateur-built aircraft in Australia have access to relevant operational and performance data would provide a significant safety benefit at what would appear to be minimal cost. In this context, the ATSB considers that CASA may wish to consider action similar to that of the FAA in response to the NTSB safety recommendations for application in Australia.

In relation to the safety recommendation AO-2014-163-SR-008 regarding aircraft flight manual (AFM) requirements for amateur-built experimental (ABE) aircraft, CASA provides the following:

Since our previous correspondence dated 11 April 2017, CASA stated that we will consider mandating the production of AFM or Pilot Operating Handbook (POH) for homebuilt ABE aircraft prior to the sale of the aircraft. This consideration included discussions with Sport Aircraft Association of Australia (SAAA), who had indicated their in-principle agreement to this approach. From this review, CASA has drawn the conclusion and position that we recommend the production of sufficient information to operate the aircraft safely in some form of documentation (AFM, POH, Placarding) rather than mandating the production of an AFM. Mandating the production of an AFM by CASA may give rise to the prospect that it could be assumed that CASA would oversight ABE aircraft to assure the approval of such  a document is consistent, qualitative, and accurate in accordance with CASR 21.006. CASA is not intending to take such an approach as these aircraft operate to a different standard to other categories of aircraft.

Advisory Circulars (AC) 21.4(2) states that useful information should be available to the pilot (in alignment with FAR 23 design standards) and recommends the General Aviation Manufacturer’s Association format for a flight manual. However, for ABE aircraft, AC 21-34 indicates that a flight manual is not necessarily required to be produced, but it is expected that sufficient information to operate the aircraft safely will be available to the pilot in some form of documentation (AFM, POH, Placarding). In the case of ABE aircraft, paragraph 2.11.2 of AC 21-34 states that the necessary operational and performance data about the aircraft is established as part of the flight test program and, at a minimum, the following is required to be provided to the pilot:

aircraft description
b. airspeed limitations
c. powerplant limitations
d. weight and balance and loading information
e. operations permitted
f. normal and emergency procedures
g. minimum field length for take-off and landing.

Furthermore, since 2011 and in consultation with CASA’s Sport Aviation Section, the SAAA have implemented a process to encourage their members to develop an AFM for ABE aircraft upon conclusion of the phase 1 flight testing.  Consequently, the SAAA have updated their ‘Authorised Person Manual of Procedures’ in November 2018 and it requires the SAAA delegate to ensure that the minimum standard of information required by Section 2.11.2 is provided to the pilots via the various optional means described in Section 2.11.1 before the issuance of a phase 2, Special Certificate of Airworthiness. 

In addition, one of the major concerns highlighted by the ATSB was subsequent owners may not have sufficient reference to operational and performance data transferred to them as that information was not readily available in the form of an AFM (or equivalent). The SAAA have indicated to CASA that they advise their members if an AFM (or equivalent) had not been previously developed, then one should be developed before the aircraft is sold to a subsequent owner.  Furthermore, with reference to the ATSB Research and Analysis Report AR-2007-043, in 2007 a survey of 77 pilots who purchased a second-hand ABE aircraft was conducted and found that about 80% of respondents obtained an aircraft flight manual, aircraft log, and engine log.  Where respondents did not obtain a flight manual (8 of 77), two had flight test documents.  Therefore 89.6% of ABE pilots surveyed indicated they received sufficient operational and performance information about the aircraft to operate it safely.

Lastly, the ATSB indicated that CASA may wish to consider actions like that of the FAA in response to the NTSB safety recommendations for application in Australia. CASA reviewed the NTSB safety recommendations and FAA responses, which stated the FAA would not conduct a rule change but instead would update their relevant advisory circular (AC 90-89A) to provide guidance for a requirements-based phase 1 flight test that would result in flight test data being documented. Since the introduction of CASA instrument 10/11 and its successors (now CASA 10/19), the Maintenance Procedures Course (MPC) and flight testing requirements have met or exceeds the FAA position which was acknowledged by the NTSB as an accepted alternate means of compliance.

Noting the information above, CASA believes there is no identified safety concern that would warrant retrospective regulatory action of mandating an AFM or POH for ABE aircraft being sold as there is sufficient guidance material for production of operational and performance documentation.

The ATSB welcomes the recommendation that information necessary to safely operate an aircraft be produced prior to a Phase 2 Special Certificate of Airworthiness being issued. Nevertheless, the ATSB is still concerned that there is unnecessary residual risk for other legacy aircraft. At this point in time, it is clear that CASA do not intend to take any further action to address this safety issue, so the ATSB is closing the safety issue as partially addressed.