Some AwIPs may be closed after just one iteration of the above process. Common shortfalls include inadequate analysis of the airworthiness issue, unsupported risk evaluations and inappropriate risk treatments. This has historically proven to be a poor strategy for a number of reasons, including the following: The updated version should focus on the progress that has been made toward AwIP closure.
To avoid the pitfalls often observed, AwIPs should follow a standard risk management approach and the following procedures should be adopted: Following type certification, open AwIPs will be presented to annual in-service Airworthiness Boards for re-assessment. They are also useful for obtaining TAR and OAA concurrence on a proposed resolution strategy for a design shortfall, before the PO expends resources on pursuing the strategy.
Provided appropriate operational limitations are imposed to maintain aircraft safety, open AwIPs should not preclude the issue of a type certificate. When used appropriately, AwIPS have historically proven to be an excellent medium for resolving complex airworthiness issues. Timeliness is a key attribute of the effective use of AwIPs.
As updated versions focus on progress, the final version may be quite straightforward if only the progress to report is the application of the agreed risk treatments and confirmation that the level of risk has been reduced as proposed.
Either approach will result in frustration and additional work for the PO. In particular, they provide a structured and well-understood means of obtaining authoritative input from key airworthiness stakeholders. This annex provides guidance on the use and management of AwIPs.
However, this is rarely possible, and most projects will have open AwIPs when applying for a type certificate. However, POs must recognise that AwIPs by their nature can impose an administrative burden, so they should be reserved for issues that cannot be more efficiently resolved via more direct means for example, via a minute to the TAR that requests a change to a design standard in the certification basis.Issue Paper Process & Reuse Issue Papers Date: March Rotorcraft Forum Presenter: Eric Haight, FAA, Rotorcraft Standards Staff resolution between an applicant and the FAA.
•Types of Issue Papers Reference to the use of this issue paper as the means of compliance should be. To write an issue paper, it is important to understand the topic, search for examples, format an outline, write the essay and edit the final version.
In written examinations, an issue essay is generally allotted 45 minutes for completion.
One of the most important steps is to understand the given. Analysis of System Boundary/Interface components (C/IMRBPB) 1: Issue Paper Status: 3: Enhance MSG 3 to incorporate SFAR aspects now being considered by FAA.
The FAA may choose to document an issue by means of a cover IP (CIP) if the bilateral partner authority has produced an equivalent document that is acceptable to the FAA to track resolution of an issue. issue paper no. wip09sfara on sfar88 ads and cdccl-equivalent pmas rev: march 17, prepared by: chris nenov, phd issue 2.
the faa lacks policy and guidance on approvals of cdccl-equivalent pma parts as amoc to sfar88 ads, and no compliance time has been provided. FAA ISSUE PAPER Summary This policy statement provides guidance on acceptable methods of compliance with the flammability requirements of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 25 for commonly constructed parts, construction details, and materials.
6 FAA ISSUE PAPER.Download