UNITED STATES OF AMERICA


 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION

WASHINGTON, DC  20591

GRANT OF EXEMPTION

     By letter dated November 8, 2005, and supplementary information dated December 19, 2005, Mr. Chip W. Erwin, Czech Aircraft Works, S.R.O. (CZAW), Luční 1824, 686 02 Staré Město, Czech Republic, petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an exemption from § 21.190 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR).  The proposed exemption, if granted, would allow the CZAW Mermaid aircraft to be eligible for the issuance of a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category, even though the aircraft is equipped with retractable landing gear. 

 The petitioner requests relief from the following regulation:

Although the petitioner requests an exemption from § 21.190, we find that, for the operations requested, the petitioner will need an exemption from § 21.190(c)(2), which prescribes that:

(c) Manufacturer's statement of compliance for light-sport category aircraft. The manufacturer's statement of compliance required in paragraph (b)(1)(iii) of this section must—

(2) State that the aircraft meets the provisions of the identified consensus standard;

The petitioner supports its request with the following information: 

AIR-06-045-E
 

The petitioner seeks airworthiness certification in the special light-sport aircraft (SLSA) category under the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) light-sport airplane consensus standards for its “Mermaid” amphibious aircraft.  The Mermaid can take off or land from either a hard surface or from water.  The petitioner states the Mermaid is equipped with repositionable landing gear that can be retracted or extended using controls in the aircraft cockpit.

 The petitioner conjectures the FAA will publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) proposing changes to the regulations to allow SLSA certification of certain aircraft with repositionable landing gear.  This exemption is necessary to allow certification of the Mermaid until the FAA publishes a final rule codifying the relief granted in the exemption. 

 The petitioner has completed design and testing of the Mermaid for compliance with the ASTM F2245-04 standards, and CZAW is ready to apply for SLSA certification.  Instead of waiting for the FAA to finish rulemaking on this issue, the petitioner asserts granting the exemption will allow final certification so the aircraft can be sold to CZAW customers.  Waiting for the FAA to issue a final rule would cause a delay in deliveries of the Mermaid and a loss of market momentum.

 The petitioner acknowledges extra training and endorsements will be required for pilots operating the Mermaid.  CZAW has created a flight training syllabus and flight manual supplement similar to those used for the operation of amphibious aircraft manufactured by Lake Aircraft.  These new standards created by CZAW will meet any added training requirements for the exemption.  CZAW will require this training for all purchasers of the Mermaid, and will issue placards for the aircraft to prevent operation without a proper pilot endorsement.

 Following the LSA-ASTM meeting in Sebring, Florida, CZAW accepted the task of drafting the standards for repositionable gear systems for float-equipped airplanes and amphibious aircraft.  Because of its experience in manufacturing aircraft floats, CZAW is the most qualified organization to write the ASTM standards.  The straightforward design of the CZAW products will meet any future ASTM standard, and it already complies with the landing load requirements of ASTM 2245-04.

A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on January 4, 2006, (71 FR 382).  The FAA received 450 comments from 260 commenters.  To ensure we considered all comments on the issue, the FAA reviewed the comments filed to the docket number for CZAW’s petition and any comments for this issue sent to the docket for the Certification of Aircraft and Airman for the Operation of Light-Sport Aircraft rulemaking (FAA-2001-11133). 

All commenters were in favor of the relief requested by CZAW, except for one commenter who said changing the gear position would increase risk to the occupants, and another commenter who said the consensus standard for light-sport aircraft should be maintained.  We have categorized the comments into four topics: safety, cost, regulatory, and general public interest.

Safety

Fifty-four commenters cited the safety benefits of amphibious aircraft that can make an emergency landing on water or land.  Two commenters said this safety benefit is underreported.  Nine commenters said pilots of float-equipped (non-amphibious) aircraft are tempted to land with less fuel if they are limited to fueling only from dockside facilities.  Two persons commented that aircraft limited to water operations must carry more fuel, adding to risk.  Fourteen commenters cite the safety advantages of being able to park and maintain the aircraft either on land or while docked in water. 

 Twenty-four commenters said the design and performance envelope of the Mermaid aircraft minimizes the risk to its occupants in the event of a landing with misconfigured landing gear.  Four persons said the Mermaid aircraft would be seriously damaged if landed on water with the gear down, and 8 said landing with the wheels up on a hard surface is safe.   Two commented that the Slipstream Genesis and the Adventura II amphibious ultralight aircraft can be landed gear-down on water without damage or injury.  One commenter, a manufacturer of amphibious ultralight aircraft, cited data from two water landings with the gear down in the past five years, and neither incident resulted in any injuries to the occupants.  One commenter recommended requiring that manufacturers of amphibious light-sport aircraft publish crash-test data.

 Twelve persons said changing the gear position is a simple procedure, and 3 commented that increasing the complexity of the aircraft would increase risk.  Three persons recommended equipping the Mermaid aircraft with a simple gear-changing mechanism.  One commenter recommended allowing only one change of gear position per flight, and another recommended permitting gear changes only outside the traffic pattern.  One person recommended immediately raising the gear after a land takeoff because that position is best in an emergency landing, either on land or in the water.

 Thirty-four commenters recommended supplemental pilot training or installing a cockpit placard.  Three suggested the training won’t be difficult for Mermaid pilots.  One commenter suggested the training apply only to sport pilots, not pilots already holding a private pilot certificate or higher.  Nine commenters recommended installation of gear-position warning devices, and one recommended against warning devices because the gear is visible from the cockpit.  One person recommended the FAA implement a special SLSA seaplane rating and recurrent flight review.  One recommended operations procedures for the landing gear be added to the airplane flight manual.

 One petitioner said without an exemption, manufacturers might sell the aircraft equipped with “beaching gear” instead of landing gear, for use only when taxiing to land from water, and vice versa, using a ramp.  This commenter stated pilots would be tempted to use the beaching gear as landing gear, and thus would compromise safety.

 Cost

Thirty-four commenters said the relief would benefit the SLSA concept and light-sport aircraft industry.  Eight commenters cited the economic benefits to fixed-base operators (FBOs) and other airport-based businesses.  Ten commenters said an exemption would save individuals money, 9 said it would economically benefit the manufacturer, and one aircraft importer said it would enhance business.  One cited the economic benefits for the national economy.  One said the aircraft will be a useful and cost-effective tool for flight instruction. 

 Regulatory

Thirty-one commenters said the original concept of the sport pilot rule was to permit use of amphibious aircraft.  Three commenters said FAA permits operation of amphibious ultralight aircraft, and therefore should permit amphibious light-sport aircraft.  Three persons said enforceability would be a problem for the FAA.  One commenter said legal ambiguity would distract pilots from flying chores.  Two persons said certain gliders have retractable gear and controllable pitch propellers and extra training is not required.  One said that manufacturers might employ hazardous designs to comply with the letter of the rule, but not the spirit.  One commenter suggested the weight of the special landing gear on amphibious light-sport aircraft shouldn’t be counted toward the total aircraft weight when determining if the aircraft qualifies for SLSA certification. 

 Forty-six commenters said the rule should be changed to permit operations like those sought by CZAW, and 17 said the rule is illogical and needs clarification.  Ten persons said an FAA representative had informed them the FAA was planning to change the rule.

 General Public Interest

Eight commenters said the public would benefit from the enjoyment of flying the Mermaid aircraft.  Thirty-five persons commented on the added utility of amphibious aircraft.  Twelve cited the convenience of servicing an aircraft on water or land.  One said the Mermaid aircraft is not a threat to the general public.  Three said the aircraft fits a niche for pilots who have special certification limitations.  Two commenters said an exemption would reduce traffic at airports since the aircraft will not require parking at an airport.  Two commenters said insurance companies will have extra safety requirements which will supplement the FAA’s initiatives.

 The Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA) commented that the FAA does not have a regulatory basis on which to deny a SLSA certificate to the Mermaid aircraft. 

EAA does not recommend any required supplemental training for pilots of the Mermaid aircraft outside of that required by existing regulation.

 CZAW (the petitioner) submitted a letter, dated May 2, 2005, citing the safety advantages of amphibious aircraft in general and the Mermaid aircraft in particular.  The commenter cites accident data indicating small seaplanes do not react as catastrophically to a landing with mispositioned gear when compared to a larger amphibious aircraft.  Another commenter said CZAW is especially suited for an exemption because of its experience in building amphibious aircraft. 

A comment from a representative of the Seaplane Pilots Association, Inc. (SPA) agreed with most of the widely held comments, i.e., the aircraft could take advantage of more emergency landing sites, is easy to maintain, and would have access to better storage away from water, and SLSA certification for the Mermaid would provide economic benefits to the light-sport industry, pilots, and CZAW.  The SPA commenter also recommends supplemental training and gear position indicators.  The commenter suggests a gear-down landing on water in an amphibious aircraft “usually results in a uncontrollable inversion of the aircraft.”  The commenter cited NTSB data suggesting about 4% of accidents involving amphibious aircraft are caused by mispositioned landing gear, and that all fatalities in this type of aircraft were limited to accidents involving larger amphibious aircraft instead of light SLSA-type aircraft.

The FAA's analysis is as follows:

The FAA has reviewed CZAW’s petition and supporting information, as well as information provided in comments submitted in response to the publication of a summary of the petition in the Federal Register.  After careful consideration, we find a grant of exemption, subject to specific conditions and limitations, would provide an equivalent level of safety to that of the regulation and would serve the public interest.  The following is a summary of the FAA’s analysis of CZAW’s petition for exemption.

The petitioner seeks an exemption so it can certificate its Mermaid aircraft with a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category.  The Special Light-Sport Aircraft (SLSA) category was created in 2004 to provide for the manufacture of new aircraft that conform to an acceptable consensus standard.  These aircraft are larger than ultralight vehicles but generally smaller than aircraft certificated in the FAA’s existing airworthiness certification categories.  The “Certification of Aircraft and Airmen for the Operation of Light-Sport Aircraft” final rule (69 FR 44772) (sport pilot rule) was meant to address new sport and recreational aircraft that previously lacked suitable certification guidelines. 

Contrary to the petitioner’s assertion, the FAA considers the Mermaid to have retractable landing gear instead of repositionable landing gear.  As set forth in the preamble to the sport pilot final rule, the FAA defines repositionable gear as:

“wheeled landing gear that allows an aircraft designed for operation on water to take off and land from a hard surface, and which may be retracted on the ground to permit takeoff and landing on water.  Repositionable landing gear remains fixed in its position from takeoff through landing.” (69 FR 44801)

The FAA had stated its concerns about retractable landing gear on light-sport aircraft in its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for the sport pilot rule.  Data submitted by commenters to the proposed rule address the FAA’s stated concerns about structural integrity and occupant safety when the pilot lands the aircraft with the landing gear in the incorrect position.  Other commenters stated that most complex aircraft systems are inconsistent with the FAA’s SLSA design philosophy.   Light-sport aircraft are intended for use by a person with the training and experience of a sport pilot.

Each SLSA aircraft design must meet consensus standards acceptable to the FAA, and the existing consensus standards for light-sport aircraft do not address retractable landing gear.  A grant of exemption by the FAA would allow certification of the Mermaid with retractable landing gear; otherwise, the aircraft meets acceptable consensus standards for SLSA aircraft.

The FAA’s primary concern is to determine if the Mermaid is as safe as any other aircraft with SLSA airworthiness certification.  We reviewed the information provided by CZAW, as well as that provided by the commenters to the petition for exemption.  The FAA agrees with the commenters who inferred the safety of amphibious aircraft is better served by allowing for retractable rather than repositionable landing gear, because of the manner in which amphibious aircraft are operated.  The FAA considers the comment from a petitioner who said that pilots might be tempted to use “beaching gear” (if equipped) as landing gear to be a persuasive argument.  Using “beaching gear” as landing gear would compromise safety, because it is not designed for landing impact loads.

The FAA agrees with the commenter who indicated the consensus standard for SLSA aircraft should be maintained.  The FAA plans to participate in developing revisions to aircraft consensus standards to address retractable landing gear for amphibious aircraft.  

The FAA agrees with commenters that, from the perspective of accident impact speeds, the light weight and low speed of light-sport aircraft make them distinct from existing amphibious aircraft.  Also, the data submitted by the SPA supports the assertion that for amphibious aircraft, accidents in smaller airplanes are more

survivable than accidents in larger airplanes, when those airplanes are landed in the water with the wheels down.  The FAA intends to cooperate with industry efforts to determine if appropriate design constraints in the consensus standards can further guarantee that amphibious light-sport aircraft will perform safely in event of a water landing with mispositioned landing gear.

Regarding the comment advising that FAA require that CZAW publish crash-test data for its aircraft, the FAA believes that adherence to design guidelines in the consensus standards would be a more appropriate safety measure for aircraft designed as SLSAs.

Several commenters were concerned that retractable landing gear would add to the complexity of amphibious SLSAs.  Commenters were divided as to the need for landing gear position indicators for amphibious SLSAs.  FAA finds that a direct-action manual lever to mechanically operate the landing gear might be most appropriate for amphibious SLSAs, as is currently allowed for sailplanes certificated as light-sport aircraft. 

Several commenters offered different procedural recommendations to reduce the likelihood of inadvertently landing in water with landing gear down.  The ASTM committee addressing SLSA flight operations consensus standards would be the most ideal forum to consider these recommendations.           

The FAA finds the structural integrity of the Mermaid aircraft is enhanced by its “flying boat” design.  This design offers increased protection for the occupants in event of landing with improperly positioned landing gear.  We also find the simple method of actuating and monitoring the position of the landing gear is consistent with the design objectives for light-sport aircraft.  The proposed requirements for supplemental ground and flight instruction for pilots of the Mermaid, along with required logbook endorsements, are consistent with the training and recordkeeping principles established for sport pilots. 

The FAA notes persons exercising at least private pilot privileges in this aircraft are not required to meet the training and endorsement requirements specified in the conditions and limitations section of this exemption.

We find that, with the conditions and limitations specified, this exemption provides an equivalent level of safety to that of an aircraft that has been issued a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category. 

 The FAA’s Decision:

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption is in the public interest.  Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. §§ 40113 and 44701, delegated to me by the Administrator, Czech Aircraft Works S.R.O. is granted an exemption from 14 CFR § 21.190(c)(2) to the extent necessary to allow CZAW Mermaid aircraft that

otherwise meet the requirements of §21.190 to be eligible for issuance of a special airworthiness certificate in the light-sport category, even though the aircraft are equipped with retractable landing gear.

Conditions and Limitations

1.      This grant of exemption applies only to the Czech Aircraft Works, S.R.O. Mermaid aircraft.

2.      Czech Aircraft Works, S.R.O. must supply each purchaser of a Mermaid aircraft with a copy of this exemption.  A copy of the exemption must be carried on board each Mermaid aircraft certificated under the provisions of this exemption.

3.      Each Mermaid aircraft certificated under the provisions of this exemption must be equipped with a placard stating “LOGBOOK ENDORSEMENT REQUIRED FOR OPERATION BY PERSONS EXERCISING SPORT PILOT PRIVILEGES.”

4.      Each person exercising sport-pilot privileges while operating the Mermaid aircraft must receive ground and flight training from an authorized flight instructor on the following requirements for operation of the Mermaid aircraft: 

a.       Ground training on the function, operation, and preflight inspection of the landing gear system.

b.      Ground and flight training on normal and emergency procedures of the landing gear system, including:

i.              Six (6) takeoffs and landings, including three (3) takeoffs and landings using

          each (water and land) mode of the landing gear.

ii.             Three (3) transitions of the landing gear from one mode to the other while in  

           flight.

c.       Ground and flight training on the landing gear system emergency procedures.

d.      A logbook endorsement from an authorized flight instructor certifying the applicant has received the additional training required under this exemption and is proficient to operate the Mermaid aircraft.

        5.      Czech Aircraft Works, S.R.O. must maintain a record of all owners of the  
              Mermaid aircraft certificated under the provisions of this exemption.

This exemption terminates on April 30, 2010, unless sooner rescinded or superseded.

Issued in Washington, DC, on April 4, 2006.

/s/ John J. Hickey

Director, Aircraft Certification Service