MAWA Conference French experience in implementing a military airworthiness regulation Warsaw, July 2011
The international civil regulation ICAO: shall be applicable to civil aircraft, and shall not be applicable to State aircraft (Chapter I, art. 3 a) ; aircraft used in military, customs and police services shall be deemed to be State aircraft (Chapter I, art. 3 b) ; the contracting States undertake, when issuing regulation for their State aircraft, that they will have due regard for the safety of navigation of civil aircraft (Chapter I, art. 3 d). (EC) n 1592/2002 creating EASA Art 1 : This shall not apply when products, parts, appliances, personnel and organisations are engaged in military, customs, police, or similar services. The Member States shall undertake to ensure that such services have due regard as far as practicable to the objectives of this N.B. Current is (EC) n 216/2008 : Art 1.2 has not changed 2
Prior situation Airworthiness requirements were not mandatory in the technical specifications of DGA contracts for aircraft procurement JAR/FAR requirements sometimes specified for civil derivative aircraft : JAR/FAR 25 for cargo aircraft JAR/FAR 29 for helicopters (including Tiger and NH90) Certification is explicitly part of qualification process No equivalent available for fighter aircraft, even if practically done Specification of various norms (AIR, Stanags ) Specification of safety objectives Safety of flight assessed during qualification process in particular during flight tests by CEV (now DGA Flight testing) Certification is implicitly part of qualification process Aircraft maintenance has always been performed according to the state of the art, but was not based on a formal airworthiness regulation 3
Why a regulation? Three accidents occurred in 2000/2001: US C130 firefighter leased by Civil Safety service Not considered as a State owned aircraft Mirage F1 after engine stopped Modification declared mandatory to restore airworthiness 15 years before but never procured CAP232 during an acceptance test flight by CEV (now DGA Flight testing) Civil registered but with invalid permit to fly No particular higher crash rate, but lawsuits more likely to happen Need of an airworthiness regulation for legal protection 4
French regulation France issued an airworthiness regulation for military and State owned aircraft on 09 Dec 2006 under the Decree n 2006-1551 (signed by the Prime Minister) with 3 ministerial orders Edicts rules for the use, the airworthiness and the registration of military aircraft and state owned aircraft engaged in customs, police and similar services Defines three categories of military aircraft 1 State owned Aircraft used by the organisations concerned with the authority of the Minister of Defence; 2 Aircraft not belonging to the State classified as armaments or military systems; 3 On joint decision of the Minister of Defence and the Minister in charge for the civil aviation, aircraft not belonging to the State, but used to carry out missions for the State and piloted by a crew under the authority of the Minister of Defence. Excludes from its scope the foreign military aircraft used by their armed forces and flying in France Designates also the head of DGA as the certification authority for the State owned aircraft engaged in custom, police and similar services 5
French State aviation organisation The EASA regulation speaks of competent authority Identify the competent authority for each domain The original organisation was based on : 1 Technical Authority : PtF, type certification, continued airworthiness of type design, DOA/POA, registration for flight test aircraft 7 End Users (called Operating Authorities) : CoA, continuing airworthiness of individual aircraft, registration of aircraft in service, continuing airworthiness management /maintenance/training organisation approvals and personnel licences 6
French State aviation organisation Possible conflicts of interest : Technical Authority : The head of DGA is both Technical Authority and responsible manager of all armament programmes The decision makers who have a delegation of authority from the head of DGA are in separate directorates to guarantee sufficient independence DGA instruction defining the level of airworthiness decisions that can be signed by the officially appointed authorized signatories End Users (called Operating Authorities) : The End Users have both operating responsibility and oversight responsibility Need for splitting 7
Creation of DSAE : State aviation authority (Airworthiness directorate) Prior situation in 2006 Military aviation Current situation in 2011 Civil aviation Current situation Technical Authority Continuing Airworthiness Authorities End Users (incl. CAMO) Operators May grant exemption, by a justified decision and for a limited period, with the requirements of the CoA in the event of Exceptional circumstances or of urgent operational needs 8
Civil vs military : who does what? Civil stakeholders European Commission EASA Rulemaking and executive functions Establishes the essential requirements Conduct Type certification Approve flight test conditions Ensure Continued airworthiness Approves Design organisations Military stakeholders Technical Authority Establish the rules for continuing airworthiness Aviation Safety Authority National authorities permit to fly (flight tests) Registration of flight test aircraft Approves Production organisations Appreciates the compliance of new products to the type design Approves organisations (maintenance, continuing airworthiness management, training) maintenance personnel licences Individual CoAs Registration of aircraft in service Technical Authority Aviation Safety Authority Operators Apply the rules Manages Continuing airworthiness End Users / CAMOs Can grant exemptions for urgent operational needs 9
Transitional provisions of the regulation Transitional provisions in order not to ground fleets : for the Technical Authority : - The types of product in service before the publishing date of this ministerial order or already qualified by the DGA are considered type certified. - Within three years from the publishing date of this ministerial order, the technical authority issues a Type Certificate for each type of product mentioned in the previous subparagraph, with the associated Type design definition, and designates a Type Certificate Holder (TCH). for the End Users : - Within five years from the publishing date of this ministerial order, the end users issue, according to the corresponding Type Certificates, the certificates of airworthiness: 1 to aircraft in service before the publishing date of this ministerial order and in conformity, if necessary, with the decisions taken in the configuration management board, maintained in accordance with the maintenance rules in force and with the directives issued by the technical authority; 2 to aircraft, of which the contract of acquisition or rent was notified at the latest on the publishing date of this ministerial order, in conformity with their qualified definition. 10
Late 2006 : Ambitious original schedule but limited scope Late 2006 Late 2009 Late 2011 TCs Continued airworthiness of type design CoAs - TCs for all product types (legacy products included) - CoAs for all aircraft in service after 2011 - Broad requirements for TCH organisations - No requirements for maintenance organisations and personnel 11
Type certificates Schedule for issuing TCs almost met The Technical Authority has issued so far 67 aircraft TCs + 2 UAVs, 48 engine TCs, 22 propeller TCs, 24 STCs No TC issued for fleets to be retired before 31.12.2014 Each TC is issued with : a TCDS (Type Certificate Data Sheet) for legacy products, an Airworthiness Reference Data Sheet listing : the Technical Authority s decisions related to continued airworthiness the modifications decided by the Configuration Management Board and considered as airworthiness mandatory (from a mutually agreed Board decision rank up to TC issuance : modifications decided before this rank are supposed to be implemented no need to sort out mandatory modifications) The Airworthiness Reference Data Sheet is then to be updated by the End Users 12
FRA annexes Instruction n 2009-16880/DEF/DGA/DET/CEP/ASA dated 16 Jan 2009 related to essential requirements with 4 annexes : Annex 1 : essential requirements for the airworthiness of military aircraft and State owned aircraft (based on OCCAR document adapted from annex I to EC regulation 216/2008) Annex 2 : a list of certification specifications and associated means of compliance (mostly civil except for UAVs) recognized to meet the essential requirements Annex 3 : FRA 21 (based on Part 21 of EC regulation 1702/2003 + Subpart Z Alternative procedures based on GM and AMC 21A14(B)) Annex 4 : FRA forms (based on EASA forms) 1a, 52, 53, 25 Instruction n 017/DEF/IGA-Air/BSMN dated 30 Jul 2010 (based on EC regulation 2042/2003) related to continuing airworthiness, organisation approvals and maintenance personnel licences with 4 annexes : Annex 1 : FRA M (based on Part M) Annex 2 : FRA 145 (based on Part 145) Annex 3 : FRA 66 (based on Part 66) Annex 4 : FRA 147 (based on Part 147) 13
FRA scope vs EASA scope Decree + Order n 1 + Essential Requirements (instr DGA annex 1) Order n 2 + FRA 21 (instr DGA annex 3) + Forms (instr DGA annex 4) list of certification specifications & associated means of compliance (instr DGA annex 2) FRA M FRA 145 FRA 66 FRA 147 and associated AMC s DGA DSAÉ 14
Other amendments and add on Order n 2 was amended by the order dated December 17 th, 2009 : Notion of primary certification authority, civil or military Possibility to recognise the certification process performed by a primary authority Precision of DGA scope of work in that case Instruction n 2010-84372/DEF/DGA/DT/ST/DGA_IP/ASA dated 16 Mar 2010 defining the conditions of approval and application of: - the airworthiness directives issued by - the supplemental type certificates issued by - the SB s, repair solutions and some technical directives issued by the manufacturers and approved by a recognized civil primary authority to (civil) types certified aircraft used by MoD, Customs, Public Safety and Civil Safety services In case the OEM is not or is no longer the TCH, possibility to limit the obligations of the actual TCH ex : SIAé (State industrial maintenance organisation) Modifications on conditions of PtF issuance for acceptance flights 15
: TC/STC General provisions : The manufacturer applies for obtaining a TC/STC Transitional provision : The Technical authority issues a TC/STC and designates a TCH What if the manufacturer refuses to be the TCH Find another TCH (ex : SIAé for C160) Contracting TCH support to assume the duties of continued airworthiness Possible additional costs Possible gaps between 2 subsequent contracts GFE (Government furnished equipment) If within airworthiness scope, issue a TSO or a STC Stores and mission equipment Define which are within airworthiness scope and which are not work in progress Controlled environment additional costs thus limit the scope strictly to airworthiness related stores and mission equipment Incomplete documentation for some exotic legacy aircraft Difficulties to consolidate the airworthiness reference data sheet 16
: airworthiness reviews Airworthiness reviews not well prepared by some CAMO units because of lack of experience (CAMO units relying on airworthiness reviews to address deviations) Requires airworthiness review complements to check corrective actions Rely on transitional provisions in order not to ground aircraft with level 1 deviations Original schedule based on the assumption that the next 2 extensions of the airworthiness review certificates are issued by CAMO under FRA M approval privilege : Very few CAMOs are FRA M approved Unexpected additional workload for the Aviation Safety Authority to fill the gap unless introducing a new transitional provision : maximum 3-year validity of the first airworthiness review certificates until FRA M approval 17
: DOA/POA (FRA 21) The Design and Production organisation approvals may be granted with privileges. The possible privileges are defined in : Design : Subpart J FRA21A.263 is approved under the authority of design organisation approval (DOA) n C.[xyz]-DGA Approval of flight conditions except for initial flights PtF issued by the Technical authority ( civil regulation) Production : Subpart G FRA21A.163 Issue flight clearance, within the frame of a general PtF Production without POA remains possible Subpart F Civil organisation approvals may be recognized if the civil airworthiness authority is recognized and if the scope is applicable Audits although limited to OEMs with direct contracts means consistent and skilled workforce to perform them Approved modifications (in the airworthiness sense) still need to be accepted by the Configuration Management Board before being implemented approval does not replace Quality Assurance : it is just part of it 18
: Form 1 FRA form 1a : Authorized release certificate for parts and appliances from production according to FRA 21 Subpart G FRA form 1b : Authorized release certificate for parts and appliances from maintenance organisations according to FRA 145 Possibility to merge FRA Form 1a and CoC (Certificate of Conformity) to have a single certificate valid both for airworthiness and contract? Introduce transitional provisions to cope with the absence of POA For civil certified aircraft types, EASA Form 1 is recognized for new products but dispute with the company acting on behalf of the FR CAA for oversight about products aimed for military aircraft not taken into account for fee calculation for maintained parts and appliances, the use of EASA form 1 is forbidden by EASA No FRA Form 1a for Supplier furnished spare equipment because there is no direct contract with subcontractors 19
: MMEL/MEL Aircraft with equipment unserviceable cannot be authorized to fly with just the green light of the chief of operations Records of such unauthorized configurations in the aircraft logbook may lead to level 1 deviations during the airworthiness reviews Introduce the civil principle of MMEL/MEL in the regulation MMEL : Master Minimum Equipment List - Defined by the TCH and approved by the Technical Authority during the certification process MEL : Minimum Equipment List - Defined by the End User and approved by the Aviation Safety Authority (DSAE) - Cannot be less restrictive than MMEL Already used on civil type certified aircraft, but not addressed on specific military aircraft like fighters Mandatory for future aircraft types Introduce also transitional provisions For legacy aircraft, in the absence of MMEL, define and validate an Operating & Technical Tolerance List (OTTL) based on grandfather law Until 31.12.2014, Airworthiness Review Certificates can still be issued and extended in spite of the absence of MEL or OTTL 20
: organisation approvals and maintenance personnel licences FRA M approvals CAMO to be appropriately appointed Responsibilities to be properly endorsed by the accountable manager Incremental approval process by product types The approved maintenance plan based on the recommended maintenance plan issued by the TCH during certification does not exist for some legacy aircraft Draft a maintenance plan for approval by the CAMO FRA 145 approvals For state maintenance organisations, incremental approval process by product types For private maintenance organisations, approval process to be programmed according to award or renewal of MRO contracts Obligation of the main contractor to oversee its subcontractors, which cannot have a FRA 145 approval as they is no direct contract Traceability of spare parts in stock : maintenance data often not approved or even absent 21
: organisation approvals and maintenance personnel licences FRA 66 licences : Grandfather law to issue FRA 66 licences to skilled maintenance personnel difficulty to have a single grandfather law among the 7 End users FRA 66 licences to be issued also for maintenance personnel of private FRA 145 maintenance organisations Need to synchronize with FRA 145 approvals Military turnover to be anticipated FRA 147 approvals Incremental approval process by product types No return of experience yet 22
New and more realistic implementation schedule with updated or new transitional provisions ~ 1500 CoAs ~ 200 maintenance organisations to approve ~ 70 design or production organisations to approve ~ 5000 licensed maintenance personnel OK 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 D S A É D G A 2011 2012 2013 2014 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 FRA 21 G Controlled environment : Late 2016 23 100% CoAs (Sustainable fleets) Late 2014 100% FRA M, FRA 147 Late 2014 100% FRA 145 NSO Mid-2015 100% FRA 145 NSI 2016 2016 (*) FRA 21 J Design : no real timeframe constraint as, in the absence of DOA, any airworthiness approval is done by the Technical Authority CoAs CAMO, Training organisations State maintenance organisations Private maintenance organisations Production(*)
A 310 A330 AUG A 340 TLRA A400M Alouette III Alphajet ATL2 C135 FR CAP 10B CASA 212 CASA 235 CL 415 Cougar Dauphin Dauphin Pedro Dauphin SP DHC 6 DRAC E-2 C Hawkeye E-3 F AWACS EC 135 EC 145 EC 725 Ecureuil Epsilon Extra 300/330 F 406 F10 MER Falcon Gardian Falcon 50 Falcon 50 Surmar Falcon 900 Falcon ARPEGE Falcon 7X Fennec Gazelle Hercules C130 H Jodel D140 KC 135 R Lynx Mirage 2000 D Mirage 2000 C Mirage 2000 N Mirage 2000-5 Mirage 2000 B Mirage F1 CR Mirage F1 CT Mirage F1 B Mystère 20 NH90 Panther PC 7 PC 6 Gliders Puma Q 400 Rafale M Rafale B Rafale C Rallye SEM SIDM Harfang SDTI Sperwer Super Puma TBM 700 Tigre HAD Tigre HAP Transall C160 Transall Gabriel Turbofirecat Xingu 24