Rule: Revisions To Cockpit Voice Recorder and Digital Flight Data Recorder Regulations

Friday,
March 7, 2008
Part III
Department of
Transportation
Federal Aviation Administration
14 CFR Parts 23, 25, 27 et al.

Revisions to Cockpit Voice Recorder and
Digital Flight Data Recorder Regulations;
Final Rule
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with RULES2
VerDate Aug<31>2005 21:04 Mar 06, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\07MRR2.SGM 07MRR2
12542 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 46 / Friday, March 7, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Authority for This Rulemaking Recommendation No. A–96–89.

The FAA’s authority to issue rules Within two years, require all aircraft
Federal Aviation Administration regarding aviation safety is found in required to have a CVR to be retrofitted
Title 49 of the United States Code. with a CVR that receives, on dedicated
14 CFR Parts 23, 25, 27, 29, 91, 121, Subtitle I, Section 106 describes the channels, (1) uninterrupted input from
125, 129 and 135 authority of the FAA Administrator. the boom or mask microphone and
Subtitle VII, Aviation Programs, headphones of each crewmember; and
[Docket No. FAA–2005–20245; Amendment (2) uninterrupted input from an area
No. 23–58, 25–124, 27–43, 29–50, 91–300, describes in more detail the scope of the
agency’s authority. microphone. During these recordings, a
121–338, 125–54, 129–45, and 135–113]
This rulemaking is promulgated sidetone must be produced only when
RIN 2120-AH88 under the authority described in the transmitter or interphone is selected.
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section Finally, all audio signals received by
Revisions to Cockpit Voice Recorder 44701. Under that section, the FAA is hand-held microphones must be
and Digital Flight Data Recorder charged with prescribing regulations recorded on the respective flight
Regulations providing minimum standards for other crewmember’s channel when keyed to
practices, methods and procedures the ‘‘ON’’ position.
AGENCY: Federal Aviation Recommendation No. A–96–171.
Administration (FAA), DOT. necessary for safety in air commerce.
This regulation is within the scope of Require that all newly manufactured
ACTION: Final rule. CVRs intended for use on airplanes have
that authority since flight data recorders
are the only means available to account a minimum recording duration of two
SUMMARY: This final rule amends hours.
cockpit voice recorder (CVR) and digital for aircraft movement and flight crew
Recommendation No. A–99–16. By
flight data recorder (DFDR) regulations actions critical to finding the probable
January 1, 2005, retrofit all airplanes
affecting certain air carriers, operators, cause of incidents or accidents,
that are required to carry a CVR and an
and aircraft manufacturers. This final including data that could prevent future
FDR with a CVR that (1) meets the
rule increases the duration of certain incidents or accidents.
standards of the Technical Standard
CVR recordings, increases the data Background Order on Cockpit Voice Recorder
recording rate for certain DFDR Systems, TSO-C123a, or later revision;
parameters, requires physical separation A. Statement of the Problem
(2) is capable of recording the last two
of the DFDR and CVR, improves the For many years, the National hours of audio; and (3) is fitted with a
reliability of the power supplies to both Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has 10-minute independent power source
the CVR and DFDR, and requires that experienced difficulties while that is located with the CVR and that
certain datalink communications investigating aircraft accidents and automatically engages and provides 10
received on an aircraft be recorded if incidents. The information recorded on minutes of operation whenever power to
datalink communication equipment is cockpit voice recorders (CVRs) and the recorder ceases, either by normal
installed. This final rule is based on Digital Flight Data Recorders (DFDRs) shutdown or by a loss of power to the
recommendations issued by the has not always been sufficient to bus.
National Transportation Safety Board support the NTSB’s investigations. The Recommendation No. A–99–17.
following its investigations of several problems encountered by the NTSB Require all aircraft manufactured after
accidents and incidents, and includes include the limited duration of CVR January 1, 2003, that are required to
other revisions the FAA has determined recordings preceding an incident, and carry a CVR and a DFDR, to be equipped
are necessary. These changes to CVR the loss of power to both CVRs and with two combination (CVR/DFDR)
and DFDR systems are intended to DFDRs. These issues arose in the recording systems. One system should
improve the quality and quantity of investigation of the following accidents be located as close to the cockpit as
information recorded, and increase the and incidents: Alaska Airlines, Inc. practicable and the other as far aft as
potential for retaining important flight 261 on January 31, 2000; EgyptAir practicable. Both recording systems
information needed for accident and flight 990 on October 31, 1999; Delta Air should be capable of recording all
incident investigations. Lines, Inc. flight 2461 on December 15, mandatory data parameters covering the
DATES: These amendments become 1998; Swissair flight 111 on September previous 25 hours of operation and all
effective April 7, 2008. 2, 1998; SilkAir flight 185 on December cockpit audio and controller-pilot
19, 1997; ValuJet Airlines flight 592 on datalink communications for the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
May 11, 1996; Trans World Airlines, previous two hours of operation. The
technical questions contact: Timothy W.
Inc. flight 800 on July 17, 1996; and system located near the cockpit should
Shaver, Avionics Systems Branch,
ValuJet Airlines flight 597 on June 8, be provided with an independent power
Aircraft Certification Service, AIR–130,
1995. The notice of proposed source that engages automatically and
Federal Aviation Administration, 800
rulemaking that preceded this final rule provides 10 minutes of operation
Independence Avenue, SW.,
was published on February 28, 2005 whenever normal aircraft power ceases.
Washington, DC 20591; telephone (202)
(‘‘Revisions to Cockpit Voice Recorder The aft system should be powered by
385–4686; facsimile (202) 385–4651; e-
and Digital Flight Data Recorder the bus that provides the maximum
mail tim.shaver@faa.gov. For legal
Regulations,’’ 70 FR 9752) and discusses reliability for operation without
questions contact: Karen L. Petronis,
these accidents and incidents in more jeopardizing service to essential or
Regulations Division, Office of the Chief
detail, starting on page 9753. emergency loads. The system near the
Counsel, Federal Aviation
cockpit should be powered by the bus
Administration, 800 Independence B. NTSB Recommendations that provides the second highest
Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20591;
Based on its findings following these reliability for operation without

telephone (202) 267–3073; facsimile investigations, the NTSB issued five jeopardizing service to essential or
(202) 267–3073; e-mail safety recommendations for improving emergency loads.
karen.petronis@faa.gov. the flight recorder systems on all aircraft Recommendation No. A–99–18.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: required to carry a CVR and a DFDR. Amend § 25.1457 (for CVRs) and
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 46 / Friday, March 7, 2008 / Rules and Regulations 12543
§ 25.1459 (for DFDRs) to require that data to compare probable costs and NATA provided examples of aircraft
CVRs, DFDRs, and redundant benefits. We did request comment on models it does not believe were
combination CVR/DFDR units be each of these items. considered, as well as the types of
powered from separate generator buses A more detailed discussion of each information that the association asserts
with the highest reliability. proposed change can be found in the should have been collected by the FAA
NPRM document on pages 9755–9762. for analysis. The NATA suggested itself
C. Summary of the NPRM
as a source of the data, but did not
In February 2005, we proposed Discussion of Comments include with its comment any of the
changes to the regulations that address A. General Summary data it suggested the FAA collect.
the NTSB’s recommendations (70 FR The National Business Aviation
9752; February 28, 2005)(the NPRM). The FAA received 55 submissions
Association (NBAA) submitted a similar
We agreed with recommendation Nos. from 53 commenters (two commenters
comment, indicating that a broad
A–96–89, A–96–171, A–99–18, and each submitted two comments) in segment of on-demand operators would
parts of Nos. A–99–16 and A–99–17. response to the NPRM. have to comply with the proposed
In the NPRM, we proposed that all Six commenters supported the regulations, but that there was no
CVRs be able to retain the last two hours proposal in its entirety. Thirty-two indication that we properly evaluated
of cockpit conversation, and that a commenters generally supported the their effect on those operators. As an
better technical standard for equipment intent, but offered detailed alternatives example, the NBAA noted that the cost
be mandatory. We proposed that aircraft or changes to various sections. The of development of a supplemental type
carry an independent power source to supporting commenters included certificate that would be needed for
power CVRs for 10 minutes after main airframe manufacturers, aircraft more than 15,000 aircraft was not
power sources fail. We also proposed operators, industry associations, an determined or accounted for in the
language to standardize across operating accident investigator, and several regulatory evaluation.
parts when a CVR is operated. individuals. Similarly, the Regional Airline
We proposed wiring requirements Three commenters opposed the Association (RAA) said that the
that would ensure that each CVR and proposal in its entirety and requested regulatory evaluation does not
DFDR receives its electrical power from that we either abandon or postpone the adequately describe the benefits of the
the bus that provides the maximum proposed requirements. One commenter proposed equipment retrofit, and does
reliability for operation of each recorder did not specifically state opposition, but not feel that there is enough information
without jeopardizing service to essential it was inferred from the comment. Eight in the regulatory evaluation for them to
or emergency loads. Each recorder also commenters objected to the proposed comment on adequately.
must remain powered for as long as changes specifically for part 27 and part These associations urged the FAA to
possible without jeopardizing 29 rotorcraft, for part 91 and part 135 retract those parts of the rule that affect
emergency operation of the aircraft. aircraft, or for aircraft with fewer than these operators, or to take no further
These requirements would apply to 60 seats. Some of these commenters also action until more comprehensive data
newly manufactured aircraft. questioned the FAA’s analysis of the can be gathered and analyzed. Each
We proposed that CVRs and DFDRs be effect of the proposed rule on small commenter believes that the cost
installed in separate containers in all businesses. The opposing commenters estimates would be significantly higher
airplanes; rotorcraft would be allowed included aircraft operators, industry than those presented in the NPRM.
to have a single combined unit for both associations, and individuals. We reviewed our analysis of the
recorders. For aircraft that have both a In the three remaining comments, one impact of the two CVR changes
CVR and a DFDR, we proposed that the individual commenter offered a specific proposed as retrofits for part 91 and 135
interphone communications language change to the proposed rule airplanes (2-hour recorders and
requirements described in the without stating support or opposition to independent power supply), and we
certification rules apply to all part 23 the rest of it. The other two comments have concluded that our regulatory
and part 25 airplanes. were joint submissions from four evaluation did not include several
We proposed increased data recording members of the U.S. House of issues raised by the commenters. Since
rates for certain flight control Representatives that expressed strong we are not able to quantify the potential
parameters that would apply to both support for the use of deployable burden of the two CVR retrofit
airplanes and rotorcraft. recorder systems. requirements on these operators, we
We proposed that datalink have removed the two CVR
B. Proposed Retrofits for Part 91 and
communications be recorded when requirements from the final rule for
Part 135 Aircraft
datalink systems are installed on aircraft operating under parts 91 and
airplanes after a certain date, and we Two parts of the proposed rule would 135. For other reasons discussed below,
sought comment on the nature and affect aircraft currently operating under we are also not adopting the proposed
scope of what should be required to be parts 91 and 135 by requiring ‘checklist to checklist’ language for part
recorded, acknowledging that the state equipment retrofits. These include the 91 or part 135. New applicability
of the technology is still developing. requirements that CVRs use solid state sections will retain the same checklist
We did not propose to adopt the memory (replacing magnetic tape) and language as exists in the affected part.
NTSB recommendation that the 10- have two hours of recording capability, However, we are adopting the
minute CVR power supply be installed up from as little as 15 minutes in part datalink recording requirement for these
as a retrofit on current aircraft, that 91. two operating parts. If an operator of an
aircraft carry a deployable recorder The National Air Transportation aircraft under part 91 or 135 voluntarily
system, or that each airplane carry two Association (NATA) expressed installs datalink equipment after two
complete recording systems. In disappointment with what it considers years from the effective date of the rule,
evaluating these recommendations, we the agency’s failure to include a the requirement for datalink recordation
determined that the anticipated costs meaningful review of the impact of will apply. This is consistent with the
were too great to justify any potential these two proposed requirements on requirement facing operators under
benefit, or that there was insufficient part 91 and part 135 operators. The parts 121 and 125, and we have no
reason to discriminate between these the proposed requirement for part 129 the confusion about current
operating rules. We are also adopting airplanes, however, does not specify a requirements.
the requirement for separate containers recording duration, which it noted may No change to the 2-hour recording
for CVRs and DFDRs (except for have been an omission. duration has been made in the final rule
rotorcraft) as it imposes no cost since it The language we proposed for based on these comments.
is a codification of current FAA policy § 129.22 (now § 129.24) would require D. CVR Independent Power Supply
and no combined recorder has ever been the CVR on a U.S. registered airplane to
approved for installation on an airplane. record the information that would be Seven commenters (ALPA, Boeing,
The NPRM also contained several required to be recorded if the aircraft Smiths, the NTSB, the Aerospace
other requirements that will affect only were operated under part 121, 125, or Industries Association (AIA), Radiant
newly manufactured airplanes that may 135. This requirement captures the Power Corporation (Radiant) and
operate under parts 91 and 135. The proposed requirement in those parts for Airbus) expressed concern that the
commenters provided no reason why two hours of CVR recording time. No proposed requirement for a Recorder
those upgrades that must be change to the final rule is necessary for Independent Power Supply (RIPS) for
incorporated at the time of aircraft the two-hour duration to apply to part CVRs did not address installation
manufacture should not be applicable to 129 airplanes. issues. These commenters want to
all categories of aircraft regardless of the minimize the possibility of an
In addition to its comment on the
eventual operator. In general, the inadvertent disconnect from the CVR
economic value of the retrofit, the RAA
proposed CVR and DFDR upgrades on that could result from damage to the
questioned the value of a two hour
wiring, data rates, and interphone RIPS or to exposed, lengthy wiring.
recorder on flights that are on average
communications will be adopted as These commenters suggested several
much shorter. Since many of the RAA’s
proposed for all newly manufactured installation solutions, including:
constituents operate flights of less than • Installing a combination kit of the
aircraft. Similarly, the CVR 60 minutes, the RAA stated that the
requirements for 2-hour solid state CVR plus the RIPS (AIA), or integrating
current 30 minute recording time is the RIPS in the CVR (Airbus, Radiant,
recorders and the addition of a backup sufficient to capture relevant voice data.
power system will remain for all newly Smiths); and
Although we agreed with the • Co-locating the CVR and the RIPS
manufactured aircraft. Again, we are commenters concerning the evaluation
unable to draw a distinction between (ALPA) or locating the RIPS as close as
of retrofit costs, the FAA cannot agree practical to the CVR (Airbus, Boeing,
the eventual operating regulations for
that a different standard should apply to NTSB).
aircraft of any size that have yet to be
certain aircraft when they are in The FAA agrees with the concern
manufactured.
regional operation. The benefit of this raised by these commenters. We have
C. CVR Recording Duration additional information is the same considered the various installation
The FAA proposed that all CVRs be regardless of individual flight duration. solutions suggested by the commenters,
able to retain the last two hours of Further, aircraft transfer between routes and have determined that requiring the
cockpit audio. Both the NTSB and the and operating parts, and none of the RIPS to be installed as close as
Transportation Safety Board of Canada aircraft cited by the RAA are limited by practicable to the CVR is the best
noted that the short duration of design to flights of 30 minutes or less. solution. This configuration will
available cockpit audio hindered the Smiths Aerospace, LLC (Smiths) minimize the distance between the CVR
investigation of several accidents. commented that the standard proposed and the RIPS and the amount of wiring
The Air Line Pilots Association in the final rule for CVRs, TSO–C123a, necessary, decreasing the potential for a
(ALPA) did not support the proposal to mirrors the standard set forth in power failure affecting the CVR when
increase CVR recording time because EUROCAE document ED–56, which main power is lost and the RIPS unit
the FAA did not propose any increase allows for the combined (merged) engages. Therefore, the final rule
in the privacy protections regarding the recording of three non-area microphone contains a requirement that the RIPS be
access and use of information recorded signals into a single recording after the installed as close as practicable to the
on a CVR. The ALPA stated that existing first 30 minutes. Smiths suggested that CVR.
protections are inadequate despite years allowing combined audio for 90 of the As to the integration of the RIPS into
of its attempts to change the standard. proposed 120 minutes will reduce the the CVR unit, we do not have enough
We recognize that ALPA and others quality and effectiveness of the data to support either mandating or
have concerns about the use of CVR recording. Smiths also proposed prohibiting a combined RIPS/CVR unit.
data, and we continue to work to language that would specifically The decision to combine the units is
address these concerns. We are unable prohibit the use of magnetic tape best left to the system designer for
to concur with the conclusion that those recorders, since it was the agency’s individual aircraft. Our TSO–C155 and
concerns outweigh the investigative stated intent in the NPRM. other industry standards allow for
need for more information, especially While an interesting technical certification of RIPS as either a
when it is so readily available and consideration, the FAA did not propose combined or stand-alone unit.
affordable. The history of accident a change to the TSO standard (which is Combined units would meet the ‘‘as
investigation contains several examples based on ED–56) in the NPRM, and the close as practicable’’ standard of the
of CVR recordings that begin well into process for changing TSOs is separate regulation.
a conversation of the problem under and complex. We also believe that a Boeing noted the term ‘‘independent’’
investigation. The adverse effect on requirement for two hours of recording could be interpreted to mean the RIPS
safety of these abbreviated recordings time is enough to eliminate the use of must be a separate piece of equipment
cannot be ignored. magnetic tape recorders for those and cannot be incorporated into the
Boeing Commercial Airplanes aircraft subject to the requirement. CVR. Boeing suggested adding a new
(Boeing) agreed that the additional data Further, Smiths did not indicate where subparagraph to § 25.1457 that would
from a longer duration recorder would this language would be inserted, and a allow, but does not require,
have been a significant benefit in change in the retrofit applicability for incorporation of the RIPS as part of the
accident investigation. Boeing notes that parts 91 and 135 would simply add to CVR.
As stated, the purpose of the RIPS substantial installation and annual F. RIPS Duration Requirement
equipment is to ensure the CVR costs. Three commenters (Boeing and two
continues to function for 10 minutes The lack of historical data supporting individuals) requested that the FAA
following the loss of its main power a need for RIPS for CVRs in rotorcraft change the duration of the RIPS power
source by having its own independent was also cited by HAI. It noted that the requirement. Boeing requested that the
power source. The term ‘‘independent’’ proposed rule is directed at transport requirement be changed from 10
does not describe the location of the category airplanes, where RIPS can be minutes to 10±1 minutes, to prevent
RIPS as it relates to the CVR. In TSO- justified, but does not make the case for erasure or overwriting of valuable data,
C155, we state that the RIPS may be a small to medium rotorcraft certificated and to be consistent with TSO C–155 for
part of the CVR or separate from it. under part 27 or part 29. The HAI stated RIPS, and other industry standards from
Five commenters (AIA, ALPA, that the increase in system weight, cost EUROCAE’s ED–112 (Minimum
Boeing, L3 Communications (L3) and and complexity would provide little or Operational Performance Specification
the NTSB) suggested the final rule no enhancement to safety. for Crash Protected Airborne Recorder
should contain a 4-year retrofit RIPS As a consequence of the proposed Systems) and ARINC 777 (Recorder
requirement similar to that proposed for RIPS installation, Columbia Helicopters, Independent Power Supply). If adopted,
the 30-minute-to-2-hour CVR Inc. (Columbia) asked the FAA to Boeing suggested that the final rule state
conversion. The NTSB stated the consider possible unwanted that the ‘‘10±1 minutes’’ means the
benefits of such a requirement vastly consequences on helicopters operating backup power source must operate at
outweigh the additional costs. Boeing under part 133 external load operation least 9 minutes, but not longer than 11
agreed, stating that a RIPS retrofit would (non-passenger carrying) rules. minutes.
have significant value for in-service Columbia noted that the added weight One individual commenter suggested
aircraft. The ALPA and AIA support a and operating cost of a RIPS might increasing the time to 30 minutes
RIPS retrofit requirement for all aircraft discourage these operators from because 10 minutes is too short a time
operating under part 121, while L3 voluntarily installing CVRs. Columbia period to record everything during a
noted that it had anticipated the need suggested language limiting the RIPS power failure. The commenter provided
for such equipment, and that their requirement to passenger carrying no details or examples of the need for
product development is complete and operations. 30 minutes. A second individual stated
represents an available, cost-effective The final rule includes part 27 and 29 that the 10-minute standard is
solution. rotorcraft with fewer than 20 passengers insufficient, but did not specify what
While the FAA recognizes the benefits in the RIPS requirement, as proposed. the duration should be.
of expanding the RIPS requirement The purpose of the RIPS requirement is The FAA agrees with Boeing that the
beyond newly manufactured aircraft, we to record additional pilot final rule should be consistent with the
remain unable to mandate retrofit as a communications, environmental noises TSO and industry standards. The final
cost-beneficial change. When we and other information (such as from a rule requires the RIPS to provide 10±1
considered the option for the NPRM, we cockpit-mounted area microphone) if all minutes of electrical power to operate
found that the cost of a RIPS retrofit was power is lost. A loss of power is both the cockpit voice recorder and
considerable and the burden on current possible on aircraft of all types. We are cockpit area microphone. We are not
operators would be substantial. Even if unable to distinguish rotorcraft from including the additional suggested
the equipment is already available, a other aircraft when the possibility of language since the documents cited by
RIPS retrofit could easily require major power loss is considered, and the Boeing establish that 10±1 minutes
alterations and extensive aircraft benefits are considered the same. We do means the backup power source shall
rework. While expressing their support, not require compliance with EUROCAE run at least 9 minutes, but not longer
the commenters did not provide any standards; our regulations must reflect than 11 minutes, and repetition of the
data that changes our conclusion. our requirements. language is not necessary.
The FAA does not agree the RIPS The other commenters did not explain
E. RIPS on Rotorcraft
requirement might discourage part 133 why the international standard of 10
Three commenters, Bell Helicopter operators from voluntarily installing minutes is not appropriate nor provide
Textron Inc. (Bell), Eurocopter CVRs. The RIPS requirement is for any other support for their positions.
Deutschland GmbH (Eurocopter) and newly manufactured aircraft whose
the Helicopter Association International operating rules require a CVR. There is G. Other RIPS Issues
(HAI), recommended the RIPS no mandated RIPS retrofit if a CVR is Airbus stated that two years is not
requirement not apply to part 27 and 29 installed on an aircraft that does not enough time to integrate a RIPS into
rotorcraft. Bell stated the NPRM failed require one for operation. current aircraft designs. Airbus stated
to make a case for small to medium The CVR and RIPS TSOs provide the that TSO–C155 requires that a RIPS
rotorcraft (fewer than 20 passengers) minimum performance standards for system provide both a failure
and noted that these aircraft are much this equipment. However, neither one monitoring function and indications to
less likely to suffer the types of events requires that RIPS be installed; that is the flightcrew. Airbus requested that the
and failures that occur in fixed wing done by regulation. If a part 133 compliance time be changed to four
aircraft. operator voluntarily chooses to install a years, to account for the modifications,
Eurocopter stated that a RIPS CVR, it is not currently required to also qualification and certification of RIPS
requirement is not relevant for rotorcraft install the RIPS, nor is the operator equipment.
for two reasons, first citing three prevented from installing a RIPS. This We agree that RIPS installation on
EUROCAE documents that forbid decision is totally up to the part 133 newly manufactured aircraft will
shutdown of a CVR by the crew. operator. Therefore, we do not agree require integration into the existing
Second, when the CVR is already with the commenter that adding the warning and indication systems.
powered by the safest electrical power RIPS requirement to parts 27 and 29 However, Airbus did not provide us
bus, a RIPS would not decrease the would affect the decision to voluntarily with any specific data to support its
probability of a failure, but would add install a CVR. position that this requirement could not
be accomplished two years after this Bell also stated that the ‘‘no single costs or benefits that would change our
final rule. Further, no other airframe electrical failure could disable both the conclusion. The final rule remains
manufacturer expressed this concern. CVR and DFDR’’ language was applicable only to aircraft manufactured
The 2-year compliance date for the ambiguous. Bell noted that it has been two years after this final rule.
installation of RIPS into newly interpreted in different ways, and that if
2. Single Electrical Failure vs. Most
manufactured airplanes is adopted as it is applied to either the failure of any
single electrical component within a Reliable Bus
proposed.
Airbus and Boeing each noted that the combined CVR/DFDR, or to a single In addition to the requirement that no
CVR may also provide power for the electrical failure external to the single electrical failure disable both
cockpit area microphone and associated recorder, it would make most available recorders discussed above, we proposed
electronics, such as a preamplifier. recorders obsolete. Bell suggested that if that all newly manufactured aircraft
Since the proposed RIPS requirement the applicability to all rotorcraft is have a CVR and DFDR installed that
only applies to the CVR, they expressed maintained, the language be changed to receives its electrical power from the
concern that the additional equipment indicate that the single electrical failure bus that provides the maximum
may not be powered and would render at issue is external to the recorder. reliability of operation.
the CVR useless despite its own power. Columbia Helicopters made a similar AirTran and Northwest Airlines
Each commenter suggested that argument, noting that for an allowed (Northwest) suggested the proposed
language be added to § 25.1457 that combined recorder, the requirement is language for these two requirements is
addresses a continuation of power to all confusing and contradictory, and contradictory. AirTran stated that, in
parts of the CVR system required for requested that the language be clarified. order to have the DFDR and CVR on
recording area microphone audio input. The FAA acknowledges that the different sources to preclude a single
The FAA agrees with Boeing and separation of electrical power has not failure from disabling both units, one of
Airbus. In addition to the reference for been an issue on rotorcraft to date. the units is likely to be on a less reliable
10±1 minutes of electrical power However, the potential problem being source than the other. Northwest asked
discussed above, the regulation has been addressed by the ‘‘no single electrical if requiring both the CVR and FDR to be
changed to include power to operate failure’’ requirement remains in any powered by the most reliable bus would
both the cockpit voice recorder and the tiered electrical power system and may
create an opportunity for a single point
cockpit-mounted area microphone. affect all aircraft, fixed wing or
electrical failure that disabled both
AirTran Airways (AirTran) requested rotorcraft. We also agree that the
recorders, violating the single failure
that any RIPS requirement ensure CVR language of the proposed requirement
proposal.
interchangeability so that operators will could be misinterpreted in a combined
recorder installation. Since the intent of We disagree that the two requirements
not have to maintain separate CVR are contradictory. Proper system design
inventories for aircraft that have the the regulation is to prevent electrical
failures of aircraft wiring or electrical will allow the CVR and the FDR to be
RIPS and those that do not. powered by different, but equally
While we recognize that CVR power external to the recorder from
disabling both recorder functions, we reliable, buses. This will ensure that a
interchangeability is desirable, the type single point failure does not affect both.
of CVR (and RIPS) on a given aircraft is have changed §§ 23.1457(d)(4),
25.1459(a)(7), 27.1457(d)(4) and We recognize that some sensors in the
driven by installation and component DFDR system may be powered by buses
design, not by regulation. The CVR and 29.1459(a)(6) to reflect this
interpretation. However, we remain that are lower in the electrical hierarchy
RIPS each have a TSO (as well as than the recorders. While some
ARINC standards) that will ensure that unable to distinguish rotorcraft by the
number of passengers, and the rule is information may be lost if these lower
as long as an operator uses these buses fail, the failure itself could
components, interchangeability should adopted for all helicopters with the
modifications described here. provide insight as to the sequence of
not be an issue. AirTran and other events occurring during an accident or
The NTSB and the AIA recommended
operators need to provide input to the incident and does not create an issue
the no single electrical failure
manufacturers of airframes and CVRs with the failure of power to the recorder
requirement be expanded beyond newly
during the development of RIPS itself.
manufactured aircraft to include the
equipment. The final rule does not existing fleet. The NTSB noted that,
address CVR interchangeability. 3. Most Reliable Bus—Other Comments
with this change, the final rule would
H. CVR and DFDR Wiring Requirements comply with the NTSB recommendation The ATA expressed concern that the
on this subject. The NTSB also stated proposed language regarding power to
1. Single Electrical Failure that since most existing aircraft already the recorders from the most reliable bus
We proposed that CVRs and DFDRs be meet this requirement, any retrofit (§§ 25.1457(d)(1) and 25.1459(a)(3)) is
installed so that no single electrical requirement would have a minimal vague, and proposed different language
failure could disable the recorders. economic impact. The AIA suggested for these sections. Northwest expressed
Bell requested the FAA exclude part the FAA consider including the current the concern that the last sentence in
27 and part 29 rotorcraft with fewer fleet after conducting a cost-benefit each paragraph is redundant and
than 20 passengers from the analysis. suggested the proposed language is
requirement that no single electrical The FAA considered this option redundant with the existing paragraph.
failure will disable both the CVR and while developing the NPRM and found We have reviewed the proposed
DFDR. Bell referred to historical data that a wiring retrofit represents a language and have concluded it
presented by the United Kingdom significant economic burden, and could properly conveys the intent of the
Aircraft Accident Investigation Board require extensive aircraft rework in requirements. The language suggested
(AAIB) and Bell’s own experience with order to rewire not only the recorder by the ATA introduces terms that would
combined recorders, to conclude that systems, but other aircraft systems that be open to numerous interpretations,
this requirement is unnecessary and are affected by changes made for the and suggests a requirement for recorder
would result in significant development recorders. The commenters did not power much more restrictive than our
and certification costs. provide any new data for either the intent.
Regarding Northwest’s comment that may have one combined unit. A These suggestions bring up several
the second sentence in each paragraph combined unit must meet all of the issues when one or more combination
is redundant, we note that, while requirements for both DFDRs and CVRs, recorders are installed, including non-
similar, they address two separate which are determined by aircraft age. functioning equipment for Minimum
issues. The first sentence addresses the The other DFDR and CVR Equipment List (MEL) relief, RIPS units,
source of the recorder’s power (i.e., the requirements are mandated in and the regulations on recorder location
bus). The second sentence addresses the § 135.152(m)(1), which applies to and separate containers.
situation experienced during Swissair aircraft manufactured two years after the Accordingly, the FAA is revising the
flight 111, in which the flightcrew rule, and repeats the new container regulations to allow for the following in
disabled the electric bus that powered reference; there is no retrofit the final rule:
both the CVR and the DFDR while requirement for the other certification (1) When a single combination
searching for a source of smoke in the sections referring to wiring if the recorder is used in place of either a
cockpit. installation is not altered. On this topic, DFDR or a CVR, it will only be allowed
Smiths suggested that all CVRs on the commenter may also have been to function as the chosen unit. The
newly manufactured aircraft provide confused by the discussion in the combination recorder and the single
dual isolated power bus inputs to preamble of the proposed rule, which function recorder must maintain the
provide the recorders with the most indicates that if a rotorcraft operator requirements for aft location and
reliable and available power and reduce changes a current two-unit installation separate boxes. No relief from any
the possibility of a single electrical to a single combined unit, the new regulation is granted by this
failure disabling a recorder. power and wiring requirements must be configuration. If one combination box is
We reviewed Smiths’ proposal, but met. Since a single combined unit is used, it cannot be used as a CVR located
the commenter did not provide any optional, the rule does not impose the near the cockpit.
information comparing its suggestion to new wiring requirements unless the (2) When two combination recorders
the proposed rule, any suggestion of the operator chooses to make the change, are used, one may be located near the
extent to which it might be used, or the and the operator must consider the cost cockpit. This recorder will function as
cost of such a requirement. We of the rewiring as part of its decision to the CVR and, in newly manufactured
concluded that our proposal to require change to a single combined unit. airplanes, may be co-located with the
the DFDR and the CVR to be powered RIPS. In the event of an equipment
J. Dual Combination Recorders
by separate buses is sufficient and is failure subject to relief under an
performance-based. When the NTSB recommended the operator’s MEL, no further relief is given
installation of two full recording than for separate units.
I. Separate Containers systems, it was included as part of a The FAA does not consider the
Boeing noted the proposal stated that much larger system recommendation. voluntary installation of two
each separate container must meet the The NTSB suggested that each aircraft combination recorders to be the
‘‘crashworthiness requirements already have a system that included two redundant/dual system envisioned by
in the regulations.’’ Boeing assumed this combination recorders, one fore and one the NTSB recommendation. The use of
statement refers to §§ 25.1457(e) and aft, with a RIPS attached to the forward two combination recorders is not
25.1459(b) and requested clarification. combination recorder. The NTSB mandated for any installation. Single-
The phrase ‘‘crashworthiness recommended this as a retrofit. purpose recorders are the regulatory
requirements already in the regulations’’ We did not propose the installation of
minimum, and when used, all of the
refers to the existing requirements in two full sets of recording equipment,
requirements including separate
parts 91, 121, 125 and 135 for installing referred to as ‘‘dual combination
containers, wiring, and aft location
recorders (both CVR and DFDR) that recorders,’’ as recommended by the
remain the same.
meet the crashworthiness requirements NTSB because of the substantial costs
of TSO–C123a or TSO–C124a. involved. We did propose that a RIPS be K. Increased DFDR Recording Rates
Columbia sought clarification on the installed for the CVRs on newly
applicability of the proposed 1. Need for 16 Hertz (Hz) Requirement
manufactured airplanes.
requirements of §§ 27.1459 and 29.1459. Several commenters, including The FAA proposed an increase in the
Columbia interpreted the proposal to Airbus, ALPA, Boeing, Embraer, recording rate to 16 Hz for certain flight
require all helicopters currently Honeywell, Smiths, and the NTSB, each control parameters on aircraft
equipped with combination recorders to suggested some variation on our manufactured two years after the final
meet the entirety of the certification allowing the use of combination rule. While acknowledging that
sections cited four years after the recorders. In a related issue, three parameters recorded at 1 or 2 Hz are
adoption of the final rule, which would individual commenters recommended inadequate, five commenters, Airbus,
require a retrofit of several items, placing the CVR and DFDR in separate AirTran, ATA, Boeing, and Embraer,
including the 10 minute RIPS. Columbia parts of the aircraft to increase the suggested that a 16 Hz recording rate is
suggested this interpretation did not chances of survival. The commenters excessive and could be very costly.
reflect the intent of the FAA and raised issues of cost, survivability, Airbus argued the proposed rate
recommended rewording the rule to separate location, and redundancy in would not only affect the DFDR and
remove any confusion. arguing for combination recorders. associated interface units, but would
We believe the commenter is Generally, if two combination also require redesign of the aircraft’s
misreading the proposal. Columbia recorders are installed, one would be systems providing the parameter data.
referred to ‘‘proposed 135.152(1),’’ but designated as the DFDR and one as the Airbus stated the impact of such a
that is not a valid reference. Proposed CVR in accordance with the separate redesign is not covered in the
§ 135.152(l) (lower case ‘‘L’’) addresses container requirement. As a follow-on to compliance cost estimates in the NPRM,
only the recorder containers, and means this configuration, several commenters nor is the proposed 2-year time frame
that part 23 and 25 airplanes must requested that one combination recorder realistic for a redesign of these systems.
maintain the recorders in two separate be located at the front of the airplane to Therefore, Airbus recommended
boxes, while part 27 and 29 rotorcraft act as the CVR. replacing the existing standard with a
sampling rate appropriate to a given Boeing recommended that the final acquisition systems can support the
aircraft type and supplied rates for each rule prohibit interleaving, since that proposed sample rate of 16 Hz, and
of its aircraft models. Airbus’s comment practice impacts the true sampling rate. would require new equipment. Embraer
does not include information on how Interleaving is the practice of sampling recommended a lower sample rate (8
the FAA would decide which rate is inputs and combining those samples to Hz), and proposed that a 16 Hz sample
appropriate for any given aircraft, or comply with sampling rate rate apply to new aircraft type
how such a standard could be requirements. For example, if the left certification programs only.
established or its estimated cost for each elevator position is recorded two times Honeywell noted that, for aircraft in
model aircraft. per second, and the right elevator two production, any increase in the
AirTran noted the proposed sampling times per second, the total of these two sampling rate of a control surface
rate for each flight control unit (nine measurements are combined to derive a position or a control input would
total) would exceed the capacity of the sampling rate of four times per second. require a change to the systems that
DFDR system installed in its fleet. This practice was originally necessary to provide source data to the DFDR system.
AirTran recommended a sampling rate meet the sampling rate requirements on Honeywell also stated that a sampling
equal to the recording capacity of the DFDR systems with smaller memory rate of 16 times per second, while
DFDR systems. For AirTran’s installed capacity. This practice is undesirable reasonable for some parameters, might
DFDR systems, this capacity is roughly because, in reality, alternating the be burdensome or inefficient for others.
8 Hz. inputs only provides data at the lower Honeywell suggested that a
The ATA noted that some in- rate for each interleaved position. In performance-based standard for
production aircraft do not provide data some cases, such as for inboard and recording would be superior to the one
at the 16 Hz rate. These aircraft would outboard aileron surface positions, the proposed, with the actual rate to be
require an extensive and costly redesign inboard surface is locked out under established as part of the certification
to keep component interchangeability. certain flight conditions. When the process.
Therefore, ATA proposed changing the parameters from these surfaces are We are adopting an 8 Hz requirement
16 Hz recording rate to a recording rate interleaved, the result is no data for half in the final rule rather than the 16 Hz
requirement that is ‘‘at a maximum rate of the samples.
available from that aircraft system up to proposed. Based on the comments, we
We agree with Boeing and have
16 Hz.’’ have determined that 8 Hz is the
changed the language of the final rule to
Boeing stated that 16 Hz is not maximum rate that can be achieved
state that alternately sampling inputs to
necessary if the goal is to make the without requiring modification of the
meet the applicable sampling interval is
recorded control motions unambiguous. systems and equipment that provide
not permitted. The prohibition on
Instead, a change to 16 Hz would result individual parameter data to the DFDR
interleaving applies to those flight
in unnecessarily large data analysis files system. The need for some increase in
control parameters subject to footnote
and require significant added costs to the sampling rate has been addressed in
20 to part 121 Appendix M (and its
change the signal source. Boeing the NTSB recommendations, as well as
equivalent in other operating parts).
recommended recording at 4 Hz. a study done by the FAA and NASA.
Embraer suggested the 16 Hz 2. 16 Hz Requirement—Applicability The study clearly shows that critical
recording rate will require a substantial Four commenters (Bombardier, control surface position data can be lost
amount of data memory capacity on Dassault, Embraer and Honeywell) at the lower sampling rates, and that it
DFDRs that may not be available. This recommended that any requirement to is true for all aircraft. The final rule
would result in the removal of some increase sampling rates apply only to requirement for an 8 Hz recording rate
recorded parameters or installing new new aircraft type certification programs, will apply to all newly manufactured
DFDRs having more data memory. rather than newly manufactured aircraft. aircraft.
Embraer proposed the FAA require a Bombardier noted that a sampling 3. 16 Hz Requirement—Other
recording rate of 8 Hz, or the maximum interval of 0.0625 seconds (16 Hz) Comments
sensor output frequency, whichever is would require a major redesign of
less. existing equipment from the data source The NTSB expressed disappointment
The FAA appreciates the detailed through data concentrator units to the that the proposed increase in the
comments received on this subject. We FDR. None of the current equipment on sampling rate does not address existing
have reconsidered the proposal and Bombardier’s products was designed to aircraft, as called for in NTSB
agree that a 16 Hz recording rate, while process data at 16 Hz. Bombardier Recommendation A–03–49.
desirable, is not practicable for most contended the cost estimates in the As discussed in the NPRM, the FAA
installations. We remain convinced that NPRM severely underestimated the was unable to justify the substantial
existing recording rates for certain equipment redesign costs and the economic burden that would be
primary flight controls are lagging subsequent test and certification costs. imposed on current operators to apply
behind available technology and that a These extensive changes would require this as a retrofit requirement. As
change is necessary. Therefore, in the more than two years to develop and detailed by the commenters, it is
final rule, the new recording rate is 8 Hz certify. anticipated that it could be a significant
for specified parameters on aircraft Dassault stated the proposed 16 Hz burden to incorporate into newly
manufactured two years after this final requirement could require a complete manufactured aircraft, much less as a
rule. This rate will sufficiently increase electrical and mechanical modification, retrofit to much older aircraft whose
the reliability of the data received and and result in a recertification of the recording systems and source
will not require any modifications to the entire DFDR installation. In addition, equipment are not equipped to record at
systems that provide the parameter data Dassault noted that a 16 Hz sampling the higher proposed rate. While we
to the DFDR system. For some newly rate is too high for flight controls and recognize the benefits of increasing the
manufactured airplanes, additional adds no value. sampling rates of flight control
recorder capacity may be required, but Embraer stated that, on some of its parameters on existing aircraft, we are
the source equipment will remain as is airplanes, neither the force sensors for unable to quantify that benefit or
installed today. the flight controls nor the data balance it against the costs. The NTSB
has not provided us with data that do not define the message set, we do not • Record ‘‘flight deck datalink
would change this conclusion. foresee an instance in which a DLC communications’’ rather than ‘‘all’’ to
An individual commented that the system certificated under the eliminate the recording of navigation,
proposed language ‘‘the sampling regulations proposed by the JAA would surveillance and maintenance, and
interval per second is 16’’ for footnote not be in compliance with our cabin and passenger communications.
5 of Appendix E to part 91 is requirement as proposed. • Not require the recording of flight
ambiguous. The commenter In response to the JAA’s Notice of deck crew interaction, including cabin
recommended changing this to ‘‘the Proposed Amendment (NPA), the FAA terminal messages, maintenance
minimum sampling rate is 16 samples has sent several comments concerning computer messages, engine condition
per second’’ or ‘‘the maximum sampling general and specific provisions of the monitoring messages, or atmosphere/
interval is .0625 second.’’ proposal. We acknowledge that the two wind reports.
The proposed language is consistent proposals are not harmonized, and we • Limit recording to communications
with industry practice and the footnotes believe the scope of the current NPA between aircraft and air traffic control
already in Appendix E to part 91 and would result in significant costs on via the air traffic network.
the other applicable flight recorder some operators without a resulting • Record all DLCs sent and received
appendices that have been in use for safety benefit. We have asked that regardless of their content or format, or
years. No change was made based on several technical issues be clarified, whether they are ‘‘approved message
this comment. including parts of ED–112 and whether sets;’’ this would be the least restrictive
the regulation would apply to aircraft to implement and provide the most
L. 25-Hour Recorder with ACARS only. We will continue information to investigators.
Eurocopter stated the proposed working with the JAA (and the • Place the definition of ‘‘approved
increased duration for DFDR recording European Aviation Safety Agency data message set’’ in part 121 (and parts
in § 91.609(c)(3) (25 hours) should not (EASA) when it assumes responsibility 91, 125 and 135 as appropriate), similar
be applied to rotorcraft, based on its for this issue from the JAA) to make the to the current FDR parameters.
experience that rotorcraft missions do regulations more compatible but will • Make the definition of approved
not exceed 10 hours. not delay the issuance of this rule since message sets flexible to respond to
Based on its experience in our rule is more performance-based and changes in technology, such as higher
investigating aircraft accidents and less dependent on the resolution of bandwidth.
incidents, the NTSB determined that an individual technical issues. The types of messages and the content
FDR duration of 25 hours would address The International Air Transport of those messages that will be recorded
many of the issues it has faced. The Association (IATA) stated that before will be determined during certification
FAA has chosen to make the 25-hour the United States proposes a DLC of the DLC system. The rule language is
DFDR recording retention standard for recording requirement, the International performance-based, with the intent that
all new aircraft. As the commenter Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) system design would be driven by
noted, increased recording time is a should take the lead to substantiate the customer needs and regulatory
matter of memory, and is not a technical datalink recording requirements and compliance. The ‘‘approved message
challenge. While we acknowledge provide clear guidance on the data that set’’ will be comprised of the messages
Eurocopter’s suggestion that regulations needs to be recorded (including its provided by the system being installed,
for fixed-wing aircraft and rotorcraft relevance to accident investigation). The and will be determined by certification
might have different goals, we believe IATA stated that industry cannot personnel. Concurrent with the
that the issue of recording time should address the desired architecture for all publication of this rule, we are
be maintained as a standard regardless aircraft types until these two issues are publishing a Notice of Availability of
of aircraft type. We have no data to resolved. Advisory Circular, AC 20–160. The AC
suggest that recording time needs be Since no specific message set is identifies Controller-Pilot Datalink
specific to aircraft type or operation, required, we consider our regulation to Communications (CPDLC) as one set of
and believe that standardization makes be adaptable to ICAO or the JAA’s messages that are anticipated to be
the regulations less complicated and proposed requirements at the time an included in the required message set.
less expensive by using the same aircraft is certificated. We do not believe An example of a CPDLC message set can
available equipment. it is in anyone’s interest to wait for also be found in ICAO Document 4444
another international standard to be ‘‘Air Traffic Management Procedures for
M. Datalink Communication (DLC) settled before recording is required, and Air Navigation Services’’, Appendix 5.
1. International Compatibility we built the described flexibility into However, we anticipate that as new
our standard. datalink systems and capabilities are
Three commenters, Airbus, Boeing developed, the message sets of that
and an individual, noted that the Joint 2. Definitions of DLCs and Approved
equipment will evolve and will need to
Aviation Authorities (JAA) is also Message Sets
be evaluated to determine which parts
preparing a regulation on DLC recording Thirteen commenters addressed the need to be recorded to comply with the
and requested that the FAA ensure the issue of what DLCs should be recorded regulations. A rule that requires
U.S. regulations are harmonized with and what would constitute an approved approval at certification anticipates this
the JAA’s. They expressed concern that message set. These commenters evolution without creating regulatory
as proposed, the regulations are criticized the proposed requirement to lists that cannot be changed as quickly
incompatible. record ‘‘all datalink communications’’ as the technology develops and thus
The FAA believes the proposed DLC as open to interpretation, ambiguous hinders system evolution and
recording regulation is compatible with and poorly defined. These commenters improvements.
the DLC regulations proposed by the sought clarification and requested that
JAA. The proposed rule is designed to clear guidance material be available 3. Compliance Time
be performance-based, with the message when the final rule is published. A The NTSB objected to the proposed
set to be recorded and approved at the sampling of the comments on DLC requirement to record DLCs two years
time of aircraft certification. Since we message sets includes suggestions to: after datalink equipment is installed.
The NTSB failed to see the reason for many aircraft have the equipment, but it economic impact by allowing it to be
the delay when the installed is not enabled or used. introduced during the aircraft design
communications equipment should The requirement for recording DLC is process.
have the capability of outputting the determined when the DLC system is • Most DLC applications are related
required datalink messages to the voice installed and certified. If the system is to air traffic control, are still evolving,
recorder at the time of installation. installed and certified before April 7, and are not yet sufficient to replace the
The NTSB’s interpretation of the 2010, there is no requirement for those aircraft/controller voice communication
proposed requirement is incorrect. The systems to record messages. If the DLC entirely or to supplement voice
requirement is to record DLCs on any system is installed and certified (at communication as planned.
aircraft on which DLC equipment is manufacture or by retrofit) after April 7, • Current DLC systems cannot
voluntarily installed beginning two 2010, the DLC system must be examined support recording functions without
years from the effective date of the final to determine whether its message set significant upgrades or replacement
rule. For the first two years after the installed at the time must be recorded. with newer systems. The aircraft
effective date of the final rule, DLC The messages that must be recorded modifications required would
equipment can be installed on aircraft become the approved message set for significantly exceed the expenses for
regardless of whether the messages can that installation. If a provisional changing the CVR and wiring only.
be recorded. However, beginning two (inactive) system is installed and The FAA recognizes these concerns,
years from the date of the final rule, certificated before April 7, 2010, and but we continue to believe that the two
DLC messages must be recorded as of requires no further certification when year applicability in the rule provides
the date of equipment installation or the system is activated, then there is no the best balance of compliance time and
certification, whether the equipment is recording requirement for that system technological development. If an
installed as a retrofit or at new even if the activation occurs after two operator cannot justify the expense of a
certification. years. However, a change in such a recording system for a new DLC
system (especially a change to the installation, then it is because the
Northwest requested that, for newly
message set being used) may trigger the benefits of having the system will be
manufactured aircraft, the compliance
requirement to record as though the outweighed. This is why we tied the
date be extended to the 2010–2012
whole system were a new installation requirement to the voluntary
timeframe rather than two years after
under the regulation. installation of DLC systems. The
the final rule. Northwest stated that
recording requirement remains the same
more time is needed to approve the 5. Datalink Recording Requirement
as proposed—that new installations (at
different message sets that will be used Applicability
certification or on retrofit) of datalink
by air carriers and to create the required Several commenters (ATA, AirTran, accomplished two years after the
ground infrastructure. Airbus, Boeing and RAA) suggested that compliance date must be recorded.
While developing the NPRM, the FAA the applicability of the datalink
considered the factors listed by recording requirement be changed or 6. Technical Issues
Northwest, but determined that two that the requirement be completely An individual commenter questioned
years from the effective date of the final withdrawn. The ATA proposed that on- the amount of memory needed to meet
rule is sufficient for airframe and board recording of datalink the two-hour DLC recording
recorder manufacturers to develop communications ‘‘only apply to new requirement. This commenter noted the
compliant systems for the DLC (datalink system) installations on amount of data that could theoretically
recording requirement, especially since aircraft in production.’’ Airbus be received in two hours will increase
installation remains optional. No other concurred with the requirement for as developments in DLCs are deployed.
comments were received indicating this newly manufactured aircraft, but Therefore, an agreed methodology (for
time period is insufficient. We also note requested that the requirement for formatting and storing messages in
that the topic has been under recording messages from newly memory) will be needed to support
consideration internationally for years. installed systems on existing aircraft be certification.
4. Existing DLC Capability delayed until 2010. The RAA requested Smiths concurred with the proposed
that ‘‘the proposal to retrofit airplanes rule, and noted the capacity of DLCs to
Japan Air Lines (JAL) requested for recording datalink messages also be be recorded is dependent on the aircraft
clarification on the applicability to withdrawn.’’ Boeing commented that system design (such as an ARINC 429
airplanes equipped with DLC ‘‘[T]he appropriate point to introduce databus or AFDX network). Smiths
equipment before the 2-year date, in onboard recording is at a new airplane expressed concern that too many
order to properly estimate the type certification program or, for messages to be recorded could exceed
anticipated financial impacts and effects existing production models, at a major the capacity of the allocated 2-hour
on production and maintenance. upgrade to the next generation of recording partition.
Similarly, AirTran requested the final datalink communications, such as To meet current recorder
rule specify that aircraft that are DLC- FANS 2 or equivalent.’’ The requirements, recorder manufacturers
equipment capable, but have never had commenters provided the following have developed procedures to calculate
it fully installed, are not subject to the reasons in support of withdrawing the the necessary memory requirements
recording requirements. AirTran also requirement or changing the proposed depending on system design and
requested that the recording recording applicability: installation. Therefore, the FAA has no
requirement not apply to airplanes on • High costs of incorporation would reason to believe these manufacturers
which DLC is installed ‘‘post delivery’’ delay and/or prevent the installation will be unable to determine the amount
or it will deter installation of DLC and use of DLCs, diminishing the safety of memory needed to meet the two-hour
equipment. benefits associated with datalink DLC recording requirement.

Boeing stated the regulation should operations, and the benefits of reduced The NTSB noted that adding a
require datalink recording only if DLCs separation and increased traffic. properly placed cockpit video camera
are used operationally, rather than if • Incorporation during a new type would allow DLCs displayed to the crew
DLC equipment is installed, noting that certification program lessens the to be recorded on the video image
recorder. Since the use of video audio signals be the same for all part 23 We also discovered that providing
technology would not require any and part 25 aircraft regardless of consistent language throughout the
modifications to an aircraft’s operating part. No comments were operating parts could be more
communication or display systems, the received on this portion of the NPRM, complicated and confusing than
NTSB stated that this approach to and the proposal is adopted without warranted by the minor inconsistencies
recording DLCs might greatly reduce the change. that now exist. Questions of compliance
time and expense of retrofitting older time, applicability to aircraft of certain
aircraft. O. Checklist-to-Checklist Requirement age, and the differences in the
Our NPRM did not propose the The FAA proposed language to construction of the operating parts have
installation of cockpit video cameras standardize across all operating parts caused us to decide not to adopt the
and our regulatory evaluation did not when CVRs must be in operation. This proposed language. Since we never
include their use in cost estimates or is known as the ‘‘checklist to checklist’’ intended to change how CVRs operate,
benefits analysis, nor has the use of requirement. the decision to leave the current
cockpit video been proposed for public Five commenters, ATA, Boeing, language in the rules is not expected to
or industry comment. The issue of Dassault, Northwest, and one have any negative effects. Where new
cockpit video is unsettled and would individual, said the proposed language applicability paragraphs are being
dramatically delay the implementation was confusing. The ATA and one adopted, they will use the same
of DLC recording standards that are individual commenter noted the checklist language as had been used
already being developed internationally. proposed wording could require previously in that part.
The FAA is not adverse to certification changes to existing CVRs from ones that We received a considerable number of
of an image recorder system that meets operate once electrical power is applied comments regarding specific operation
the operational requirements of this to the respective power supply bus, to of CVRs under the proposed checklist to
rule, but no image recording system will ones that can be switched ‘‘on’’ or ‘‘off’’ checklist requirement. Since we have
be mandated to comply with DLC by the flight crew when the checklist is decided not to include the proposed
recording requirements. used. change in the final rule, we are not
Northwest stated that while most of including any discussion of those
7. TSO for DLC comments.
its aircraft appear to meet the intent of
Bombardier recommended that a TSO this language, the proposed language
for CVRs with datalink recording P. Deployable Recorders—Request for
could require an automatic shutoff of Comments
capability be prepared and released for the CVR on completion of the final
comment with any proposed operating In the NPRM, the FAA sought
checklist. Since some CVR systems stop comments and information about the
rule mandating the use of TSO approved the CVR five minutes after final engine
equipment where DLC recording is feasibility of and specifications for a
shutdown, this situation would require deployable flight recorder system. We
required. a costly retrofit. Northwest added that
The FAA has issued TSO-C176 which received 12 comments in response to
any such requirement should not be this request. Eight commenters (ALPA,
identifies the minimum performance
effective at the adoption of the final DRS Technologies (DRS), Hall and
standards for a Crash Protected Datalink
rule, since changes may take longer to Associates, LLC (Hall), National Air
Recorder. The TSO is based on
implement. Disaster Alliance/Foundation (NADA/
EUROCAE minimum performance
standards document ED–112. Our TSO Boeing proposed changing the F), Representatives John J. Duncan, Jr.
allows the certification of a stand-alone language to clarify that the goal is a and William J. Pascrell, Jr. in a joint
recorder or a recorder that combines this minimum recording time as described. submission, and Representatives Harold
function with other recorder functions Boeing also suggests a longer Rogers and David Price in a joint
(DFDR, CVR). compliance time. It inferred the intent submission) supported the use of
The ALPA disagreed with the of the proposal is to record cockpit deployable recorder systems. These
proposal to record two hours of DLCs voice communications as soon as commenters cited a number of reasons
and recommends they be recorded for possible before the flight and as long as for supporting deployable flight
the entire duration of flight. The ALPA possible after the flight. recorders, including:
stated that the importance of DLCs to an The FAA reviewed the proposed • Since fixed and deployable
investigation makes it imperative that language and agrees with the recorders have different survivability
these communications be captured for commenters that a change in the current characteristics, the use of both types
the entire duration of flight. The language could cause undue confusion. would provide maximum redundancy
commenter believed this would most It was never our intent to change the and improve the odds of recovering
easily be accomplished by recording current operation of CVRs. In preparing complete, undamaged recorders for data
these communications on the FDR. the NPRM, we found the existing analysis.
Since the duration of any particular regulations on CVR start/stop criteria • Deployable system technology
flight is variable, the FAA has lacked consistency between operating could dramatically reduce the time and
established a minimum DLC recording parts. We were trying to address this cost to locate and recover recorders.
duration of at least two hours to match issue by proposing a single standard • The expansion of aviation practices
the requirement for the CVR. Ground that specified the minimum time period such as the production of larger aircraft,
stations also record CPDLC messages, so for CVR operation (checklist-to- increasing numbers of flights, increased
any messages that occur outside of the checklist). CVR operation was not polar and over water flights, and the
2-hour minimum could be retrieved intended to be limited to this minimum onset of free flight, present new
from a ground source. time period, and existing CVR systems demands on investigators and
would not need to be modified to run compound the need for immediate
N. Recordation of Cockpit only during this minimum time period access to better information.
Communication or Audio Signals if their current operation had them • The time savings associated with
The NPRM proposed that the starting sooner or ending later than the recovery would have a dramatic affect
expansion of the recordation of cockpit proposed criteria. on the U.S. economy. Since September
11, 2001, an airline crash without a Q. Miscellaneous Comments reliable flight information at an
known cause is more likely to cause the acceptable cost.
1. Applicability Finally, Radiant did not provide any
traveling public to lose faith in the air
transportation system, costing the U.S. Four commenters (Boeing, Radiant criteria for determining what a
economy billions of dollars. and two individuals) suggested changes ‘‘reasonable service life remaining’’
• Current recorder standards no to the general applicability of the would be, nor its proposed ‘‘foreseeable
longer meet safety and security needs, proposed rule. Boeing stated that all future in commercial aviation.’’ As
where heightened security threats aircraft operating in the U.S. should be such, we have no response. Radiant’s
demand that officials have complete subject to the proposed requirements. proposed cutoff date (‘‘airplanes that are
information as quickly as possible to Boeing noted that accidents and still being produced as of December 31,
determine the cause of a crash. incidents involving non-U.S.-registered 2005’’) would exclude several popular
aircraft (such as EgyptAir 990) have aircraft models from the final rule,
Five commenters (Boeing, IATA, been the subject of FAA and NTSB including the Boeing 757 and 737
Northwest and two individuals) did not investigations, and stated that the ‘‘Classic,’’ and all McDonnell Douglas
support the use of deployable recorder additional data gained from airplanes. These airplanes are expected
systems for several reasons, including: investigations involving these aircraft to remain in the U.S. fleet in large
• Since existing recording systems would be just as useful as in data gained numbers for many years. Radiant’s
provide enough data and are protected during investigations of U.S.-registered proposed date would also exclude seven
from all but the most extreme crash aircraft. of the eight aircraft models involved in
conditions, it is doubtful that a Two individual commenters the incidents/accidents cited in the
deployable flight recorder would suggested that we expand the NTSB recommendations that are the
significantly increase data survivability. applicability of the proposed rules. One basis for this rulemaking. No changes to
• The survivability and recoverability recommended the rule apply to all the final rule were made based on these
of the current fixed recorders is carriers, while another suggested the comments.
acceptable and the costs of rule should apply to all operators and
implementing deployable recorder manufacturers. 2. Harmonization
systems are not balanced by sufficient In contrast, Radiant asked us to Five commenters (AIA, Airbus,
benefits. restrict the final rule to aircraft with a Boeing, Bombardier and one individual)
• Deployable recorder systems may ‘‘reasonable service life remaining’’ or a expressed concern that the proposal in
present a safety hazard if the event of an ‘‘foreseeable future in commercial the NPRM is not harmonized with
inadvertent deployment over populated aviation.’’ Radiant proposed limiting the parallel activities currently being
areas or active runways, or if manual final rule to those aircraft models being considered by the JAA. These
deployment distracts a flightcrew from manufactured as of December 31, 2005. commenters consider it vital that these
its primary tasks during an emergency. Radiant stated this change would result regulations are harmonized or the
• The safety hazards to maintenance in a modern CVR and independent affected industry could face conflicting
personnel or the public from a misfire power supply being installed in most of requirements, significant compliance
are considerable. the world fleet of active commercial costs and potentially complex system
aircraft. designs in an attempt to satisfy two
Smiths expressed neither objection to Like all countries, the FAA has different sets of regulations. The
nor support for deployable recorder limited authority to require the commenters suggest that a common set
systems, but said that, because of installation of particular equipment on of technical requirements be
uncertain dynamics, deployable systems aircraft not on our registry but merely implemented within a similar time
should be qualified to the identical flying in our airspace. frame. Since both the FAA and the JAA
survivability requirements as fixed Similarly, while the NTSB plays a are proposing flight recorder changes,
recorders. primary role in investigating accidents the commenters urged the FAA to use
The FAA appreciates all the involving U.S.-registered aircraft, its this opportunity to harmonize the
information provided in response to our role in investigations involving other requirements before promulgating a
request for comments. This information countries’ aircraft is usually by final rule.
is helpful and will aid us in invitation. The accident investigation The FAA continues to work with JAA
understanding the technology involved, authority from the country in which the (and we will work with the European
possible future applications for aircraft is registered usually leads these Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) when it
deployable recorder systems, and the investigations and may ask the NTSB to takes over responsibility for this issue
consequences of their design and participate. Other regulatory authorities from the JAA), ICAO and other non-U.S.
installation. are free to increase the CVR/DFDR regulatory bodies to harmonize our
Despite several requests, this final regulations for aircraft of their registry if regulations whenever possible, but we
rule does not include a requirement for they desire. do not change our position or our
deployable recorder systems. The Further, this final rule changes the regulations solely for the sake of
request for comments in the NPRM was regulations in both certification parts harmonization. When we determine that
made to bring the issue to the public’s (23, 25, 27, and 29) and operating parts the need exists for a certain regulation,
attention. We would need significant (91, 121, 125, 129, and 135), affecting and the other regulatory agencies find
amounts of information concerning anyone who is regulated by those parts. that a more stringent or lenient
design and cost before we could begin While some operators were excluded requirement is appropriate, we review
to properly assess such an addition. We from certain retrofit requirements their findings and will revise our
will not delay the CVR and DFDR adopted here, that was done following regulation if our regulatory goals are
improvements promulgated in this final considerable analysis that showed a met, an equivalent level of safety is
rule while we continue our analysis of significant economic burden would be achieved, and there is no burden
new technology. Deployable recorder imposed. Our analysis demonstrates imposed on the industry if a change is
systems may be addressed in a future that the scope of the final rule is made. This is the approach we have
rulemaking action. sufficient to meet the safety goal of more taken when drafting the NPRM and this
final rule, but we will not delay the producing airplanes with 2-hour solid out, most airframe manufacturers and
timing of our rulemaking simply to state recorders, which means the aircraft operators already begin DFDR operation
accommodate the continuing already comply with the rule. Removing at engine start. Therefore, the proposed
consideration of issues by numerous the g-switches would be a new retrofit changes would have no effect on these
other regulatory bodies. on which we have not solicited aircraft. As for the Canada Air
comment, including alternative Challenger CL–600 accident cited by the
3. Definition of ‘‘Date of Manufacture’’
technologies for complying with the NTSB, this is not an example of a
Dassault noted the ‘‘date of certification rule, and for which we drawback of the existing DFDR start/
manufacture’’ determines the have no cost estimates. The comments stop criteria. The manufacturer’s design
applicability of certain requirements are insufficient to support the need for, to start DFDR operation once the anti-
and the NPRM does not define this and do not properly estimate the scope collision (strobe) light switch is placed
term. This omission could lead to of, the recommended change. No change in the ‘‘on’’ position allows operators to
different interpretations and has been made to the regulations based meet the existing DFDR start/stop
disagreements between operators, on this comment. criteria (as long as the switch is ‘‘on’’
manufacturers and the FAA. Therefore, before takeoff roll begins). The fact that
Dassault recommended the FAA define 5. FDRs—Start/Stop Criteria
the pilots of the CL–600 involved in the
this term in the final rule. The ALPA recommended changing accident failed to take this step implies
While we use the term ‘date of the DFDR start/stop criteria to mirror an operational error and not a design
manufacture’ in several regulations, we the proposed CVR criteria for newly problem with the airplane.
do not routinely define it each time. In manufactured and new certificated Finally, changing the FDR start/stop
general, the date of manufacture is designs. It noted that at least one criteria was not proposed in the NPRM.
usually considered the date an aircraft manufacturer has DFDR start/stop We did not perform a regulatory
receives its airworthiness certificate. criteria based on the status of the evaluation of the impact of this change,
There may be other circumstances that parking brake, which can adversely and no costs for implementation were
modify this date, however, and we will affect the ability to obtain complete, provided by either commenter
not attempt to set a strict definition for accurate or relevant DFDR data. suggesting it. Since we are unable to
purposes of this rule. The NTSB proposed different DFDR support the change as necessary, we are
start/stop criteria. The NTSB stated that not incorporating it in this final rule.
4. CVRs—Automatic Stop Requirement the FDR should start operating either
The NTSB and Airbus recommended before engine start for the purpose of 6. DFDR Activation Switch—Request for
removal of the existing requirement that flight or by an automatic means when Comments
CVRs have an automatic means of engine oil pressure is sensed on any In the NPRM, the FAA requested
stopping 10 minutes after crash impact. engine. The DFDR should then operate comments on the cost to retrofit a
They both noted the proposal to replace continuously until termination of the switch for the flight crew to activate the
the 30-minute CVR with a 2-hour CVR flight when all engines are shut down. DFDR to record at the start of the
makes this requirement less important. The NTSB also requested a change to checklist. We received only one
While it may seem appropriate to the airworthiness requirements in the comment in response to this request.
remove a rule that was originally regulations. This change would provide Boeing asked if there was a typo in the
written for short-duration recorders, for the automatic application of request (CVR rather than DFDR), as this
removal of a certification rule has a electrical power to the DFDR at liftoff to subject matter is not discussed
broader impact than suggested by the safeguard against the failure of any elsewhere in the NPRM.
commenters. Because the 2-hour automatic or manual means of powering The request for comments on this
recorder requirement is an operating the DFDR. subject was an error in the NPRM. We
rule, the effect of removing a The FAA is not including the changes believe the existing regulations on
certification requirement is not parallel. to DFDR start/stop criteria. There is no DFDR start/stop criteria are satisfactory.
And although the 10-minute rule may historical evidence that the start/stop
be considered less important, it is not functions on aircraft have interfered R. Errors and Inconsistencies in NPRM
without merit and cannot be considered with accident investigations. The only Dassault noted the sampling interval
unnecessary. aircraft cited by ALPA are no longer in of parameter 23 in Appendix F to part
The commenters did not make a case production, so requirements for newly 135 would change from 0.5 (= 2 Hz) to
that the current certification manufactured airplanes would have no 0.25 (= 4 Hz). However, the sampling
requirement is burdensome, or that it is effect. We believe the existing interval for the same parameter in
a hindrance or inconsistent with the regulations on DFDR start/stop criteria Appendix M to part 121 and Appendix
proposed new operating requirements, are satisfactory. These regulations E to part 125 remains unchanged (0.5
only that it is less important than it once require the DFDR to operate from the (= 2 Hz)). Dassault recommended no
was. The NTSB comment indicates that instant the airplane begins its takeoff change to parameter 23 in Appendix F
its real concern is the use of switches roll until it has completed its landing to part 135 so it is consistent with
that can be activated prematurely as a roll. We believe this standard allows the Appendix M to part 121 and Appendix
means of implementing the stop criteria. DFDR to capture all the critical data E to part 125.
While the NTSB suggested that from the recorded parameters during all The proposed changes to parameter
gravitation accelerator switches (g- phases of flight. 23 in Appendix F were in error. No
switches) can be removed at the time of In addition, neither ALPA nor the change is being made to that parameter.
replacement with a 2-hour solid state NTSB indicated how their proposed Airbus and Boeing noted that
recorder, their suggestion does not changes would significantly improve proposed § 129.1(b) removes the
include the actual g-switch ban they the quality or quantity of information requirement that §§ 129.16, 129.32, and
desire, the regulation in which that recorded, or increase the potential for 129.33 apply to operations of U.S.-
change might be implemented, or the retaining important information needed registered aircraft solely outside the U.S.
costs to implement it. The two largest during accident and incident Those sections refer to damage-tolerance
aircraft manufacturers are already investigations. As the NTSB pointed inspections, repair assessments and
aging airplane requirements. Airbus and would double the sample time. Two does not contain a provision requiring
Boeing assumed this omission was seconds refers to four interleaved the replacement of magnetic tape FDRs.
inadvertent and recommended the FAA samples of 0.5 seconds each. The ALPA expressed concern the
change § 129.1(b) to reinsert these Honeywell had two comments about FAA did not propose any new
requirements. the language in § 91.609. First, requirements in response to NTSB
The FAA thanks the commenters for Honeywell noted the proposed addition Safety Recommendation A–03–050 that
bringing this to our attention. The of paragraphs (i), (j) and (k) and asked was issued following the Board’s
proposed rule intended only to add new why there is no paragraph (h). Second, investigation of the American Airlines
§ 129.22 (now § 129.24) to the Honeywell asked why the phrase flight 587 accident that occurred at
applicability of § 129.1(b), not to ‘‘* * * using a recorder that meets the Jamaica Bay, New York on November
eliminate any existing requirements. standards of TSO–C124a, or later 12, 2001. During the investigation, the
This has been corrected in the final rule. revision’’ is missing in § 91.609(c)(2) NTSB determined that the rudder (and
Airbus and Boeing noted errors in when it is in § 91.609(c)(3) and other other) control surface position
part 121 Appendix M, part 125 proposed similar revisions. information recorded on the DFDR was
Appendix E and part 135 Appendix F In 1999, the FAA issued Notice No. filtered before it was recorded. This
for the resolution of parameters 12a, 99–19 (64 FR 63140, November 18, filtering made it difficult for the NTSB
14a, 15 and 88. They stated that they 1999), which proposed to increase the to approximate the actual rudder surface
believe the existing resolutions for these number of DFDR parameters required movement during the accident. The
parameters are correct and were not for all Boeing 737 series airplanes. A NTSB recommended that the FAA act to
meant to be changed. new paragraph (h) for § 91.609 was part remove known flight control parameter
The FAA agrees. The final rule of that proposal. When this rule was filtering on three models of aircraft. In
reflects the resolutions for those four proposed, the next available paragraph its comment, ALPA urged the FAA, as
parameters without change. was (i). Since this final rule will publish part of this rulemaking, to consider
Boeing stated the new wording in the before the 1999 proposal, the paragraphs additional DFDR modifications in
‘‘Remarks’’ column for parameter 1 in added to § 91.609 in this rule will be (h), response to the NTSB recommendation.
part 121 Appendix M is unclear. Boeing (i) and (j). On July 7, 2004, the FAA hosted a
noted its preference for the existing Honeywell is incorrect about public meeting to discuss the NTSB
language and proposed the FAA keep it. including TSO–C124a in § 91.609(c)(2). recommendation and the issue of
The published version of the NPRM Inclusion of the standard would be a filtered flight data in general. The
introduced an error; the ‘‘Remarks’’ retrofit we did not intend nor estimate purpose of this meeting was to gather
column was not intended to be changed the costs for. The TSO–C124a standard information from industry and other
except to correct the word ‘‘second’’ to is for newly manufactured aircraft only. interested parties about current
‘‘seconds.’’ practices on processing of data as it is
Boeing recommended the FAA make S. Items Not Proposed recorded on all transport airplanes.
several editorial changes to part 121, Four commenters (ALPA, the NTSB Representatives from Airbus, ALPA, the
Appendix M as clarifications: and two individuals) recommended the Allied Pilots Association (APA), Boeing
(i) In the ‘‘Parameters’’ column for FAA add new CVR and DFDR and the NTSB each made presentations
Parameter 23, insert the word ‘‘speed’’ requirements as part of this final rule. at the meeting.
before ‘‘brake.’’ The ALPA requested that we require We completed our analysis of issues
(ii) In the ‘‘Parameters’’ column for all newly manufactured CVRs and surrounding filtered flight data and the
Parameter 19, change the word ‘‘trime’’ DFDRs to meet the underwater locator options available to us to address the
to ‘‘trim.’’ beacon (ULB) security-of-attachment NTSB’s recommendation. On November
(iii) In the ‘‘Resolution’’ column for standard specified in the EUROCAE 15, 2006, we published a proposed rule
Parameter 26, revise the existing ED–112 document. The ALPA noted that addresses filtered flight data (71 FR
wording ‘‘1 ft + 5% above 500 ft’’ to that in some recent accidents there have 66634) and this subject is being
read ‘‘1 ft up to and including 500 ft, 1 been cases where the ULB has become addressed as a separate regulatory issue.
ft + 5% of full range above 500 ft.’’ nearly or fully separated from the CVR Six commenters supported the use of
The Parameter 23 listing is corrected or FDR memory module. a ground recording system. Five of these
in the final rule. Since the Parameter 19 The ULB standard of ED–112 standard commenters (APA, AirTran, RAA and
listing is correct in the 2006 Code of is included in all of the new FAA TSOs two individuals) raised this issue as part
Federal Regulations, no further action is on recorders (numbers 123b, 124b, 166 of their objection to the datalink
necessary. Regarding the Parameter 26 and 167). communication (DLC) proposal. These
listing, Boeing presented nothing to Three commenters (NTSB, ALPA and commenters noted that ground
indicate that the current text is a L3) recommended that the FAA require recording is a more cost efficient means
problem or has led to misunderstanding, the replacement of magnetic tape flight of capturing DLCs since the same data
and has given no reason other than its recorders in the final rule. The that will be recorded on the aircraft is
preference why this should be revised. commenters noted that magnetic tape available for accident investigation at
No change has been made in the final FDRs are more problematic than the receiving ground based stations.
rule. magnetic tape CVRs and far less reliable These commenters see no merit in
Boeing also stated that the ‘‘Remarks’’ than solid-state DFDRs. requiring DLC recording on aircraft.
column for Parameter 85 should be The replacement of magnetic tape The remaining individual commenter
corrected, from ‘‘0.5 second’’ to ‘‘2 flight recorders was not proposed in the suggested a ground recording system as
seconds’’ because, when sampled NPRM and represents a significant an alternative to recording any data on
alternately at 4-second intervals as change that is beyond the scope of the an aircraft as this would eliminate the
indicated in the table, the result will rulemaking. The commenters did not loss of data during a crash.
provide a sample each two seconds. provide any data on the extent of usage The FAA agrees that ground recording
The commenter is misreading the or the cost of replacement, nor has the systems are a useful tool to assist in
rule; the specification is correct as public (including affected operators) accident investigations. However, these
published. The suggested rewording been allowed to comment. The final rule systems cannot be adopted as the
primary source of data recording. In the T. Comments on Cost/Benefit Analysis recorder’’ to clarify our intent. We
past, the NTSB and other accident Empire Airlines said that the FAA’s accept Bell’s estimated cost of $100,000
investigators have encountered cost-benefit analysis did not consider per model with a recurring cost of
significant problems in acquiring the cumulative economic impact of the $5,000 to the operator. The IATA
ground recorded data. Liability and several operational and equipment rules commented that the airlines must carry
other legal concerns have caused some the agency has issued during the last the costs of all the new requirements,
private entities that perform ground two years. and that the FAA did not substantiate
recording and some foreign Our regulatory evaluations estimate the benefits of the proposed changes in
governments to delay the release of the cost of each rule individually. the accidents cited in the NPRM. The
recorded data for long periods. The Different rules affect different parties IATA also noted that the proposed
NTSB and other accident investigators and the cumulative impact on any one benefits are speculative, in that they
have repeatedly expressed their desire operator would be impossible to ‘‘may result in safety benefits,’’ and thus
that recorded data remain on the aircraft estimate and would not be relevant for do not justify the costs in equipment
because of the immediate availability of and impact on operations.
any other operator.
the data once the recorders are located. As described in the Initial Regulatory
An individual commented that the
Evaluation, any benefits from this final
Further, for ground recording systems FAA’s economic analysis did not
rule are dependent upon investigating
to function as intended, all countries or include the cost to re-engineer
authorities gaining additional, better
private entities recording data would equipment and to install the equipment
quality information that they are able to
need compatible systems, the for recording datalink communications use to determine the causes of future
specifications for which have not been if DLC equipment is installed after the accidents with greater certainty, which
proposed. There are no international compliance date. could result in safety improvements
standards in place for such recording, In the Initial Regulatory Evaluation, being adopted sooner. We are unable to
and we have no way of ensuring that it we estimated a cost of $762,500 the first predict with certainty whether this
would happen. time a manufacturer engineers a DLC additional information will or will not
The ALPA suggested we require a recording system. We estimated a cost of provide incremental benefits in the
system that provides an electronic $262,500 for engineering the second investigation of any future accident or
common time reference information to airplane model, presuming much of the incident. This has always been true for
the CVR, the DFDR, and any other work from the first can carry over. flight recorder requirements, which by
onboard recorders. They noted that, as Similarly, we estimated an engineering nature do not fit the traditional cost/
part of every accident investigation, the cost of $75,000 for each remaining benefit analysis. As always, we rely on
relative timing of the CVR and DFDR model in a series. Retrofitting an aircraft the expertise of the NTSB that the
events must be determined, and that it to be DLC capable would require additional information is important to
is a manual, labor-intensive effort by significant engineering, while the cost of its ability to fully investigate accidents
accident investigators that could engineering to record datalink and incidents as aircraft technology
introduce uncertainty into the results. A communications would be a minimal evolves.
system to provide electronic common extension of the overall effort with a Regarding the proposal to require 2-
time reference information to the CVR resultant minimal cost. hour solid state CVRs, Northwest
and DFDR would eliminate these Bell Helicopter stated that compliance commented that it would have to
problems. with the ‘‘no single electrical failure modify 105 of its 30-minute solid state
could disable both the CVR and DFDR’’ CVRs at a cost of $767,000 (a per
The NTSB viewed installing the new
requirement is open to two airplane cost of about $7,300) and
2-hour CVR as an ideal opportunity to
interpretations—each of which would replace 15 CVRs at a cost of $180,000 (a
require all aircraft equipped with a CVR
have different cost implications. If the per airplane cost of $12,000).
to also have pilot boom microphones.
correct interpretation were that ‘‘No In the Initial Regulatory Evaluation,
An individual asked us to consider failure of a single electrical bus shall we estimated retrofitting a 30-minute
accelerometer outputs and wheel disable both the CVR and DFDR’’, it solid state CVR would cost about $8,140
rotation as required parameters. The estimates that it would cost $100,000 ($7,500 for the equipment and $640 for
commenter noted that current per ‘‘application’’ to comply with the the labor). Since our estimates were
accelerometer outputs are extremely rule, plus a recurring cost of based on older information, we accept
noisy, making it difficult to extract approximately $5,000 to the operator. If Northwest’s estimate of $7,300 per
usable data. The commenter suggested the correct interpretation is that ‘‘No airplane and have used it in the Final
that recording wheel rotation is an single electrical failure external to the Regulatory Evaluation. We also
excellent way of determining initial recorder, or the failure of any single estimated that it would cost $17,500 to
touchdown. electrical component within a combined replace a unit, and are adopting
For the balance of the issues, none of CVR/DFDR, shall disable both the CVR Northwest’s estimate for use in the Final
these were included in the NPRM and and DFDR’’, Bell states that all or most Regulatory Evaluation. No other
are beyond the scope of the proposed of the current recorders will be obsolete. comments on these costs were received.
rule changes. The commenters did not If this occurs, ‘‘a major industry wide Northwest also described three costs
submit any data on the cost of the design will be required.’’ Bell estimates it believes should be added to the
suggested changes, nor have they been that costs for development of a new regulatory evaluation: (1) The cost to
estimated as part of this rulemaking. recorder and TSO would be in the modify a solid-state CVR from TSO–
While they may be worthy millions of dollars, recertification costs C123 to TSO–C123a; (2) The cost for
considerations for future rulemaking, will be approximately $250,000 per new test equipment to download and
none of the suggested changes are model, and the recurrent costs to decode additional datalink information
necessary as part of the changes being operators will approach $50,000 per from the CVR; and (3) The additional
adopted in this rulemaking. No changes rotorcraft to replace existing recorders.’’ routine maintenance cost, such as
have been made to the final rule based As discussed previously, we have battery reconditioning, for the CVR–
on these suggestions. added the phrase ‘‘external to the RIPS installed on new aircraft.
Regarding the cost of conversion to the end of the paragraph. No change was B. Part 25—Airworthiness Standards:
TSO–C123a, we contacted four of the made from the language proposed in the Transport Category Airplanes
major equipment vendors, who stated NPRM. Section 25.1457, Cockpit voice
that their CVRs manufactured under (3) Add a new paragraph (d)(4) recorders, is being amended to:
TSO–C123 already meet the regarding a single electrical failure not (1) Add a new paragraph (a)(6)
requirements of TSO–C123a, and that if disabling the CVR and DFDR. The final requiring the recordation of datalink
necessary, a service bulletin could be rule adds the phrase ‘‘external to the communications. No change was made
issued to re-identify the recorder. recorder’’ as requested by commenters from the language proposed in the
Regarding the cost of DLC test NPRM.
to clarify where the failure may not
equipment, as we stated in the Initial (2) Amend paragraph (d)(1) to add the
Regulatory Evaluation, we believe this occur.
duration of CVR power as a sentence at
cost would be minimal. Northwest did (4) Add a new paragraph (d)(5) that
the end of the paragraph. No change was
not provide any estimated costs for this requires an independent power source
made from the language proposed in the
item, no other commenter raised it as a for the CVR and the cockpit-mounted
NPRM.
cost issue, and DLC remains an optional area microphone, the capacity for
(3) Add a new paragraph (d)(4)
installation. Accordingly, we have no automatic switching to the independent
regarding a single electrical failure not
basis to change our estimates on the cost source, and the allowable location of the
disabling the CVR and DFDR. The final
of this item. power source. At the request of the
rule adds the phrase ‘‘external to the
Regarding additional maintenance commenters, the final rule specifies the recorder’’ as requested by commenters
costs, in the Initial Regulatory duration of power as 10 +/-1 minutes, to clarify where the failure may not
Evaluation we estimated that the adds the area microphone, and specifies occur.
average RIPS battery would be replaced the location of the power source. (4) Add a new paragraph (d)(5) that
every two years; we will continue to use (5) Add a new paragraph (d)(6) requires an independent power source
that estimate in our cost calculations. requiring that the CVR be in a separate for the CVR and the cockpit-mounted
We also estimated that one additional container from the flight data recorder. area microphone, the capacity for
hour would be required for the CVR- No change was made from the language automatic switching to the independent
RIPS system maintenance; we have used proposed in the NPRM. source, and the allowable location of the
that estimate in our cost calculations in
(6) Revise paragraph (e) by expanding power source. At the request of the
the Final Regulatory Evaluation.
the CVR location requirements to commenters, the final rule specifies the
Boeing stated that the total cost of all
include the use of a combination duration of power as 10 ± 1 minutes,
the proposed requirements were
recorder that acts as the CVR and its adds the area microphone, and specifies
undervalued by 20 to 35 percent. In
location near the cockpit. This was not the location of the power source.
making this statement, Boeing cites
included in the language proposed in (5) Add a new paragraph (d)(6)
costs associated with equipment,
the NPRM. Comments concerning the requiring that the CVR be in a separate
testing, and certification and
use of combination recorders with an container from the flight data recorder.
‘‘uncertainties in the statement of work’’
independent power source led to the No change was made from the language
such as the DLC requirements ‘‘are
addition of these provisions to clarify proposed in the NPRM.
driving a level of assumptions that affect
these possibilities and change the (6) Revise paragraph (e) by expanding
potential cost outcomes.’’
We accept that Boeing’s information allowable location of the CVR. the CVR location requirements to
is based on more recent information include the use of a combination
Section 23.1459, Flight data recorders, recorder that acts as the CVR and its
than we used for the Initial Regulatory is being amended to:
Evaluation, and have revised our Final location near the cockpit. This was not
Regulatory Evaluation to include this (1) Revise paragraph (a)(3) to add the included in the language proposed in
estimate. No other commenters duration of DFDR power as a sentence the NPRM. Comments concerning the
presented specific information at the end of the paragraph. No change use of combination recorders with an
addressing this issue. was made from the language proposed independent power source led to the
in the NPRM. addition of these provisions to clarify
Section-By-Section Analysis these possibilities and change the
(2) Add a new paragraph (a)(6)
The following is a summary of the allowable location of the CVR.
regarding a single electrical failure not
changes to the current text of the Section 25.1459, Flight data recorders,
disabling the CVR and DFDR. The final
regulations. This summary does not is being amended to:
rule adds the phrase ‘‘external to the
include the reasons for these changes (1) Revise paragraph (a)(3) to add the
recorder’’ as requested by commenters
because we have already discussed duration of DFDR power as a sentence
to clarify where the failure may not
them as part of the above disposition of at the end of the paragraph. No change
occur.
comments. was made from the language proposed
(3) Add a new paragraph (a)(7) in the NPRM.
A. Part 23—Airworthiness Standards: requiring that the DFDR be in a separate (2) Add a new paragraph (a)(7)
Normal, Utility, Acrobatic, and container from the CVR, and that a regarding a single electrical failure not
Commuter Category Airplanes combination recorder may be used. If a disabling the CVR and DFDR. The final
Section 23.1457, Cockpit voice combination recorder is used to comply rule adds the phrase ‘‘external to the
recorders, is being amended to: with the CVR requirement and located recorder’’ as requested by commenters
(1) Add a new paragraph (a)(6) near the cockpit, the aft-mounted DFDR to clarify where the failure may not
requiring the recordation of datalink used to comply with this paragraph occur.
communications. No change was made must also be a combination unit. The (3) Add a new paragraph (a)(8)
from the language proposed in the language proposed in the NPRM was requiring that the DFDR be in a separate
NPRM. changed to mirror the revised container from the CVR, and that a
(2) Amend paragraph (d)(1) to add the requirement for CVRs in § 23.1457(d)(6) combination recorder may be used. If a
duration of CVR power as a sentence at and (e)(2). combination recorder is used to comply
with the CVR requirement and located that combination recorders must meet E. Part 91—General Operating and
near the cockpit, the aft-mounted DFDR all of the CVR and DFDR standards. Flight Rules
used to comply with this paragraph Section 91.609, Flight data recorders
must also be a combination unit. This D. Part 29—Airworthiness Standards:
Transport Category Rotorcraft and cockpit voice recorders, is being
language proposed in the NPRM was amended to:
changed to mirror the revised Section 29.1457, Cockpit voice (1) Add a new paragraph (c)(2) that
requirement for CVRs in § 25.1457(d)(6) recorders, is being amended to: includes the separate container
and (e)(2). requirements for CVRs and DFDRs on
(1) Add a new paragraph (a)(6)
C. Part 27—Airworthiness Standards: requiring the recordation of datalink part 23 or part 25 airplanes. The
Normal Category Rotorcraft communications. No change was made requirement to retain the last 25 hours
from the language proposed in the of recorded DFDR data, which was
Section 27.1457, Cockpit voice
NPRM. proposed in the NPRM as a retrofit, is
recorders, is being amended to:
(1) Add a new paragraph (a)(6) not included.
(2) Revise paragraph (d)(1) to add the (2) Add a new paragraph (c)(3),
requiring the recordation of datalink duration of CVR power as a sentence at applicable to aircraft manufactured two
communications. No change was made the end of the paragraph. No change was years after the effective date of this rule,
from the language proposed in the made from the language proposed in the that requires compliance with all
NPRM. NPRM.
(2) Revise paragraph (d)(1) to add the provisions of the flight data recorder
duration of CVR power as a sentence at (3) Add a new paragraph (d)(4) certification requirements in §§ 23.1459,
the end of the paragraph. No change was regarding a single electrical failure not 25.1459, 27.1459, or 29.1459, as
made from the language proposed in the disabling the CVR and DFDR whether applicable. The additions to these
NPRM. installed as separate units or as a single sections include the power duration
(3) Add a new paragraph (d)(4) combined unit. The final rule adds the requirement, the single electrical failure
regarding a single electrical failure not phrase ‘‘external to the recorder’’ as requirement, and the separate container/
disabling the CVR and DFDR whether requested by commenters to clarify combination unit requirements noted in
installed as separate units or as a single where the failure may not occur. the amendments to the certification
combined unit. The final rule adds the (4) Add a new paragraph (d)(5) that parts. New paragraph (c)(3) also requires
phrase ‘‘external to the recorder’’ as requires an independent power source that these newly manufactured
requested by commenters to clarify for the CVR and the cockpit-mounted airplanes have DFDRs that retain the
where the failure may not occur. area microphone, the capacity for last 25 hours of recorded information
(4) Add a new paragraph (d)(5) that automatic switching to the independent using a recorder that meets the standard
requires an independent power source source, and the allowable location of the of TSO–C124a, or later revision. The
for the CVR and the cockpit-mounted power source. At the request of the language proposed in the NPRM was
area microphone, the capacity for commenters, the final rule specifies the changed slightly for clarification; no
automatic switching to the independent duration of power as 10 ± 1 minutes, substantive changes to the proposed
source, and the allowable location of the adds the area microphone, and specifies requirements were made.
power source. At the request of the the location of the power source. (3) The proposed revision to
commenters, the final rule specifies the paragraph (e)(2) to include new
(5) Add a new paragraph (h) to allow ‘‘checklist-to-checklist’’ language is not
duration of power as 10 ± 1 minutes, the installation of a single combined
adds the area microphone, and specifies included in this final rule. No retrofit of
unit when both a cockpit voice recorder this new procedure is required; the
the location of the power source. and flight data recorder are required.
(5) Add a new paragraph (h) to allow previous version of this language in
The language was changed to clarify paragraph (e)(2) remains in effect.
the installation of a single combined that combination recorders must meet
unit when both a cockpit voice recorder (4) Add a new paragraph (h) that
all of the CVR and DFDR standards. includes the separate container
and flight data recorder are required.
The language was changed to clarify Section 29.1459, Flight data recorders, requirements for CVRs and DFDRs on
that combination recorders must meet is being amended to: part 23 or part 25 airplanes. (Note that
all of the CVR and DFDR standards. (1) Revise paragraph (a)(3) to add the this was proposed as paragraph (i)
Section 27.1459, Flight data recorders, duration of DFDR power as a sentence because the paragraph (h) designation
is being amended to: at the end of the paragraph. No change was proposed in a separate rulemaking
(1) Revise paragraph (a)(3) to add the was made from the language proposed that is not yet final). This paragraph also
duration of DFDR power as a sentence in the NPRM. requires transport category airplanes to
at the end of the paragraph. No change meet additional recording requirements
(2) Add a new paragraph (a)(6) in §§ 23.1457 or 25.1457, as proposed in
was made from the language proposed
regarding a single electrical failure not the NPRM. The requirement to retain
in the NPRM.
(2) Add a new paragraph (a)(6) disabling the CVR and DFDR whether two hours of recorded information on a
regarding a single electrical failure not installed as separate units or as a single CVR that meets the requirements of
disabling the CVR and DFDR whether combined unit. The final rule adds the TSO–C123a, which was proposed in the
installed as separate units or as a single phrase ‘‘external to the recorder’’ as NPRM as a retrofit, is not included.
combined unit. The final rule adds the requested by commenters to clarify (5) Add a new paragraph (i),
phrase ‘‘external to the recorder’’ as where the failure may not occur. applicable to aircraft manufactured two
requested by commenters to clarify (3) Add a new paragraph (e) to allow years after the effective date of this rule,
where the failure may not occur. the installation of a single combined that requires compliance with all
(3) Add a new paragraph (e) to allow unit when both a cockpit voice recorder provisions of the cockpit voice recorder
the installation of a single combined and flight data recorder are required. certification requirements in §§ 23.1457,
unit when both a cockpit voice recorder The language was changed to clarify 25.1457, 27.1457, or 29.1457, as
and flight data recorder are required. that combination recorders must meet applicable. The additions to these
The language was changed to clarify all of the CVR and DFDR standards. sections include the power duration
requirement, the single electrical failure hours of recorded data and meet the G. Part 125—Certification and
requirement, and the separate container/ standards of TSO–C124a, or later Operations: Airplanes Having a Seating
combination unit requirements noted in revision. No change was made from the Capacity of 20 or More Passengers or a
the amendments to the certification language proposed in the NPRM. Maximum Payload Capacity of 6,000
parts. This paragraph also requires that Section 121.359, Cockpit voice Pounds or More; and Rules Governing
newly manufactured airplanes retain the recorders, is being amended to: Persons On Board Such Aircraft
last two hours of recorded information (1) Add a new paragraph (i) that Section 125.225, Flight recorders, is
and that the CVR meets the requires airplanes manufactured before being amended to:
requirements of TSO–C123a, or later April 7, 2010 be retrofitted with CVRs (1) Revise the title of the section to
revision. These requirements are that meet the separate container say ‘‘Flight data recorders.’’
adopted as proposed, except for a requirement, retain the last two hours of (2) Add a new paragraph (j) to specify
change in the paragraph designation. recorded information using a CVR that that after August 20, 2001, § 125.225
(6) Add a new paragraph (j) that meets the standard of TSO–C123a, or applies only to the aircraft models listed
requires all airplanes and rotorcraft that later revision, and meet additional in § 125.226(l)(2). No change was made
are required to have a CVR to record recording requirements in §§ 23.1457 or from the language proposed in the
datalink communications if they install 25.1457. Four years is allowed for the NPRM.
DLC equipment two years after the retrofit of these items. We are not Section 125.226, Digital flight data
effective date of this rule. This adopting the checklist to checklist recorders, is being amended to add a
requirement is adopted as proposed language proposed in the NPRM. We are new paragraph (m) that requires all
except for a change in the paragraph adopting the same checklist to checklist newly manufactured airplanes comply
designation. language as exists in other applicability with additional paragraphs of § 25.1459,
(7) Appendix E to part 91, Airplane and have a DFDR that retains the last 25
paragraphs of this section. Otherwise,
Flight Recorder Specifications, is being hours of recorded data and meet the
no change was made from the language
amended to add footnote 5 to the standards of TSO–C124a, or later
proposed in the NPRM.
parameter for Stabilizer Trim Position or revision. No change was made from the
Pitch Control Position. No change was (2) Add a new paragraph (j) that language proposed in the NPRM, except
made from the language proposed in the requires newly manufactured airplanes for the paragraph designation.
NPRM. have a CVR that meets all of §§ 23.1457 Section 125.227, Cockpit voice
(8) Appendix F to part 91, Helicopter or 25.1457, and retains the last two recorders, is being amended to:
Flight Recorder Specifications, is being hours of recorded information using a (1) Add a new paragraph (g) that
amended to add footnote 4 changing the CVR that meets the standard of TSO– requires airplanes manufactured before
sampling interval for five parameters. C123a, or later revision. We are not April 7, 2010 to retrofit their CVRs to
No change was made from the language adopting the checklist to checklist meet the separate container
proposed in the NPRM. language proposed in the NPRM. We are requirement, retain the last 2 hours of
adopting the same checklist to checklist recorded information using a CVR that
F. Part 121—Operating Requirements: language as exists in other applicability meets the standard of TSO–C123a, or
Domestic Flag and Supplemental paragraphs of this section. Otherwise, later revision, and meet additional
Operations no change was made from the language paragraphs of § 25.1457. Four years is
Section 121.343, Flight recorders, is proposed in the NPRM. allowed for the retrofit of these items.
being amended to: (3) Add a new paragraph (k) that We are not adopting the checklist to
(1) Revise the title of the section to requires the recordation of datalink checklist language proposed in the
say ‘‘Flight data recorders.’’ communications if DLC equipment is NPRM. We are adopting the same
(2) Revise paragraph (c) to change the installed two years after the effective checklist to checklist language as exists
date from 1994 to 1995. date of this rule. No change was made in paragraph (a) of this section.
(3) Add a new paragraph (m) to from the language proposed in the Otherwise, no change was made from
specify that after August 20, 2001, NPRM. the language proposed in the NPRM.
§ 121.343 applies only to the aircraft Appendix M to part 121, Airplane (2) Add a new paragraph (h) that
models listed in § 121.344(l)(2). No Flight Recorder Specifications, is requires newly manufactured airplanes
change was made from the language amended to: have a CVR that meets all of § 25.1457,
proposed in the NPRM. retains the last 2 hours of recorded
Section 121.344, Digital flight data (1) Revise parameter 1 to correct a
information using a CVR that meets the
recorders for transport category typographical error.
standard of TSO–C123a, or later
airplanes, is being amended to add a (2) Revise parameters 12a, 12b, 13a, revision. We are not adopting the
new paragraph (m) that requires all 13b, 14a, 14b, 15, 16, 17, and 88 to add checklist to checklist language proposed
newly manufactured airplanes comply footnote 18 (proposed as footnote 20) for in the NPRM. We are adopting the same
with additional paragraphs of § 25.1459, newly manufactured airplanes. Footnote checklist to checklist language as exists
and have a DFDR that retains the last 25 18 changes the seconds per sampling in paragraph (a) of this section.
hours of recorded information and meet interval to 0.125 for these parameters Otherwise, no change was made from
the standards of TSO–C124a, or later and prohibits alternate sampling the language proposed in the NPRM.
revision. No change was made from the (interleaving). The NPRM proposed 16 (3) Add a new paragraph (i) that
language proposed in the NPRM, except Hz for these parameters; the final rule requires the recordation of datalink
for the paragraph designation. requires they be sampled and recorded communications if DLC equipment is
Section 121.344a, Digital flight data at 8 Hz, and adds the prohibition on installed two years after the effective
recorders for 10–19 seat airplanes, is interleaving samples. date of this rule. No change was made
being amended to add a new paragraph (3) The NPRM publication of the from the language proposed in the
(g) that requires all newly manufactured appendix included several errors in the NPRM.
airplanes comply with additional resolution column; none of the current Appendix E to part 125, Airplane
paragraphs of §§ 23.1459 or 25.1459, resolution percentages are being Flight Recorder Specifications, is being
and have DFDRs that retain the last 25 changed. amended to:
(1) Revise parameters 12a, 12b, 13a, (2) Add a new paragraph (g), amended to add footnote 3, changing
13b, 14a, 14b, 15, 16, 17, and 88 to add applicable to certain aircraft the sampling interval on the Pilot
footnote 18 (proposed as footnote 20) for manufactured two years after the Input—Primary Controls parameter for
newly manufactured airplanes. Footnote effective date of this rule, that requires rotorcraft manufactured two years after
18 changes the seconds per sampling compliance with specified provisions of the date of the final rule. No change was
interval to 0.125 for these parameters the cockpit voice recorder certification made to the language proposed in the
and prohibits alternate sampling requirements in § 23.1457, § 25.1457, NPRM.
(interleaving). The NPRM proposed 16 § 27.1457, or § 29.1457, as applicable.
Appendix F to part 135, Airplane
Hz for these parameters; the final rule The additions to these sections include
Flight Recorder Specification, is being
requires they be sampled and recorded the power duration requirement, the
at 8 Hz, and adds the prohibition on single electrical failure requirement, and amended to:
interleaving samples. the separate container/combination unit (1) Correct the last word of the title of
(2) Revise parameter 23 to correct an requirements noted in the amendments the appendix to read ‘Specifications.’
errant reference to part 121. No changes to the certification parts. This paragraph (2) Revise parameters 12a, 12b, 13a,
were made from the language proposed also requires that newly manufactured 13b, 14a, 14b, 15, 16, 17, and 88 to add
in the NPRM. airplanes retain the last two hours of footnote 18 for newly manufactured
(3) The NPRM publication of the recorded information and that the CVR airplanes. Footnote 18 changes the
appendix included several errors in the meets the requirements of TSO–C123a, seconds per sampling interval to 0.125
resolution column; none of the current or later revision. The checklist to for these parameters and prohibits
resolution percentages are being checklist language being adopted is the alternate sampling (interleaving). The
changed. same language that exists in paragraphs
NPRM proposed 16 Hz for these
(a)(2) and (b) (2) of this section, not the
H. Part 129—Operations: Foreign Air parameters; the final rule requires they
language proposed in the NPRM.
Carriers and Foreign Operators of U.S.- be sampled and recorded at 8 Hz, and
Otherwise, no change was made to the
Registered Aircraft Engaged in Common adds the prohibition on interleaving
language proposed in the NPRM.
Carriage (3) Add a new paragraph (h), that samples.
Section 129.1, Applicability, is being requires all airplanes or rotorcraft that (3) The NPRM publication of the
amended to revise paragraph (b) to add are required to have a CVR to record appendix included several errors in the
new § 129.24 (proposed as § 129.22) to datalink communications if DLC resolution column; none of the current
the applicability. The NPRM equipment is installed two years after resolution percentages are being
inadvertently omitted several section the effective date of this rule. No change changed.
references from this paragraph and did was made to the language proposed in
(4) The NPRM introduced several
not account for other changes that had the NPRM.
Section 135.152, Flight recorders, is errors to the proposed change to
been made to § 129.1. The only change
being adopted is the added reference to amended to: parameter 23; parameter 23 is not being
§ 129.22 on CVRs. (1) Add a new paragraph (l) that changed.
Section 129.24 (proposed as § 129.22), requires separate containers for CVRs Paperwork Reduction Act
Cockpit voice recorders, is being added. and DFDRs on airplanes, and allows for
This section requires that airplanes combined recorders on rotorcraft. Information collection requirements
operated under part 129 be equipped (2) Add a new paragraph (m) that associated with this final rule have been
with an approved CVR that meets the requires that newly manufactured approved previously by the Office of
standards of TSO–C123a, or later airplanes have a DFDR that meets Management and Budget (OMB) under
revision, and record the information additional provisions of the flight data the provisions of the Paperwork
that the airplane would be required to recorder certification requirements in Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C.
record if it were operated under part §§ 23.1459, 25.1459, 27.1459, or 3507(d)), and have been assigned OMB
121, 125, or 135, using the compliance 29.1459, as applicable. The additions to Control Number 2120–0700.
times for the applicable part. No change these sections include the power
was made from the language proposed duration requirement, the single International Compatibility
in the NPRM. electrical failure requirement, and the
In keeping with U.S. obligations
separate container/combination unit
I. Part 135—Operating Requirements: under the Convention on International
requirements noted in the amendments
Commuter and On Demand Operations to the certification parts. New paragraph Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to
and Rules Governing Persons On Board (m)(2) also requires that these newly comply with International Civil
Such Aircraft manufactured airplanes have DFDRs Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards
Section 135.151, Cockpit voice that retain the last 25 hours of recorded and Recommended Practices to the
recorders, is amended to: information using a recorder that meets maximum extent practicable. The FAA
(1) Add a new paragraph (f) that the standard of TSO–C124a, or later has reviewed the corresponding ICAO
includes the separate container revision. No change was made to the Standards and Recommended Practices
requirements for CVRs and DFDRs on language proposed in the NPRM. and has identified the following
part 23 or part 25 airplanes. This Appendix C to part 135, Helicopter difference: ICAO Annex 6, section
paragraph also requires transport Flight Recorder Specifications, is being 6.3.1.5.1, calls for recording all datalink
category airplanes to meet additional amended to add footnote 4, changing communication messages, including
recording requirements in §§ 23.1457 or the sampling interval for five parameters controller-pilot datalink
25.1457, as proposed in the NPRM. The for rotorcraft manufactured two years communications, on all aircraft by
requirement to retain two hours of after the date of the final rule. No January 1, 2007. The FAA is not
recorded information on a CVR that change was made to the language requiring the retrofit of datalink
meets the requirements of TSO–C123a, proposed in the NPRM. communication recording equipment on
which was proposed in the NPRM as a Appendix E to part 135, Helicopter aircraft. The FAA intends to file a
retrofit, is not included. Flight Recorder Specifications, is being difference with ICAO.
Regulatory Evaluation, Regulatory Has benefits that justify its costs, (2) is • It costs $19,900 to change from a
Flexibility Determination, International not an economically ‘‘significant magnetic tape CVR to a 2-hour solid
Trade Impact Assessment, and regulatory action’’ as defined in section state CVR. The change will result in an
Unfunded Mandates Assessment 3(f) of Executive Order 12866, (3) is annual operational and maintenance
‘‘significant’’ as defined in DOT’s cost reduction of $910 for these
Changes to Federal regulations must Regulatory Policies and Procedures; (4) airplanes.
undergo several economic analyses. will not have a significant economic • It costs $8,140 to change from a 30-
First, Executive Order 12866 directs that impact on a substantial number of small minute memory solid state CVR to a 2-
each Federal agency shall propose or entities; (5) will not create unnecessary hour solid state CVR.
adopt a regulation only upon a reasoned obstacles to the foreign commerce of the
determination that the benefits of the • The maximum cost for a future
United States; and (6) will not impose production commercial airplane is
intended regulation justify its costs. an unfunded mandate on state, local, or
Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act $10,020 for RIPS, for recording DLC,
tribal governments, or on the private and for the DFDR changes. Annual
of 1980 (Pub. L. 96–354) requires sector by exceeding the threshold
agencies to analyze the economic increased operational and maintenance
identified above. These analyses are costs are $1,400.
impact of regulatory changes on small summarized below.
entities. Third, the Trade Agreements • The cost of RIPS for a future
Act (Pub. L. 96–39) prohibits agencies A. Total Costs and Benefits of This Rule production large helicopter is $3,840.
from setting standards that create The undiscounted cost of this rule is Annual increased operational and
unnecessary obstacles to the foreign $239 million ($169 million in present maintenance costs are $1,300.
commerce of the United States. In value terms at a discount rate of 7 • The maximum cost for a future
developing U.S. standards, this Trade percent and $206 million in present production business jet is $8,520 for
Act requires agencies to consider value terms at a discount rate of 3 RIPS, for recording DLC, and for the
international standards and, where percent). This rule adopts certain NTSB DFDR changes. Annual increased
appropriate, that they be the basis of recommendations and is in response to operational and maintenance costs are
U.S. standards. Fourth, the Unfunded the Swissair 11 and Alaska Airlines 261 $1,000.
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. accidents. The following discussion • Cost of aviation fuel is $1.60 per
104–4) requires agencies to prepare a provides more detailed cost and benefit gallon.
written assessment of the costs, benefits, information: • The primary sources for this
and other effects of proposed or final B. Who Is Affected by This Rule information are: (1) Industry responses
rules that include a Federal mandate to a 2002 FAA survey and (2) public
likely to result in the expenditure by Manufacturers of aircraft type comments we received in response to
State, local, or tribal governments, in the certificated under parts 23, 25, 27 and the NPRM.
aggregate, or by the private sector, of 29, and operators of aircraft operated
$100 million or more annually (adjusted under parts 91, 121, 125, 129 and 135. D. Costs of This Rule
for inflation from the base year of 1995). C. Assumptions and Standard Values Since the publication of the notice we
This portion of the preamble have learned that almost all of the
• Period of analysis is 2007–2017.
summarizes the FAA’s analysis of the • Discount rates are 7 percent and 3 manufacturers have been installing the
economic impacts of this final rule. We percent. newer equipment that was proposed
suggest readers seeking greater detail • Burdened labor rate for an aviation and operators have been retiring older
read the full regulatory evaluation, a engineer is $125 an hour. aircraft. As Table 1 shows, the costs
copy of which we have placed in the • Burdened labor rate for an aviation estimated in this final rule are
docket for this rulemaking. mechanic is $85 an hour. significantly less (approximately $90
In conducting these analyses, the FAA • Number of airplanes to be million) than we estimated in the
has determined that this final rule: (1) retrofitted is 7,575. NPRM.
TABLE 1.—SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES IN ASSUMPTIONS AND PARAMETERS USED FOR THE RULE AND FOR THE PROPOSAL
Assumption/parameter Final rule Proposal
Present Value (7%) of Total Costs ...................................................................... $169 ........................................ $256

Time Frame for Analysis ...................................................................................... 11 Years (2007–2017) ............ 20 Years (2003–2022).
Part 121 Airplanes:
Number of Magnetic Tape CVRs to be replaced ......................................... 2,941 ....................................... 5,904
Number of 30-Minute Memory Solid State CVRs to be replaced ................ 4,634 ....................................... 3,741
Number of Production Airplanes with 30-Minute Memory Recorders .......... 394 .......................................... 13,658
Percent of All Production Airplanes with 30-Minute Memory Recorders ..... 10% ......................................... 100%
Cost of Increased Memory/2 hours .............................................................. $1,500 ..................................... $3,500
Need RIPS (number of aircraft) .................................................................... 3,935 ....................................... 13,658
Cost of RIPS ................................................................................................. $4,180 ..................................... $2,820
Record CPDLC (number of aircraft) ............................................................. 1,181 ....................................... 13,658
Percent that will Record CPDLC .................................................................. 20% ......................................... 100%
Increased FDR and DFDAU Capacity .......................................................... 3,935 ....................................... 13,658
Large Production Helicopters:
Number of Production Helicopters with 30-Minute Memory CVRs .............. 0 .............................................. 1,337
Need RIPS (number of aircraft) .................................................................... 259 .......................................... 1,337

Record CPDLC (number of aircraft) ............................................................. 0 .............................................. 1,337
Business Jets:
Number of Production Business Jets for which costs were estimated ........ 3,575 ....................................... 0
Miscellaneous:
TABLE 1.—SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES IN ASSUMPTIONS AND PARAMETERS USED FOR THE RULE AND FOR THE
PROPOSAL—Continued
Assumption/parameter Final rule Proposal
Price of Aviation Fuel ................................................................................... $1.60 ....................................... $0.75
E. Benefits of This Rule Agencies must perform a review to standards or engaging in related
The rule increases the amount and determine whether a rule will have a activities that create unnecessary
quality of the information being significant economic impact on a obstacles to the foreign commerce of the
recorded, which may result in new or substantial number of small entities. If United States. Legitimate domestic
revised safety rules (for airplane the agency determines that it will, the objectives, such as safety, are not
manufacturing or operations) or in agency must prepare a regulatory considered unnecessary obstacles. The
voluntary changes to airline and pilot flexibility analysis as described in the statute also requires consideration of
procedures that may produce a safer RFA. international standards and, where
However, if an agency determines that appropriate, that they be the basis for
fleet and operations. Although we did
a rule is not expected to have a U.S. standards. The FAA assessed the
not adopt all of the NTSB
significant economic impact on a potential effect of this rule and
recommendations concerning CVR and substantial number of small entities, determined that it responds to a
DFDR modifications, we chose the section 605(b) of the RFA provides that domestic safety objective and is not
course of action that maximizes safety the head of the agency may so certify considered an unnecessary barrier to
benefits relative to compliance costs. and a regulatory flexibility analysis is trade.
F. Alternatives Considered not required. The certification must
include a statement providing the I. Unfunded Mandates Assessment
We modified the proposed rule based The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
factual basis for this determination, and
on the comments. In particular, unlike of 1995 (Pub L. 104–4) (the Act) is
the reasoning should be clear.
the proposed rule, the final rule does The FAA believes that this final rule intended, among other things, to curb
not require part 91 operators to retrofit will not have a significant impact on a the practice of imposing unfunded
their airplanes. The proposed retrofit of substantial number of entities for the Federal mandates on State, local, and
a 2-hour CVR would have affected following reasons: tribal governments. Title II of the Act
approximately 15,000 airplanes at a The rule affects manufacturers of part requires each Federal agency to prepare
total cost that would have been several 23 and part 25 airplanes. For these a written statement assessing the effects
hundred million dollars. Any potential manufacturers, a small entity is one of any Federal mandate in a proposed or
benefits would be far outweighed by with 1,500 or fewer employees. No final agency rule that may result in the
these costs. manufacturer of part 23 or part 25 expenditure of $100 million or more
We had proposed new sampling aircraft that could be affected by these (adjusted annually for inflation) by
frequencies of 16 times per second for operational regulations (turbine State, local, and tribal governments, in
9 flight control parameters; the final rule powered aircraft with 10 or more seats) the aggregate, or by the private sector;
requires sampling at 8 times per second. has fewer than 1,500 employees. such a mandate is deemed to be a
Manufacturers commented that some The rule also affects all operators of ‘‘significant regulatory action.’’ The
entire DFDR systems would need to be airplanes with 10 or more seats FAA currently uses an inflation-
re-engineered at a potential cost of operating under parts 91, 121, 129, and adjusted value of $128.1 million in lieu
millions of dollars per aircraft model. 135. Some of these operators are small of $100 million.
Further, recording parameters at 16 entities that must retrofit their airplanes. This rule does not contain such a
times per second would not yield The cost to retrofit an individual mandate. The requirements of Title II do
comparatively better information given airplane is between $8,140 and $19,900. not apply.
the costs to obtain it. We have operating revenue for 24 of the
46 small air carriers affected. Of these Executive Order 13132, Federalism
G. Regulatory Flexibility Determination
24 small air carriers, the maximum one- The FAA has analyzed this final rule
The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 time cost will be 0.71 percent of 2005’s under the principles and criteria of
(Pub. L. 96–354) (RFA) establishes ‘‘as a revenue for one airline and for the Executive Order 13132, Federalism. We
principle of regulatory issuance that remaining 23 small air carriers, the determined that this action will not
agencies shall endeavor, consistent with percentage will not exceed 0.35 percent. have a substantial direct effect on the
the objectives of the rule and of The FAA does not consider it a States, or the relationship between the
applicable statutes, to fit regulatory and significant economic impact when total national Government and the States, or
informational requirements to the scale one-time compliance costs are less than on the distribution of power and
of the businesses, organizations, and one percent of a year’s revenue. responsibilities among the various
governmental jurisdictions subject to Therefore, as the FAA Acting levels of government, and therefore does
regulation. To achieve this principle, Administrator, I certify that this rule not have federalism implications.
agencies are required to solicit and does not have a significant economic
consider flexible regulatory proposals Environmental Analysis
impact on a substantial number of small
and to explain the rationale for their entities. FAA Order 1050.1D defines FAA
actions to assure that such proposals are actions that may be categorically
H. International Trade Impact
given serious consideration.’’ The RFA excluded from preparation of a National

covers a wide range of small entities, Assessment Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
including small businesses, not-for- The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 environmental impact statement. In
profit organizations, and small (Pub. L. 96–39) prohibits Federal accordance with FAA Order 1050.1D,
governmental jurisdictions. agencies from establishing any appendix 4, paragraph 4(j), this
proposed rulemaking action qualifies for 14 CFR Part 27 both the cockpit voice recorder and the
a categorical exclusion. Aircraft, Aviation Safety. flight data recorder;
(5) It has an independent power
Energy Impact 14 CFR Part 29 source—
The energy impact of the notice has Aircraft, Aviation Safety. (i) That provides 10 ± 1 minutes of
been assessed in accordance with the electrical power to operate both the
Energy Policy and Conservation Act 14 CFR Part 91 cockpit voice recorder and cockpit-
(EPCA), Public Law 94–163, as amended Aircraft, Aviation safety. mounted area microphone;
(43 U.S.C. 6362), and FAA Order (ii) That is located as close as
1053.1. It has been determined that the 14 CFR Part 121 practicable to the cockpit voice
notice is not a major regulatory action Air carriers, Aircraft, Aviation safety, recorder; and
under the provisions of the EPCA. Charter flights, Safety, Transportation. (iii) To which the cockpit voice
Availability of Rulemaking Documents 14 CFR Part 125 recorder and cockpit-mounted area
microphone are switched automatically
You may obtain an electronic copy of Aircraft, Aviation safety. in the event that all other power to the
this final rule using the Internet by: cockpit voice recorder is interrupted
(1) Searching the Federal 14 CFR Part 129
either by normal shutdown or by any
eRulemaking Portal (http:// Air carriers, Aircraft, Aviation safety. other loss of power to the electrical
www.regulations.gov); power bus; and
(2) Visiting the FAA’s Regulations and 14 CFR Part
(6) It is in a separate container from
Policies Web page at http:// 135 Air taxis, Aircraft, Aviation
the flight data recorder when both are
www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/; or safety.
(3) Accessing the Government required. If used to comply with only
Printing Office’s Web page at http:// The Amendment the cockpit voice recorder requirements,
www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. a combination unit may be installed.
■ In consideration of the foregoing, the
You may also obtain a copy by (e) The recorder container must be
Federal Aviation Administration
sending a request to the Federal located and mounted to minimize the
amends parts 23, 25, 27, 29, 91, 121,
Aviation Administration, Office of probability of rupture of the container as
125, 129, and 135 of Title 14, Code of
Rulemaking, ARM–1, 800 Independence a result of crash impact and consequent
Federal Regulations, as follows:
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or heat damage to the recorder from fire.
by calling (202) 267–9680. Make sure to PART 23—AIRWORTHINESS (1) Except as provided in paragraph
identify the notice number or docket STANDARDS: NORMAL, UTILITY, (e)(2) of this section, the recorder
number of this rulemaking. ACROBATIC, AND COMMUTER container must be located as far aft as
Anyone is able to search the CATEGORY AIRPLANES practicable, but need not be outside of
electronic form of all comments the pressurized compartment, and may
received into any of our dockets by the ■ 1. The authority citation for part 23 not be located where aft-mounted
name of the individual submitting the continues to read as follows: engines may crush the container during
comment (or signing the comment, if Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701– impact.
submitted on behalf of an association, 44702, 44704. (2) If two separate combination digital
business, labor union, etc.). You may ■ 2. Amend § 23.1457 by removing the flight data recorder and cockpit voice
review DOT’s complete Privacy Act period at the end paragraph (d)(3) and recorder units are installed instead of
statement in the Federal Register adding a semicolon in its place, by one cockpit voice recorder and one
published on April 11, 2000 (Volume revising paragraphs (d)(1) and (e), and digital flight data recorder, the
65, Number 70; Pages 19477–78) or you by adding new paragraphs (a)(6), (d)(4), combination unit that is installed to
may visit http://DocketsInfo.dot.gov. (d)(5), and (d)(6) to read as follows: comply with the cockpit voice recorder
requirements may be located near the
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement § 23.1457 Cockpit voice recorders. cockpit.
Fairness Act (a) * * * * * * * *
The Small Business Regulatory (6) If datalink communication 3. Amend § 23.1459 by revising the
Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of equipment is installed, all datalink section heading, by removing the period
1996 requires the FAA to comply with communications, using an approved at the end of paragraph (a)(4) and
small entity requests for information or data message set. Datalink messages adding a semicolon in its place, by
advice about compliance with statutes must be recorded as the output signal removing the word ‘‘and’’ after the
and regulations within its jurisdiction. If from the communications unit that semicolon in paragraph (a)(5), by
you are a small entity and you have a translates the signal into usable data. revising paragraph (a)(3) to read as
question about this document, you may * * * * * follows, and by adding new paragraphs
contact your local FAA official, or the (d) * * * (a)(6) and (a)(7) to read as follows:
person listed under FOR FURTHER (1) It receives its electrical power from
INFORMATION CONTACT. You may find out the bus that provides the maximum § 23.1459 Flight data recorders.
more about SBREFA on the Internet at reliability for operation of the cockpit (a) * * *
http://www.faa.gov/regulations_ voice recorder without jeopardizing (3) It receives its electrical power from
policies/rulemaking/sbre_act/. service to essential or emergency loads. the bus that provides the maximum
The cockpit voice recorder must remain reliability for operation of the flight data
List of Subjects recorder without jeopardizing service to
powered for as long as possible without
essential or emergency loads. The flight
14 CFR Part 23 jeopardizing emergency operation of the

Aircraft, Aviation safety. airplane; data recorder must remain powered for
* * * * * as long as possible without jeopardizing
14 CFR Part 25 (4) Any single electrical failure emergency operation of the airplane;
Aircraft, Aviation safety. external to the recorder does not disable * * * * *
(6) Any single electrical failure (iii) To which the cockpit voice requirements, a combination unit may
external to the recorder does not disable recorder and cockpit-mounted area be installed. If a combination unit is
both the cockpit voice recorder and the microphone are switched automatically installed as a cockpit voice recorder to
flight data recorder; and in the event that all other power to the comply with § 25.1457(e)(2), a
(7) It is in a separate container from cockpit voice recorder is interrupted combination unit must be used to
the cockpit voice recorder when both either by normal shutdown or by any comply with this flight data recorder
are required. If used to comply with other loss of power to the electrical requirement.
only the flight data recorder power bus; and * * * * *
requirements, a combination unit may (6) It is in a separate container from
be installed. If a combination unit is the flight data recorder when both are PART 27—AIRWORTHINESS
installed as a cockpit voice recorder to required. If used to comply with only STANDARDS: NORMAL CATEGORY
comply with § 23.1457(e)(2), a the cockpit voice recorder requirements, ROTORCRAFT
combination unit must be used to a combination unit may be installed.
comply with this flight data recorder (e) The recorder container must be ■ 7. The authority citation for part 27
requirement. located and mounted to minimize the continues to read as follows:
* * * * * probability of rupture of the container as Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701–
a result of crash impact and consequent 44702, 44704.
PART 25—AIRWORTHINESS heat damage to the recorder from fire.
STANDARDS: TRANSPORT ■ 8. Amend § 27.1457 by removing the
(1) Except as provided in paragraph word ‘‘and’’ after the semicolon in
CATEGORY AIRPLANES (e)(2) of this section, the recorder paragraph (d)(2), by removing the period
container must be located as far aft as at the end of paragraph (d)(3) and
■ 4. The authority citation for part 25
continues to read as follows: practicable, but need not be outside of adding a semicolon in its place, by
the pressurized compartment, and may revising paragraph (d)(1) to read as
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701, not be located where aft-mounted
44702, and 44704. follows, and by adding new paragraphs
engines may crush the container during (a)(6), (d)(4), (d)(5), and (h) to read as
■ 5. Amend § 25.1457 by removing the impact.
word ‘‘and’’ after the semicolon in follows:
(2) If two separate combination digital
paragraph (d)(2), by removing the period flight data recorder and cockpit voice § 27.1457 Cockpit voice recorders.
at the end of paragraph (d)(3) and recorder units are installed instead of (a) * * *
adding a semicolon in its place, by one cockpit voice recorder and one (6) If datalink communication
revising paragraphs (d)(1) and (e) to read digital flight data recorder, the equipment is installed, all datalink
as follows, and by adding new combination unit that is installed to communications, using an approved
paragraphs (a)(6), (d)(4), (d)(5), and comply with the cockpit voice recorder data message set. Datalink messages
(d)(6) to read as follows: requirements may be located near the must be recorded as the output signal
§ 25.1457 Cockpit voice recorders. cockpit. from the communications unit that
(a) * * * * * * * * translates the signal into usable data.
(6) If datalink communication ■ 6. Amend § 25.1459 by revising the * * * * *
equipment is installed, all datalink section heading, by removing the period (d) * * *
communications, using an approved at the end of paragraph (a)(4) and (1) It receives its electrical power from
data message set. Datalink messages adding a semicolon in its place, by the bus that provides the maximum
must be recorded as the output signal removing the word ‘‘and’’ after the reliability for operation of the cockpit
from the communications unit that semicolon in paragraph (a)(5), by voice recorder without jeopardizing
translates the signal into usable data. removing the period at the end of service to essential or emergency loads.
* * * * * paragraph (a)(6) and adding a semicolon The cockpit voice recorder must remain
(d) * * * in its place, by revising paragraph (a)(3) powered for as long as possible without
(1) It receives its electrical power from to read as follows, and by adding new jeopardizing emergency operation of the
the bus that provides the maximum paragraphs (a)(7) and (a)(8) to read as rotorcraft;
reliability for operation of the cockpit follows: * * * * *
voice recorder without jeopardizing (4) Whether the cockpit voice recorder
§ 25.1459 Flight data recorders.
service to essential or emergency loads. and digital flight data recorder are
The cockpit voice recorder must remain (a) * * * installed in separate boxes or in a
powered for as long as possible without (3) It receives its electrical power from combination unit, no single electrical
jeopardizing emergency operation of the the bus that provides the maximum failure external to the recorder may
airplane; reliability for operation of the flight data disable both the cockpit voice recorder
recorder without jeopardizing service to and the digital flight data recorder; and
* * * * *
(4) Any single electrical failure essential or emergency loads. The flight (5) It has an independent power
external to the recorder does not disable data recorder must remain powered for source—
both the cockpit voice recorder and the as long as possible without jeopardizing (i) That provides 10 ± 1 minutes of
flight data recorder; emergency operation of the airplane; electrical power to operate both the
(5) It has an independent power * * * * * cockpit voice recorder and cockpit-
source— (7) Any single electrical failure mounted area microphone;
(i) That provides 10 ± 1 minutes of external to the recorder does not disable (ii) That is located as close as
electrical power to operate both the both the cockpit voice recorder and the practicable to the cockpit voice
cockpit voice recorder and cockpit- flight data recorder; and recorder; and
mounted area microphone; (8) It is in a separate container from (iii) To which the cockpit voice
(ii) That is located as close as the cockpit voice recorder when both recorder and cockpit-mounted area
practicable to the cockpit voice are required. If used to comply with microphone are switched automatically
recorder; and only the flight data recorder in the event that all other power to the
cockpit voice recorder is interrupted communications, using an approved powered for as long as possible without
either by normal shutdown or by any data message set. Datalink messages jeopardizing emergency operation of the
other loss of power to the electrical must be recorded as the output signal rotorcraft;
power bus. from the communications unit that * * * * *
* * * * * translates the signal into usable data. (6) Whether the cockpit voice recorder
(h) When both a cockpit voice * * * * * and digital flight data recorder are
recorder and a flight data recorder are (d) * * * installed in separate boxes or in a
required by the operating rules, one (1) It receives its electrical power from combination unit, no single electrical
combination unit may be installed, the bus that provides the maximum failure external to the recorder may
provided that all other requirements of reliability for operation of the cockpit disable both the cockpit voice recorder
this section and the requirements for voice recorder without jeopardizing and the digital flight data recorder.
flight data recorders under this part are service to essential or emergency loads. * * * * *
met. The cockpit voice recorder must remain (e) When both a cockpit voice
■ 9. Amend § 27.1459 by revising the powered for as long as possible without recorder and a flight data recorder are
section heading and paragraph (a)(3) to jeopardizing emergency operation of the required by the operating rules, one
read as follows, and by adding new rotorcraft; combination unit may be installed,
paragraphs (a)(6) and (e) to read as * * * * * provided that all other requirements of
follows: (4) Whether the cockpit voice recorder this section and the requirements for
§ 27.1459 Flight data recorders. and digital flight data recorder are cockpit voice recorders under this part
installed in separate boxes or in a are met.
(a) * * *
(3) It receives its electrical power from combination unit, no single electrical
the bus that provides the maximum failure external to the recorder may PART 91—GENERAL OPERATING AND
reliability for operation of the flight data disable both the cockpit voice recorder FLIGHT RULES
recorder without jeopardizing service to and the digital flight data recorder; and
(5) It has an independent power ■ 13. The authority citation for part 91
essential or emergency loads. The flight continues to read as follows:
data recorder must remain powered for source—
as long as possible without jeopardizing (i) That provides 10 ± 1 minutes of Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1155, 40103,
emergency operation of the rotorcraft; electrical power to operate both the 40113, 40120, 44101, 44111, 44701, 44709,
cockpit voice recorder and cockpit- 44711, 44712, 44715, 44716, 44717, 44722,
* * * * * mounted area microphone; 46306, 46315, 46316, 46504, 46506–46507,
(6) Whether the cockpit voice recorder (ii) That is located as close as 47122, 47508, 47528–47531, articles 12 and
and digital flight data recorder are practicable to the cockpit voice 29 of the Convention on International Civil
installed in separate boxes or in a recorder; and Aviation (61 stat. 1180).
combination unit, no single electrical (iii) To which the cockpit voice 14. Amend § 91.609 by revising the
failure external to the recorder may recorder and cockpit-mounted area section heading, by redesignating
disable both the cockpit voice recorder microphone are switched automatically paragraph (c) as (c)(1), and by adding
and the digital flight data recorder. in the event that all other power to the new paragraphs (c)(2), (c)(3), (h), (i), and
* * * * * cockpit voice recorder is interrupted (j) to read as follows:
(e) When both a cockpit voice either by normal shutdown or by any
recorder and a flight data recorder are other loss of power to the electrical § 91.609 Flight data recorders and cockpit
required by the operating rules, one power bus. voice recorders.
combination unit may be installed, * * * * *
* * * * *
provided that all other requirements of (c) * * *
(h) When both a cockpit voice
this section and the requirements for (2) All airplanes subject to paragraph
recorder and a flight data recorder are
cockpit voice recorders under this part (c)(1) of this section that are
required by the operating rules, one
are met. manufactured before April 7, 2010, by
combination unit may be installed,
provided that all other requirements of April 7, 2012, must meet the
PART 29—AIRWORTHINESS requirements of § 23.1459(a)(7) or
STANDARDS: TRANSPORT this section and the requirements for
flight data recorders under this part are § 25.1459(a)(8) of this chapter, as
CATEGORY ROTORCRAFT applicable.
met.
■ 10. The authority citation for part 29 (c)(3) All airplanes and rotorcraft
■ 12. Amend § 29.1459 by revising the
continues to read as follows: subject to paragraph (c)(1) of this section
section heading, by removing the word
that are manufactured on or after April
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701– ‘‘ and’’ after the semicolon in paragraph
7, 2010, must meet the flight data
44702, 44704. (a)(4), by removing the period at the end
recorder requirements of § 23.1459,
■ 11. Amend § 29.1457 by removing the of paragraph (a)(5) and adding ‘‘; and’’
§ 25.1459, § 27.1459, or § 29.1459 of this
word ‘‘and’’ after the semicolon in in its place, by revising paragraph (a)(3)
chapter, as applicable, and retain at
paragraph (d)(2), by removing the period to read as follows and by adding new
least the last 25 hours of recorded
at the end of paragraph (d)(3) and paragraphs (a)(6) and (e) to read as
information using a recorder that meets
adding a semicolon in its place, by follows:
the standards of TSO–C124a, or later
revising paragraph (d)(1) to read as revision.
§ 29.1459 Flight data recorders.
follows, and by adding new paragraphs
(a)(6), (d)(4), (d)(5), and (h) to read as (a) * * * * * * * *
follows: (3) It receives its electrical power from (h) All airplanes required by this
the bus that provides the maximum section to have a cockpit voice recorder
§ 29.1457 Cockpit voice recorders. reliability for operation of the cockpit and a flight data recorder, that are
(a) * * * voice recorder without jeopardizing manufactured before April 7, 2010, must
(6) If datalink communication service to essential or emergency loads. by April 7, 2012, have a cockpit voice
equipment is installed, all datalink The cockpit voice recorder must remain recorder that also—
(1) Meets the requirements of (1) Meets the requirements of equipment on or after April 7, 2010,
§ 23.1457(d)(6) or § 25.1457(d)(6) of this § 23.1457, § 25.1457, § 27.1457, or must record all datalink messages as
chapter, as applicable; and § 29.1457 of this chapter, as applicable; required by the certification rule
(2) If transport category, meets the and applicable to the aircraft.
requirements of § 25.1457(a)(3), (a)(4), (2) Retains at least the last 2 hours of
and (a)(5) of this chapter. recorded information using a recorder ■ 15. Amend appendix E to part 91 by
(i) All airplanes or rotorcraft required that meets the standards of TSO–C123a, adding footnote 5 to the Stabilizer Trim
by this section to have a cockpit voice or later revision. Position or Pitch Control Position,
recorder and flight data recorder, that (j) All airplanes or rotorcraft required under the heading Parameters to read as
are manufactured on or after April 7, by this section to have a cockpit voice set forth below. The text of footnotes 1,
2010, must have a cockpit voice recorder and a flight data recorder, that 3, and 4 is reprinted without change for
recorder installed that also— install datalink communication the convenience of the reader.
APPENDIX E TO PART 91.—AIRPLANE FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS

Sampling
Installed system 1 minimum Resolution 4
interval
Parameters Range accuracy read out
(per
(to recovered data) (percent)
second)
* * * * * * *
Stabilizer Trim Position or Pitch Con- Full Range ........................................ ±3% unless higher uniquely required 1 31
trol Position 5.
* * * * * * *
1 When data sources are aircraft 3 Percent

of full range. ■ 16. Amend appendix F to part 91 by
4 This
column applies to aircraft
instruments (except altimeters) of acceptable adding footnote 4 to the Collective,
quality to fly the aircraft, the recording manufactured after October 11, 1991. Pedal Position, Lat. Cyclic, Long. Cyclic,
5 For Pitch Control Position only, for all
system, excluding these sensors (but and Controllable Stabilator Position,
including all other characteristics of the aircraft manufactured on or after April 7,
2010, the sampling interval (per second) is 8. under the heading Parameters to read as
recording system), shall contribute no more set forth below. The text of footnotes 1
Each input must be recorded at this rate.
than half of the values in this column. through 4 is reprinted without change
Alternately sampling inputs (interleaving) to
* * * * * meet this sampling interval is prohibited. for the convenience of the reader.
APPENDIX F TO PART 91.—HELICOPTER FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS

Installed
system 1 Sampling
minimum Resolution 3
interval
Parameters Range accuracy read out
(per
(to recov- (in percent)
second)
ered data)
(in percent)
* * * * * * *
Collective 4 ............................................................ Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21
Pedal Position 4 ..................................................... Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21
Lat. Cyclic 4 ........................................................... Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21
Long. Cyclic 4 ........................................................ Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21
Controllable Stabilator Position 4 .......................... Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21
1 When data sources are aircraft § 121.343 Flight data recorders.

PART 121—OPERATING
instruments (except altimeters) of acceptable REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC, FLAG, * * * * *
quality to fly the aircraft, the recording AND SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATIONS (m) After August 20, 2001, this
system, excluding these sensors (but
section applies only to the airplane
including all other characteristics of the
■ 17. The authority citation for part 121 models listed in § 121.344(l)(2). All
recording system), shall contribute no more
continues to read as follows: other airplanes must comply with the
than half of the values in this column.
2 Percent of full range. Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 40119, requirements of § 121.344, as applicable.
3 This column applies to aircraft 41706, 44101, 44701–44702, 44705, 44709– ■ 19. Amend § 121.344 by adding new
manufactured after October 11, 1991. 44711, 44713, 44716–44717, 44722, 46105. paragraph (m) to read as follows:
4 For all aircraft manufactured on or after
■ 18. Amend § 121.343 by revising the § 121.344 Digital flight data recorders for
April 7, 2010, the sampling interval per
section heading, by amending paragraph transport category airplanes.
second is 4.
(c) by revising ‘‘1994’’ to read ‘‘1995’’, * * * * *
and by adding new paragraph (m) to (m) All aircraft subject to the
read as follows: requirements of this section that are
manufactured on or after April 7, 2010,
must have a digital flight data recorder ■ 21. Amend § 121.359 by adding new must have a cockpit voice recorder
installed that also— paragraphs (i), (j), and (k) to read as installed that also—
(1) Meets the requirements of follows: (1) Meets the requirements of
§ 25.1459(a)(3), (a)(7), and (a)(8) of this § 23.1457 or § 25.1457 of this chapter, as
chapter; and § 121.359 Cockpit voice recorders.
applicable;
(2) Retains the 25 hours of recorded * * * * *
(2) Retains at least the last 2 hours of
information required in paragraph (h) of (i) By April 7, 2012, all turbine recorded information using a recorder
this section using a recorder that meets engine-powered airplanes subject to this that meets the standards of TSO–C123a,
the standards of TSO–C124a, or later section that are manufactured before or later revision; and
revision. April 7, 2010, must have a cockpit voice
■ 20. Amend § 121.344a by adding new (3) Is operated continuously from the
recorder installed that also— use of the checklist before the flight to
paragraph (g) to read as follows:
(1) Meets the requirements of completion of the final checklist at the
§ 121.344a Digital flight data recorders for § 23.1457(d)(6) or § 25.1457(d)(6) of this end of the flight.
10–19 seat airplanes. chapter, as applicable; (k) All airplanes required by this part
* * * * * (2) Retains at least the last 2 hours of to have a cockpit voice recorder and a
(g) All airplanes subject to the recorded information using a recorder flight data recorder, that install datalink
requirements of this section that are that meets the standards of TSO–C123a, communication equipment on or after
manufactured on or after April 7, 2010, or later revision; and April 7, 2010, must record all datalink
must have a digital flight data recorder (3) Is operated continuously from the messages as required by the certification
installed that also— use of the checklist before the flight to rule applicable to the airplane.
(1) Meets the requirements in
completion of the final checklist at the ■ 22. Amend appendix M to part 121 by
§ 23.1459(a)(3), (a)(6), and (a)(7) or
end of the flight. revising parameters 1, 12a, 12b, 13a,
§ 25.1459(a)(3), (a)(7), and (a)(8) of this
chapter, as applicable; and (4) If transport category, meets the 13b, 14a, 14b, 15, 16 and 17 and 88, and
(2) Retains the 25 hours of recorded requirements in § 25.1457(a)(3), (a)(4), adding footnote 18, to read as set forth
information required in § 121.344(g) and (a)(5) of this chapter. below. The text of footnotes 1, 3, 4, 5,
using a recorder that meets the (j) All turbine engine-powered 6, 7, and 8 are reprinted without change
standards of TSO–C124a, or later airplanes subject to this section that are for the convenience of the reader.
revision. manufactured on or after April 7, 2010, * * * * *
APPENDIX M TO PART 121.—AIRPLANE FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS

Accuracy Seconds per sam-
Parameters Range Resolution Remarks
(sensor input) pling interval
1. Time or relative 24 Hrs, 0 to 4095 ... ± 0.125% per hour .. 4 ............................. 1 sec ......................
UTC time preferred when
times counts.1 available. Count increments
each 4 seconds of system
operation.
* * * * * * *
12a. Pitch control(s) Full Range .............. ± 2° unless higher 0.5 or 0.25 for air- 0.5% of full range ... For airplanes that have a
position (nonfly-by- accuracy uniquely planes operated flight control breakaway ca-
wire systems).18 required. under pability that allows either
§ 121.344(f). pilot to operate the controls
independently, record both
control inputs. The control
inputs may be sampled al-
ternately once per second
to produce the sampling in-
terval of 0.5 or 0.25, as ap-
plicable.
12b. Pitch control(s) Full Range .............. ± 2° unless higher 0.5 or 0.25 for air- 0.2% of full range ...
position (fly-by-wire accuracy uniquely planes operated
systems).3 18 required. under
§ 121.344(f).
13a. Lateral control Full Range .............. ± 2° unless higher 0.5 or 0.25 for air- 0.2% of full range ... For airplanes that have a
position(s) (nonfly- accuracy uniquely planes operated flight control breakaway ca-
by-wire).18 required. under pability that allows either
plicable.
13b. Lateral control Full Range .............. ± 2° unless higher 0.5 or 0.25 for air- 0.2% of full range.
position(s) (fly-by- accuracy uniquely planes operated

wire).4 18 required. under
§ 121.344(f).
APPENDIX M TO PART 121.—AIRPLANE FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS—Continued

14a. Yaw control po- Full Range .............. ± 2° unless higher 0.5 .......................... 0.3% of full range ... For airplanes that have a
sition(s) (nonfly-by- accuracy uniquely flight control breakaway ca-
wire).5 18 required. pability that allows either
pilot to operate the controls
terval of 0.5.
14b. Yaw control po- Full Range .............. ± 2° unless higher 0.5 .......................... 0.2% of full range ...
sition(s) (fly-by- accuracy uniquely
wire).18 required.
15. Pitch control sur- Full Range .............. ± 2° unless higher 0.5 or 0.25 for air- 0.3% of full range ... For airplanes fitted with mul-
face(s) position.6 accuracy uniquely planes operated tiple or split surfaces, a suit-
18 required. under able combination of inputs
§ 121.344(f). is acceptable in lieu of re-
cording each surface sepa-
rately. The control surfaces
may be sampled alternately
once per second to produce
the sampling interval of 0.5
or 0.25, as applicable.
16. Lateral control Full Range .............. ± 2° unless higher 0.5 or 0.25 for air- 0.3% of full range ... A suitable combination of sur-
surface(s) posi- accuracy uniquely planes operated face position sensors is ac-
tion.7 18 required. under ceptable in lieu of recording
§ 121.344(f). each surface separately.
The control surfaces may
be sampled alternately to
produce the sampling inter-
val of 0.5 or 0.25, as appli-
cable.
17. Yaw control sur- Full Range .............. ± 2° unless higher 0.5 .......................... 0.2% of full range ... For airplanes with multiple or
face(s) position.8 accuracy uniquely split surfaces, a suitable
18 required. combination of surface posi-
tion sensors is acceptable
in lieu of recording each
surface separately. The
control surfaces may be
sampled alternately to
val of 0.5.
* * * * * * *
88. All cockpit flight Full Range Control ± 5% ....................... 1 ............................. 0.3% of full range ... For fly-by-wire flight control
control input forces wheel ± 70 lbs. systems, where flight con-
(control wheel, Control column trol surface position is a
control column, ± 85 lbs. Rudder function of the displacement
rudder pedal).18 pedal ± 165 lbs. of the control input device
only, it is not necessary to
record this parameter. For
airplanes that have a flight
control breakaway capability
that allows either pilot to
operate the control inde-
pendently, record both con-
trol force inputs. The control
force inputs may be sam-
pled alternately once per 2
seconds to produce the
sampling interval of 1.
1 For A300 B2/B4 airplanes, resolution = 6 airplanes, resolution = 2.20% 5 For A330/A340 series airplanes,
seconds. (0.703°>0.064°). resolution = 1.18% (0.703°>0.120°).

4 For A318/A319/A320/A321 series 6 For A330/A340 series airplanes,
* * * * *
3 For airplanes, resolution = 0.22% resolution = 0.783% (0.352°>0.090°).
A318/A319/A320/A321 series 7 For A330/A340 series airplanes, aileron
airplanes, resolution = 0.275% (0.088°>0.080°). For A330/A340 series
airplanes, resolution = 1.76% resolution = 0.704% (0.352°>0.100°). For
(0.088°>0.064°). For A330/A340 series A330/A340 series airplanes, spoiler
(0.703°>0.080°).
resolution = 1.406% (0.703°>0.100°).
8 For A330/A340 series airplanes,

■ 25. Amend § 125.226 by adding new starting the engines for the purpose of
resolution = 0.30% (0.176°>0.12°). For A330/ paragraph (m) to read as follows: flight), to the completion of the final
A340 series airplanes, seconds per sampling checklist at the termination of the flight.
interval = 1. § 125.226 Digital flight data recorders.
(h) All turbine engine-powered
* * * * * * * * * * airplanes subject to this section that are
18 For all aircraft manufactured on or after (m) All aircraft subject to the manufactured on or after April 7, 2010,
April 7, 2010, the seconds per sampling requirements of this section that are must have a cockpit voice recorder
interval is 0.125. Each input must be manufactured on or after April 7, 2010,
recorded at this rate. Alternately sampling installed that also—
must have a flight data recorder
inputs (interleaving) to meet this sampling (1) Meets the requirements of
installed that also—
interval is prohibited. (1) Meets the requirements in § 25.1457(a)(3) through (a)(6), (d)(1),
§ 25.1459(a)(3), (a)(7), and (a)(8) of this (d)(4), (d)(5), and (d)(6) of this chapter;
PART 125—CERTIFICATION AND (2) Retains at least the last 2 hours of
chapter; and
OPERATIONS: AIRPLANES HAVING A (2) Retains the 25 hours of recorded recorded information using a recorder
SEATING CAPACITY OF 20 OR MORE information required in paragraph (f) of that meets the standards of TSO–C123a,
PASSENGERS OR A MAXIMUM this section using a recorder that meets or later revision; and
PAYLOAD CAPACITY OF 6,000 the standards of TSO–C124a, or later (3) Is operated continuously from the
POUNDS OR MORE; AND RULES revision. start of the use of the checklist (before
GOVERNING PERSONS ON BOARD ■ 26. Amend § 125.227 by adding new starting the engines for the purpose of
SUCH AIRCRAFT paragraphs (g), (h), and (i) to read as flight), to the completion of the final
follows: checklist at the termination of the flight.
■ 23. The authority citation for part 125 (i) All turbine engine-powered
continues to read as follows: § 125.227 Cockpit voice recorders. airplanes required by this part to have
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701– * * * * * a cockpit voice recorder and a flight
44702, 44705, 44710–44711, 44713, 44716– (g) By April 7, 2012, all turbine data recorder, that install datalink
44717, 44722. engine-powered airplanes subject to this communication equipment on or after
section that are manufactured before April 7, 2010, must record all datalink
■ 24. Amend § 125.225 by revising the April 7, 2010, must have a cockpit voice
section heading and by adding new messages as required by the certification
recorder installed that also— rule applicable to the airplane.
paragraph (j) to read as follows: (1) Meets the requirements of
■ 27. Amend appendix E to part 125 by
§ 125.225 Flight data recorders. § 25.1457(a)(3), (a)(4), (a)(5), and (d)(6)
of this chapter; revising parameters 12a, 12b, 13a, 13b,
* * * * * (2) Retains at least the last 2 hours of 14a, 14b, 15, 16, 17, 23, and 88, and
(j) After August 20, 2001, this section recorded information using a recorder adding footnote 18, to read as set forth
applies only to the airplane models that meets the standards of TSO–C123a, below. The text of footnotes 3, 4, 5, 6,
listed in § 125.226(l)(2). All other or later revision; and 8, and 12 are reprinted without change
airplanes must comply with the (3) Is operated continuously from the for the convenience of the reader.
requirements of § 125.226. start of the use of the checklist (before * * * * *
APPENDIX E TO PART 125.—AIRPLANE FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS

* * * * * * *
12a. Pitch control(s) Full range ............... ± 2° unless higher 0.5 or 0.25 for air- 0.5% of full range ... For airplanes that have a
wire systems) 18. required. under pability that allows either
plicable.
12b. Pitch control(s) Full range ............... ± 2° unless higher 0.5 or 0.25 for air- 0.2% of full range.
systems) 3 18. required. under
§ 125.226(f).
13a. Lateral control Full range ............... ± 2° unless higher 0.5 or 0.25 for air- 0.2% of full range ... For airplanes that have a
position(s) (nonfly- accuracy uniquely planes operated flight control break away ca-
by-wire) 18. required. under pability that allows either

plicable.
APPENDIX E TO PART 125.—AIRPLANE FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS—Continued

13b. Lateral control Full range ............... ± 2° unless higher 0.5 or 0.25 for air- 0.2% of full range.
wire) 4 18. required. under
§ 125.226(f).
14a.Yaw control po- Full range ............... ± 2° unless higher 0.5 .......................... 0.3% of full range ... For airplanes that have a
wire) 5 18. required. pability that allows either
terval of 0.5.
14b. Yaw control po- Full range ............... ± 2° unless higher 0.5 .......................... 0.2% of full range.
wire) 18. required.
15. Pitch control sur- Full range ............... ± 2° unless higher 0.5 or 0.25 for air- 0.3% of full range ... For airplanes fitted with mul-
face(s) position 6 18. accuracy uniquely planes operated tiple or split surfaces, a suit-
required. under able combination of inputs
§ 125.226(f). is acceptable in lieu of re-
plicable.
tion 7 18. required. under ceptable in lieu of recording
§ 125.226(f). each surface separately.
cable.
17. Yaw control sur- Full range ............... ± 2° unless higher 0.5 .......................... 0.2% of full range ... For airplanes fitted with mul-
face(s) position 8 18. accuracy uniquely tiple or split surfaces, a suit-
required. able combination of surface
position sensors is accept-
able in lieu of recording
each surface separately.
val of 0.5.
* * * * * * *
23. Ground Spoiler Full Range or Each ± 2° Unless higher 1 or 0.5 for air- 0.2% of full range.
Position or Speed Position (discrete). accuracy uniquely planes operated
Brake Selection 12. required. under
§ 125.226(f).
* * * * * * *
88. All cockpit flight Full range Control ± 5% ....................... 1 ............................. 0.3% of full range ... For fly-by-wire flight control
rudder pedal) 18. pedal ± 165 lbs. of the control input device
that allows control inde-

* * * * * an approved cockpit voice recorder that (2) No person may operate a

3 For
A318/A319/A320/A321 series meets the standards of TSO–C123a, or multiengine, turbine-powered airplane
airplanes, resolution = 0.275% later revision. The cockpit voice or rotorcraft that is manufactured on or
(0.088°>0.064°). recorder must record the information after April 7, 2010, has a passenger
For A330/A340 series airplanes, resolution
that would be required to be recorded if seating configuration of 20 or more
= 2.20% (0.703°>0.064°).
4 For A318/A319/A320/A321 series the aircraft were operated under part seats, and that is required to have a
airplanes, resolution = 0.22% 121, 125, or 135 of this chapter, and flight data recorder under § 135.152,
(0.088°>0.080°). must be installed by the compliance unless it is equipped with an approved
For A330/A340 series airplanes, resolution times required by that part, as cockpit voice recorder that also—
= 1.76% (0.703°>0.080°). applicable to the aircraft. (i) Is installed in accordance with the
requirements of § 23.1457, § 25.1457,
resolution = 1.18% (0.703°>0.120°). PART 135—OPERATING § 27.1457(a)(6), (d)(1), (d)(4), (d)(5), and
REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND (h), or § 29.1457(a)(6), (d)(1), (d)(4),
resolution = 0.783% (0.352°>0.090°). ON DEMAND OPERATIONS AND
7 For A330/A340 series airplanes, aileron (d)(5), and (h) of this chapter, as
RULES GOVERNING PERSONS ON applicable;
resolution = 0.704% (0.352°>0.100°).
BOARD SUCH AIRCRAFT (ii) Is operated continuously from the
For A330/A340 series airplanes, spoiler
resolution = 1.406% (0.703°>0.100°). use of the check list before the flight, to
■ 31. The authority citation for part 135
8 For A330/A340 series airplanes, completion of the final check list at the
resolution = 0.30% (0.176°>0.12°). continues to read as follows:
end of the flight; and
For A330/A340 series airplanes, seconds Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 41706, 44113, (iii) Retains at least the last 2 hours of
per sampling interval = 1. 44701–44702, 44705, 44709, 44711–44713, recorded information using a recorder
* * * * * 44715–44717, 44722.
that meets the standards of TSO–C123a,
12 For
A330/A340 series airplanes, spoiler ■ 32. Amend § 135.151 by adding new or later revision.
resolution = 1.406% (0.703°>0.100°). paragraphs (f), (g), and (h) to read as (h) All airplanes or rotorcraft required
* * * * * follows: by this part to have a cockpit voice
18 For
all aircraft manufactured on or after
§ 135.151 Cockpit voice recorders. recorder and a flight data recorder, that
April 7, 2010, the seconds per sampling
install datalink communication
interval is 0.125. Each input must be * * * * *
recorded at this rate. Alternately sampling equipment on or after April 7, 2010,
(f) By April 7, 2012, all airplanes
inputs (interleaving) to meet this sampling must record all datalink messages as
subject to paragraph (a) or paragraph (b)
interval is prohibited. required by the certification rule
of this section that are manufactured
applicable to the aircraft.
before April 7, 2010, and that are
PART 129—OPERATIONS: FOREIGN ■ 33. Amend § 135.152 by revising the
required to have a flight data recorder
AIR CARRIERS AND FOREIGN section heading and by adding new
installed in accordance with § 135.152,
OPERATORS OF U.S.-REGISTERED paragraphs (l) and (m) to read as
must have a cockpit voice recorder that
AIRCRAFT ENGAGED IN COMMON follows:
also—
CARRIAGE
(1) Meets the requirements in § 135.152 Flight data recorders.
■ 28. The authority citation for part 129 § 23.1457(d)(6) or § 25.1457(d)(6) of this
chapter, as applicable; and * * * * *
continues to read as follows: (l) By April 7, 2012, all aircraft
(2) If transport category, meet the
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 1372, 40113, 40119, manufactured before April 7, 2010, must
44101, 44701–44702, 44705, 44709–44711,
requirements in § 25.1457(a)(3), (a)(4),
and (a)(5) of this chapter. also meet the requirements in
44713, 44716–44717, 44722, 44901–44904, § 23.1459(a)(7), § 25.1459(a)(8),
44906, 44912, 46105, Pub. L. 107–71, sec. (g)(1) No person may operate a
multiengine, turbine-powered airplane § 27.1459(e), or § 29.1459(e) of this
104.
or rotorcraft that is manufactured on or chapter, as applicable.
■ 29. Amend § 129.1 by revising (m) All aircraft manufactured on or
paragraph (b) to read as follows: after April 7, 2010, that has a passenger
seating configuration of six or more after April 7, 2010, must have a flight
§ 129.1 Applicability. seats, for which two pilots are required data recorder installed that also—
* * * * * by certification or operating rules, and (1) Meets the requirements of
(b) Operations of U.S.-registered that is required to have a flight data § 23.1459(a)(3), (a)(6), and (a)(7),
aircraft solely outside the United States. recorder under § 135.152, unless it is § 25.1459(a)(3), (a)(7), and (a)(8),
In addition to the operations specified equipped with an approved cockpit § 27.1459(a)(3), (a)(6), and (e), or
under paragraph (a) of this section, voice recorder that also— § 29.1459(a)(3), (a)(6), and (e) of this
§§ 129.14, 129.16, 129.20, 129.24, (i) Is installed in accordance with the chapter, as applicable; and
129.32 and 129.33 also apply to U.S.- requirements of § 23.1457, § 25.1457, (2) Retains the 25 hours of recorded
registered aircraft operated solely § 27.1457(a)(6), (d)(1), (d)(4), (d)(5), and information required in paragraph (d) of
outside the United States in common (h), or § 29.1457(a)(6), (d)(1), (d)(4), this section using a recorder that meets
carriage by a foreign person or foreign (d)(5), and (h) of this chapter, as the standards of TSO–C124a, or later
air carrier. applicable; revision.
* * * * * (ii) Is operated continuously from the ■ 34. Amend appendix C to part 135 by
■ 30. Amend part 129 by adding new use of the check list before the flight, to adding footnote 4 to the Collective,
§ 129.24 to read as follows: completion of the final check list at the Pedal Position, Lat. Cyclic, Long. Cyclic,
end of the flight; and and Controllable Stabilator Position,
§ 129.24 Cockpit voice recorders. (iii) Retains at least the last 2 hours of under the heading Parameters to read as
No person may operate an aircraft recorded information using a recorder set forth below. The text of footnotes 1
under this part that is registered in the that meets the standards of TSO–C123a, through 3 is reprinted without change
United States unless it is equipped with or later revision. for the convenience of the reader.
APPENDIX C TO PART 135.—HELICOPTER FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS

Installed
system 1
minimum Sampling in- Resolution 1
Parameters Range accuracy terval (per read out
(to recov- second) (percent)
ered data)
(percent)
* * * * * * *
Collective 4 ............................................................ Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21
Pedal Position 4 ..................................................... Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21
Lat. Cyclic 4 ........................................................... Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21
Long. Cyclic 4 ........................................................ Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21
Controllable Stabilator Position 4 .......................... Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21
1 Whendata sources are aircraft instruments (except altimeters) of acceptable quality to fly the aircraft, the recording system, excluding these
sensors (but including all other characteristics of the recording system), shall contribute no more than half of the values in this column.
2 Percent of full range.
3 This column applies to aircraft manufactured after October 11, 1991.
4 For all aircraft manufactured on or after April 7, 2010, the sampling interval per second is 4.
■ 35. Amend appendix E to part 135 by Longitudinal Cyclic, Lateral Cyclic, reprinted without change for the
adding footnote 3 to the Pilot Input— Pedal) parameter to read as set forth convenience of the reader.
Primary Controls (Collective, below. The text of footnotes 1 and 2 is
APPENDIX E TO PART 135.—HELICOPTER FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS

Accuracy
sensor input Sampling in- Resolution 2
Parameters Range to DFDR terval (per read out
readout second) (percent)
(percent)
* * * * * * *
Pilot Input—Primary Controls (Collective, Longi- Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 1 0.5
tudinal Cyclic, Lateral Cyclic, Pedal) 3.
* * * * * * *
1 Percent of full range.
2 Thiscolumn applies to aircraft manufactured after October 11, 1991.
2 3 For all aircraft manufactured on or after April 7, 2010, the sampling interval per second is 4.
■ 36. Amend appendix F to part 135 by 15, 16, 17, and 88, and adding footnote without change for the convenience of
revising the appendix heading and 18, to read as set forth below. The text the reader.
parameters 12a, 12b, 13a, 13b, 14a, 14b, of footnotes 3 through 8 is reprinted * * * * *
APPENDIX F TO PART 135.—AIRPLANE FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS
Accuracy (sensor Seconds per sam-
input) pling interval
* * * * * * *
* *
12a. Pitch control(s) Full Range .............. ± 2° unless higher 0.5 or 0.25 for air- 0.5% of full range ... For airplanes that have a
wire systems) 18. required. under § 135.152(j). pability that allows either
plicable.
12b. Pitch control(s) Full Range .............. ± 2° unless higher 0.5 or 0.25 for air- 0.2% of full range ...
systems) 3 18. required. under § 135.152(j).
APPENDIX F TO PART 135.—AIRPLANE FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS—Continued

13a. Lateral control Full Range .............. ± 2° unless higher 0.5 or 0.25 for air- 0.2% of full range ... For airplanes that have a
position(s) (nonfly- accuracy uniquely planes operated flight control breakaway ca-
by-wire) 18. required. under § 135.152(j). pability that allows either
plicable.
13b. Lateral control Full Range .............. ± 2° unless higher 0.5 or 0.25 for air- 0.2% of full range ...
wire) 4 18. required. under § 135.152(j).
14a. Yaw control po- Full Range .............. ± 2° unless higher 0.5 .......................... 0.3% of full range ... For airplanes that have a
wire) 5 18. required. pability that allows either
to produce the sampling of
0.5 or 0.25, as applicable.
14b. Yaw control po- Full Range .............. ± 2° unless higher 0.5 .......................... 0.2% of full range ...
wire) 18. required.
15. Pitch control sur- Full Range .............. ± 2° unless higher 0.5 or 0.25 for air- 0.3% of full range ... For airplanes fitted with mul-
face(s) position 6 18. accuracy uniquely planes operated tiple or split surfaces, a suit-
required. under able combination of inputs
§ 135.152(j).. is acceptable in lieu of re-
plicable.
tion 7 18. required. under § 135.152(j). ceptable in lieu of recording
each surface separately.
cable.
17. Yaw control sur- Full Range .............. ± 2° unless higher 0.5 .......................... 0.2% of full range ... For airplanes with multiple or
face(s) position 8 18. accuracy uniquely split surfaces, a suitable
required. combination of surface posi-
tion sensors is acceptable
in lieu of recording each
surface separately. The
control surfaces may be
sampled alternately to
val of 0.5.
APPENDIX F TO PART 135.—AIRPLANE FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS—Continued

* * * * * * *
* *
88. All cockpit flight Full Range Control ± 5° ......................... 1 ............................. 0.3% of full range ... For fly-by-wire flight control
rudder pedal) 18. pedal ± 165 lbs. of the control input device
that allows either pilot to
operate the control inde-
6 For A330/A340 series airplanes, interval is 0.125. Each input must be

* * * * *
3 For
A318/A319/A320/A321 series resolution = 0.783% (0.352°>0.090°). recorded at this rate. Alternately sampling
7 For A330/A340 series airplanes, aileron
airplanes, resolution = 0.275% inputs (interleaving) to meet this sampling
(0.088°>0.064°). resolution = 0.704% (0.352°>0.100°). interval is prohibited.
For A330/A340 series airplanes, resolution For A330/A340 series airplanes, spoiler
resolution = 1.406% (0.703°>0.100°). Issued in Washington, DC, on February 19,
= 2.20% (0.703°>0.064°).
4 For A318/A319/A320/A321 series 8 For A330/A340 series airplanes, 2008.
airplanes, resolution = 0.22% resolution = 0.30% (0.176°>0.12°). Robert A. Sturgell,
(0.088°>0.080°). For A330/A340 series airplanes, seconds Acting Administrator.
For A330/A340 series airplanes, resolution per sampling interval = 1.
[FR Doc. E8–3949 Filed 3–6–08; 8:45 am]
= 1.76% (0.703°>0.080°). * * * * *
5 For A330/A340 series airplanes, 18 For
all aircraft manufactured on or after BILLING CODE 4910–13–P
resolution = 1.18% (0.703°>0.120°). April 7, 2010, the seconds per sampling

Rule: Revisions To Cockpit Voice Recorder and Digital Flight Data Recorder Regulations

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Rule: Revisions To Cockpit Voice Recorder and Digital Flight Data Recorder Regulations

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Friday,

14 CFR Parts 23, 25, 27 et al.

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Authority for This Rulemaking Recommendation No. A–96–89.

Based on its findings following these reliability for operation without

equipment. benefits associated with datalink DLC recording requirement.

Present Value (7%) of Total Costs ...................................................................... $169 ........................................ $256

Need RIPS (number of aircraft) .................................................................... 259 .......................................... 1,337

Price of Aviation Fuel ................................................................................... $1.60 ....................................... $0.75

given serious consideration.’’ The RFA excluded from preparation of a National

14 CFR Part 23 jeopardizing emergency operation of the

APPENDIX E TO PART 91.—AIRPLANE FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS

1 When data sources are aircraft 3 Percent

APPENDIX F TO PART 91.—HELICOPTER FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS

Pedal Position 4 ..................................................... Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21

Lat. Cyclic 4 ........................................................... Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21

Long. Cyclic 4 ........................................................ Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21

Controllable Stabilator Position 4 .......................... Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21

1 When data sources are aircraft § 121.343 Flight data recorders.

APPENDIX M TO PART 121.—AIRPLANE FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS

position(s) (fly-by- accuracy uniquely planes operated

APPENDIX M TO PART 121.—AIRPLANE FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS—Continued

seconds. (0.703°>0.064°). resolution = 1.18% (0.703°>0.120°).

8 For A330/A340 series airplanes,

APPENDIX E TO PART 125.—AIRPLANE FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS

inputs may be sampled al-

APPENDIX E TO PART 125.—AIRPLANE FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS—Continued

trol force inputs. The control

* * * * * an approved cockpit voice recorder that (2) No person may operate a

APPENDIX C TO PART 135.—HELICOPTER FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS

Pedal Position 4 ..................................................... Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21

Lat. Cyclic 4 ........................................................... Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21

Long. Cyclic 4 ........................................................ Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21

Controllable Stabilator Position 4 .......................... Full Range ............................................................ ±3 2 21

APPENDIX E TO PART 135.—HELICOPTER FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS

tudinal Cyclic, Lateral Cyclic, Pedal) 3.

APPENDIX F TO PART 135.—AIRPLANE FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS—Continued

APPENDIX F TO PART 135.—AIRPLANE FLIGHT RECORDER SPECIFICATIONS—Continued

6 For A330/A340 series airplanes, interval is 0.125. Each input must be

S-ar putea să vă placă și