Cap562 7
Cap562 7
1 Introduction
2 Background
          Dangerous Goods are defined as articles or substances which are capable of posing
          a risk to health, safety, property or the environment when transported by air and
          which are classified according to the ICAO's Technical Instructions for the Safe
          Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air. Personnel may be more familiar with the field
          document produced by IATA, the Dangerous Goods Regulations. These reflect the
          Technical Instructions and as such are a comprehensive set of rules to ensure the
          perfectly safe practice of transporting dangerous goods.
          Regulations is a criminal offence, the penalty for which reflects the potentially very
          serious consequence of any breach.
3.4       In summary, aircraft spares and replacement items (i.e. components and equipment)
          meeting the criteria of dangerous goods, may only be transported by air as cargo in
          accordance with the ICAO Technical Instructions (or IATA Dangerous Goods
          Regulations). It is imperative that all personnel with responsibilities either directly or
          indirectly associated with the transport of these items are aware of this fact. It is also
          essential that measures are put in place to ensure that dangerous goods can never
          be offered for air transport when not fully meeting the requirements.
1 Introduction
          This Appendix supersedes Airworthiness Notice No. 12 Appendix 68, Issue 2, dated
          28 September 2005.
2 Background
2.1       The CAA continues to receive reports of damage to aircraft and engines caused by
          foreign objects (FOD). Foreign object damage presents a serious airworthiness threat
          to any aircraft not to mention the economic impact on the operator. In extreme cases,
          FOD can lead to an accident and loss of life. FOD damage to airframes and engines
          can be extremely expensive to rectify and may result in the aircraft being removed
          from revenue service for significant periods of time. There are numerous reports on
          record of FOD damage to engines (in particular rotating assemblies), nose and main
          landing gear assemblies and aircraft structure.
2.2       Recent audits of airports, including a 10-month study at one major UK international
          airport, have revealed that a continuing threat exists from varying amounts of FOD
          present on aircraft maintenance areas and airport-manoeuvring areas, including
          stands, aircraft taxiways and runways. The study showed the aircraft themselves as
          the main cause of FOD on the runway and this poses the highest immediate risk.
          Here, parts of aircraft become detached or tools and equipment, inadvertently left in
          the aircraft fall out during take off or landing. The largest item found on a runway was
          a wheel chock but metal panels and honeycomb structure were also amongst the
          larger items. The FOD found on taxiways and stands came mainly from airport
          vehicles and the equipment they tow such as baggage trolleys, steps, cargo
          equipment etc. The size and shape of some of this FOD makes it likely to cause tyre
          damage and subsequent tyre burst. The cleaning of aircraft cabins and the transfer of
          waste from cabin to airside rubbish containers is also seen to be a common source
          of FOD in the stand areas. Other typical FOD consists of such items as oil cans,
          spanners, pliers, engineers torches, suitcase items (both internal and external),
          mobile radios, aircraft catering equipment, cutlery, landing gear ground lock pins,
          thrust reverser lock-out pins and broken parts of ground servicing equipment/
          vehicles.
2.3       Smaller items could be ingested by an engine. In many cases, FOD damage to engine
          rotating assemblies has led to vibration leading to air turn-backs, diversions and
          subsequent engine replacement. Boroscope inspections of engines following reports
          of engine surging very often reveal internal damage to the engine – such damage can
          of course be very expensive to repair. Typically, damage to the aircraft can range from
1 Introduction
2 Background
2.1       During an investigation into an accident, it became apparent that some information
          contained in the maintenance documents for the aircraft was in fact ambiguous and
          had led to confusion in the minds of the staff concerned.
2.2       Whilst care is taken by all concerned, it is not always possible to avoid error or
          ambiguity, and in consequence, instructions may occasionally be found to be
          inaccurate or not clear as to their meaning.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
          EASA Part 145.45 (c) and AMC 145.A.45 (c) require that a Part 145 approved
          organisation has procedures in their Maintenance Organisation Exposition detailing
          how any maintenance data errors and ambiguities should be reported to the author of
          the data. A record of these communications should be kept until the error or
          ambiguity has been addressed by the author of such data. Any person or organisation
          not subject to the Part-145 regulation who identifies ambiguities or errors in approved
          documents of any kind (Maintenance Schedules, Flight Manuals, etc.) should inform
          the organisation responsible for the publication of the source data so that any
          uncertainties which could affect airworthiness can be corrected.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          CAA publications have for some years included units from the SI system alongside
          the previous Imperial Units.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       The use of SI Units (Système International) within the United Kingdom is dealt with
          in a publication 'Changing to the Metric System' issued by the National Physical
          Laboratory and obtainable from The Stationery Office, and in BSI 5775, obtainable
          from the British Standards Institute.
3.2       The names of the various units, the symbols used for them, and the methods to be
          used for presentation of those symbols in technical documents, are dealt with in both
          documents.
3.3       The correct understanding of technical information and instructions can depend upon
          the symbols used and their method of presentation. Hence, it is important that where
          safety may depend on the correct interpretation of symbols, product support
          departments and others involved in the dissemination of safety documents should
          consider whether any doubt could exist. Where this is the case, potentially
          ambiguous notation should be explained and illustrated by examples, where
          appropriate.
3.4       Where the users of such documents are in any doubt, they should make a careful
          check using reference documents such as those mentioned in paragraph 2.
3.5       In one case, a degree of uncertainty evidently arose when an area was expressed
          using the symbol 'mm2' to express the concept of a square millimetre. This usage is
          similar to that, in Imperial Units, of 'in2' to represent square inches (or 'sq in').
3.6       Figure 1 illustrates the unit of area of one square inch, or 1 in2 (cross-hatched). An area
          of two square inches is shown, occupying twice the area. A two inch square, i.e. a
          square of sides 2 inches, clearly occupies four times the area or 4 in2.
Figure 1
3.7       Figure 2 similarly illustrates the unit of area of one square millimetre, or 1 mm2, and
          as an example, an area of 50 square millimetres (i.e. 50 mm2, in that case a rectangle
          5 mm by 10 mm). Once again this is quite different from the area of a 50 mm square,
          which is 50 times greater.
Figure 2
3.8       This Appendix is issued for information and action by all concerned. Reference should
          also be made to CAAIP Leaflet 11–22, Appendix 4–1 Ambiguous Information.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          The CAA wishes to remind Licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineers and Authorised
          Certifying Staff employed by Part-145 Approved Maintenance Organisations of their
          responsibilities when issuing Certificates of Release to Service after maintenance.
3 Certification Responsibilities
          CAP 562 Leaflet 15-2 specifies the certification responsibilities for Type Rated
          Licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineers in relation to Articles 14 and 16 of the Air
          Navigation Order 2005 (as amended). Paragraph 1.7 includes the following
          information relative to the certification of maintenance:
          ‘A Certificate of Release to Service shall only be issued for a particular overhaul,
          repair, replacement, modification, mandatory inspection or scheduled maintenance
          inspection when the signatory is (signatories are) satisfied that the work has been
          properly carried out and accurately recorded, having due regard to the use of:
          a) up-to-date instructions including manuals, drawings, specifications, CAA
             mandatory modifications/inspections and company procedures,
          b) recommended tooling and test equipment which is currently calibrated where
             applicable, and
          c) a working environment appropriate to the work being carried out.’
1         The CAA has been made aware that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has
          cancelled the Technical Standard Order (TSO) Authorisation for the L-3
          Communications (Formerly known as LORAL Data Systems and Fairchild Aviation
          Recorders, Sarasota, Florida 34232 USA) Digital Flight Data Recorder Model F-800.
          This followed reports of several performance problems related to this type of
          magnetic tape recorder. Some of these problems have caused difficulties for air
          accident investigators when replays are conducted. The CAA has conducted its own
          review of the service experience of the Model F-800 and has drawn similar
          conclusions to those of the FAA.
2         As a result, the CAA declared the BCAR Equipment Approval Number AR 515
          obsolescent. This means that the L-3 Communications Model F-800 Digital Flight
          Data Recorder may not be newly installed on any UK registered aircraft for the
          purposes of compliance with any mandatory carriage requirement. (Mandatory
          carriage requirements are specified in the UK Air Navigation Order 2005 (as
4         The CAA recommends that aircraft operators and maintenance organisations take
          these, and any other relevant obsolescence issues into account when reviewing their
          flight recorder maintenance schedules. Maintainers should ensure that approved
          replacement parts are acquired to meet future demand.
5         In addition, it should be noted that solid state Flight Data Recorder (FDR) technology
          meeting the standards listed below has become widely available. One of the
          advantages of this technology is that solid state equipment can be designed to be
          operated under an on-condition maintenance regime.
          • EUROCAE ED55
          • EUROCAE ED112
          • FAA TSO C124a
          • JAA TSO C124a
          • EASA ETSO C124a*
          • EASA ETSO 2c124b (which supersedes *).
1 Introduction
          This Appendix supersedes Airworthiness Notice No. 12 Appendix 61, Issue 4, dated
          29 September 2006.
5         For non-EASA aircraft, it is the responsibility of the operator to retain the records for
          the period specified in the Air Navigation Order 2005 (as amended) (currently two
          years after the aircraft has been destroyed or has been permanently withdrawn from
          use).
7         The requirements for retention of records for all other aircraft registered in the United
          Kingdom are defined in the Air Navigation Order 2005 (as amended). Article 22
          requires the Operator of the aircraft to keep Aircraft, Engine and Propeller Log Books,
          and ANO Article 15 requires a Technical Log where applicable. The Log Books must
          include particulars as specified in ANO Schedule 6, for example:
          • Particulars of all maintenance work carried out on the aircraft or its equipment; and
          • Particulars of any overhauls, repairs, replacements and modifications relating to
            the aircraft or its equipment.
          It should be noted that for some aircraft types, where there are components that have
          assigned overhaul, service life or ultimate life limits the use of individual log cards for
          the components are often used. These form part of an aircraft's records. The
          retention period is the same as that specified in the Air Navigation Order 2005 (as
          amended) or Part M as appropriate unless the cards have been returned with the
          component to an overhaul facility.
          Also note that any document, such as a work pack, which is incorporated by a cross-
          reference entered in a log book, shall be part of the log book and it is the duty of the
          Operator to retain the above records. Every log book shall be preserved by the
          Operator of the aircraft until two years after the aircraft has been destroyed or has
          been permanently withdrawn from use.
                                                                             Minimum Records
           Applicable Entity              Requirement Reference
                                                                             Retention Period
2         Background
          A split diaphragm in the fuel pump of a Hercules engine and a corroded capsule of a
          Gipsy Queen engine resulted in over-rich operation, both of which led to fatal
          accidents. Power loss in another Hercules engine was probably caused by failure of
          the insulation in a magneto. In each case extended calendar time between overhauls
          and low utilisation may have been factors contributing to the deterioration.
3         Airworthiness Considerations
          These are just three examples of malfunctions associated with the deterioration of
          aged components in aircraft which are not maintained to an approved Maintenance
          Schedule.
3.1       It is recommended, therefore, that components including materials where
          deterioration due to age may occur, be inspected periodically. If signs of ageing,
          hardening, or deterioration of rubber components, insulation materials, or corrosion
          of metallic components are found, such components should be assessed and
          renewed as necessary.
3.2       Original servicing schedules and procedures should be used wherever available with
          due regard to the low utilisation of the aircraft. Operators are advised to consider
          additional periodic inspections for all components and equipment which may be
          affected by calendar time deterioration.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          The CAA wishes to remind all Operators, Certifying Engineers and Part-145 Approved
          Maintenance Organisations of the need to prepare complete documentation prior to
          the work being accomplished which clearly and accurately defines the non-scheduled
          maintenance task(s) to be undertaken.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
5         Maintenance tasks on aircraft vary in complexity and task cards raised for scheduled
          maintenance reflect the level of complexity of the specific task. Control of these
          complex tasks by maintenance personnel at shop floor level is normally simplified by
          breaking each task down into a number of discrete steps with the provision for
          appropriately authorised staff to sign/stamp when each step is completed. It is equally
          important that non-scheduled maintenance tasks are similarly broken down into steps
          to provide a detailed record of maintenance which is to be carried out and certified on
          completion of each step or group of steps as they occur. Engineers are reminded of
          the need for a full and comprehensive hand-over of work outstanding at shift changes.
          NOTE: The CAA endorses the use of stage sheets which is good maintenance
                practice as it enables personnel to record work to be carried out and provide
                a record of the accomplishment of that work. Human factors studies in
                engineering repeatedly show that the use of properly prepared stage sheets
                when carrying out tasks considerably reduces the opportunity for
                maintenance errors occurring.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          There have been a number of occurrences involving nose undercarriage failure in the
          older types of transport aircraft. These failures can be attributed, at least in part, to
          loads induced during towing or push-back. Such loads have, in a number of cases,
          resulted in the initiation of fatigue cracking, leading to subsequent failure under
          operational loads.
3 Operating Considerations
3.1       Aircraft manufacturers specify suitable ground handling equipment, compatible with
          the aircraft type, designed to avoid overloading, e.g. employing shear pins, which fail
          at predetermined loads. However, it is possible to induce overloading by rapid
          acceleration or braking, especially when employing large, powerful tractors to move
1         Introduction
1.1       This Appendix supersedes Airworthiness Notice No. 12, Appendix 70, Issue 1, dated
          29 March 2006.
2         The CAA has been made aware of an incident in which an aircraft sustained structural
          damage to the nose landing gear to fuselage mounting structure. It is believed that a
          causal factor in this incident was that ground movement of the aircraft had been
          undertaken using a hydraulically powered "towbarless" tug and not ensuring that this
          was accomplished in accordance with the appropriate aircraft manufacturers'
          instructions.
4         Operators/owners and their maintenance and ground service providers are obliged to
          comply with all the applicable aircraft manufacturers' instructions in order to ensure
          the continued airworthiness of their aircraft.
5         By publication of this Appendix to Leaflet 11-22 the CAA would like to remind all
          operators/owners that when their aircraft is towed by either themselves or a third
          party they take the necessary steps to make sure the above obligations and practices
          are adhered to.
APPENDIX 10-1 Control of the Use of Pitot Head and Static Vent Blanking
              Covers
          (Previously issued as AN 12, Appendix 57)
1         A serious incident involving a large commercial air transport aircraft occurred due to
          the loss of half the primary reference flight instruments readings during take-off. The
          reason for the loss was that pitot head blanking covers had not been removed before
          flight.
2         The aircraft had been subjected to an overnight stop during which time all four of the
          pitot head blanking covers were installed.
3         The engineering and flight crew pre-departure check resulted in two of the four pitot
          head covers being removed. The remaining two were missed, and not removed.
4         The pre-departure check was carried out at night and in rain, thus weather and
          darkness contributed to the incident.
5         Good maintenance practices dictate that the installation of blanks or covers requires
          a clear, unambiguous entry in the Technical Log that the aircraft is no longer airworthy
          as a result of that installation. This practice would assist line maintenance personnel
          in ensuring the removal of such items before aircraft acceptance by the flight crew.
7         The reliance of warning or attention getting 'flags' attached to blanks or covers is not,
          in itself, sufficient to insure their identification and removal before flight. This is
          especially true when completing aircraft pre-departure checks in darkness or adverse
          weather conditions.
          NOTE:     Operators should consider application of similar practises in respect of other
                    commonly used blanking or locking devices such as landing gear locking pins, intake
                    blanks, external control locks etc.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          Resulting from an enquiry into an accident, the CAA wishes to draw attention to the
          importance of the correct positioning and legibility of aircraft markings and placards,
          especially those relating to emergency situations.
3 Maintenance Considerations
3.1       Operators and maintenance organisations are reminded that all placards, markings,
          operating instructions, especially those which pertain to emergency equipment and
          exits, should be inspected periodically to ensure legibility, complement and location.
3.2       The Light Aircraft Maintenance Schedule (LAMS) requires the inspection of placards
          in Section 7 at Check A, 50 hour, 150 hour and Annual check periods. Where other
          maintenance schedules do not refer to this subject, action should be taken to revise
          the schedule as appropriate.
1 Introduction
          This Appendix supersedes Airworthiness Notice No. 12 Appendix No. 5 Issue 2 dated
          1 April 1985 which was originally issued to warn of the possibility of accidents
          occurring as a result of incorrect fluids being used.
2 Background
          Aircraft are replenished with many fluids during their operation. Accidents and
          incidents continue to draw attention to the need to avoid the use of incorrect fluids.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       In addition to the obvious risks associated with damage to systems and failure to
          function if they are filled with the incorrect fluids, there is a risk that the damage may
          not become apparent until the aircraft is in flight with possible catastrophic results.
          Use of incorrect fluids may result from:
          a) Incorrectly establishing the fluid required.
          b) Incorrect identification of the fluid available.
3.2       Identifying fluids
3.2.1     To avoid incorrectly establishing the fluid required, the following should be observed:
          a) Filling points are required to be clearly marked to indicate the fluid to be used and
             these markings should be maintained in a legible condition.
          b) Where it is critical that the fluid to be used is to a particular specification(s), the
             marking may either indicate the specification(s) or provide sufficient information to
             permit servicing staff to determine which specification is applicable. Where neither
             is indicated, operators should ensure that the servicing staff, whether their own or
             an agent’s, follow a procedure that will ensure that the required specification is
             correctly established.
3.2.2     To avoid incorrect identification of the fluid available, the following should be
          observed:
          a) Containers and dispensing apparatus should be clearly marked with the identity of
             the fluid.
          b) If a 'used' container has to be re-used to contain a fluid other than that
             corresponding to the original identification, then the identification should be
             removed or permanently obscured and the identification of the new fluid should be
             clearly marked on the container.
          c) Fluids should only be obtained from sources whose integrity in respect of the
             contents of a container is beyond doubt.
3.3       Additional hazards apply when servicing fluids are carried on board aircraft and used
          to replenish systems when transiting overseas stations. Where foreign handling
          agents are used, language problems may compound potential problems. Operators
          should ensure that:
          a) Ideally all fluids are in sealed manufacturer’s cans.
          b) Purpose-designed stowages are provided for each fluid type, arranged where
             possible, to give physical separation between different types.
          c) The stowages are clearly identified as to the contents and that these markings
             correspond to those on the aircraft filler points.
          d) Procedures on use and replacement are contained in an appropriate Company
             manual.
          e) Scheduled checks are made to check the identity and stowage of on-board fluids.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          Several incidents and an accident have occurred after stained oil level sightglasses
          gave the impression that transmission gearboxes were full, when they were in fact
          empty. This problem is particularly prevalent when synthetic oil is used.
3 Maintenance Considerations
          Operators are reminded that sightglasses should be closely inspected for staining,
          regularly, and if readability is impaired they should be cleaned.
1 Introduction
          This Appendix supersedes Airworthiness Notice No. 12 Appendix 66, Issue 1, dated
          23 October 2003 which was issued to highlight the problems which arose from
          leaking aircraft potable water and toilet systems.
2 Background
2.1       In recent years, the CAA has received numerous reports regarding damage to
          property caused by blue or clear ice falling from aircraft. During the six year period
          1997 – 2002, over 200 ice fall reports within the UK were received by the CAA and
          whilst in the majority of cases it was not possible to identify the offending aircraft it
          is known that the ice in most of these cases emanated from toilet system servicing
          points on the aircraft.
2.2       On several occasions, where an accurate incident time and location have been
          provided, ATC radar replays have been able to identify a specific aircraft responsible
          for the ice fall and follow up investigations have been able to identify an aircraft defect
          responsible for the ice build-up. Reports received by the CAA show that ice falls from
          aircraft occur throughout the year, mainly during descent and in the majority of cases
          affect properties located under approach paths into the UK’s major airports. On those
          days when higher ambient temperatures exist at lower levels the ice may well melt,
          reaching the ground as slush or fluid.
2.3       The majority of ice accumulations recovered following such incidents are reported as
          being blue or clear in colour – the blue ice emanating from leaking toilet system
          servicing points, whereas the clear ice in the majority of cases is believed to come
          from leaking water system servicing or overflow points. In one incident where
          significant damage was caused to the roof of a house it was found that the
          responsible aircraft’s water tank overflow valve was stuck open.
2.4       Damage to property has ranged from significant damage to house roofs,
          conservatories, greenhouses, garages and other buildings to cracked car
          windscreens. Reported sizes of ice range from “pellet” or “melon” size up to the size
          of a “bag of cement”. Whilst there are reports of people on the ground having been
          struck by falling ice and suffering minor injury, to date there have been no known
          fatalities.
2.5       Quite apart from the potential for falling ice to damage property and cause a hazard
          to people, ice detaching from an aircraft can present a serious airworthiness threat.
          There are several cases on record of extensive damage being caused to mainplanes,
          stabilizers and engines by ice detaching from leaking toilet system servicing points.
2.6       Several aircraft have over the years suffered engine detachment during flight due to
          being struck by ice accumulating at leaking toilet system servicing points. In one case,
          a large commercial air transport aircraft had a long history of the forward toilet not
          flushing due to the toilet system repeatedly losing its fluid charge. Eventually, the No.
          3 engine detached during cruise at 35,000 ft after being hit by a large piece of ice that
          became detached from the forward toilet system servicing panel. Damage to engine
          intakes and compressor sections is not uncommon.
2.7       Toilet system fluid readily promotes corrosion and if allowed to leak past toilet system
          servicing panel sealing arrangements can be forced by the airflow into difficult to
          access structures (e.g. lap joints) and may well eventually result in the need for
          expensive repairs to pressure hull boundary structures.
2.8       Aircraft operators should be aware that during ramp audits of aircraft by the CAA and
          indeed by overseas regulatory authorities, any evidence of leakage/staining at toilet
          and water system servicing points may well result in the aircraft being delayed whilst
          investigations are carried out. Cases are on record where aircraft with no leaks but
          with previous staining not removed have been delayed for investigation during such
          audits.
2.9       It should be noted that what might appear to be a small seep/leak on the ground past
          toilet system servicing point seals will be significantly greater when the aircraft is
          pressurised.
          REMEMBER
          THE ONLY ACCEPTABLE LEAK IS NO LEAK!!
3.1       Whilst toilet and water system details vary between aircraft types, the operating
          concepts and philosophies are of course similar and operators, maintenance and
          ground handling organisations should bear the following points in mind.
          • Operators must ensure that personnel employed by contracted ground handling
            companies who provide toilet and water system servicing to the aircraft are fully
            aware of the reasons for and potential hazards associated with blue/clear ice.
            Ground handling personnel should be provided with instruction in Aircraft
            Maintenance Manual procedures for toilet and water system servicing.
            Continuation training programmes should ensure that these aspects are revisited
            as and when required. Ground handling personnel should be advised of the need
            to report leakage, damage or any servicing difficulties to maintenance personnel
            for corrective action.
          • Reports of inoperative toilet flush and water systems especially where the fluid
            charge is being lost should be investigated and rectified without delay.
          • Galley and toilet sinks that refuse to drain in flight are often an indication of a failed
            drain mast heater and therefore another possible source of ice accumulation.
          • Operators should ensure that the aircraft maintenance programme contains all the
            manufacturer’s recommendations for the maintenance of such systems.
          • Operator and maintenance organisation quality departments should include
            inspection of toilet and water system servicing points for evidence of leakage and
            satisfactory condition of sealing arrangements in aircraft audit programmes.
          • Where leaks are found prior to flight and cannot be rectified, the system should be
            drained and the toilet placarded INOPERATIVE – reference should be made to the
            aircraft’s MEL.
          • Where dents/damage to engine intake lips, compressor blades, stabilizer leading
            edges etc. are seen with no readily apparent reason for such damage,
            consideration should be given to the damage having been caused by the
            detachment of ice from toilet or water system servicing points forward of the
            damaged area.
          • Where blue streaking/staining from toilet servicing panels is evident with nil
            apparent leaks, consideration should be given to the possibility of inadequate
            servicing procedures having been used.
          • Whilst obviously all Airworthiness Directives applicable to such systems must be
            complied with all non mandatory service bulletins and modifications should be
            carefully assessed for application to such systems.
          • Toilet and water system servicing point sealing arrangements must be maintained
            serviceable at all times and should receive the same level of attention as afforded
            to any other aircraft system.
          • Leakage from otherwise fully serviceable toilet systems has on occasions been
            caused by items such as soap dispensers and disposable nappies being placed in
            toilets and becoming lodged under the toilet dump valve assembly. Placards
            located adjacent to the toilet showing prohibited items should be maintained
            legible at all times.
          • Toilet systems servicing panel areas should be kept clean and free of staining to
            assist in the early detection of leaks. Following any leak rectification, maintenance
            personnel should ensure that any staining/contamination is removed otherwise
            any future leaks may well go undetected. Operators should consider the
            implementation of a cleaning programme for toilet servicing panel areas to assist
            the prompt detection of leaks.
          REMEMBER
          THE ONLY ACCEPTABLE LEAK IS NO LEAK!
1 Introduction
          This Appendix supersedes Airworthiness Notice No. 12 Appendix No. 1 Issue 1 dated
          1 March 1973 which was originally issued to warn operators of the possible failure of
          a power control bracket fitting to the elevator.
2 Background
3 Airworthiness Considerations
          In this type of assembly it is important that the initial torque loading at manufacture
          should be maintained throughout the life of the assembly. This object was defeated
          by the use of soft metal shims and thus a design feature which had been proved by
          experience to be undesirable, was repeated and created a serious hazard.
1 Introduction
          This Appendix supersedes Airworthiness Notice No. 12 Appendix No. 2 Issue 1 dated
          1 March 1973 which was originally issued to warn of the possibility of a control shaft
          becoming completely jammed.
2 Airworthiness Considerations
2.1       Crowded ball races have no cage, and the balls are placed in position by forcing them
          through assembly slots in the inner and outer races. Only a small amount of
          interference between the ball and the slot is possible during assembly, with the result
          that excessive wear (which can be caused by rusting or faulty manufacture) can leave
          the balls free to re-enter the assembly slot. The inner race can then become locked
          to the outer race and, in addition, loose balls may drop out and possibly create a
          further hazard.
2.2       Cases have arisen with such bearings in which the clearances became sufficiently
          large for a ball to move from its proper track into the assembly slot and yet not escape
          completely because of the configuration of the bearing on the shaft. In this position,
          the ball completely jammed the control shaft on which it was used.
2.3       Among many ways of preventing this kind of hazard is the use of shaped washers
          alongside the bearing to prevent the balls moving sideways far enough to re-enter the
          slot.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          Fatal accidents to UK registered civil aircraft have occurred after, and at least in one
          instance, as a result of, the unauthorised alteration of parts in such a way as to enable
          their incorrect assembly and functioning.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       No part which could affect the safety of an aircraft may be altered other than in
          accordance with drawings or instructions from the manufacturer or an appropriately
          approved organisation.
3.2       In the assembly of all parts, but particularly when any change which could affect
          interchangeability has been made, care must be taken to ensure that the correct part
          for the particular purpose is fitted, that it is fitted correctly, the right way round, and
          if a working part, that it and the system of which it is part, works in the correct sense
          and throughout the correct range.
3.3       No alteration may be made to nullify a feature provided to prevent wrong assembly.
1 Introduction
2 Background
2.1       A number of incidents have been reported in which the failure of pipes and cable
          looms has occurred due to poor or incorrect routing, incorrect or absent structural
          attachments and in the case of rigid pipes, corrosion and chafing at 'P' clips and 'B'
          nut locations.
2.2       Manufacturers’ recommended maintenance requirements and standard practices
          have always stressed the need to conduct adequate inspections of pipes and cable
          looms in areas of poor and limited access during scheduled maintenance inspections
          and non-scheduled maintenance. However, it is felt appropriate to re-emphasise the
          need to conduct satisfactory inspections and re-installations of pipes and cable looms
          following maintenance activities.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       Maintenance organisations and maintenance personnel must be alert to the need to
          ensure the satisfactory condition of all pipes and cable looms with regard to chafing,
          correct routing and adequate structural attachment, following scheduled
          maintenance inspections, non-scheduled maintenance and the installation of
          approved modifications. Attention should also be paid to the re-installation of pipes
          and cable looms in accordance with the manufacturer’s original installation.
3.2       When inspecting pipes, care should also be taken to ensure that no corrosion exists
          under 'P' clips and 'B' nuts. Particular attention should be paid to pipes located in
          areas of adverse environmental exposure such as wheel bays, wing trailing edges and
          undercarriages.
3.3       For additional information related to cable looms see CAAIP Leaflet 11-22 Appendix
          24–3 and for Stainless Steel pipes see CAAIP Leaflet 11-22 Appendix 70–3.
1 Introduction
2 Background
2.1       An engine’s titanium alloy fan blade failed in fatigue that had emanated from an area
          of local blending on the blade leading edge. The failed airfoil may have been contained
          initially by the fan containment casing but the imposed impact and rotor unbalance
          loads caused damage such that together with aerodynamic loads, there were
          consecutive separations in-flight of the nose-cowl assembly and of the fan
          containment casing which then damaged the airframe and another engine.
2.2       The blending is believed to have met the acceptable standards for removing visible
          damage, but had been applied to remove a burned area which had been caused by a
          high energy electrical arc contacting the blade’s leading edge. Subsequent laboratory
          examination of the failed blade’s microstructure indicated that the blending operation
          had not removed all of the arc burn’s heat affected area, one remaining portion of
          which became the origin of a fatigue crack.
2.3       There have been other cases of fan blade failure from arc burns. In addition, a failure
          of a helicopter rotor blade has been attributed to an arc burn which had occurred
          during an anodising process in manufacture.
2.4       The accidental occurrence of electrical arcs produces localised melting and rapid
          subsequent cooling of materials, thereby causing a local degradation of material
          properties, which may then lead to cracking (cracks for evaluation of fatigue crack
          growth in test specimens are often 'started' by means of low voltage short duration
          electrical arcs used to introduce a flaw in the material).
2.5       An arc burn may be evidenced by a small circular or semi-circular heat-affected area
          on the surface which may contain shallow pitting, re-melting or cracking. Usually a
          dark blue oxide discoloration is associated with the heat-affected area (paint protected
          materials are not immune, and paint burns could be indicative of arc burn damage in
          the component).
2.6       Most manufacturers provide detailed instructions for the rectification of the large
          scale arc burn damage caused by lightning strikes, but they may not all adequately
          cover the possibility and hazards of arc burns from electrical equipment used during
          maintenance and overhaul.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       Minimise the possibility of arc burns by proper maintenance of all electrical equipment
          used in the vicinity of aircraft/engine components.
3.2       If any electrical equipment, including its leads, is found to be faulty or has blown a
          fuse, inspect carefully for evidence of arc burns on any item which the equipment has
          been near.
3.3       Do not regard arc burns as 'normal' damage in determining the actions to remove the
          damaged area – in the absence of any published specific instructions regarding
          removal of arc burn damage, obtain advice from the manufacturer or reject the part.
1 Introduction
2 Background
2.1       A shut off valve, integral with a flying control actuator, jammed due to internal
          corrosion and could not function correctly causing an accident to a large helicopter.
          The corrosion had been induced by chlorine contamination of the hydraulic fluid.
2.2       Whilst manufacturers’ publications and accepted maintenance practices have always
          stressed the need for scrupulous cleanliness when dealing with hydraulic
          components, there has been little emphasis on the potential hazards which may
          result from the vulnerability of both phosphate ester and mineral based hydraulic
          fluids to contamination by cleaning solvents or water.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       Cleaning fluids in general contain, or are based on, chlorinated solvents. These
          solvents, or their residues, can combine with excessive amounts of water, which are
          often found in hydraulic systems, to form hydrochloric acid. This acid will attack
          internal metallic surfaces in a system, particularly ferrous materials, and produce rust-
          like corrosion. Such corrosion is virtually impossible to stop and component overhaul
          and thorough system decontamination is usually necessary to restore the system to
          a serviceable condition.
3.2       Residual contamination by chlorinated solvents during hydraulic system maintenance
          or component overhaul must be prevented. When chlorinated solvents are used, care
          should be taken to ensure that all surfaces, including connectors associated with
          hydraulic test rigs of ground power supply sources, are free from such residual
          solvent before assembly or connection to the aircraft system.
3.3       All overhaul agencies and maintenance personnel must be alert to this significant but
          obscure hazard and are advised to review their maintenance procedures to ensure
          that chlorinated solvents cannot get into hydraulic systems or components.
3.4       In some fluids, an excess of water, even in the absence of chlorine contamination,
          may result in a build-up of acidity, or the formation of gelatinous deposits which can
          clog filter elements and small passageways, therefore, hydraulic fluid in aircraft
          systems and test rigs should be periodically checked for total acidity and water
          content to ensure these parameters remain within the appropriate aircraft
          manufacturer’s recommended limits.
1 Introduction
          This Appendix supersedes Airworthiness Notice No. 12 Appendix No. 9 Issue 1 dated
          7 November 1973 which was issued following an incident where the aileron control
          of a light aircraft jammed.
2 Background
          The aileron controls of a light aircraft recently jammed in flight; the pilot managed to
          maintain control by means of the rudder. The incident was caused by the corrosion
          and seizure of a bearing which supported the output drive gear of an auto-pilot roll
          servo motor. A slipping clutch associated with this gear had also seized. There was
          no weak link in the drive between the servo motor and the aileron control system.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       The type of auto-pilot involved in the incident is installed in many light aircraft, and the
          use of a slipping clutch to protect the aircraft against excess servo motor torque, or a
          jammed servo motor, is a feature common to other types of light aircraft auto-pilots.
          It must be realised that such a slipping clutch does not provide protection against
          jamming where seizures occur in the drive between the clutch and the flying control
          system.
3.2       In the operating instructions for the aircraft involved in the incident, the pilot is advised
          to check the system prior to each flight to ensure that the clutch can be slipped.
          Wherever practicable a similar check should be made by pilots of all light aircraft fitted
          with auto-pilots in which slipping clutches are incorporated.
3.3       Any auto-pilot servo motor (including bearings and attachments) which is connected
          so as to be part of the Flying Control Installation, must be subjected to the same
          maintenance checks as those called up in the Maintenance Schedule for the Flying
          Control Installation.
3.4       At all times the manufacturers’ recommendations for operating and maintaining the
          autopilot must be adhered to.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          Investigations into incidents involving total loss of electrical power supplies on light
          aircraft have shown that insufficient care was taken in the maintenance of the major
          components of the electrical system.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       A single fault, or a single fault plus a dormant fault, may cause the loss of electrical
          supplies. For example:
          a) If the battery becomes disconnected from a generation system using 'commercial'
             type alternators, instability may occur with the subsequent loss of the output of
             both alternators and result in the total loss of electrical power.
          b) In a twin-engined aircraft, a slack drive belt may operate quite adequately when
             both generators/alternators (generator) are sharing the load, but may slip should
             the other generator fail, with the resultant loss of output from both and leaving the
             electrical system demands dependent on the battery. On a single-engined aircraft,
             the belt may slip with increasing electrical load on the system, with similar results.
          c) Faults in the load-sharing system may effect both generators, possibly to such an
             extent as to result in the loss of output from them both.
3.2       While there are obviously many other faults which may result in generation system
          failures, these examples are quoted since they have occurred a number of times in
          service.
3.3       Should both generators fail and difficulty be experienced in re-setting, it may be
          possible to re-set one of them by reducing the electrical load to a minimum. Having
          re-set one, it is advisable not to attempt to re-set the other, since this may cause
          permanent loss of the output of both.
3.4       The attention of Owners and Operators is drawn to the necessity for ensuring that
          the following items are checked periodically:
          a) The battery and its control relay must be correctly installed and the battery
             terminals must be free from corrosion and correctly tightened.
          b) Voltage settings and load-sharing adjustment (where applicable) must be correct.
          c) All cable connections must be secure with locking devices in place and with end
             fittings showing no signs of fatigue fracture or corrosion. Earth connections are
             equally as important as the positive connections.
          d) Drive belts for generators must be checked to ensure that they are in good
             condition and correctly tensioned.
3.5       It is recommended that these checks should be carried out approximately every 50
          flying hours or six months, whichever is the sooner. The appropriate Maintenance
          Schedules should be reviewed and, where necessary, adjusted to take these
          recommendations into account.
3.6       The operation of the appropriate indicators and failure warning devices should be
          checked daily or during the pre-flight drill.
3.7       Whilst the CAA considers that the situation should be contained by the diligent
          application of maintenance procedures, owners and operators may, nevertheless,
          wish to consider modifications to improve the reliability of their own particular aircraft
          by, for example, the introduction of an emergency battery to act as a power source
          for vital services should the main electrical system fail. Such batteries have already
          been introduced on certain aircraft, and installation information is available.
1 Introduction
2 Background
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       Study of the pertinent factors has indicated that in addition to avoiding damage to
          cables during installation, modification or repair activity, there is a need for vigilance
          in the following areas:
          a) Fluid contamination of electrical equipment is obviously to be avoided but it is
             particularly necessary to appreciate that certain contaminants, notably that from
             toilet waste systems (which is saline) and fluids which contain sugar, such as
             sweetened drinks, can induce electrical tracking of degraded electrical cables and
             unsealed electrical components.
          b) Cable looms are particularly vulnerable to liquid contamination because they can
             provide a drainage path. Care should be taken to route cables away from known
             areas of possible leakage but, should contamination occur, cable looms must be
             thoroughly cleaned and dried and any unsealed electrical items removed to
             workshops for examination.
          c) In areas where it is not possible to provide segregation between electrical cables
             and pipes which carry fluid, it is good design practice to keep pipe joints to an
             unavoidable minimum. The fitment of drip shields or drained enclosures to joints
             in liquid waste systems is recommended.
          d) The CAA will pay additional attention to the quality control of hot stamp printing
             applied by cable users and will expect to see appropriate testing of cables after
             printing. The preferred method of ensuring that the insulation of printed cable has
             not been degraded is to employ a High Voltage Test using one of the systems
             defined in British Standard BS 3G 230: 2000 Test 16. Continuous testing is not
             required provided an adequate sample is tested whenever any machine setting is
             altered, including changes of alpha numeric characters.
          e) It is important to note that hot stamp printing may only be applied onto cable types
             and sizes which have been certified as capable of accepting such marking. Cable
             manufacturers whose products have approval under BCAR Section A, Chapter
             A/B4–8 procedures are able to give appropriate guidance on a Declaration of
             Design and Performance (DDP) and they will be able to advise on suitable test and
             inspection methods.
3.2       It has been further reported that certain types of widely-used cable insulation are
          susceptible to 'arc track' when seriously abused in service. The failure detailed in
          paragraph 2 related to a wet 'arc tracking' condition and designers of installations
          should be aware that, in addition to the factors noted in paragraph 3.1, it is
          recommended that cable selection should include evaluation of 'wet-arc tracking'
          characteristics. BS 3G 230: 2000 defines test conditions for aircraft electrical cables
          and Test 42 provides a test regime which facilitates comparison between cable types.
          Cable manufacturers are evaluating their existing products using Test 42 criteria and
          in consequence some new cable manufactures have been developed.
3.3       A further failure mode which has been established by laboratory testing and widely
          canvassed, is that of 'dry-arc tracking', which is a secondary failure condition resulting
          from the short circuiting of cables. The primary aim of the testing was to explore
          'battle damage' failure but it may be postulated that cable to cable abrasion or other
          'cut-through' faults can permit intense local heating at power levels which are well
          within the short term no-trip characteristic of the associated electrical protection. In
          such conditions some insulation materials can form a conducting char and if this
          extends to cables not involved in the original fault, a 'cascade' failure may develop.
          The CAA and other agencies are seeking to establish if this failure mechanism has any
          relevance to civil aircraft beyond placing further emphasis on the need for good
          design, installation and maintenance of electrical interconnect systems.
          Personnel engaged in servicing of aircraft are reminded that the discovery of a
          potentially hazardous failure condition during maintenance or fault finding may well
          justify the raising of a Mandatory Occurrence Report (MOR). In the context of this
          Appendix, any disruptive failure of electrical cables would warrant such a report.
          Physical evidence should be retained for investigation.
1 Introduction
2 Background
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       The basic function of a thermal circuit breaker (CB) is to detect an electrical overload
          condition which is, for rating and calibration purposes, assumed to be a constant
          current. The first point to note, therefore, is that electrical faults may be of a form
          which do not represent an overload to a given CB and that faults seldom present a
          constant value of current for a continuous time. The CB can only be expected to
          isolate faults which will overload the circuit and therefore any protection which is
4 Operational Use
4.1       In-flight operational use of CBs will usually involve the action of resetting a circuit
          breaker which has tripped because of an electrical overload or fault. Clearly the re-
          establishment of electrical power to a circuit which is at fault does involve, however
          slight, an element of risk. Accordingly, flight crews should be advised not to attempt
          to reset CBs in flight for other than essential services and, even then, only when there
          is no clearly associated condition of smoke or fumes. A second reset should not be
          attempted.
4.2       Cabin crew should be advised that CBs associated with domestic services should not
          be reset in flight because, by definition, the circuits involved are mostly within the
          passenger areas and the inconvenience caused by the loss of service would not
          justify any possible distress occasioned by 'electrical smells'.
4.3       A Technical Log entry should be made whenever any circuit breaker trips when the
          aircraft is in operation and a thorough investigation should subsequently be
          undertaken, including a visual inspection of the appropriate cable harnesses wherever
          possible (see CAAIP Leaflet 11–22 Appendix 24–3).
5 Maintenance Considerations
5.1       It has become apparent that the progressive development of the Maintenance
          Review Board determining scheduled maintenance has led to a significant erosion of
          maintenance checks of circuit breakers. Users are reminded that there is a continuing
          duty to monitor the performance of equipment and that items such as circuit breakers
          which are largely passive in nature should be assessed for dormant faults.
5.2       As a minimum and where Maintenance Schedules do not require a high level of
          checking, all CBs which are not regularly exercised by mechanical switching should
          be checked for correct mechanical operation by performing two manual switching
          cycles at periods of not more than two years. The necessary action should be taken
          to revise Maintenance Schedules as appropriate.
5.3       Where aircraft maintenance organisations are required to undertake scheduled
          calibration checks of circuit breakers, corresponding reliability data should be
          gathered. Simple pass/fail criteria is not sufficient for circuit breakers, or indeed any
          other equipment, where an analysis can make a significant contribution to reliability
          and airworthiness.
5.4       When installing CBs, any units which have not been supplied directly from an
          Approved source or have been stored for two years or more, should be checked for
          correct mechanical and, ideally, electrical operation before fitment to an aircraft.
1 Introduction
2 Background
3 Design Considerations
3.1       Following this incident, the CAA issued a letter to Operators (LTO No. 795) giving
          details of the dangers associated with loose battery terminals.
3.2       The terminals are basically square headed brass bolts, tinned and fluxed and placed
          with thread uppermost in a lead casting assembly. Cables are held on to the terminal
          post by a wing nut so as to maintain contact between the cable terminal pad and the
          battery terminal post.
3.3       The FAA conducted their own investigation with the manufacturers of the batteries
          and a General Aviation Airworthiness Alert No. AC 43–16 was issued. This alert
          recommended certain actions as preventative maintenance which is supported by the
          CAA and are outlined below:
          a) Ensure that before installing any battery into an aircraft, it is the correct model for
             the installation.
          b) Inspect the battery terminal and stud. If it is at all loose or deformed, it should not
             be installed.
          c) Ensure that the battery cable terminal is clean and free from corrosion, oxidation
             and contamination.
          d) Ensure that the battery cable terminal fits correctly on the terminal.
          e) Ensure the battery terminal post wing nut is correctly tightened (it should not be
             possible to move the terminal lug by hand).
                CAUTION: Do not overtighten the terminal post wing nut. Overtightening may
                result in deformation of the terminal post material which will eventually result
                in the terminal becoming loose in service.
3.4       Personnel are reminded that the discovery of a potentially hazardous failure condition
          during maintenance or fault finding may well justify the raising of a Mandatory
          Occurrence Report (MOR). In the context of this appendix, any broken or detached
          battery terminals discovered would warrant such a report. Physical evidence should
          be retained for investigation.
3.5       CAAIP Leaflet 11–22 Appendix 24–1 also deals with battery terminals.
1 Introduction
1.1       The development of primary cells employing Lithium in combination with other
          materials has resulted in the availability of batteries with energy densities which are
          very significantly higher than those which have previously been achieved. In-service
          experience and the results of safety tests carried out to Lithium batteries has shown
          that there is a potential for hazard. It is therefore necessary for users to consider the
          possible hazardous consequences of abuse or failure of such devices and this
          Appendix considers the safeguards which should be observed.
1.2       Lithium sulphur dioxide cells have been available for aircraft use for many years but
          early experience showed the risk of disruptive failure if batteries did not incorporate
          adequate protective devices. In the USA Technical Standard Order C97 was produced
          and this has represented an acceptable standard for Lithium Sulphur Dioxide cells, but
          because other Lithium based systems have now been developed, TSO C97 has
          naturally become outdated. In 1984 the CAA sought the assistance of the BSI in
          preparing a British Standard to cover all known systems which was published as
          British Standard G239; this standard has now been updated and re-issued as 2G 239.
          Since initial publication of this Appendix, advances in Lithium technology have
          resulted in Secondary (rechargeable) Lithium batteries becoming available. At present
          no appropriate standard is available covering the use of these batteries on aircraft. The
          CAA have again sought BSI assistance in formulating a standard similar to 2G 239 for
          secondary Lithium batteries. It is the policy of the CAA to continue to implement BS
          2G 239 and, in the absence of a specific standard for secondary Lithium batteries,
          implement the safety requirements defined in BS 2G 239.
          NOTE:    EASA has published ETSO-C97 which is equivalent to the FAA TSO-C97.
2         Intending users of Lithium batteries, as defined in paragraph 3, are advised that the
          CAA will seek positive assurances regarding the design and build standard of such
          batteries. The following guidelines should, therefore, be observed:
2.1       The specification for the battery should embrace all the relevant requirements of BS
          2G 239.
2.2       The procuring design authority should invoke BCAR Chapter A3-3 requirements for
          the approval of a Controlled Item and a Declaration of Design and Performance to the
          format given in BS 2G 239 should be obtained in all cases. This will normally involve
          a supplier who holds an appropriate approval to BCAR Chapter A8-1 as a Group A1
          Company, or EASA Part 21 subpart G, Production Approval (as appropriate).
2.3       Due regard should be taken of the possibility that some types of cell may fail such that
          gases will be vented. Such failure is usually associated with accidental electrical
          charging, the puncturing of cells, or the application of heat. It follows that Lithium
          batteries should not be installed in proximity to passengers or flight crew if any of
          these conditions can be foreseen.
2.4       The CAA and EASA have approved suitable organisations for the design and
          manufacture of Lithium batteries. The assembly of batteries by unapproved
          organisations is not acceptable unless the user can, under the terms of his own
          approval, demonstrate that such batteries do satisfy the requirements of BS 2G 239.
          Continuing control of the design standard and production quality of such items should
          be maintained.
2.5       Where Lithium batteries have been installed in aircraft prior to the issue of this
          Appendix evidence should be sought that such batteries were approved to TSO C97
          or that the safety requirements of BS 2G 239 are met. Should such assurance not be
          available, as a minimum, evidence of safe operation under the abusive failure
          conditions which are relevant to individual installations should be sought.
2.6       When batteries are removed from aircraft at the end of life, it is in the interest of
          safety that the disposal procedures given in BS 2G 239 be followed.
3         For the purpose of this Appendix a single cell fitted in aircraft as a Line Replaceable
          Unit (LRU) may be taken as representing a battery and thus be eligible for Accessory
          Approval (BCAR Chapter A3-3). However, small button cells which are hard wired
          within equipment may be considered as a component part of the equipment (as
          defined in CAAIP Leaflet 9-3) and be approved within the overall type test. Such cells
          should be fully assessed by equipment designers, who should be aware of the
          precautions which need be taken to avoid abusive failures and be able to demonstrate
          that the effects of failure have been considered. They may, therefore, seek a
          Declaration of Design and Performance from the cell manufacturer as supportive
          evidence.
4         Overhaul manuals for equipment containing Lithium batteries or cells should include
          cautionary notes and refer to the methods of disposal given in BS 2G 239. Attention
          should be drawn to the corrosive nature of any chemical contamination which may
          result from disruptive failure, with appropriate advice on cleaning methods.
5         Attention is also drawn to Guidance Note GS43 entitled 'Lithium Batteries' which is
          published for the Health and Safety Executive by HMSO.
1 Introduction
          This Appendix supersedes Airworthiness Notice No. 12, Appendix 64, Issue 3, dated
          28 September 2005.
2         Background
          Electrical wires meeting the MIL-W-22759/16,17,18 and 19 specifications have a
          single non-cross linked ETFE extruded insulation.
          Although not generally recommended by large aircraft manufacturers, this type of
          wire construction is and continues to be in widespread use within the aircraft
          industry. The acceptability of this wire type is referenced in a number of industry and
          regulatory documents, e.g. FAA AC 43.13-1B, FAA Policy Memorandum Ref No.PS-
          ACE100-2004-10023 and SAE AS50881.
          Although this wire can be suitable for a wide range of applications it is recognised that
          there are a number of performance limitations with this type of wire construction that
          should be reviewed before the wire can be assessed as suitable for use in a specific
          application.
3 Limitations
4 Discussion
          Aircraft equipment should always be assessed for its suitability for use (fit for
          purpose) and compliance with the relevant certification requirements. The use of this
          type of wire is not automatically acceptable for the reasons stated above. Particular
          care must therefore be taken when selecting this wire type to ensure that it meets all
          installation and regulatory requirements and is fit for its intended application.
5 Requirement
          The design assessment of the wire selection shall establish any maintenance or
          inspection procedures with appropriate intervals to ensure the continued
          airworthiness of the wire insulation, as appropriate.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          Investigations into an aircraft accident revealed that some of the passenger seats had
          detached at the floor attachment points, resulting in injury and fatalities of
          passengers. The fittings used, in this particular case, were of a claw and locking collar
          device on the seat legs mating with mushroom headed studs on the cabin floor. The
          fitting part number was D1416–2 manufactured by General Logistics in America.
          Normally the seat leg fitting and collar have an inter-connected secondary locking
          device. On the seats in question, the seat leg fitting was of an early design that did
          not have the secondary locking device. It is believed that impact forces allowed the
          locking collar to be driven out of engagement allowing the claw to disengage from the
          floor attachment, thus releasing the seats.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       All aircraft should have their seats and other items of furnishings (e.g. Galleys)
          inspected for this type of fitting. Where such fittings are found, they should be
          replaced with a style of attachment fitting which requires positive manual actions to
          release it. If it is intended that the claw and mushroom head type be retained, then
          they should be of a type possessing a minimum of four groups of holding claws plus
          two interconnected locking devices. The second locking device must be of a type that
          requires a positive physical action to operate it before the primary claw locking collar
          can be moved.
3.2       All future designs for furnishings should use fittings similar to those described in
          paragraph 3.1 above.
1 Introduction
2 Background
3 Maintenance Checks
3.1       Attention of operators and manufacturers is drawn to the need for careful
          interpretation of the requirements for accessibility of safety equipment* as they
          relate to the occupants of aircraft, and particularly passengers, having ready and easy
          access to the valise during all phases of the flight. These requirements apply not only
          to the initial certification of the aeroplane type but also to modifications to seats,
          seating arrangements, and equipment stowage arrangements.
3.2       Interpretation of the requirement for ease of accessibility will in most installations,
          necessitate the valises, when stowed under seats, being located near to the front
          edge of the seat pan, arranged so as to allow the occupant of the seat readily to
          remove the valise from the stowage pouch, which may be a two handed operation,
          in the shortest possible time. The method for removing the valise from the stowage
          pouch should not, therefore, necessitate any extensive body movement by a seated
          passenger with safety belt fastened. Furthermore, the possibility of the valise being
          ejected or falling from its stowage pouch onto the cabin floor either during normal
          operation or in an emergency should be minimal.
          * EASA Certification Specification (CS) 25.1411.
1 Introduction
          This Appendix supersedes Airworthiness Notice No. 12, Appendix 62, Issue 1 dated
          29 October 2001 which was issued as a result of a fatal accident.
2         An investigation into a fatal accident involving a light aircraft concluded that the seat
          belt failed during a forced landing. The orientation of the stitched joint on the harness
          and its interaction with a hard object, probably a trouser belt buckle, was cited as the
          probable cause of the failure.
3 Background
          A high proportion of light aircraft seat belts have the release box, tongue and overlap
          stitching positioned so that they fall well to the side or behind the occupant’s body
          when installed and adjusted. These belts are considered satisfactory and are
          excluded from this notice. Care should be taken to ensure that any overlapped joints
          do fall behind the body on all occasions allowing for all reasonable variations of
          adjustment of the seat belt to accommodate a full range of adult human body height
          and girth.
Incorrect Correct
1 Introduction
          This Appendix supersedes Airworthiness Notice No. 12, Appendix 16, Issue 3, dated
          18 March 2003.
4         For all aircraft fitted with inflatable escape slides which are automatically deployed by
          the opening of emergency exits, slides must be deployed as part of a slide
          deployment programme on the aircraft by the automatic release and inflation of the
          slide in accordance with paragraph 4.1 or 4.2 of this Leaflet. It is recommended that
          when feasible the slide deployment should be carried out by cabin crew, in order to
          better replicate the emergency condition.
4.1       Every slide on the aircraft should be deployed when it becomes due for overhaul in
          accordance with the manufacturer's recommended intervals. This period should not
          exceed 36 months.
4.2       Operators can develop a slide deployment sampling programme, with the agreement
          of the CAA as part of the Approved Maintenance Programme. This programme must
          ensure that, on each aircraft type, a sample of at least 10 or 10%, whichever is the
          greater, of all the exits in the fleet, will have been deployed within an elapsed period
          of not more than two years. The sampling programme must ensure a reasonably
          uniform distribution of the exits on that aircraft type. Inadvertent slide deployments
          should not be included in the slide deployment sampling programme but should still
          be investigated if the slide fails to deploy correctly.
6         Every operator should define it’s own pass / fail criteria which should be accepted by
          the local Regional Office. The pass / fail criteria should be based on any
          recommendations made by the aircraft or slide manufacturer and would be expected
          to include at least the following as failures:
          • Failure of the automatic deployment system (i.e. manual inflation required);
          • Failure of the door to fully open;
          • Door assist failure (if fitted);
          • Failure to fully inflate;
          • Failure to fully inflate within 10 seconds (unless otherwise specified by the
            manufacturer). Timing is from when the door is initially actuated until the slide is
            deployed in a useable state;
          • Complete failure of slide lights to illuminate
          All the above failures must be reported to the authority using the mandatory
          occurrence reporting (MOR) scheme and to the aircraft type certificate holder.
7         To assist in the slide deployment failure investigation, unless otherwise agreed by the
          CAA, all slide deployments must be recorded by video or other similar means and
          copies of failed deployments should be held for a minimum of one year or until any
          MOR or investigation into the failure has been closed. A copy should be made
          available to the CAA on request.
8         All slide deployment failures must be investigated to determine the cause of failure
          and action taken to prevent similar occurrences. The type certificate holder and
          escape slide manufacturer should be kept informed of failure investigations and
          provide assistance where possible. If there are either high levels of slide failures or
          slide failure causes cannot be determined it may be necessary, in conjunction with
          the CAA to carry out further deployment tests, increase the paragraph 4.2 sampling
          size or remove MEL alleviation until a satisfactory level of reliability is achieved.
9         For each deployment test the door / slide position, slide part number, pass or fail
          result, date of manufacture of the slide, failure mode and failure cause should be
          recorded. Operators should forward a summary of slide deployment testing at regular
          intervals for each aircraft type to the appropriate CAA Regional Office. This summary
          should include the following information: Number of aircraft in fleet, number of
          deployments carried out and overall pass rate for fleet.
10        Due to the complexity and safety critical nature of escape slide systems it is
          recommended that Maintenance Organisations involved in the installation,
          maintenance and overhaul of escape slides should implement duplicate or
          independent inspections on critical tasks i.e. slide installation, firing mechanism
          connections, girt bar installation and rigging, door assist deactivation / slide safety pin
          removal. Consideration should also be given to the training and competence of
          personnel involved with the packing, installation, inspection and overhaul of escape
          slides.
11        Operators should review all escape slide continued airworthiness instructions from
          the type certificate holder and escape slide manufacturer including service bulletins
          and service letters and consider embodiment where there may be improvements in
          escape slide reliability.
          When an Operator changes maintenance providers i.e. slide overhauler or aircraft
          maintenance organisation it must review the slide deployment programme to monitor
          the affects of such changes on the fleet escape slide reliability.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          The collection of debris, dust and discarded catering materials found in various areas
          of aircraft has, in a number of cases, created conditions which have resulted in the
          outbreak of fire or the production of sufficient fumes for an emergency to be declared.
3.1       Recently reported flight deck incidents have been attributed to:
          a) the collection of dust around the flight crew foot warmers which subsequently
             ignited when a high temperature setting was selected;
          b) fumes produced by shorted electrical equipment as the result of metal objects
             falling onto connections (as many as 7 metal cutlery knives have been found
             behind a glare shield).
3.1.1     Fumes have also been produced when equipment cooling systems have collected
          sufficient dust and lint to drastically reduce the airflow. This has on a number of
          occasions resulted in the smell of burning and/or smoke and emergency in-flight
          action having to be taken.
3.2       Collection of debris in other areas also provides the potential for various electrical
          sources to ignite combustible materials. Areas such as the void beneath toilet
          shrouds, behind light fittings and behind sidewall-to-floor panels in the passenger
          cabin are all places where flammable materials can accumulate. Such accumulations
          pose an obvious fire risk where electrical equipment and wiring carries sufficient
          current to create sparks.
3.3       Modern interior carpeting often produces large quantities of lint which finds its way
          into equipment cooling filters and toilet smoke detector sampling tubes often
          resulting in a reduction in performance or complete failure.
3.4       The design of most aircraft is such that large objects cannot fall into sensitive areas,
          but the omission of gap fillers, seals, electrical terminal shielding and insulating boots
          during maintenance can create conditions that may initiate a fire.
3.5       Maintenance personnel should ensure that design standards of sealing are restored
          after equipment and panels are refitted and that all loose objects are removed prior to
          closure.
3.6       Maintenance Organisations and Operators should ensure that cleaning programmes
          are designed to address the removal of clogging and combustible materials at regular
          intervals.
3.7       Quality sampling programmes should address cleanliness standards of aircraft
          interiors, particularly flight deck areas. Flight crew should be reminded of the dangers
          of placing any loose objects (including catering) on flight deck glare-shields and
          pedestals.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          Incidents in which aircraft have experienced a sudden asymmetric flap retraction have
          occurred in the UK. Two of these incidents, one of which resulted in a fatal accident,
          involved different types of aircraft of United States origin and were caused by
          malfunctioning of a single 'down' limit microswitch. Subsequent mechanical failures
          in the flap operating mechanism resulted from repeated high loading when the flap
          drive system reached the mechanical limits of its travel. Other incidents have been
          reported in which asymmetric flap retractions have resulted solely from mechanical
          failure of the flap drive system, e.g. operating cables or flexible drive assemblies.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       During functional checks, it is recommended that particular attention should be paid
          to the correct operation of all microswitches which affect the travel limits of the flaps
          and to the condition of all visible elements of the operating mechanism. The Light
          Aircraft Maintenance Schedule has been amended to require a check based on these
          recommendations.
3.2       Where the 'up' and 'down' limits of flap travel are governed by the operation of single
          microswitches and one of these microswitches is found to be faulty, the operating
          mechanisms should be checked for any evidence of static overloading.
3.3       Where a modification to introduce an additional microswitch is available, it is strongly
          recommended that it should be embodied.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          Whilst carrying out full and free control movement checks prior to take-off, the first
          officer felt a restriction in the aileron controls. The aircraft captain confirmed there
          was a restriction and the aircraft returned to the stand where it was found that a bolt,
          (instead of the correct rigging pin) was installed in the control wheel rigging pin hole
          at the base of the Captain’s control column.
3.1       Subsequent investigations revealed that due to the non-availability of the correct
          rigging pin, (with an attached ‘attention getting’ red disc/flag), a bolt obtained from a
          free issue dispensing area was used as an alternative. The correct rigging pin, with a
          red disc/flag attached, would have been clearly visible at the base of the control
          column. The bolt used as an alternative was not only difficult to see but effectively
          camouflaged by two similar and adjacent bolts.
3.2       All aircraft maintenance engineers, and in particular those holding certification
          responsibilities, are reminded of the need for vigilance when working on control
          systems and in particular during rigging operations when rigging pins are being used.
          In order to minimize hazards associated with rigging pins and to prevent future
          occurrences the following points should be noted:
3.3       Control of Rigging Pins
3.3.1     All rigging pins should be subjected to a form of control in order that their
          whereabouts can be established. A tool store procedure which could include visual
          cues in the form of shadow boards is one possibility.
3.3.2     All rigging pins should be subjected to serviceability checks prior to use, with
          particular emphasis being placed on the secure attachment of ‘attention getting’
          flags/discs.
3.3.3     The installation and removal of rigging pins should be controlled by the use of
          worksheets, or stage sheets (CAAIP Leaflet 11-22 Appendix 5-2 refers).
1 Introduction
          This Appendix supersedes Airworthiness Notice No. 12, Appendix 65, Issue 1 dated
          18 March 2003 which was issued as a result of information received from the FAA.
2 Background
          In November 2001 the CAA received information from the FAA of a NTSB
          investigation of control cable end fittings. The NTSB has investigated the failure of
          flight control cable end fittings on six aircraft. Four of the failures occurred in-flight,
          although not leading to serious accident or loss of life.
3         Additional end fittings from some of the incident aircraft as well as from four other
          aircraft were examined and found cracked. Most of the end fittings had fractured or
          cracked in a transverse manner through the shaft on the threaded end of the fitting
          close to the spanner/wrench flats. A few showed evidence of cracking in the swaged
          portion of the fitting.
4         The NTSB investigation identified a number of common features to the failures and
          cracking of the end fittings:
          • The material of manufacture of the fittings was a free machining stainless steel
            grade containing selenium and a high sulphur content.
          • The fittings surfaces were generally corrosion pitted. Where locking wire was
            wrapped around the fitting it was noted that the pits had a higher density beneath
            the wire.
          • The predominant fracture mode was stress corrosion cracking, initiated at
            corrosion pits.
5         Stress corrosion cracking only occurs under specific environmental conditions, in sus-
          ceptible materials when tensile stresses are induced in the material. The end fittings
          examined were all taken from light aircraft which had been in service for at least 20
          years, however the specific environmental conditions that caused the corrosion have
          not been identified. Although, not all stainless steel end fittings are considered sus-
          ceptible, it is not possible to identify the grade of stainless steel used for a fitting by
          inspection.
6         The initial indication of degradation would be surface pitting of the steel. As the attack
          progresses surface breaking cracks will become evident, and possibly staining and
          discolouration of the steel.
7         It is recommended that all control cable end fittings are inspected for degradation
          when access allows.
1 Introduction
2 Background
2.1       Instances have occurred in flight whereby altimeter pressure setting scales have
          become detached from altimeter pointers when the pilot was attempting to set an
          appropriate QNH. This has resulted in large indicated altimeter errors.
2.2       Subsequent investigation has revealed that satisfactory operation of the altimeter
          depends on the barometric adjustment control knob being attached to the spindle so
          that no fore or aft play exists between the knob and instrument bezel. If such play
          exists, forward or rearward pressure on the knob may disengage the barometric
          adjustment scale from the altimeter pointer.
2.3       A number of altimeters of US manufacture are known to be prone to this particular
          defect. Included amongst these are the following:
                Aero Mechanism 8040, 8140, 8141, 8142, 8503 Series
                Kollsman Altimeters,
                Narco AR 800 Series,
                Bendix 3252013 Series, and
                United Instrument Altimeters.
3 Maintenance Considerations
3.1       The Federal Aviation Administration have issued Airworthiness Directive 86–05–02
          which is applicable to a range of part numbers of United Instruments Altimeters that
          do not have encoding capabilities and were manufactured after 1 February 1985. The
          affected instruments were discovered to have a deficient locking clamp which
          resulted in a possible de-synchronisation of the barometric adjusting knob and altitude
          pointers.
          NOTE:     The CAA previously published Additional Airworthiness Directive (AAD) 006-02-87
                    which was cancelled on 28 September 2003.
3.2       It is strongly advised that before each flight the following checks are made:
          a) That rotation of the barometric adjustment control knob results in a movement of
             both the pressure setting scale and the altimeter pointers, and that forward and
             rearward pressure on the knob during rotation does not disengage the barometric
             adjustment scale from the altimeter pointers.
          b) That the relevant altimeter pointer reading is compatible with the setting on the
             barometric adjustment scale.
1 Introduction
1.1       A recent incident on an imported light aircraft has shown the possible danger of the
          presentation of false information to the pilot due to reversed indication by the vertical
          speed indicator during a fast rate of descent.
1.2       United Kingdom approved instruments and instruments complying with EASA ETSO-
          C8d, JAA JSTO Specification C8d, or the United States TSO Specifications C8d or
          C8e, are fitted with stops to prevent such occurrences. It is not known whether other
          instruments, particularly those likely to be installed in imported aircraft of less than
          5700 kg (12 500 lb) maximum weight, are similarly equipped.
2 Action
2.1       Before issue of the Airworthiness Certificate and subsequent reviews for continued
          airworthiness of an imported aircraft, it shall be established whether the vertical
          speed indicator is fitted with limit stops. This may be done by test or reference to the
          manufacturer.
2.2       If stops are not fitted, either the vertical speed indicator shall be replaced by an
          instrument that has stops, or alternatively the placard defined in paragraph 3 shall be
          fitted.
3 Placard
3.1       The following placard shall be fitted adjacent to a vertical speed indicator not fitted
          with stops:
          ‘This indicator is not fitted with limit stops and a rate of change of altitude in excess
          of the maximum calibration will cause indication in the reverse sense.’
3.2       The placard may, as a temporary measure, be typewritten on white card, but shall be
          replaced by a more permanent placard as soon as possible.
4 Record
          A record of the action taken to comply with paragraph 2 above shall be made in the
          aircraft log book, quoting the serial number of the instrument.
1 Introduction
          This Appendix supersedes Airworthiness Notice No. 12 Appendix No. 8 Issue 2 dated
          8 October 1974 which was originally issued to alert operators of the possibility of
          malfunction of anti-skid protection.
2 Background
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       Experience has shown that dormant faults which reduce the maximum energy
          absorption capability of the brakes can exist without being detected during normal
          energy stops. These only become apparent when the full effectiveness of the brakes
          is called into use, such as during a rejected take-off. In order, therefore, to guard
          against such troubles, it will be necessary to institute checks, at agreed periodic
          intervals and also after any disturbance or replacement of the brake or parts of the
          anti-skid system, to ensure that:
          a) the operation of each anti-skid sensor controls the brake on the wheel with which
             it is associated and
          b) the operation of the whole braking system, including any anti-skid facility, is normal
             and satisfactory
3.2       If functional checks carried out in accordance with the relevant Maintenance Manuals
          would not achieve the objectives stated in 3.1 a) and b), the aircraft manufacturer
          should be consulted in order to agree suitable amendments to the Manuals to include
          tests which will verify the functional integrity of the system.
3.3       Operators having Maintenance Schedules/Programmes approved by the CAA should
          review these Schedules/Programmes, and if necessary, forward suitable
          amendments which will ensure that functional checks prescribed in the Schedule will
          cover the particular matters stated in 3.1 a) and b) and that any necessary cross
          references to the Maintenance Manual are amended or added.
3.4       In the event of difficulty in obtaining agreement with manufacturers, the CAA’s
          Survey Department should be consulted.
1 Introduction
2 Background
2.1       Multiple tyre failures have become more significant with the growth in aircraft size
          and weight and have resulted in serious accidents and incidents. Inadequate
          maintenance of tyres directly affects their performance and reliability. This is
          particularly so for the high pressure and/or high speed rating tyres, i.e. marked in
          excess of 160 mph, used on multi-wheel landing gear.
2.2       A marked reduction or loss of inflation of one tyre can, through over-deflection, result
          in the failure of other tyres on the same axle, or in a marked reduction in its own ability
          to carry the increased load after another tyre failure. The risk of such failures is likely
          to be greater during take-off when wheel loads and/or speeds are highest or during
          extended taxiing. Braking performance may also be affected to the extent that
          stopping distances are increased or the remaining effective brakes are over-heated.
          Tyre and wheel debris may damage hydraulic and anti-skid systems. One large aircraft
          was completely destroyed by fire and other serious fires have occurred. In some
          accidents, aircraft have left the runway during rejected take-offs associated with tyre
          problems during the take-off run.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       Adequate inflation pressure levels and leakage checks are necessary if adequate tyre
          performance is to be achieved. The maximum permissible inflation pressure
          improves a tyre’s capability to sustain abnormal loads. Tyre pressures should be
          accurately checked on at least a daily basis, visual inspection is totally inadequate.
          Tyres should be inspected for external condition at every available opportunity bearing
          in mind that fitted stationary tyres cannot be entirely inspected.
3.2       Tyre removal criteria should be adhered to, and particular attention should be paid to
          tyres which have been over-deflected or underinflated or subjected to excessive
          brake heat. Wear limits and damage criteria can be found in tyre manufacturers’
          manuals and it should also be noted that very wet operational conditions could cause
          aquaplaning during landing.
3.3       The possibility of tyre carcass and tread failures which may damage structure,
          systems and engines and thus jeopardise safety, can be directly reduced by timely
          attention to, and adequate maintenance of, tyre and wheel assemblies.
          A recent survey of a Yak aircraft established that an American manufactured tyre had
          been fitted of a different size and ply rating to that recommended within the Parts
          catalogue. It should be noted that such changes to original specification must be
          supported by an approved modification.
5 Additional Information
          Additional information can be found within CAAIP Leaflet 5-7 Tyres, and for specific
          tyre brands, most tyre manufacturers now publish information on their websites,
          detailing information on tyre care and general servicing instructions for aircraft tyres
          and tubes. The instructions are generally applicable, unless superseded by an
          individual aircraft maintenance manual, technical order or Airworthiness Directive.
          Examples include:
          http://www.dunlopaircrafttyres.com/tyrecare/index.htm
          http://www.goodyearaviation.com/tirecare.html
          http://www.airmichelin.com/databook.html
          http://ap.bridgestone.co.jp/candm/candm.html
1 Introduction
2 Background
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       For all aircraft, it is recommended that all strobe lights installed in areas which may be
          subjected to either spilt or vented fuel, or to high concentrations of fuel vapour (such
          as the wing tips or lower fuselage) should be inspected to ensure that a positive bond,
          not greater than 0·05 ohms resistance, is provided between the airframe and light
          housing. The inspection and any necessary rectification action should be carried out
          as soon as is practical, but in any event not later than the next schedule airframe
          maintenance inspection.
3.2       Wherever practical the bond should be a short, flexible, metal strap, attached
          between the light housing and the aircraft local structure, and with clean metal-to-
          metal contacts. After completion, the bonding attachments and surrounding areas
          should be adequately protected against corrosion.
3.3       Where the form of bonding described in paragraph 3.2 is impractical, a good metal-to-
          metal contact between the light housing and the aircraft structure must be ensured.
          This contact area must be clean and free from paint, dirt or corrosion.
1 Introduction
2 Background
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       Engineers must ensure that the instructions contained in the relevant maintenance/
          overhaul manuals are complied with, particularly those applicable to course deviation
          and alarm current settings.
3.2       Prior to installation in an aircraft, engineers must ensure that the current settings of
          units are compatible with the particular aircraft system.
3.3       Any adjustment found necessary must only be carried out in a workshop where the
          necessary test equipment and maintenance/overhaul manuals are available and by
          persons appropriately approved.
3.4       Most ramp test equipment, whilst capable of checking alarm circuits for some gross
          failures, is inadequate for checking their operation in other important cases. In
          particular, it will not reveal whether current settings are such as to prejudice proper
          flag operation. The CAA is discussing with manufacturers the possibility of modifying
          such equipment, e.g. by making provision for the interruption of the tone sources so
          as to enable a check of the operation of alarm circuits of the installation to be made,
          and the outcome of these discussions would be the subject of manufacturers
          bulletins.
3.5       It is good practice, which the CAA will expect operators and maintenance
          organisations to implement, that all units incorporating adjustments for variable loads,
          whether in aircraft or held as spares, have a label indicating the loads for which the
          unit has been adjusted, fixed in a prominent position on the front of the unit. Aircraft
          using such units should have a similar label fixed to the unit mounting.
1 Introduction
          This Appendix supersedes Airworthiness Notice No. 12, Appendix 67, Issue 4, dated
          21 March 2005.
2         CAA have become aware of incorrect 24-bit addresses being installed/hard wired on
          individual aircraft. This has happened not only on first installation of a Mode S
          transponder but also when a modification has been made or following a change of
          State of Registration. Incorrect installation, such as setting the address to all zeros or
          inadvertent duplication of an address, can pose a risk to flight safety. In particular, the
          airborne collision avoidance system (ACAS) operates on the assumption that only a
          single, and therefore unique 24-bit aircraft address exists per airframe. The
          performance of ACAS can be seriously degraded and in some cases disabled if an
          incorrect or duplicate address is installed on an aircraft.
3         ICAO has recognised that the present management methodology of aircraft 24-bit
          addresses presents a genuine safety hazard that needs to be addressed and suitably
          mitigated in any system that is to make use of the Mode S address. CAA have issued
          AIC 94/2004 (yellow 151) dated 14 October 2004 in order to make the operating
          community aware of this issue. This Appendix to Leaflet 11-22 is published to make
          the maintenance community similarly aware as it affects them.
4         In order to ensure that the 24-bit Mode S address is installed correctly at the time of
          initial CAA certificate of airworthiness issue, as well as throughout the in-service life
          of the aircraft and at the time it leaves the UK register, the following should be
          accomplished:
          a) A positive check that the correct Mode S address is assigned for each transponder
             installed on the aircraft.
          b) The correct Mode S address is periodically confirmed and recorded for each
             transponder installed on the aircraft, via a field test set at an appropriate
             maintenance opportunity (not to exceed a 2 year periodicity). This task should be
             incorporated into the Approved Maintenance Schedule or Programme.
                NOTE:     Contact details to obtain an allocated ICAO 24-bit address may be obtained from
                          the Mode S homepage on the Directorate of Airspace Policy website via
                          www.caa.co.uk.
          c) Ensure whenever the aircraft is subject to modification that the Mode S address
             has not been changed.
          d) The UK assigned Mode S address is removed when the aircraft leaves the UK
             register.
5         Operators are requested to review their documented procedures and update them,
          as appropriate, to ensure the above points are addressed. These procedures should
          also include a method to record that the applicable actions have been accomplished.
6         Reference should also be made to CAAIP Leaflet 11-22 Appendix 34-3 which contains
          advice on testing criteria for Transponders.
          NOTE:         With the introduction of Mode S Elementary and Enhanced Surveillance
                        functionality, within the transponder, it is envisaged that additional testing of the
                        transponder will be required on a periodic basis (not to exceed 2 years). Notification
                        of revised testing requirements will be included in a future issue of CAAIP Leaflet
                        11-22 Appendix 34-3.
APPENDIX 34-3 ATC Transponders and Traffic Alert and Collision Avoidance
              Systems (TCAS) Ground Testing
1 Introduction
          This Appendix supersedes Airworthiness Notice No. 12 Appendix 69, Issue 1, dated
          28 September 2005.
          This Leaflet is to provide general guidance material to aircraft maintenance
          organisations and maintenance personnel relating to ATC Transponder and Traffic
          Alert and Collision Avoidance Systems (TCAS). It includes information on the TCAS
          system together with precautions to be considered when ground testing ATC
          Transponders in order to minimise the possibility of causing nuisance advisory
          warnings on TCAS equipped aircraft.
          NOTE:     In Europe TCAS is often referred to as Airborne Collision Avoidance System (ACAS).
2 General
          A number of aircraft operating within airspace regulated by the United Kingdom are
          now equipped with TCAS. This equipment provides flight deck crew with an
          independent back-up to visual search and the ATC system by alerting them to
          potential collision hazards. In the case of the more sophisticated systems which
          predominate in number, the equipment provides advice to the flight deck crew on
          how best to manoeuvre so that adequate separation may be maintained or achieved
          between potentially conflicting aircraft.
3.1       TCAS comprises a dedicated computer unit with associated aerials. Visual and voice
          advisories are provided for the flight deck crew.
3.2       The TCAS computer requires the presence of a mode S transponder which provides
          a data link between TCAS equipped aircraft. Sensor inputs to TCAS include radio
          height and pressure altitude.
3.3       TCAS can provide two distinct forms of advisory information to the flight deck crew,
          Traffic Advisory (TA), and Resolution Advisory (RA).
          a) Traffic Advisory (TA), is aural and visual information provided in the cockpit to
             advise the flight deck crew as to the position of a potential threat aircraft.
          b) Resolution Advisory (RA), is aural and visual information provided in the cockpit to
             advise the flight deck crew that a particular manoeuvre should, or should not, be
             performed to maintain safe separation from a threat aircraft.
                NOTE:   Resolution Advisories can not be produced if a potential threat aircraft does not
                        provide altitude information.
3.4       TCAS equipped aircraft operate by interrogating the mode S or mode A/C
          transponders in proximate aircraft. The replies from mode S and mode C
          transponders are tracked in range, bearing and altitude. This data is passed on to the
          system logic for TA and RA processing and display.
3.5       Mode A/C transponders which are not equipped with an altitude encoder or when the
          altitude reporting is switched off, reply with no data in the altitude field, therefore, the
          TCAS will track in range and bearing only. This information is passed to the collision
          avoidance logic for TA detection and display.
4 Testing Considerations
1 Introduction
          This Appendix supersedes Airworthiness Notice No. 12 Appendix No. 3 Issue 1 dated
          1 March 1973 which was originally issued to warn operators of the damage which can
          be caused when fire is fed by the aircraft’s oxygen system.
2 Background
2.1       Serious fire damage to aircraft has been caused where fires (which would probably
          otherwise have been insignificant) have been fed by oxygen from the aircraft’s piped
          oxygen system. In some cases an oxygen leak contributed to the outbreak of fire, in
          others the oxygen was liberated by the fire which as a result then became much more
          severe.
2.2       Although the increased flammability and heat of combustion of many materials in the
          presence of oxygen is well known, it appears that due regard for this fact is not always
          paid in the design of aircraft, particularly in the consideration of minor modifications
          after original manufacture.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
          Precautions should be taken to ensure that an oxygen leak will not create a fire hazard
          where none previously existed and that a minor overheat or an electrical fire condition
          cannot damage the oxygen system, thus promoting far more serious consequences.
          Therefore, leak checks should be carried out after any disturbance of an oxygen
          system.
1 Introduction
2 Background
2.1       The CAA has noted an increasing number of occurrences relating to failures of
          passenger/crew oxygen systems. In a significant proportion of the cases reported,
          the failures were attributed to installation errors following maintenance, operation or
          test. These occurrences were mostly in connection with, but not confined to,
          passengers/crew oxygen automatic drop out systems.
2.2       Due to the nature of the design of the automatic drop out systems, an installation
          error may lay dormant and undetected until the system is used (possibly in an
          emergency). Faulty installation has, on a number of occasions, subsequently led to a
          functional failure of part or all of a system, leading to an obvious lowering of safety
          levels. On a number of occasions, it has been reported that supply pipes have been
          crushed and rendered inoperative by faulty installation.
3 Maintenance Considerations
3.1       Operators should ensure that staff who may need to maintain, test or re-install
          oxygen systems, especially the more elaborate passenger/crew oxygen drop out
          systems, are adequately trained for the task and are retrained as necessary to ensure
          retention of their competency levels.
3.2       Operators should ensure that maintenance schedules adequately address the need
          to assess the functional integrity of these otherwise mostly dormant systems.
          Additionally, test and installation instructions to maintenance staff and crew
          members (where necessary) should be reviewed to ensure that such instructions are
          adequate and unambiguous. The instructions should emphasise the need to ensure
          that following functional testing or maintenance, all functional inhibiting devices are
          removed.
3.3       In the case of portable oxygen systems in particular, care should be taken to ensure
          that not only is the bottle addressed during routine maintenance and check (contents
          and pressure testing etc.) but the condition of masks and piping should be
          continuously monitored during service, possibly by cabin staff as well as maintenance
          staff. Consideration should be given to invoking pre-flight checks by cabin staff where
          appropriate.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          An abnormally high failure rate in service of H–11 steel bolts has been reported from
          the USA. Such failures are mainly caused by stress corrosion. H–11 is a 5% chromium
          molybdenum tool steel to specifications such as BS 4659; BH–11; DTD 5222; AMS
          6488; AISI H–11 Modified. It is heat-treatable to tensile strength above 1400Mpa
          (over 200,000 lbf/in2) with good strength retention at high temperature. Typical
          applications are specialised bolts in engine, nacelle, flap track and undercarriage
          mounting structures and H–11 is also offered as a material in some standard ranges
          of fasteners.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       Aircraft manufacturers are asked to review their current and projected designs and
          take any necessary action to avoid the use of H–11 fasteners wherever practicable,
          particularly in locations where any fastener is:
          a) in a tension application,
          b) a single load path,
          c) exposed to phosphate-ester hydraulic fluid above 120°C (250°F),
          d) exposed to exhaust gases,
          e) subject to weathering.
3.2       When failures have occurred in service, the remaining H–11 fasteners should be
          replaced by a fleet campaign rather than on an attrition basis. The aircraft
          manufacturer should be consulted regarding replacement fasteners of a suitable
          alternative material.
3.3       Owners and operators are asked to review their aircraft fleets in respect of such
          fasteners to ensure:
          a) adequate maintenance of corrosion protection schemes,
          b) implementation of manufacturer’s SB on the subject,
          c) correct torque tightening (without over-torque) of such fasteners on re-installation.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          In conjunction with the international activity on ageing aircraft, the CAA has been
          reviewing the nature of corrosion inhibiting (temporary protective) compounds and
          their use in the transport aircraft operating industry.
3 Design Considerations
3.1       Overall it has become clear that operators may be using such compounds that are
          different from those recommended or approved by the manufacturer of the aircraft
          they operate. Operators are reminded that in such circumstances it is their
          responsibility to ascertain, and technically justify, the fitness for purpose of the
          compound they use in their particular applications. Furthermore, adequate
          procedures should be in place to ensure that the material procured consistently
          meets its specification.
3.2       On this latter point a local authority trading standards department has advised the
          CAA that in recent years one product of intermediate viscosity has been supplied to
          the industry with its viscosity clearly above specification maxima.
3.3       One consequence of too high viscosity is the lack of penetrating capability which
          could lead to areas of structure, particularly mating surfaces, remaining unprotected.
          Operators are advised to check that their stocks of such material are of the
          appropriate viscosity. Should they believe that they have used such non-conforming
          materials on an aircraft, the area of application should be cleaned and reprotected
          with appropriate conforming material, at the next maintenance opportunity.
1 Introduction
2 Background
2.1       An airframe manufacturer has experienced a problem whilst inserting steel swage
          locking pins (lock-bolts).
2.2       When auto setting ¼” dia. lock-bolts (U.S.A. NAS 1468) in a rear wing spar assembly
          some failures of the lock-bolt occurred on the first locking ring groove instead of at
          the break groove. Other ¼” dia. lock-bolts removed from the same assembly were
          found to be 'necked' with cracking evident in the first locking ring groove. This
          cracking is not visible without removing the bolt but may result ultimately in the loss
          of the locking collar.
2.3       Subsequent investigations revealed that defective lock-bolts have a carburised
          surface with a hardness above the upper limit of the U.S.A. Procurement
          Specification (NAS 1413).
3 Airworthiness Considerations
          Manufacturers using this type of fastener are recommended to check that their
          stocks are within specification, with particular reference to hardness values. Owners
          and Operators of aircraft are advised to check such fasteners for security of collar on
          an opportunity basis.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          In the latest incident, a series of 90° countersinks were cut when 100° was specified.
          This was not revealed during fastener installation or the subsequent inspection of the
          fasteners, as the countersinks were covered by the fastener heads.
3 Design Considerations
3.1       Manufacturers and maintenance organisations are reminded of the need to ensure
          that adequate procedures are in place to control the issue and use of precision cutting
          tools and the installation of correct fasteners.
3.2       Incorrectly cut countersinks can cause a severe decrease in the strength of a joint
          leading to a serious reduction in airworthiness and to the need for costly repair or
          replacement.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          A recent incident investigation concluded that the cause was the loss of a number of
          bolts, used to secure a helicopter tail rotor drive shaft fairing, and that the bolts were
          lost because the self-locking function of the associated stiffnuts had become
          ineffective.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
1 Introduction
2 Background
          Jamming of aircraft flight control systems by foreign objects and loose articles such
          as those identified below continues to be a major threat to aircraft safety. Approved
          Organisations, Aircraft Owners and Licensed Aircraft Engineers must remain alert to
          the hazards of entrapment of such items and ensure that adequate precautions are
          taken to prevent items falling into or being left in critical areas. Good design, high
          standards of cleanliness and the implementation of standard practices can reduce the
          risks of such incidents. However the awareness of personnel involved in all aspects
          of aircraft operation is one of the most important elements in preventing such
          potentially dangerous incidents.
3.1       As the presence of foreign objects and loose articles can cause jamming or restriction
          of engine and flight control systems, organisations involved in the manufacture,
          operation and maintenance of aircraft, should establish standard practices to address
          foreign object and loose article control. Such practices should require personnel to
          check that all equipment, tools, rags or any loose objects/articles, which could impede
          the free movement and safe operation of a system(s), have been removed and that
          the system(s) and installation in the work area are clean and unobstructed.
3.2       In particular maintenance personnel are the front line of defence against such
          problems. As such they should remain vigilant of the need to remove foreign objects
          and loose articles during and after any scheduled or non-scheduled maintenance.
          Consideration should also be given to the potential to introduce loose articles into
          control systems from adjoining structure e.g. loose or incorrectly torqued fasteners.
          While a structure may remain safe with one fastener missing, the aircraft safety may
          be severely compromised if that fastener jams a control system.
          NOTE: The Duplicate Inspection is intended to ensure the correct operation and
                assembly of controls, it will not prevent loose articles or foreign objects from
                becoming a hazard to their continued safe operation.
3.3       Some of the reported incidents:
          • Throttle movement found to be stiff due to a broken plastic spoon, lodged
            between throttle levers and adjacent components in throttle pedestal.
          • A bolt lodged between a flying control hydraulic-booster jack and its chassis.
          • Hydraulic fluid top-up cans and meal trays fouling primary control runs.
          • A spare control rod left in a fin by the manufacturer, causing intermittent jamming
            of rudder and not found during twelve months of operation.
          • A nut left on a control chain adjacent to the sprocket, causing the chain to fail and
            jamming one flap surface.
          • A ring spanner which had remained undiscovered for two and a half years in a wing
            bay which had been opened several times for control systems inspection.
          • An incorrectly fitted screw on a fin leading edge which rolled across the top of the
            fin and jammed the elevator during the take-off climb.
          • A rudder pedal control jammed during taxi checks due to a coat hanger in a
            footwell.
          • The AAIB investigation of an accident involving a jammed elevator, found
            numerous foreign objects which potentially may have restricted control system
            movement.
          • An AAIB investigation of a fatal accident to a light aeroplane, revealed a small
            screwdriver had jammed the elevators such that they could not be moved beyond
            neutral in a nose-up direction.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          The CAA wishes to draw attention to the importance of maintaining the visibility of
          windshields and transparencies to ensure that a clear and undistorted view is
          provided for flight crew.
          Operators and maintenance organisations are reminded that the optical standard and
          the standard of cleanliness of cockpit windshields and transparencies can have a
          direct effect on the flying of the aircraft especially in conditions of poor visibility. A
          hazy screen blurs the details, reduces black to grey and dims outlines. Dirt or slight
          scratching scatters the light and may make it impossible for the pilot to see against
          the sun.
          Section 7 of the Light Aircraft Maintenance Schedule (LAMS) requires the inspection
          of windscreens at Check A intervals, with a further inspection of all windows at 50
          hour, 150 hour and Annual check periods. Where other maintenance schedules do not
          refer to this subject, action should be taken to revise the schedule as appropriate.
1 Introduction
2 Background
2.1       Premature failure of stainless steel pipes has occurred in engines due to the
          unauthorised applications of chloride based materials, such as Neoprene tube and
          glass fibre tape, used as wrappings to protect pipes from chafing against adjacent
          parts. Whilst the desire to minimise wear due to fretting is quite reasonable, the need
          to ensure that the correct materials are used cannot be over-emphasised.
2.2       Chloride based materials break down with heat (temperatures above 150°C) to
          produce corrosive salts which will attack stainless steel and titanium components,
          resulting in premature failure.
2.3       It is possible that smears of chloride material may be left on components which have
          been touched by PVC (Plasticised Polyvinyl Chloride) sheeting while covered over by,
          or packed in, such material.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
          Operators and Maintenance Organisations are reminded of the need to refer to the
          approved publications and use only the equipment and materials specified therein.
1 Introduction
2 Background
2.1       Forced-landings have occurred involving piston-engined aircraft which were directly
          attributable to collapsed air intake filters obstructing the carburettor. In one case only
          a fortunate combination of circumstances enabled the pilot to avoid a potentially
          serious accident.
2.2       Investigation suggests that the maintenance applied to the air intake filters on piston-
          engined light aircraft may not always be adequate. The LAMS Schedules concern
          themselves with the cleanliness and condition of air intake filters, but under the
          definition of 'inspect', imply that this can be done in situ and as viewed externally.
          Individually approved maintenance schedules are generally similar in this respect.
3 Airworthiness Considerations
3.1       In practice it is apparent that for a typical air intake filter installation:
          a) Visual inspection of the downstream face is usually not possible in situ. It is this
             face which may show the first signs of collapse.
          b) Varying degrees of dismantling may be necessary to gain access to it.
          c) In nearly all cases it must be removed for cleaning.
          d) Methods of cleaning vary and some methods may not be effective for all types of
             filter.
3.2       When completing scheduled maintenance inspections, engineers and pilots who may
          accomplish 50-hour checks on Private Category aircraft maintained to the LAMS
          Schedules must be satisfied that air intake filters are clean and fully serviceable. If
          visual inspection of both faces of the filter is not readily possible, consideration must
          be given to gaining access sufficiently often to ensure continued serviceability.
          Reference should be made to the manufacturers instructructions whenever air filter
          inspections are carried out.
1 Introduction
2 Background
          An incident which could easily have been a serious accident occurred because the
          single strand inner core of a flexible push pull mixture control failed at the mixture
          control lever on the carburettor and the lever subsequently vibrated into the lean
          position, resulting in a loss of engine power during take-off.
3 Design Considerations
          Designers embodying such controls should consider the consequence of failure and
          the practicability of mitigating any serious effect by the provision of a friction device
          or by spring biasing the part to be operated by such a control to the safest position.
1 Introduction
          This leaflet supersedes Airworthiness Notice No. 21 Issue 3 dated 15 May 1970
          which was issued following reports of contamination of fuel tanks.
2 Background
2.1       Reports have been received that aircraft regularly operating in climatic conditions
          such as those prevailing between the latitudes 30° North and 30° South, have been
          contaminated in the fuel tanks by fungus. Another aircraft, regularly operating from
          the United Kingdom, was found to have localised areas of heavy growth when
          inspected after standing in a heated hangar for two months with fuel in the tanks. It
          is considered that the storage conditions were a contributory factor.
2.2       In one case contamination was found during an investigation into the cause of erratic
          fuel contents indication, when white crusty deposits and brown stains were seen on
          the probes. Further examination revealed the presence of brown/black slimes
          adhering to horizontal upward facing surfaces within the tanks. Examination by the
          Commonwealth Mycological Institute, Kew, confirmed that this substance was a
          fungal growth of the type Cladesporium Resinae.
3 Effects of Contamination
3.1       The problems associated with microbiological growths have been known for some
          years and research into their behaviour has been conducted throughout the world. In
          the case of Cladesporium Resinae, the spores of the fungus can exist in a dormant
          state in kerosene fuels in most parts of the world. These will only develop when in
          contact with water in fuel at temperatures such as those reached when the aircraft
          or storage tanks are exposed to a warm ambient temperature such as radiation from
          the sun for long periods in a tropical or sub-tropical environment, or prolonged periods
          in a heated hangar. If developing fungus forms on water not drained off and which
          adheres to the tank surfaces, the fungus is able to absorb water later introduced with
          fuel or condensing following a cold soak.
3.2       Where fungus has formed there is a probability that corrosion will occur. Corrosion
          has been found where fungus had formed on the bottom tank skin, on the chordal
          support member in the wing root and on fuel pipes within the tank. In some cases
          aircraft have been sufficiently affected to necessitate replacement of some
          component parts.
3.3       The fungus itself, if dislodged by fuel during refuelling, can obstruct fuel filters.
4 Inspection
4.1       Operators uplifting fuel or operating regularly in areas having high normal ambient
          temperatures and high humidity or where fungus development is known to have been
          encountered, are advised to scrutinise tank areas for signs of fungus whenever
          access is gained for any purpose. It is further recommended that, for aircraft operating
          under these conditions, Maintenance Schedules should be amended to include a
          visual internal tank check at periods prescribed by the aircraft manufacturer. It is also
          important, whenever fuel tanks are inspected, to ensure that all passage ways
          between rib cleats, etc. are not obstructed, so that a drainage path for water is
          maintained at all times. If the aircraft has been standing in a heated hangar for a
          prolonged period the fuel in the tanks should be treated with biocide (see paragraph
          5).
4.2       If contents gauges give suspect indications, immediate consideration should be given
          to the possibility that tank probes may be contaminated with water and/or fungus and
          appropriate inspections should be carried out.
4.3       Whenever fuel filters are checked, they should be closely examined for the presence
          of slimes of any colour.
4.4       The need to prevent water collection by good maintenance practices and control of
          fuel supplies is emphasised. A high degree of protection can be maintained by strict
          adherence to water drain checks before and after refuelling and again, if the aircraft
          has been standing for any length of time, before the next flight. Fuel quality control
          checks should be rigorously applied.
5 Treatment
5.1       If fungus is discovered, the fuel system should be cleaned as soon as possible by a
          method approved by the aircraft manufacturer and the engine manufacturer. It must
          be appreciated that if the fungus is allowed to develop, cleansing and rectification
          could become a major operation involving grounding the aircraft for a long period.
5.2       It is strongly recommended that when aircraft operate in an area where fungal growth
          can be encountered, or where there is any possibility of temperatures in the fuel tanks
          frequently rising above 25°C, a fungicide additive should be used in the fuel as
          approved by the aircraft manufacturer and the engine manufacturer. The frequency of
          treatment and the dilutions prescribed by the aircraft manufacturer and the engine
          manufacturer must be adhered to. Introduction of an unapproved fungicide or
          inhibitor may jeopardise the safe operation of the aircraft.
1 Introduction
          This Leaflet has been raised to provide guidance on the use of standard parts in
          aircraft restoration projects and their subsequent maintenance. This Leaflet should be
          read in conjunction with the relevant aircraft manuals, manufacturers instructions,
          British Civil Airworthiness Requirements (BCAR) and CAP 562 Leaflet 11-45.
2 Background
2.1       BCAR Chapter A4–8 prescribes procedures for the Design Approval of Aircraft
          Equipment and Accessories. In particular paragraph 3 refers to Standard Parts with a
          statement that BCAR A4–8 need not be followed for Aircraft General Spares (AGS)
          and other standard parts complying with National or International specifications or
          standards recognised by the CAA.
          NOTE: This is intended to cover minor items complying with AGS, SBAC, BSI or
                similar standards, where these are limited to manufacturing drawings from
                which the approved Organisation can assess the items as suitable for the
                intended application.
2.2       From time to time, whilst carrying out aircraft restoration projects usually associated
          with vintage aircraft, the standard parts, or AGS of the original design standard are no
          longer available. To enable the project(s) to be concluded successfully, there are
          methods and procedures required to be followed by the restorer(s) for the use of
          alternative parts of AGS.
3.1       In the context of this Leaflet the term 'Critical Nature' is used to describe any bolted
          joint or attachment where stress levels are high and where inadequate assembly
          techniques or inappropriate fasteners could result in fatigue or catastrophic failure of
          the structure. Examples of critical nature joints are:
          a) Spar or wing attachment joints
          b) Fin/tailplane attachment joints
          c) Engine/strut mounting structure
          d) Flying control systems or surface attachments
3.2       In the context of this Leaflet the term 'Non Critical Nature' is used to describe any
          attachment or fastener of ancillary structure or fairings which are not critical to the
          airworthiness of the aircraft or structure. Examples of fasteners or attachments of a
          non critical nature are not exhaustive but could be associated with:
          a) Fairings
          b) Cabin interior furnishing
          c) Panel attachment
4 Alternative Parts
4.1       Standard Parts – Critical Nature Standard Parts which are replaced by those of
          equal or improved specification with regard to dimensional tolerances and material
          properties, can only be embodied by modification procedure in accordance with the
          requirements of BCAR A/B2–5, or be in accordance with the product support
          publications of the aircraft Type Certificate holder or Type Design (See CAP 562
          Leaflet 1-14).
4.2       Standard Parts – Non Critical Nature Where the manufacturer’s airworthiness
          data permits, it is acceptable to replace original standard parts used in areas of a non
          critical nature with items of equal or improved specification with regard to
          dimensional tolerances and material properties, without the need for CAA
          involvement. In all other instances the requirements of BCAR A/B2–5 are applicable.
1 Introduction
1.1       The availability of information as digital libraries providing information, guidance and
          Airworthiness data in electronic format is now widespread throughout the aviation
          industry. Airworthiness data (e.g. (EC) Regulation 2042/2003, Annex II, Part 145,
          145.45) published in this format potentially offers the user simplified search and
          access functions when compared with Airworthiness data produced in the more
          traditional formats. Increasingly the CAA is being asked if it is permissible to accept
          commercially produced electronic libraries as an alternative to the more traditional
          'hard copy' or Microform (Microfiche) manuals.
1.2       Commercial library systems provide a useful service in consolidating all related
          information into digital format with regular updating by electronic means. Users
          therefore have the benefit of a comprehensive information source without the
          difficulty of incorporating frequent amendments.
1.3       The purpose of this Leaflet is to provide guidance on the acceptance of Airworthiness
          data provided in electronic format. When promulgated by either the appropriate Type
          Certificate holder, Design Organisation or Airworthiness Authority, in any format, it is
          referred to as 'Primary Source'. When promulgated by a third party it is referred to as
          'Secondary Source'.
1.4       It should be borne in mind that, in respect of CAA Approval, firstly, access to the
          Airworthiness data is required by the requirement for gaining and maintaining that
          approval. Secondly, the CAA must be satisfied that the person (or organisation) which
          the CAA has licensed or approved to make reports is qualified to do so, and remains
          so. The need for that person or organisation to have access to the up to date
          appropriate Airworthiness data is therefore essential.
          Primary Source material need not necessarily be in hard copy format as the use of
          computer recorded Airworthiness data is now recognised in many areas of the law.
          Hence there appears to be no reason for not accepting it in aviation. The source of
          information rather than its format will, therefore, be the CAA’s primary concern.
3.1       In all cases, an organisation choosing to use Secondary Source Airworthiness data will
          be responsible for ensuring that the source of the Airworthiness data will provide a
          level of accuracy equal to that provided by Primary Source Airworthiness data.
          Furthermore, the revision frequency will need to be such that it reflects that of the
          Primary Source Airworthiness data. In entering into an arrangement based on
          Secondary Source Airworthiness data, users will need to determine that the
          organisation providing the Airworthiness data is legally entitled to do so.
4.1       Any person (or organisation) using Airworthiness data is responsible to satisfy himself
          that it has been supplied by an appropriate competent person and is in a form which
          is acceptable to the originator of the Primary Source material. Organisation
          procedures should be such that it can be demonstrated that the Airworthiness data is
          both up to date and available at all times when needed.
4.2       The library controls necessary for more traditional forms of Airworthiness data are in
          many cases equally applicable to that supplied in electronic format. However,
          organisations in choosing to use Airworthiness data provided in electronic format
          should take into account the following additional aspects:
          a) It is normal industry practice to provide amendments to Airworthiness data in
             electronic format by issuing replacement media; these amendments are often
             supplied at frequent intervals.
          b) Organisations should implement procedures which ensure that access is only
             allowed to current versions of electronic data. Where it is considered that there is
             a need to have available superseded electronic data, an archive system should be
             implemented.
          c) Airworthiness data, including associated temporary revisions and the ability to read
             the Airworthiness data, should be provided in close proximity to where the work is
             to be undertaken. Where printing facilities are provided, such printed material
             should be automatically annotated by the software to clearly identify the source of
             the Airworthiness data and its edition date.
          d) The number of terminals is sufficient in relation to the volume of work to be
             undertaken. Suitable arrangements should also be made to ensure that in the
             event of a system failure, an alternative means of providing the Airworthiness data
             is available.
          e) The operating system selected should not allow the unauthorised alteration of the
             Airworthiness data it displays.
          f) A contract with a supplier or suppliers, should be established to maintain both the
             necessary hardware and software needed to access electronic Airworthiness data,
             reflecting the working patterns of the user. The contract should provide for the
             support of the system which reflects the working patterns of the users.
This Leaflet is superseded and cancelled by JAA Administrative and Guidance Material,
Section One: General, Part 3: Temporary Guidance leaflets, Leaflet No. 17 Passenger Service
and In-Flight Entertainment (IFE) Systems, and by CAAIP Leaflet 5-12, Continuing
Airworthiness and Safety Standards of Passenger Service and In-Flight Entertainment
Systems.
1 Purpose
          The purpose of this Leaflet is to provide information and guidance to persons involved
          in the maintenance, sale, or disposal of aircraft parts. It provides additional guidance
          material and should be read, where applicable, with the requirements of Part-
          145.A.42 paragraph (d) and Part-M.A Subparts C, D and E, to prevent scrap aircraft
          parts and materials from being sold or acquired as serviceable parts and materials.
2 Introduction
          It is common practice for owners of aircraft parts to dispose of scrap parts and
          materials by selling, discarding, or transferring such items. In some instances, these
          items have reappeared for sale in the active parts inventories of the aviation
          community. Misrepresentation of the status of parts and material and the practice of
          making such items appear serviceable could result in the use of non conforming parts
          and materials.
          Persons disposing of scrap aircraft parts and materials should consider the possibility
          of such parts and materials being misrepresented and sold as serviceable at a later
          date. Caution should be exercised to ensure that the following types of parts and
          materials are disposed of in a controlled manner that does not allow them to be
          returned to service:
          a) Parts with non-repairable defects, whether visible or not to the naked eye;
          b) Parts that are not within the specifications set forth by the approved design, and
             cannot be brought into conformance with applicable specifications;
          c) Parts and materials for which further processing or rework cannot make them
             eligible for certification under a recognised released system;
          d) Parts subjected to unacceptable modification or rework that is irreversible;
          e) Life-limited parts that have reached or exceeded their life limits, or have missing
             or incomplete records;
          f) Parts that cannot be returned to an airworthy condition due to exposure to extreme
             forces or heat;
          g) Principal Structural Elements (PSE) removed from a high-cycle aircraft for which
             conformity cannot be accomplished by complying with the mandatory
             requirements applicable to ageing aircraft.
4.1       Persons disposing of scrap aircraft parts and materials should, when appropriate,
          mutilate those parts and materials prior to release. Mutilation should be accomplished
          in such a manner that the parts become unusable for their original intended use, nor
          should they be able to be reworked or camouflaged to provide the appearance of
          being serviceable, such as by re-plating, shortening and re-threading long bolts,
          welding, straightening, machining, cleaning, polishing, or repainting.
4.1.1     Mutilation may be accomplished by one or a combination of the following procedures,
          but is not limited to:
          a) Grinding;
          b) Burning;
          c) Removal of a major lug or other integral feature;
          d) Permanent distortion of parts;
          e) Cutting a hole with cutting torch or saw;
          f) Melting;
          g) Sawing into many small pieces.
4.1.2     The following procedures are examples of mutilation that are often less successful
          because they may not be consistently effective:
          a) Stamping (such as a stamped 'R' on a part);
          b) Spraying with paint;
          c) Hammer marks;
          d) Identification by tag or markings;
          e) Drilling small holes;
          f) Sawing in two pieces. Persons who rework scrap parts and materials may be
             skilled technicians and attempt to restore parts cut in two pieces in such a manner
             that the mutilation proves difficult to detect.
4.2       With regards to persons disposing of scrap aircraft parts and materials for legitimate
          non-flight uses, such as training and education aids, research and development, or for
          non-aviation applications. In such instances, mutilation is not appropriate and the
          following methods should be used to prevent misrepresentation:
          a) Permanently marking or stamping the parts, subparts, and material as ‘NOT
             SERVICEABLE’. (Ink stamping is not an acceptable method);
          b) Removing original part number identification;
          c) Removing data plate identification;
          d) Maintaining a tracking or accountability system, by serial number or other
             individualised data, to record transferred scrap aircraft parts and materials; and
          e) Including written instructions concerning disposition and disposal of such parts
             and materials in any agreement or contract transferring such parts and materials.
          NOTE:     Scrap or expired life-limited parts and materials should not be passed on to any
                    person or organisation who may end up placing the parts and materials back in actual
                    use, due to the criticality of parts and material failure and the potential safety threat.
4.3       Organisations handling scrap or expired life-limited aircraft parts and materials should
          establish a quarantine store area in which to segregate such items from active
          serviceable inventories and to prevent unauthorised access. Caution should be
          exercised to ensure that these parts and materials receive the disposition specified in
          this Leaflet.
4.4       Manufacturers producing approved aircraft parts should consider maintaining records
          of serial numbers for 'retired' life-limited or other critical parts. In such cases, the
          owner who mutilates applicable parts is encouraged to provide the original
          manufacturer with the data plate and/or serial number and final disposition of the part.
          All purchasers of aircraft parts and materials should ensure that misrepresented scrap
          parts and materials are not received into active inventory. The following are examples
          of conditions to be alert for when receiving parts:
          a) Parts showing signs of rework which were purchased as ‘new’;
          b) Used parts showing signs of unapproved or inappropriate repair;
          c) Parts with poor workmanship or signs of rework in the area of the part data plate,
             number or serial number inscription;
          d) Used parts lacking verifiable documentation of history and approval;
          e) Parts with prices ‘too good to be true’;
          f) Questionable part numbers, fraudulent or suspicious Technical Standard Order or
             FAA-Parts Manufacturer Approval markings and/or re-identification, stamp-overs
             or vibro-etching on the data plate;
          g) Parts delivered with photocopied or missing EASA Form 1 or other acceptable
             maintenance release documentation;
          h) Parts with a finish that is inconsistent with industry standards (e.g. discoloration,
             inconsistencies, resurfacing);
          i) Parts purchased as new but with release documentation reflecting a status other
             than new;
          j) Parts with poor documentation exhibiting incomplete or inconsistent part identity
             information;
          k) Intact ‘scrap’ unsalvageable parts offered in bulk weight for prices higher than for
             mutilated parts with identical weight and content.
          NOTE:     Suspected Unapproved Parts Notification can be found on FAA Internet address:
                    www.faa.gov/avr/sups.htm and Special Airworthiness Information Bulletins can be
                    found on FAA Internet address: www.faa.gov/certification/aircraft/av-info/AD/
                    saibs.asp
                    An approved organisation or LAME who receives suspect parts should report to the
                    CAA as detailed in paragraph 6 of CAP 562 Leaflet 1-6.
          NOTE:    For the purpose of this Leaflet the term 'items' includes all components, parts,
                   engines and accessories.
1 Introduction
1.1       This Leaflet reviews the factors involved in establishing the acceptability of aircraft
          items recovered from aircraft involved in accidents/incidents, and states the
          conditions to be met before such items may be returned to service.
1.2       This Leaflet applies to aircraft designated as falling under Annex II to Regulation EC
          216/2008. These are known as non-EASA aircraft and come under the regulatory
          control of the Civil Aviation Authority and are issued with National Certificates of
          Airworthiness and Permits to Fly. It does not apply to EASA type certificated aircraft,
          which are covered by requirements defined in Part 145 and Part M.
1.3       The Civil Aviation Authority has evidence that some aircraft items, (including highly
          stressed rotating parts) have been released to service after having been recovered
          from aircraft involved in accidents/incidents even though the accident circumstances
          may have caused damage or changed characteristics from those of the type design.
          Since such items may not manifest any visual evidence of damage, distortion or
          changed characteristics, a serious airworthiness hazard could result from their use
          without special precautions being taken as detailed in this Leaflet.
          NOTE:    The subject of this Leaflet was first promulgated to industry by a CAA Letter to
                   Operators Number 461 (revised to LTO 461/A on the 18 December 1981), following
                   informal consultation with industry and with aviation insurers.
2.1       When an aircraft has been involved in an accident/incident, the title to the salvage
          may pass from the insured owner to other persons (e.g. aircraft insurers) and this
          salvage may be offered for sale either complete or as separate aircraft items in an 'as
          is - where is' condition. While some items may be totally unaffected by the accident/
          incident which caused the aircraft to be declared as salvage, it is essential to obtain
          clear evidence that this is the case. If such evidence cannot be obtained, the item may
          not be returned to service.
2.2       All such items must therefore be subject to competent assessment and inspection in
          the light of adequate knowledge of the circumstances of the accident, subsequent
          storage and transport conditions, and with evidence of previous operational history
          obtained from valid airworthiness records, before overhaul and re-installation can be
          considered.
2.3       In particular, if a crash load is sufficient to take any part above its proof strength,
          residual strains may remain which could reduce the effective strength of the item or
          otherwise impair its functioning. Loads higher than this may of course crack the item,
          with an even more dangerous potential. Further, a reduction in strength may be
          caused by virtue of the change of a material’s characteristics following overheat from
          a fire. It is therefore of the utmost importance to establish that the item is neither
          cracked, distorted nor overheated. The degree of distortion may be difficult to assess
          if the precise original dimensions are not known, in which case there is no option but
          to reject the item. Any suggestion of overheating would be cause for a laboratory
          investigation into significant change of material properties.
2.4       The standard procedures appropriate to items removed for overhaul following normal
          service life may not therefore be sufficient for items from salvaged aircraft. If the
          information in the Manufacturer’s Manual, or other technical publications, is
          insufficient to deal with the considerations detailed above then the manufacturer
          must be consulted for guidance. If the manufacturer provides the additional
          information, and the item can be shown to meet this, then it may be returned to
          service.
2.5       Where a difficulty exists in classifying the airworthiness significance of an aircraft
          item recovered after an accident/incident, the question should be referred to the CAA
          Airworthiness Division, Survey Department, for advice. The CAA will require full
          details of the circumstances of the accident/incident before a response is made to the
          enquiry.
2.6       It should be noted that UK licensed engineers or CAA Approved Organisations cannot
          inspect components or assess the implications of impact damage or fatigue without
          the involvement of the manufacturer or a CAA Approved Design Organisation if the
          existing approved data for the aircraft type does not provide appropriate and specific
          inspections. The component can only be released in accordance with approved data,
          reference BCAR Section A6-2 and CAP 562 Leaflet No. 15-2.
3.1       Aviation insurers and other persons who obtain title to salvage parts may supply to
          salvage purchasers the details of the accident/incident leading to the aircraft, or
          aircraft item, being declared as salvage. It is also common practice for aviation
          insurers to pass over the airworthiness records to the salvage purchaser. Whilst such
          information and records are an essential part of the assessment, where return to
          service is being considered, they are not a guarantee that the item is acceptable for
          re-installation.
3.2       Some aviation insurers have agreed to co-operate with the CAA’s attempt to prevent
          items being returned to service if their airworthiness cannot be confidently confirmed.
          They have agreed to supply details of the occurrence, and to identify the party to
          whom the salvage has been sold, to the Airworthiness Division, Application and
          Approvals Department. This information may be relevant when CAA advice is sought
          under paragraph 2.5 of this Leaflet, but does not excuse the enquirer from furnishing
          the information required by that paragraph.
4 Supplementary Information
4.1       Attention is drawn to CAP 562 Leaflets 1-6 and 11-45 which also deal with the
          safeguards necessary for users obtaining aircraft parts in the open market, particularly
          in relation to the release documentation and evidence of previous history.
(Previously issued as AIL/0045. This leaflet has not been technically revised but is
scheduled to be reviewed in the near future.)
1 Purpose
2 References
3 Introduction
          The Air Navigation Order has been amended to require that all UK registered aircraft
          used for the purpose of Public Transport, having a seating capacity for 60 or more
          passengers will be required to carry a complement of Portable Battery-Powered
          Megaphones for use by the crew should an emergency arise.
          This Leaflet presents an acceptable means of compliance with the ANO, in the form
          of a specification which states minimum characteristics and other necessary features
          and additionally covers associated installational aspects.
          It is intended after gaining experience of its application to embody the material into a
          CAA specification. This specification is intended for guidance to an Operator who may
          wish to install a commercially available megaphone. Appendices to the specification
          state recommendations on methods of meeting the specification requirements.
          The Federal Aviation Regulations also prescribe in FAR Part 121.309(f) the carriage of
          portable battery-powered megaphones, but no Specification similar to that proposed
          by this Paper has been issued by the FAA.
Appendix A
2 Basic Requirements
          Portable megaphones to comply with this Specification should have the following
          characteristics:
          a) Intelligibility
                 Under normal ground conditions in the cabin, messages spoken into the
                 megaphone should be intelligible to at least 90% of the occupants in the
                 passenger cabin in the aircraft in which it is expected to operate. See paragraph m)
                 and Annex 1.
          b) Acoustic Power
                 As a criterion it can be taken that when the megaphone is used in open country
                 where a reasonably quiet sound background exists it should be capable of
                 providing intelligible speech at a distance of 100 metres. See Annex 1.
          c) Power Supply
                 They should have a self-contained power supply. This should not be interpreted to
                 exclude connection, when not in use, to the aircraft power supply system.
          d) Design Standard
                 The design of the megaphone and its power supply arrangements should be such
                 that the likelihood of satisfactory operation when needed is high.
          e) Environmental Resistance
                 The megaphone should be shown to be suitable for withstanding the
                 environmental conditions which it will experience in the aircraft. It should be so
                 installed as to minimise any adverse effects from the environment.
          f) Mounting in Aircraft
                 It should be so installed and retained that it will withstand the emergency
                 accelerations specified in British Civil Airworthiness Requirements Chapter D3-8
                 paragraph 2 without breaking loose or having its performance impaired.
          g) Compass Interference
                 Should powerful magnets be incorporated in the device, it must be so installed that
                 it does not interfere with any magnetic compass in the aircraft beyond the limits
                 stated in the British Civil Airworthiness Requirements Chapter D6-8.
          h) Acoustic Operational Characteristics
                 The microphone should be such as to render the system satisfactorily resistant to
                 the risk of feedback howl. The microphone should also be not unduly critical
                 regarding the distance between it and the mouth of the person speaking.
                 Consideration should be given to making this appropriate distance neutral and self-
                 evident to the user.
          i) Controls
                 The number of controls should be minimal, of a type which are self-evident and are
                 easily operable by a crew member even under conditions of stress. The control of
                 volume by the user of the megaphone should preferably be by switch setting
                 although continuous control could be considered. Two levels should be
                 incorporated which can be pre-set on checking a particular installation, one for use
                 inside and one for use outside the aircraft.
          j) General Design
                 The megaphone should be so designed that inadvertent operation is unlikely.
          k) Portability
                 A suitable means of carrying (such as a harness) should be provided.
          l) Battery Checking
                 Arrangements should be made in the maintenance schedule for the checking of
                 the battery. Labels should be attached to the exterior to render battery
                 replacement times easily identifiable.
          m) Tests
                 It is necessary to test the megaphone for intelligibility. This should preferably be
                 done in the environments in which it is intended to be used. An alternative test is
                 indicated in Annex 1.
          n) User Instructions
                 The megaphone should incorporate simple but effective instructions for its use, on
                 its outside. These should cover switching on and off, volume control and proper
                 use of the microphone.
Annex 1
          The acoustic conditions in aircraft interiors vary considerably and according to the
          aircraft design, the number of passengers who may be expected to hear a particular
          message will vary in accordance with the internal arrangements of the aircraft and the
          corresponding crew training.
          Ideally each type of megaphone should be tested in the cabin environment in which
          it is liable to be used. Volunteers should be used to simulate the passenger
          complement. A number of messages should be broadcast containing occasional
          unexpected words and the volunteers invited to write them down. A 90% correct
          recording would be regarded as acceptable.
          However, it is recognized that the assembly of people required for such a test is
          expensive and may only be warranted when there are special unknowns.
          Experiments have shown that there is a reasonable correlation between the
          performance of a megaphone in the highly absorbent acoustic environment of an
          aircraft and its ability to be heard at a distance in a quiet open-air environment. It has
          been established that the megaphones found satisfactory in typical aircraft cabins
          were all capable of good intelligibility at ranges of 100 metres in the open air.
          The open-air test should be conducted in an area where the acoustic environment is
          reasonably quiet. If it were felt that ‘reasonably quiet’ is in need of a more formal
          definition the suggested level would be that the ambient noise should not be greater
          than 40 dBA. Not less than three observers, spaced apart but all at 100 metres
          distance from the megaphone should be asked to record appropriate messages. It
          might well be desirable to use more than one speaker to eliminate the effects of
          exceptional voice characteristics or lack of training in microphone usage. Again a 90%
          correct recording would be acceptable having regard to the redundancy provided in a
          situation by the natural repetition tendency of a speaker in a crisis – particularly if
          trained to do so.
          Since the portable megaphone does not function continuously, the cost of testing in
          a simulated environment is considered unwarranted. On completion of a satisfactory
          intelligibility test, the equipment should be installed in the aircraft with its proper
          retaining arrangements and then checked for functioning at appropriate intervals (e.g.
          three months). Completion of a year’s flying with proper functioning at three-monthly
          intervals would be regarded as suitable confirmation that the chosen megaphone was
          resistant to the effects of temperature, vibration and humidity encountered on that
          installation. However, extension of overhaul periods would depend on the trust that
          can be placed on the battery.
3 The Battery
          It could well be that the megaphone would be most satisfactory if it incorporated re-
          chargeable cells in its battery. These could be trickle-charged from a detachable lead
          connected to the aircraft supply. From what is known, successive checks might easily
          establish an effective time between overhauls of several years of such a combination.
PURPOSE:            This Leaflet provides information and guidance concerning the approval and
                    installation of Radio equipment for use in aircraft for other than Flight
                    Operational Purposes.
                    The Leaflet is only applicable to those aircraft that are excluded from EASA
                    under Annex II of EC Regulation No. 216/2008 and others excluded through
                    being in service with the military, customs, police or similar services (under
                    Article I of the regulation). For all other aircraft whose Type Certificates have
                    been transferred to EASA, minor and major change procedures of Part-21 to
                    EC Regulation No. 1702/2003, Subparts D and E apply. For the remainder of
                    this Leaflet, no further reference will be made to Part-21 procedures.
REFERENCES:         Air Navigation: The Order and the Regulations, CAP 393.
                    British Civil Airworthiness Requirements (BCAR), Sections A, B and R.
                    EASA Certification Specifications: CS-23, CS-25, CS-27, CS-29 and CS-ETSO.
                    Ofcom.
                    Radio Frequency Allocations, (see website: http://www.radio.gov.uk/).
1 Introduction
          The Air Navigation Order requires all radio equipment carried on UK registered civil
          aircraft to be of a type approved by the CAA or EASA. This Leaflet provides guidance
          on the approval procedures to be followed to gain CAA approval of radio equipment
          that is to be used for purposes other than normal flight operations. Typically, such
          equipment includes radio transceivers for work involving surveillance, survey, marine
          communications, emergency services operations, passenger communications, and
          trials.
          This Leaflet is updated to: amend EASA Regulation ‘1592/2002’ to ‘216/2008’;
          convert references to AILs to CAP 562 Leaflets; and explain the use of the DAP 1902
          Form in lieu of the AD 968 Form.
2 Approval Categories
          BCAR Section R and Volume 2 of CAP 208 (now obsolescent – CAP 562 General
          Information Section, Airworthiness Publications refers) lists five approval categories
          which have the following designations:
          Approval number prefixed by – WR, VC, LAI, LAII or LAIII.
          Within BCARs other approval categories exist which have been applied to radio, they
          are:
          Approval number prefixed by – Q, MISC, SA or G.
          Non flight operational radios must be approved either in one of the latter categories
          or through the procedures described in section 4 of this Leaflet.
          NOTE: The EASA CS-ETSO (formerly JAR-TSO) system is not currently applicable to
                non-flight operational radios.
3 Approval Considerations
3.1       The approval considers that the radio equipment should function as intended but no
          ’credit’ is given for the performance capability of the system. Substantiation is
          required to demonstrate that the equipment and its installation shall not affect the
          safety of persons or the safe operation of the aircraft and shall not interfere with other
          radio users.
3.2       Article 20(5)(a) of the United Kingdom Air Navigation Order 2005 (as amended)
          (contained in CAP 393) states ’All radio and radio navigation equipment installed in an
          aircraft registered in the United Kingdom, or carried on such an aircraft for use in
          connection with the aircraft shall be of a type approved by the CAA in relation to the
          purpose for which it is to be used…..’ .
3.3       Radio equipment are generally common user, non-aircraft specific items which are
          CAA approved under a unique radio approval reference.
3.4       The following criteria shall be complied with and the appropriate evidence submitted
          with the approval application:
          a) The radio frequency or frequencies used by airborne transmitters shall comply with
             the frequency allocations for Aeronautical Mobile use as referenced in the UK table
             of Radio Frequency allocations, or have specific agreement from Ofcom.
          b) The Radio Operators Licence required for the operation of the equipment shall not
             preclude airborne use and it is the responsibility of the aircraft owner/operator to
             complete the radio licence application form DAP 1902 (ACT1 1001) and return to
             the Radio Licensing section of the Directorate of Airspace Policy at the address
             below:
                Radio Licensing Section
                Directorate of Airspace Policy
                K6 Gate 6
                CAA House
                45-49 Kingsway
                London WC2B 6TE
                Tel. 0207 453 6555
                Fax. 0207 453 6556
                E-mail radio.licensing@caa.co.uk
          NOTE:      The Form DAP 1902 replaces the Form AD 968 which is no longer used.
          c) The CAA may continue to approve these radios where it is determined that they
             are to be installed in an Annex II aircraft or aircraft excluded from EASA under
             Article I of EC Regulation No. 216/2008.
             Organisations applying for CAA approval for such radio apparatus shall provide
             adequate declarations and reports together with appropriate technical information;
             including statements of transmitter frequency range, spurious radiation, output
             power, frequency tolerance and modulation characteristics and evidence of radio
             regulatory approval, e.g. Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), Federal
             Communication Commission (FCC), BCAR Section A, Chapters A4-8 and A4-10,
             BCAR Section B, Chapters B4-8 and B4-10 refer.
          d) The method of use and installation shall be approved by the CAA in accordance
             with BCAR Section A, Chapters A2-5 and A3-11,BCAR Section B, Chapters B2-5
             and B3-11, and Section R, Chapter 4 in order to ensure that the use of this category
             of radio apparatus shall not adversely affect the safe operation of the aircraft in
             which it is installed.
             i) The organisation undertaking the design of the installation shall ensure that
                adequate Electromagnetic Compatibility (EMC) tests are performed. These
                tests should be performed with the aircraft engines running, and with all
                required electrical and avionic equipment which can be operated on the ground
                in operation. The installed radio equipment shall be operated over a range of
                frequencies throughout the operating band such as to establish that the level of
                radio and electrical interference is such as not to reduce the performance of any
                aircraft required system below a level compatible with the characteristic
                performance of the system. Systems that could be susceptible to interference
                include FADECs, engine computers, cockpit displays, required communication
                and navigation equipment and autopilot/flight director systems.
                    These tests shall be agreed with the Civil Aviation Authority.
             ii) Where it is not practical to perform ground tests (for example, on aircraft with
                 engines controlled by FADEC), it may be necessary to perform a flight test.
                    Such tests shall also be agreed with the Civil Aviation Authority.
          e) Where safety is dependent on particular crew actions, a Flight Manual supplement
             must be provided to represent the limitations and procedures required for safe
             operation.
          f) The electrical load analysis shall be amended to show that the non-flight
             operational loads do not compromise the busbar loading, generator ratings and
             battery duration.
4 Approved Organisation
4.1       Where a CAA or EASA approved design organisation has a recognised special need
          to install and/or use radio equipment that is not normally designated for civil aircraft
          use then this section applies.
4.2       This Leaflet is not eligible for use by organisations that do not hold an EASA design
          approval or, while still applicable, CAA design approvals.
4.3       This is not applicable to equipment operated within the civil aeronautical radio
          frequency bands.
30 September 2008
                                                                NON-FLIGHT OPERATIONAL RADIO EQUIPMENT
TABLE 1a
                                     Organisation:
                                     EASA/CAA Approval No:
30 September 2008
                                                                   NON-FLIGHT OPERATIONAL RADIO EQUIPMENT
TABLE 1b
                                      Organisation:
                                      EASA/CAA Approval No:
PURPOSE:            This Leaflet provides information and guidance concerning the installation of
                    Radio Altimeter activated audio voice alerting device/systems (AVAD).
1 Introduction
1.1       To meet the requirements of JAR OPS 3.660 and Schedule 4 Scale EE of the ANO,
          certain helicopters will need to be equipped with a Radio Altimeter and display
          indicator providing a voice and visual warning of descent below a pre-set height above
          surface level. This Leaflet provides guidance material on complying with these
          requirements.
1.2       Whilst most current Radio Altimeters include a height warning light, this is not
          considered sufficient for alerting a pilot to an inadvertent descent as his attention may
          be directed away from the indicator at the critical time. It is for this reason that an
          audio low height warning is considered necessary. An aural tone on its own is not
          considered to be acceptable. The warning must be distinguishable from other
          warnings and should therefore be a clear and concise voice message.
          Since 1 February 1986, an audio warning has been required, operating at a pre-set
          height and a visual warning at a pilot selectable decision height. This is mandatory
          when flying for more than a total of 3 minutes over water in any flight.
          NOTE:     The requirements for the audio warning were introduced into BCAR Section G by
                    CAA Paper G815.
3 Warning Format
3.1       In order to gain acceptance, the audio warning requires certain characteristics. They
          are:
          a) The warning should be unique (voice).
          b) It should not be inhibited by any other audio warnings.
          c) The urgency of the warning should be adequate to gain attention but not such as
             to cause undue annoyance during deliberate descents through the datum height.
3.2       Research activity has indicated that the characteristics above can be satisfactorily met
          if the warning format incorporates the following features:
          a) A unique tone should precede the voice message. A further tone after the voice
             may enhance uniqueness and attention-getting without causing undue annoyance.
          b) The perceived urgency of the tone and voice should be moderately urgent.
          c) The message should be compact as opposed to lengthy, provided the meaning is
             not compromised, e.g. ’One fifty feet’ as opposed to ’One hundred and fifty feet’.
          d) An information message is preferable (e.g. ’One hundred feet’). Messages such as
             ’Low height’ do not convey the correct impression during deliberate descents
             through the datum height.
          e) Command messages (e.g. ’Pull up, Pull up’ are not acceptable unless they relate
             specifically to height monitoring (e.g. ’Check height’).
          f) The volume of the warning should be adequate and not variable below an
             acceptable minimum value.
3.3       Every effort should be made to prevent spurious warnings.
4 Altitude Trigger
4.1       The height at which the audio warning is triggered by the radio altimeter should be
          such as to provide adequate warning for the pilot to take corrective action. It is
          envisaged that most installations will adopt a height in the range of 100 – 160 ft. It will
          not be permissible for the datum to be altered in flight.
4.2       The pre-set height should not be set such that it will coincide with commonly used
          instrument approach minima (i.e. 200 ft). Once triggered, the message must sound
          within 0.5 seconds.
4.3       The voice warning should be triggered only whilst descending through the pre-set
          height and be inhibited whilst ascending.
5 Approval Considerations
5.1       All Radio Altimeters shall be CAA or EASA approved in accordance with BCAR Section
          A Chapter A4-10, and conform to either CAP 208 Vol. 1, Pt. 13, EUROCAE ED-30,
          EASA ETSO-2087, FAA TSO C87 or RTCA DO 155.
5.2       All automatic voice alerting devices (AVAD) shall be CAA or EASA approved in
          accordance with either the Accessory Procedure or Component Procedure of BCAR
          Section A, Chapter A4-8 (non-EASA aircraft) or EASA Part 21 (EASA aircraft) as
          applicable.
6 Installation Aspects
6.1       The airframe installation shall be approved under the modification procedures of
          BCAR Chapter A2-5 (non-EASA aircraft) or EASA Part 21 (EASA aircraft) as applicable.
6.2       A single Radio Altimeter indicator is permissible provided it is usable by both pilots.
6.3       Radio Altimeters with digital only displays will not be acceptable.
6.4       A suitable ‘DH’ amber light is acceptable as satisfying the ANO requirement for a
          ’Visual Warning’.
(Previously issued as AIL/0186. Although this Leaflet has not been technically changed,
it has been updated and should be read in its entirety.)
PURPOSE:                 This Leaflet provides guidance for the certification and installation of TCAS 1
                         type equipment. A Flight Manual/Pilot’s Operating Handbook (POH)
                         supplement template is provided in Appendix 1 which, when completed,
                         should be submitted to the Flight Manuals and MMEL Unit, Aviation House,
                         Gatwick for approval. Guidance on ground and flight testing is given together
                         with modification classification guidelines.
REFERENCES:              JAR-21 Certification Procedures for Aircraft, and Related Products & Parts
                         JAR-23 Normal, Utility, Aerobatic and Commuter Category Aeroplanes
                         JAR-27 Small Rotorcraft
                         JAR 29 Large Rotocraft
                         JAR-TSO Joint Technical Standard Order (JTSO C147 - pending issue)
                         FAA TSO C147
                         Air Navigation Order 2005 (CAP 393)
                         BCAR Sections A8-1, A8-2, A8-8 and A8-9
                         AIC 37/2006 (Yellow 199)
                         BCAR Section K
                         BCAR Section G
                         CAA CAP 761 - Operation of IFF/SSR Interrogators in the UK - Planning
                         Principles and Procedures
                         CAP 747 - Mandatory Requirements                               for    Airworthiness,          Generic
                         Requirements (GRs) Nos. 4 and 6
                         CAP 562 - CAAIP Leaflet 11-37
1 Introduction
             This Leaflet is issued in response to the increasing demand for non-mandatory Traffic
             Collision Avoidance System installations (TCAS 1 and TAS types).
             These types of systems provide 'Traffic Alerts' (TA), including approximate bearing
             and range information. Unlike ACAS II (TCAS II Version 7), TCAS 1 does not provide
             Resolution Advisories (in the form of vertical guidance to the pilot). The BF Goodrich,
             Skywatch System is similar in operation to TCAS 1 and for the purposes of this Leaflet
             it may be considered a TCAS 1 type system.
    1.   Excludes passive Collision Avoidance Systems that do not transmit signals in order to interrogate nearby SSR trans-
         ponders, and ACAS II systems (carriage of ACAS II is mandatory for certain aircraft). The term Traffic Advisory Sys-
         tem (TAS) may also be used to describe TCAS 1 'type' systems.
          The guidance provided in this Leaflet is intended to assist the design organisation,
          maintenance organisation and aircraft operators to determine the certification
          considerations required to demonstrate compliance with the applicable airworthiness
          requirements. This Leaflet also provides some guidance on the installation
          considerations.
2 Airworthiness Approval
          The Design Organisation should submit the Flight Manual/Pilot’s Operating Handbook
          (POH) Supplement, as detailed in Appendix 1, duly completed, to the Flight Manuals
          and MMEL Unit, Aviation House, Gatwick for approval.
          Guidance on the compilation of a Flight Manual/Pilot’s Operating Handbook (POH)
          supplement is provided in Appendix 2 to this Leaflet.
2.5       Electrical Load Analysis
          The installation of TCAS 1 will affect the Electrical Load Analysis, and may affect
          compliance with CAP 747 GR Nos. 4 and 6. Continued compliance with these GRs
          will therefore need to be demonstrated.
2.6       Structural Analysis
          A structural analysis of the installation, including the TCAS antenna(s) and their
          mountings must be conducted.
3 Classification of Modification
          All TCAS 1 or TAS systems that transmit interrogation signals on 1030 MHz require a
          separate approval to operate from the National IFF/SSR Committee. Operators should
          obtain such an approval prior to commencing installation and flight trials. Applicants
          should note that although there is currently no charge, TCAS 1 approvals can take up
          to 4 months to process. Further details can be found in AIC 37/2006 (Yellow 199),
Appendix 1
                                                          TCAS 1
                                         Modification Number <<XXXX>>
          ADDITIONAL LIMITATIONS AND INFORMATION FOR CERTIFICATION
          LIMITATIONS
          Navigation must not be predicated on the use of the (insert name of TCAS 1 type
          system) display.
          If a 'Traffic Alert' (insert aural message here, for example 'Traffic, Traffic') is received,
          the pilot should not initiate a manoeuvre based on the display alone, without first
          visually acquiring the target.
          NORMAL PROCEDURES
          The normal procedures specified in the Basic Flight Manual remain applicable.
          EMERGENCY PROCEDURES
          None
          ABNORMAL PROCEDURES
          None
          PERFORMANCE
          None
Appendix 2
a)        The supplement should be written to fit the size and style of the Flight Manual/Pilot’s
          Operating Handbook (POH) supplied by the aircraft manufacturer and to which it
          refers, preferably without resorting to photo-reduction.
b)        A company logo can be included if desired.
c)        The supplement must be uniquely identifiable within the referenced Flight Manual/
          Pilot’s Operating Handbook (POH).
d)        A log of supplements should already be provided in the front of the manual/handbook.
          This log should be amended to reflect the additional supplement. Where no log of
          supplements exists, the design organisation/installer will provide one.
e)        Aircraft identification (Registration etc.) will be added to the copy which goes in the
          aircraft copy of the Flight Manual/Pilot’s Operating Handbook (POH). Where several
          aircraft on the same Flight Manual/Pilot’s Operating Handbook (POH) document have
          the same equipment, copies of the same Flight Manual/Pilot's Operating Handbook
          Supplement may be issued to each aircraft and annotated with the aircraft's
          identification accordingly.
f)        If a supplement is submitted for approval for a specific aircraft registration and/or
          serial number, the supplement will only be approved for that particular aircraft.
g)        Any information contained in the system users manual that addresses: the system's
          Limitations, Normal Procedures, Emergency Procedures, Abnormal Procedures and/
          or Performance, should be detailed in the Flight Manual/Pilot’s Operating Handbook
          (POH). Provision of this information in the Flight Manual/Pilot’s Operating Handbook
          (POH) by referencing the system's users manual should also be carried out with the
          guidance contained in AC 25.1581-1 & AMJ 25.1581.
h)        When approved, one copy of the supplement should be placed, as appropriate in the
          aircraft's Flight Manual/Pilot's Operating Handbook.
PURPOSE:          To provide information on the procedures acceptable to the CAA for approval
                  for airframe structural repair design on aircraft operating under CAA
                  Regulatory Approval (i.e. Annex II to EU Regulation (EC) No. 216/2008.
1 Introduction
          A revised and simplified means of repair design approval has been developed
          following a review of the procedures within the Airworthiness Division. The
          procedure places more reliance on repair approval granted by foreign regulatory
          authorities and does not necessitate a change to any requirement. For the purposes
          of this document, 'foreign' means non-UK.
2 Background
          There are currently two chapters within BCAR A and B that define the CAA's
          requirements on repair design approval to aircraft.
          a) BCAR Section A and B Chapter 5-3 paragraph 2.1 allows manuals containing
             information necessary for the repair of aircraft, such as the Structural Repair
             Manual (SRM), to be certified and published under the authority of the appropriate
             Approved UK Type Design Organisation (TDO) or in the case of foreign TDOs,
             under the local regulatory process. Repairs in the SRM, therefore, do not need to
             be approved directly by the CAA, nor do amendments to the SRM. There has been
             no change to this procedure.
          b) BCAR Section A and B Chapter 6-7 paragraph 2.1.1 requires that repairs shall
             be carried out in accordance with .... ’the approved Manuals, drawings and
             schedules related thereto, and any other documents required or recognised by
             the CAA.’ In this context ’approved’ means certified by the UK TDO, or in the case
             of foreign TDOs, under the local regulatory process.
          The change to the CAA's procedure is in the interpretation of the bold text above.
3 Revised Procedure
          It is now the intention that, for repairs designed by the TDO, a document approved
          under the local regulatory process is considered by the CAA as ’...documents.....
          recognised by the CAA.’
4 General Points
          Apart from the normal auditing of the UK TDO, the CAA reserves the right to directly
          investigate any repair from the TDO (UK or foreign) in exceptional circumstances.
          Examples of this might be:
          • if survey of an aircraft raises questions about a repair's suitability;
          • if the repair is novel or very extensive;
          • if the repair is found to conflict with the applicable CAA requirements.
          Repairs may be approved and aircraft released to service while awaiting any required
          damage tolerance evaluation. Up to a 12 month period for evaluation to be completed
          and for incorporation into the Aircraft Maintenance Schedule (AMS) is acceptable.
          There must be a procedure for any resulting inspections to be placed in the AMS.
          Under normal circumstances aircraft would not be released into service without the
          requisite approval documentation being in place. This would include documents such
          as 8110-3 or Repair Assessment Sheet (RAS), but not a 'No Technical Objection'
          (NTO).
          A statement of 'No Technical Objection' from the TDO does not constitute approval
          of a repair, although this may be necessary supporting documentation for repair
          approval.
          Reference should be made to CAP 562 Leaflet 1-1, Appendix 2 - Acceptable Data for
          use by Part-145 Organisations.
(Previously issued as AN 4)
1         Propellers listed in the attached Appendix are approved for use on civil aircraft
          manufactured in the United Kingdom with Certificates of Airworthiness issued by the
          Civil Aviation Authority. In addition, for those aircraft types which have a current Civil
          Aviation Authority Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS), that TCDS should be consulted
          for details of approved propellers. For aircraft designated as EASA aircraft in CAP 747,
          the EASA TCDS, if issued, should be consulted.
          NOTE:    Propellers listed in this Leaflet also include those which have been approved for
                   aircraft certificated in the Special Category only, and it would therefore be wrong to
                   assume that the aircraft listed against a propeller type will automatically qualify for
                   certification in other Categories with that propeller fitted.
2         For convenience, propellers are listed under types of engines, but each propeller is
          approved only for the specific engine-airframe combination shown.
3         Propellers manufactured after the date of this Leaflet to the same drawing numbers
          as those given in the attached list may, in addition, bear certain issue numbers. These
          issue numbers are used mainly to indicate minor modifications which do not affect
          safety, but in some cases the intention is to indicate changes in pitch or diameter. In
          addition, propellers manufactured by other appropriately approved organisations are
          accepted, provided it is shown that manufacture is in accordance with the relevant
          drawing requirements.
3.1       Where an issue number has been used to indicate a minor modification and the pitch
          and diameter remain the same as against the drawing number shown in this list, it
          may be assumed that the propeller is approved.
3.2       Where an issue number has been used to indicate a change in pitch or diameter and
          either of these differ from the figures given in the attached list, the propeller is not
          approved unless it actually appears in this list.
4         Before fitting a variable-pitch propeller it is essential to ensure that the basic pitch-
          range setting conforms with the latest setting approved for the particular engine-
          airframe combination.
5         The pitch quoted is that measured at the radius defined by the manufacturer. Usually
          this is at 70% or 71% of radius, although in some cases it is at 75%.
6         On 28 September 2003, responsibility for approval of new engine/propeller
          combinations for non-Annex II aircraft passed to EASA. The EASA website
          www.easa.eu.int should be consulted for information concerning any approvals
          issued for these aircraft after this date. If it is desired to use an unapproved propeller,
          application for approval should be made in accordance with the procedure prescribed
          in Chapter A4-4 of British Civil Airworthiness Requirements, for Annex II aircraft, or to
          EASA for non-Annex II aircraft.
7         For propellers approved for imported aircraft of foreign origin, reference should be
          made to the appropriate publications issued by the Airworthiness Authority
          concerned, or the relevant manufacturer. Information may also be obtained from the
          Civil Aviation Authority, Safety Regulation Group.
Appendix 1
                                                 ARDEM X
Z3405       ..      ..   ..   ..   ..    . 4.75     2.45   Turbulent, Nipper 3
Z3407       ..      ..   ..   ..   ..    . 4.75     2.7    Turbulent
HR1201      ..      ..   ..   ..   ..    . 4.75     2.45   Turbulent, Nipper 3
                                        ASTAZOU XIIH and H1
FH 76-2-07 .        ..   ..   ..   ..    . 8.2      VP     Skyvan Mk. 2
                                        CHEETAH 15, 17 and 27
CR30/242/1          ..   ..   ..   ..    . 8.25     VP     Avro 19
CR30/242/4          ..   ..   ..   ..    . 8.25     VP     Avro 19
                                               CHEETAH 19
61271A/X3 .         ..   ..   ..   ..    . 7.50     7.10   Anson
A66365 . .          ..   ..   ..   ..    . 7.50     7.10   Anson
                                             CIRRUS MAJOR 2
A66290/XI .         ..   ..   ..   ..    . 7.00     4.58   Cygnet
LA520 . . .         ..   ..   ..   ..    . 6.67     4.59   Cygnet
Z974/1   ..         ..   ..   ..   ..    . 6.23     5.26   M.18
                                             CIRRUS MAJOR 3
A66290/X1 .         ..   ..   ..   ..    .   7.00   4.58   Messenger
A66290/X6 .         ..   ..   ..   ..    .   7.00   4.98   M.18
A66670/X1 .         ..   ..   ..   ..    .   6.75   4.82   Messenger
A66697/X6 .         ..   ..   ..   ..    .   6.75   4.97   Auster J.5.G, Auster J.5.K, Messenger
A66697/X7 .         ..   ..   ..   ..    .   6.75   4.50   Auster J.5.G
A66940/X1 .         ..   ..   ..   ..    .   6.00   6.66   Aries
B67869/X1 .         ..   ..   ..   ..    .   6.96   4.58   Messenger
B67921/X1 .         ..   ..   ..   ..    .   6.67   4.50   Auster J.5.G, Messenger
B67941/X1 .         ..   ..   ..   ..    .   6.67   4.97   Auster J.5.G, J.5.K
B67971/X1 .         ..   ..   ..   ..    .   6.50   4.99   Auster J.5.G
C67975/X1 .         ..   ..   ..   ..    .   6.92   4.58   Messenger
C67999/X1 .         ..   ..   ..   ..    .   6.83   4.76   Messenger 2A
HR669    ..         ..   ..   ..   ..    .   6.84   3.53   Messenger
LA520    ..         ..   ..   ..   ..    .   6.67   4.59   Cygnet
Z3756    ..         ..   ..   ..   ..    .   6.30   5.15   Messenger
Z6013    ..         ..   ..   ..   ..    .   6.67   4.51   Blackburn B2, Messenger
Z6014    ..         ..   ..   ..   ..    .   6.67   4.70   Messenger
                                               TPE 331-2
HCB3TN-5C/T10282HB . .             ..   .   8.5    VP      Skyvan 3
HCB3TN-5E/T10282HB . .             ..   .   8.5    VP      Skyvan 3
HCB4TN-5C/T10282HB-4P              ..   .   8.25   VP      Skyvan 3A
HCB3TN-5E/T10232HB . .             ..   .   8.5    VP      Skyvan 100-81
                                            TYNE 515-101W
PD244/476/2         ..   ..   ..   ..   . 16       VP      Belfast SC5
                                         WALTER MIKRON 2
A66049/1X1          ..   ..   ..   ..   .   4.75   3.59    Tipsy Trainer
A66167/X4 .         ..   ..   ..   ..   .   5.50   3.44    Tipsy B, Tipsy Trainer
A66167/X5 .         ..   ..   ..   ..   .   5.50   3.90    Tipsy B
B66592/X1 .         ..   ..   ..   ..   .   5.25   3.56    Tipsy Trainer
LA511    ..         ..   ..   ..   ..   .   5.05   3.92    Tipsy Trainer
LA553/2 . .         ..   ..   ..   ..   .   5.35   3.22    Tipsy Trainer
REFERENCES:        Rolls-Royce Technical News Sheet TNS GE No. 27 dated 24 October 1974.
                   CAP 562 Leaflet 11-39
                   CAP 562 Leaflet 11-48
                   CAP 747 Generic Requirement (GR) No. 24.
1         All Gipsy Major 8 modifications up to and including 4037 have CAA approval.
          For engines incorporating modifications later than modification 4037,
          application shall be made to the CAA preferably through the Type Certificate
2         Propellers approved for use on the civil Chipmunk aircraft are stated in CAP 562
          Leaflet 11-39.
          Textron Lycoming Service Instruction No 1009AT states that the recommended TBO
          for the IO 360-A1B6 engine is 2000 hours. Paragraph 10 states that ’Some engines in
          the field have been altered to incorporate an inverted oil system in order to perform
          aerobatic manoeuvres. Whenever this modification is done to an engine, the TBO of
          the engine must be determined in the same manner listed for AEIO engines of the
          same model series’.
          It could be considered therefore that the manufacturer's recommended TBO for the
          engine is reduced to 1400 hours. However, the aerobatic capability of the Bulldog
          aircraft is limited by the airframe, and is not increased by the fitment of the inverted
          oil system. It has therefore been decided that a TBO of 1800 hours should be
          established, which is consistent with the TBO applicable in military service.
          This TBO may be subject to extension under CAP 747 GR No. 24. However, it should
          be noted that paragraph 3.1.1 c) of the GR states:
          ’The engine must have been operated in an aircraft registered in the United Kingdom
          for a period of at least 200 hours immediately prior to completion of the engine
          manufacturer's overhaul period recommendation’.
          Since the subject engines have clearly been operated and maintained in the United
          Kingdom the above requirement for 200 hours to be completed on the UK register
          can be waived. This allows engines with a TSO up to 1800 hours (this being the
          military TBO limitation) to be accepted for TBO extension subject to all other
          requirements of CAP 747 GR No. 24 and Section 1 of this Leaflet being satisfied.
          For the propeller, the TBOs should be as per the manufacturer's instruction for
          propellers of this type when fitted to aerobatic aircraft.
4 Timing of TBO
          The next TBO for both engine and propeller should be timed from the last overhaul in
          military service.
          NOTE: This Leaflet is applicable to ex-UK Government engines whether obtained
                directly from the UK Government or from another source. If the engines have
                been operated since being obtained from the UK Government, and are to be
                registered for use in Public Transport Category, then the Leaflet does not
                apply.
PURPOSE:           This information is issued for the guidance of applicants seeking an approval
                   under BCAR A8-20 and CAA staff when they are investigating such an
                   approval.
                   BCAR A8-20 contains the requirements for making submissions to the CAA
                   for the grant of initial approval and the maintenance of ex-Military aircraft
                   above 2730kg. The other requirements of BCAR sections A and B remain
                   applicable, in particular chapters A3-7/B3-7.
REFERENCES: BCAR Chapters A3-7, B3-7, A8-20, CAP 632, AIL 0165.
1 Introduction
1.1       An organisation approved under BCAR A8-20 may according to the scope of its
          approval, make a submission to the CAA for initial approval of an ex-military aircraft,
          perform maintenance, repair, defect rectification, inspection and modification of an
          aircraft and its related components, including complete rebuild or restoration of the
          aircraft, and make a recommendation for the issue or renewal of a Permit to Fly.
1.2       This Leaflet should be read in conjunction with BCAR A8-20. This Leaflet is issued
          primarily to give guidance for those organisations that are applying for approval under
          BCAR A8-20. The guidance is provided in two separate appendices to this Leaflet.
          Appendix 1 corresponds with paragraph 1.2.1 of BCAR A8-20 (E4 approval) covering
          design related aspects of ex-military aircraft. Appendix 2 relates to those
          organisations requiring approval for recommending the renewal of a Permit to Fly
          under paragraph 1.2.2 of BCAR A8-20 (M5 approval).
1.3       The information provided in the Appendices of this document is intended to provide
          guidance on the interpretation of the requirements and procedures required of the
          organisation in order to obtain approval for ex-military aircraft.
1.4       The organisation must be defined in an exposition and this must contain adequate
          control procedures for review and approval of the aircraft in question. The types of
          aircraft to which the approval relates will be defined in the exposition of the
          organisation by means of capability lists. These lists will be subject to the agreement
          of the CAA and the exposition must contain adequate control procedures for review
          and approval of these lists.
1.5       Organisations holding an approval under paragraph 1.2.1 (E4) or paragraph 1.2.2 (M5),
          if applying for an extension for the other associated approval, will be required to meet
          the criteria of the other approval and amend the existing exposition.
Appendix 1
1 Introduction
2 Personnel
2.1       The organisation should nominate the key design and/or engineering staff who are to
          support its operation. These staff should be employed under a formal agreement
          between the organisation and the staff member concerned with details of their terms
          of reference as senior members of the organisation provided within the exposition.
2.2       The organisation should have a staff member - see A8-20 3.2(b) - who should be a
          senior engineer and who will be the nominated contact with the CAA Design Liaison
          Surveyor and who will gather, co-ordinate and submit evidence required to the CAA
          in order to establish the standard of particular aircraft (see A8-20 3.2(c)). This person
          should have adequate qualifications and experience appropriate to the category of
          aircraft concerned.
2.3       Additional part time staff may be used to supplement the company resources where
          necessary, providing that there are in existence suitable control procedures within the
          organisation exposition. A form of agreement should be raised which gives detailed
          terms of reference in writing to each such person. Such arrangements may be
          required in order that the organisation is able to draw upon sufficiently qualified and
          experienced personnel to cover specific design aspects such as the research needed
          to establish the design standard of particular aircraft (see A8-20 3.2(c)), or structural
          substantiation (or check stress signatory) of a repair or material substitution.
2.4       CAA Forms AD458 declaring relevant qualifications and experience for persons
          nominated under the A8-20 approval should be submitted to the CAA Airworthiness
          Division, Organisations Section at Gatwick.
2.5       The Exposition will include charts showing chains of responsibility and signatories for
          documents to be submitted to the CAA.
2.6       The Exposition of organisations approved to cover Complex aircraft will include copies
          of the formal agreements with each external organisation providing support of the
          Complex aircraft and its systems and equipment.
3 Procedures
3.1       Two ex-military aircraft ostensibly of identical type may be of significantly differing
          design/build standards and fatigue states and for this reason the CAA does not
          consider that it is generally possible to accept one aircraft as series to another.
          Because of this each aircraft requires an individual investigation culminating in issue
          of an Airworthiness Approval Note specific to it, for approval and initial issue of a
          Permit to Fly. However, cross referencing to previous AANs for the same type is
          acceptable in areas where the design/build standard is identical.
3.2       The basis upon which ex-military aircraft may qualify for issue of a Permit is referred
          in BCAR A3-7/B3-7 paragraph 3.1(d) and the Appendix 1 to BCAR A3-7/B3-7 lists the
          evidence required to substantiate applications for Permits on this basis. The A8-20 E4
          organisation responsible for gathering the evidence necessary for substantiation of
          submissions to the CAA is responsible for maintaining documentary records covering
          these submissions. Particular aspects covered by the organisations procedures
          covering the following may need to be covered in the exposition:
3.2.1     Initial Application to CAA and Establishment of Aircraft Complexity Grouping.
          The organisation should make initial application to the CAA for approval of the aircraft
          early in the process (Form CA3). The applicant should also propose and obtain CAA
          agreement of the grouping (see paragraph 1.2.1 of BCAR A8-20) of the particular
          aircraft early in the process. The proposal should contain sufficient information on the
          design features of the type to justify the recommendation.
3.2.2     Establishment of Safety Record (BCAR A3-7/B3-7 Appendix 1 paragraph 2.1)
          Investigation of Intermediate and Complex aircraft of a specific type which the CAA
          have not yet accepted will commence with a demonstration that the aircraft type has
          a safety record in service acceptable to the CAA for its intended use. Combat losses
          or those directly attributable to peculiarly military operational causes such as low level
          training may be discounted but a review employing such judgements should be made
          by appropriately qualified personnel. The organisations procedures should include
          presentation of the safety record (total loss and fatal accidents per million flying hours)
          to the CAA for acceptance prior to commencement of the main investigation of
          design and build standard. Such presentations to be made by the nominated
          personnel accepted by the CAA for the purpose.
          NOTE: It may be possible to establish that particular aircraft were hazardous in
                specific operational circumstances, or that particular modifications rendered
                the aircraft hazardous. In this event, it may be that application of particular
                limitations may render the aircraft type acceptable to the CAA. In the case of
                complex aircraft, in most cases, the CAA will require that such submissions
                are supported by the manufacturer.
3.2.3     Continued Airworthiness Support/Information
          The more complex the aircraft, the more necessary it will be to have adequate
          technical/design expertise of the type in order to maintain the level of continued
          airworthiness support. For organisations supporting only Simple or Intermediate
          types, it may not be possible to retain permanent staff of adequate capability to cover
          initial approval of a given aircraft. In these cases adequate arrangements should exist
          to cover initial approval and continued support of each aircraft.
          Complex aircraft will require permanent support covering each aspect, and may
          require additional specialist support covering aspects such as powered flying control
          systems, variable geometry intakes and nozzles, reaction control systems, digital
          (computer) controlled systems. Some types may only be considered supportable by
          the armed forces who operated them or by the manufacturer. The Exposition of
          organisations approved to cover Complex aircraft should include procedures for the
          necessary interface with the manufacturers providing support for the aircraft and of
          its critical equipment, and/or an acceptable Military Authority. The nature and depth
          of such procedures will be subject to the agreement of the CAA.
          In all cases where the type continues to be actively supported by the manufacturer
          (i.e. examples of the type are still in operational service), arrangement should be made
          with the manufacturer to provide copies of all continued airworthiness information
          (i.e. SBs, STIs etc.) to the organisation.
3.2.4     Establishment of Conformity to Type Design Standard (BCAR A3-7/B3-7
          Appendix 1 paragraph 2.2)
          The organisation will have a procedure to establish that the individual aircraft
          conforms to the type Design Standard to which the established safety record is
          related. This involves ensuring that any modifications necessary to maintain the
          standard of airworthiness are determined and incorporated. This includes obtaining
          lists (in the English language) of Manufacturers (and/or the Military Engineering
          Authority's, Military Operators) modifications which were considered essential for
          airworthiness, and reviewing the aircraft and its accompanying paperwork to
          ascertain that each such modification is embodied. The Exposition will show that the
          signatory in respect of BCAR A8-20 3.2(c) will compile a statement against each such
          modification showing embodiment or acceptable alternative.
          This may also include RAF Special Technical Instructions (STIs), Service Instructions
          (SIs) etc. Compliance with Mandatory Permit Directives promulgated by CAA for the
          type is also required.
          The following aspects will be covered as part of establishing conformity to Design
          Standard:
          a) Fatigue State
                 The organisation will:
                 i) research and identify fatigue critical components, their lives and accounting
                    procedures;
                 ii) check that all such components are identifiably within these limits and this is
                     supported by documentary evidence covering the full life of the aircraft;
                 iii) obtain CAA agreement for procedures as applied to civil operation of the aircraft
                      (role factors etc.)
                    NOTE: Statements for submission to the CAA should be signed by nominated
                          personnel (BCAR A8-20 paragraph 3.2(c)).
          b) Identification of Limitations
                 The organisation will identify and record normal operating limitations appropriate
                 to the aircraft and to observe any limitations that the CAA may determine having
                 regard to the safety of third parties and occupants during intended operations of
                 the aircraft.
                 NOTE: Limitations should normally be supported by copies of published
                       documentation. Examples of circumstances where more restrictive
                       limitations may be applied (subject to agreement of the CAA) are:
                 i) where flight test has identified an unsafe part of the envelope to be avoided;
                 ii) where the equipment fit renders more restrictive limits appropriate, for instance
                     restriction of maximum altitude as a consequence of lack of oxygen system;
                 iii) where the operator chooses to operate an engine within published limitations
                      in order to conserve engine condition.
                 NOTE: Specialist Equipment such as Ejector Seats and Drop Tanks should be
                       subject to particular investigation.
          c) Published Information
                 The organisation will obtain copies (English language) of all documentation
                 necessary in order to operate and maintain the aircraft. This will normally include
                 Aircrew Manual or Pilots Notes, and schedules and manuals covering airframe,
                 engine and propeller overhaul, maintenance and repair. Any specialist systems
                 should be covered adequately.
3.2.5     Modifications made by the A8-20 E4 Organisation
          In general the normal CAA procedure as detailed in BCAR A2-5/B2-5 will apply. The
          E4 approval granted under BCAR A8-20 approval does not confer approval of any
          activity to design or seek approval for Major Modifications on this class of aircraft.
          Minor modifications to aircraft or components are required to be submitted either to
          the local CAA Regional Office, along with technical justification, to substantiate such
          change or alternatively be submitted via a suitably CAA approved design organisation.
          Significant changes to the aircraft in terms of powerplant changes, propeller type,
          alternative material specifications or equipment changes (to ensure that the aircraft is
          equipped to a standard acceptable to the CAA for the intended purpose) may be the
          subject of major modification action, but all such applications should be discussed
          with the CAA. If the E4 approved company wishes to undertake such work they
          should make application for CAA Approval under A8-8(E1) and/or A8-2(A2), but
          approval may require additional personnel with specialist qualifications and
          experience.
          While the aircraft should conform as closely as possible to the Type Design Standard
          in respect of which the safety record has been accepted, it is recognised that the
          operating organisation may wish to embody modifications in order to simplify
          operation of the aircraft (such as replacement of non-standard oxygen supply
          connectors with NATO standard connectors). The A8-20 E4 organisation's Exposition
          will include a procedure whereby such modifications are identified, defined, and
          submitted to the CAA for approval (these may form part of a submission for initial
          approval of an aircraft). Such modifications are to be adequately defined on
          modification sheets to include drawings, circuit diagrams and changes to Pilots Notes
          showing effect on limitations and operation, and justification.
          NOTE: 1 In the event that the initial basis of acceptance of an aircraft into service
                  is not known in detail, the justification for approval of such a modifica-
                  tion is subject to agreement of the CAA (e.g. compliance with a appro-
                  priate parts of a design code such as BCAR Section K, JAR-23 etc.).
                      2 Material substitution during manufacture of replacement parts (in
                        accordance with paragraph 8 of Appendix 2 to this Leaflet) or any
                        repairs not identifiably made in accordance with manufacturers repair
                        manuals constitute modifications which must be properly approved.
          in a recommendation (signed by nominated signatory) that the CAA issue the Permit
          to Fly. AIL 0165 provides detailed guidance on the content of AANs.
          The applicant's procedures should provide for submission of the draft AAN to the CAA
          and arrangement of the CAA survey of the aircraft to occur prior to flight test.
4 Exposition
4.1       The Exposition should be kept as simple as possible, appropriate to the size of the
          organisation to be approved. Full quality functions are not required but may be
          accepted if already in place.
4.2       The Exposition should contain a capability list. This list may include blanket coverage
          for aircraft in the Simple or Intermediate categories (see paragraph 1.2.1 of BCAR A8-
          20), but will be on a type-by-type basis for Complex aircraft.
4.3       The Exposition should have a BCAR approval certified statement signed by the
          accountable manager as follows:
                This Exposition defines the Organisation and Procedures upon which Civil Aviation
                Authority Approval AI/....../.... is based. These procedures are approved by the
                undersigned and must be adhered to as applicable when the Organisation is
                performing the functions relating to which the approval is granted.
                It is accepted that the Organisation's procedures do not over-ride the necessity for
                compliance with the Air Navigation Order, British Civil Airworthiness
                Requirements or other requirements published by the Civil Aviation Authority from
                time to time.
                The Company will ensure, prior to undertaking any overhaul, repair, modification,
                test or inspection, that all Manuals, Service Bulletins, Modification Standards,
                Mandatory Documentation, Special Tools (including test equipment) and any
                necessary training required by the Manufacturer or Civil Aviation Authority are
                obtained.
                HEAPWARBIRD LTD
                signed
                Accountable Manager.
Appendix 2
1 Introduction
2.1       The organisation should nominate the key engineering staff who are to support its
          operation. These staff should be employed under a formal agreement between the
          organisation and the staff member concerned with details of their terms of reference
          as senior members of the organisation provided within the exposition.
2.2       The organisation should have a minimum of one staff member who is nominated as
          a senior engineer who holds CAA licences without type ratings appropriate to the
          aircraft to be maintained. Where this cannot be satisfied in the case of established
          organisations, well known to the Regional Office, an unlicensed person with long
          association with the CAA may be acceptable.
2.3       Additional part time staff may be used to provide additional resources providing there
          are in existence suitable control procedures within the organisation exposition. A
          form of agreement should be raised which gives detailed terms of reference in writing
          to the volunteer.
2.4       CAA Forms AD458 Biographical Details for persons nominated under the A8-20
          approval should be submitted to the regional office.
3.1       A nominated senior person as required under BCAR A8-20 paragraph 3.2(b) will be
          accepted by the CAA to grant personnel authorisations under the organisation's
          approval, appropriate to the staff who are to carry out nominated functions and
          activities whilst contracted to or in the employ of the organisation.
3.2       A limited number of full authorisations may be granted, on a restricted basis, for
          issuing a flight release certificate after scheduled maintenance or defect rectification.
          In respect of aircraft nominated under A8-20 paragraph 1.2.1 as Complex, the
          signatory of the Flight Release Certificate (see BCAR A3-7 appendix 2) would be a
          suitably qualified person with appropriate practical experience, gained whilst
          employed by either the manufacturer or an acceptable Military Authority.
3.3       Authorisations may be granted for specific functions as are seen to be necessary to
          support operations either at the main base or away from that base. e.g. taxiing,
          ground runs, pre-flight checks etc.
3.4       Records of authorisations given shall be kept and issued to the persons involved.
          The organisation should ensure that all maintenance and defect rectification is
          recorded and certified by the appropriate staff with details of the necessary action
          taken. The procedure should be in a form acceptable to the CAA and take due account
          of any flight record system required by CAP 632 for the operation that is supported.
          It is expected that the normal aviation practices for the documenting of maintenance
          checks and recording defects with subsequent rectification will satisfy this
          requirement.
          Maintenance check sheets should provide information of the amendment status of
          the maintenance programme when work is certified. A work records control system
          should be established to show the status of completion of work at any time and be
          readily capable of review.
5 Maintenance Programmes
5.1       The compilation of maintenance programmes and the associated schedules should
          where possible be based upon the original aircraft type documentation and should
          reflect both the original servicing elements and any additional requirements of the
          CAA. This should take into account any known service experience such as NDI
          programmes and supplementary inspections and be adjusted to suit the aircraft
          utilisation rate. The need to change the periods from flying hours or cycles to calendar
          based periods should be considered and agreed by the CAA. Part of the maintenance
          schedule should contain life limitation listings and reflect any component overhaul or
          life limitations, fatigue limits or other significant data.
5.2       In some instances major structural inspections are not included in the military service
          notes, this should be taken into account when compiling the programme of
          maintenance. Where possible the original manufacturer should be consulted if doubt
          exists regarding the adequacy of the structural programme, or the CAA Aircraft
          Certification Department.
5.3       The maintenance schedules for the aircraft should also take into consideration the
          general requirements of the LAMS schedule; e.g. compass swings, radio checks etc.
6 Spares Procurement
6.1       All the required spare parts and components procured for this type of aircraft should,
          wherever possible, be obtained from original sources or through known and reputable
          distributors.
6.2       Where items are obtained via Military, or other related sources these items should be
          inspected and evaluated with regard to physical condition, life details, completeness
          of records, modification status and compatibility to aircraft serial by the organisation
          purchasing the item. Acceptance of the item following such inspection should be
          assessed and recorded by a certifying engineer prior to fitment. This procedure
          should be reflected in the associated exposition.
6.3       During the conditional assessment of components consideration must also be given
          to the need to carry out an internal examination to assess the effects of age and
          corrosion. It may be necessary to carry out a strip investigation, partial or full, if the
          component's condition cannot be readily assessed by other means, e.g. boroscope,
          NDT, etc.
6.4       Structural components, forging and castings should be visually inspected for
          condition and damage and consideration given to utilising NDT techniques to assist
          such an inspection, whenever possible the manufacturers advice should be sought.
6.5       Engines, propellers and gearboxes should be overhauled prior to their initial fitment
          to the aircraft except where the item's service history and current status is known and
          documented. The overhaul should be carried out by an organisation approved for the
          purpose or by a company as agreed within the terms of the A8-20 organisation's
          exposition.
6.6       AGS and Standard Parts. Standard aircraft hardware such as fasteners, e.g. nuts and
          bolts, should be purchased from normal aviation sources. These should conform to
          the specified part number in the manufacturer's maintenance information. Where this
          information differs from the current specifications for those items in civil use,
          acceptance via a certificate of conformity showing equivalence will suffice.
6.7       Where items are no longer manufactured or available from known sources, caution
          should be exercised on the acceptance of items unless their serviceability can readily
          be determined by inspection and/or overhaul. The use of alternative parts in the
          overhaul or maintenance of aircraft or components is only permitted when supported
          by the agreement of the manufacturer or an approved Design Organisation, through
          modification action, or where agreed in individual circumstances with the CAA
          Regional Office.
7.1       The arrangements for the maintenance and overhaul of items and systems as detailed
          in paragraphs 3.2. and 3.4 of A8-20 Supplement No. 1 should be defined in the
          organisation's exposition. Where the organisation does not hold the capability itself
          to satisfy this requirement, suitable letters of agreement with appropriately approved
          organisations should be held detailing the provisions made to cover all such
          undertakings.
8 Component Manufacture
8.1       With regard to the manufacture of components, the A8-20 approval is not intended to
          replace the requirements of a BCAR A8-2 Group A2 Supplier Approval. Manufacture
          of non critical parts may be permitted subject to the organisation having the
          necessary drawings and facilities, equipment, etc. where the part is intended to be
          produced only for an aircraft supported by the approved organisation.
8.2       Major structural items should be manufactured under the control of a BCAR A8-2
          company to the required specifications and original drawings, unless agreed
          otherwise in advance by the local CAA Regional Office. Any deviation in material
          specification, heat treatment or manufacturing process will need to be supported by
          technical justification and a prepared case should be submitted in the form of
          individual requests to the CAA Regional Office.
8.3       Manufacture to pattern is normally prohibited, however specific items may be agreed
          by the CAA Regional Office in conjunction with Aircraft Certification Department.
9 Modifications
9.1       The normal CAA procedure as detailed in BCAR A2-5/B2-5 will apply. The E4 approval
          granted under BCAR A8-20 does not confer approval of any activity to design or
          approve modifications on this class of aircraft. Minor modifications to aircraft or
          components are required to be submitted either to the local CAA Regional Office,
          along with technical justification, to substantiate such a change or alternatively be
          submitted via a suitably CAA approved design organisation.
9.2       Significant changes to the aircraft in terms of powerplant changes, propeller type,
          alternative material specifications or equipment changes may be the subject of major
          modification action, but all such applications should be discussed with the CAA
          Regional Office concerned in the first instance.
10.1      Where the organisation intends to conduct activities at sites other than the main site
          of the approval but remaining under the control of the basic approved organisation,
          the additional geographical locations will be considered as secondary sites for
          approval purposes. The secondary sites should be environmentally suitable for the
          needs of the operations to be carried out and defined in the exposition. Short term
          agreements for secondary sites may be arranged by letter with the local CAA
          Regional Office and may be subject to any special conditions that are deemed
          necessary.
10.2      The term secondary site is not intended to include activities associated with line
          support of the aircraft during normal operations. Repairs or scheduled maintenance
          away from base may require to be reflected in a short term agreement as above.
11.1      The Permit to Fly will be a non-expiring document that requires an associated
          Certificate of Validity. These documents will be contained in a wallet.
11.2      The validation will be predicated upon an inspection report prepared by an
          organisation approved for the purpose (A8-20), and a recommendation made on Form
          AD202P.
11.3      Following an annual inspection, the approved organisation will submit the following
          documentation to the CAA:
          a) AD200 application for renewal;
          b) Statutory fee;
          c) Flight Test (if applicable - see 11.8);
          d) AD202P recommendation.
11.4      The documentation listed in 11.3 should be sent to the CAA at the following address:
          Applications and Approvals Department
          Civil Aviation Authority
          Safety Regulation Group
          Aviation House
          West Sussex RH6 OYR
11.5      Subject to the submitted documentation being acceptable, a Certificate of Validity will
          be returned, valid for a twelve month period. The Certificate should be placed in the
          'pocket' of the Permit to Fly wallet.
11.6      The validation process may be anticipated by a maximum period of thirty one days
          without loss of the twelve month consecutive validity period. If the anticipation period
          is more than thirty one days the Certificate of Validity will be limited to one year and
          thirty one days following the recommendation date. If the validity certificate has
          expired, the validity certificate will be dated from the date of receipt by the CAA and
          expire one year from the recommendation date.
11.7      If the Certificate of Validity has expired and a flight test is required, it will first be
          necessary to submit the AD200 application together with the statutory fee in order
          that the CAA may issue a Permit to Fly for test purposes. Following completion of the
          test, the flight test report and the AD202P should be submitted as in 11.3.
11.8      The Flight Test period has been extended to three years but must be completed for
          the first issue of the non-expiring Permit to Fly. The next flight test due date will be
          stated on the Certificate of Validity.
          NOTE: AD202P pads will be supplied by the CAA.
12 Exposition
12.1      The Exposition should be kept as simple as possible appropriate to the size of the
          organisation to be approved. Full quality functions are not required but may be
          accepted if already in place.
12.2      The exposition should state the level of basic approval granted in the terms of one or
          more of the following:
          a) Maintenance of airframes and engines;
          b) Overhaul of engines;
          c) Restoration of airframes and associated systems;
          d) Component Overhaul.
12.3      The Exposition should contain a capability list. This list may include blanket coverage
          for one or more Groups (see paragraph 1.2.2 of BCAR A8-20) but will specify
          individual aircraft types for those classified as Complex in accordance with paragraph
          1.2.1(c) of BCAR A8-20.
12.4      The Exposition should have a BCAR approval certified statement signed by the
          accountable manager as follows:
                This Exposition defines the Organisation and Procedures upon which Civil Aviation
                Authority Approval AI/ ---/--- is based.
                These procedures are approved by the undersigned and must be adhered to as
                applicable when orders qualifying for release under the Approval are being
                progressed.
                It is accepted that the Organisation's procedures do not over-ride the necessity
                for compliance with the Air Navigation Order, British Civil Airworthiness
                Requirements or other requirements published by the Civil Aviation Authority from
                time to time.
                The Company will ensure, prior to undertaking any overhaul, repair, modification,
                test or inspection, that all Manuals, Service Bulletins, Modification Standards,
                Mandatory Documentation, Special Tools (including test equipment) and any
                necessary training required by the Manufacturer or Civil Aviation Authority are
                obtained.
                HEAPWARBIRD LTD
                signed
                Accountable Manager.
(Previously issued as AIL/0171. This leaflet has been revised and should be read in its
entirety.)
PURPOSE:           This Leaflet is intended to provide guidance material for the compilation of a
                   maintenance schedule for aircraft within the above group.
1 Introduction
1.1       The CAA is changing the current Certificate of Airworthiness (C of A) renewal process
          which has historically required CAA technical staff involvement at the renewal
          interval. One aspect of this change is that CAA Approved Maintenance Schedules are
          required for aircraft within this scheme. A principal benefit will be the flexibility of
          renewing C of As without disrupting the aircraft operation and minimising CAA
          technical staff effort.
1.2       Where the aircraft maintenance schedule is approved by the CAA a recommendation
          to renew the C of A can be made to CAA by an organisation approved under BCAR
          A8-3 Supplement No.2. As of 1st April 1995, all aircraft within this group will be
          required to be maintained to a CAA Approved Maintenance Schedule.
1.3       In order to ensure that the Approval process is as simple as possible the procedures
          assume the use of the manufacturers schedule (as amended), and Standard
          Maintenance Practice No. 19 (including Appendices A, B and C).
2.1       A copy of Standard Maintenance Practice No. 19 is available in CAP 562 - CAAIP Part
          14 as Leaflet 14-19 and may be copied for use.
2.2       The SMP is formatted with space for details to be added. It can however, be produced
          and formatted on a word processor providing the intent is not changed. This
          document will identify the manufacturer's schedule reference and revision status. It
          must also contain information regarding the aircraft type, serial no., and the
          registration mark. The CAA will record the aircraft registrations and schedule
          references. Anticipated annual utilisation is to be stated to enable the operator/
          contracted maintenance organisation to assess the maintenance periods against the
          manufacturer's predicted utilisation.
2.3       The SMP 19 contains three Appendices:
2.4       When SMP 19 has been completed two copies should be submitted to the CAA
          Survey Department Regional Office with a copy of the manufacturer's schedule. The
          Regional Office will assess the submission and will advise if the manufacturer's
          schedule is acceptable. Approval of this submission will be signified by the issue of
          Form AD271, and the allocation of a CAA Approval Reference.
2.5       The operator must instigate a formal method of amendment. Any proposed changes
          to the AD271 or SMP19 shall be submitted to the CAA Survey Department Regional
          Office for approval. Amendments to the manufacturer's programme must be
          incorporated and advised to the CAA Regional Office, without the need for individual
          CAA approval.
          NOTE: Amendments may be in the form of Service Bulletins issued by the
                manufacturer prior to full revision of the maintenance programme.
3.1       It is not the CAA's intention to promote the use of an Alternative to the Manufacturers
          schedule. However, if the operator or his contracted maintenance organisation
          wishes to use an alternative schedule, than a detailed submission should be made to
          the CAA setting out the justification for such an alternative and this should be
          accompanied by suitable substantiation for the revised scheduled maintenance tasks.
          A fee may be charged for this process.
3.2       The schedule with the completed SMP 19 should be sent to the CAA Survey
          Department Regional Office. Once the schedule has been reviewed any comments
          raised will be communicated to the applicant for corrective action to be taken. When
          all outstanding items have been addressed, approval will be signified by issue of
          AD271, and the allocation of a CAA Approval Reference.
4 Alignment Check
5 Maintenance Certification
          The organisation contracted to carry out maintenance of the aircraft will enter the
          details of the maintenance carried out in the appropriate Aircraft Log Books and
          indicate the reference number of the schedule used. This reference number will be
          shown on the Approval Document AD271. At the time of C of A renewal an annual
          check in the form of a Maintenance Review is to be carried out. A statement to this
          effect must be made in the Aircraft Log Book. (Details of this annual check can be
          found in SMP 19.)
1 Introduction
          This Leaflet is for Annex II aircraft only and does not apply to any product under the
          authority of EASA as defined by Regulation 216/2008. Mutual recognition is not
          automatically achieved within EASA Member states for STCs to Annex II products.
          This Leaflet is to inform owners, operators, designers and modifiers of aircraft of the
          CAA procedures for the approval of Supplemental Type Certificates (STC). The
          Leaflet has particular emphasis on the information which the applicant will be
          expected to provide to the CAA. The procedure to be followed is similar to that
          required by EASA under Regulation 1702/2003 however it must be noted that EASA
          has developed their own procedure for STC applications that can be found on the
          EASA website.
          The EASA STC Procedures classify STCs from a procedural point of view into
          Significant and Non-Significant. A Significant 1 STC is defined as "a major design
          change, which necessitates a change to the Type Certification basis referenced in the
          TCDS for the Product". A Non-Significant STC is any other STC.
          It is important to note that these STC Procedures are an alternative and not a
          replacement for the Airworthiness Approval Note (AAN) Procedures.
2 Application
          Application for issue of an STC to an Annex II Product may be made to the CAA by:
          a) A UK applicant;
          b) A non-UK applicant for an STC to be validated.
          NOTE: This is conditional on the applicant being subject to the jurisdiction of an
                Authority, which has entered into, or is prepared to enter into an
                Arrangement with the UK.
          Application must be made on the relevant CAA Form No STC01 (Appendix 1), to
          Applications and Approvals Department together with the appropriate fee.
3 Classification
          At time of application, the applicant must propose the category of the STC with
          appropriate justification. This justification will be reviewed in accordance with the
          criteria defined in Part 21.101 at the discretion of the CAA.
4 Registration
          When the application has been accepted, the Project will be issued with a CAA STC
          Project Number taken from the CAA STC Project Number register. The register for
          aircraft and engines/propellers is maintained by Applications and Approvals
          Department.
          The STC Project Number will be used as the CAA charging number as well as the
          reference for the department file and all correspondence during the Project.
          The STC Project Number will be in the form PNxxxxx and will not be the same as the
          STC Number.
5 Design Investigation
          The normal mechanism for the authorisation of exploratory test flights is for the
          organisation that proposes to conduct the flying to obtain a "permit to fly for test
          purposes" approval. Where it is necessary to conduct flight trials to establish
          compliance with the approval basis, and by implication to provide the evidence
          necessary to approve the modification, the permit must be in force throughout the
          trials.
          Where there is already evidence of satisfactory flight characteristics, such as prior
          certification by the State of Design (for STC validations), or in the case of a
          modification it can reasonably be concluded that there will be no detrimental effect,
          flight testing may not necessarily be required for approval of the design. If
          nevertheless it is considered necessary to fly the aircraft in order to confirm correct
          functioning or performance, that flight will normally be carried out after approval of the
          STC.
          Certification Meetings
          The Team Leader will review progress with the applicant on a regular basis. If
          meetings are required the applicant shall issue minutes. The minutes will be
          circulated to Team Members as appropriate.
          Documentation and Manuals
          The applicant will provide supplements to manuals or documents required by the
          applicable requirements for approval by the Team.
          Accomplishment instructions (e.g. Service Bulletins) will be prepared by the applicant
          and distributed as approved data. Approval of the instructions will be granted by the
          Team or through the applicant's design approval privilege when held.
          It is the responsibility of the applicant to define and record all activities leading to the
          issue of the STC. The applicant must determine the requirements that are applicable,
          and obtain the agreement of the CAA to the approval basis. The applicant must be
          satisfied that compliance with all of the applicable requirements has been
          demonstrated and that evidence of compliance, including assumptions and methods
          used, is recorded and retained. It is the responsibility of the applicant to provide to
          the CAA the information needed to complete the approval.
          Efficient progression of the approval will be heavily dependent upon the timely
          submission of information, that is both complete and of good quality. Where the CAA
          has to make requests for clarification, correction or additional data this will inevitably
          delay the process and increase the staff hours expended by the CAA, in turn leading
          to higher charges. Where incomplete or poor quality information is submitted, the
          CAA may suspend the approval process and require the applicant to re-submit using
          an Approved Organisation having greater expertise and ability to complete the task.
          The applicant should advise the CAA at the time of application of the proposed
          programme timescale, and of the proposed means of compliance with the approval
          basis. In this respect applicants are requested to note that the CAA commonly has
          no advance notice of the applications it receives and has to manage its finite
          resources to meet the diverse demands of the many and various applicants. Efficient
          management of resources is only possible if the timescale for each approval is
          reasonable, and allows for the inevitable multi-tasking of CAA staff.
7 STC Issue
          After the Team has been satisfied by the compliance demonstration, the applicant will
          submit the final issue of the STC Definition Document and a final Compliance
          Checklist with a Declaration of Compliance to the Team Leader. These will be held
          on the CAA file. The Team Leader will then sign a Final Statement of Compliance.
          The CAA STC will then be issued to the applicant (Appendix 4).
          Amendments to STCs are only allowed by the STC holder. The change will need to
          be classified Major/ Minor, and if major will follow a similar procedure as for the initial
          STC. A Significant change to an STC will require a new STC. The principles laid out
          in Part 21 will be followed where possible. The involvement of the Team will depend
          on the level of change.
E-Mail:
Post Code:
Aircraft/Product Type:
TCDS Ref:
STC Title:
 I hereby declare that the above particulars are true in every respect. I agree to pay any further
 charges in connection with this application, which may be notified by the CAA, including costs
 subsequently incurred by the CAA for work carried out on post-certification activities.I understand
 and accept that the STC, when issued, will be published in databases accessible to the public.
Position:
Issue: Date:
Product Modified:
STC Title/Description:
Certification Basis:
Requirements Affected:
Drawing List:
Maintenance Manual
Maintenance Schedule
MMEL
Compliance Record   Reference to the compliance record (which itself should include
Reference           reference to all compliance reports) should be included.
Drawing List        This must include all drawings introduced by the change. Where
                    there is a significant number of drawings, reference to a Master
                    Drawing List is acceptable, as long as this provides a ready
                    reference to all the other drawings.
Manuals Affected    All manuals affected should be indicated by inclusion of a
                    reference to the required supplement/amendment.
Accomplishment      Reference to the accomplishment instructions document provided
Instructions        to installers of the STC should be included.
The following should be used as an aid when determining the content of the Certification
document(s) required by the STC procedures. The applicant should agree the specific project
documentation with the CAA.
Applicants may decide whether to compile one or more documents which contain this
information. As the project progresses the document(s) will be maintained jointly by the
applicant.
                                          United Kingdom
                                       Civil Aviation Authority
                              SUPPLEMENTAL TYPE CERTIFICATE
                                              [STC No]
Pursuant to the National Regulations for the time being in force and subject to the conditions
and limitations specified below, the CAA-UK in accordance with its National Procedures,
hereby certifies to:
                                             [Applicant]
                                    [Address of the Applicant[
                          [CAA design approval reference, if applicable]
that the change in the Type Design to the following product, as specified herein, meets the
appropriate [applicable code] requirements.
STC Title:
STC Definition Document:
Flight Manual Supplement:                                             , or later approved revision.
Airworthiness Limitation Supplement(s):
1 Introduction
          The CAA has been made aware that additional guidance is necessary for those
          engaged in the rebuilding or long term restoration of aircraft, to alert them to the
          airworthiness requirements and the monitoring of such projects by the Civil Aviation
          Authority Regional Offices.
2 Applicability
          This Leaflet is applicable to aircraft that have previously held a UK/EASA Certificate of
          Airworthiness or Permit to Fly.
3 Definition
3.1       Restoration is a generic term that may include any one or combination of overhaul,
          repair, inspection, modification or replacement activity, which is to be performed on
          an aircraft where the UK Certificate of Airworthiness or Permit to Fly has lapsed for
          some years. Such an aircraft is likely to require extensive dismantling and inspection
          to determine the extent of work needed to restore it to an airworthy standard.
3.2       Aircraft rebuild projects include the return to an airworthy condition of any aircraft
          where the UK Certificate of Airworthiness or Permit to Fly has ceased to be in force
          due, for example, to accident or incident damage, the use of major parts from other
          aircraft of the same type, significant corrosion or major overhaul.
4 Background
4.1       From time to time the CAA is not made aware of major restoration or rebuild projects
          until they have reached the final stages of completion. This means that the necessary
          CAA stage inspections or surveys have not been carried out.
4.2       In many restoration cases the necessary repairs, including the production of parts no
          longer available from the original manufacturer, have not used approved data such as
          the original manufacturer's repair manual or design drawings, and have been outside
          the scope of the certification privileges of the Licensed Engineer. A number of rebuild
          projects have used structural components and major assemblies where the
          provenance and traceability of the parts fitted has been questionable.
4.3       For aircraft which held Certificates of Airworthiness, all replacement parts must either
          conform to the part number specified by the manufacturer for the particular aircraft
          type, model and serial number, or be approved under modification procedures in
          accordance with BCARs or EASA Regulations, as applicable. All replacement parts
          from whatever source must be serviceable and accompanied by appropriate
          documentation.
4.4       In the cases described in paragraphs 1 and 2 there have been delays in the CAA
          approval of the project and subsequent issue of the Certificate of Airworthiness or
          Permit to Fly and in some cases dismantling has been required to enable inspections
          to take place which could have been avoided by regular contact between the
          Licensed Engineer (or owners) and CAA Regional Offices.
5 Requirements
5.1       The attention of Certifying Engineers concerned with major rebuilding projects or the
          long term restoration of aircraft is directed to the relevant chapters of BCAR Section
          A/B, EU Regulations 1702/2002 and 2042/2003, as applicable. Reference should be
          made to the table below to assure compliance with the relevant regulations.
           It must be shown that the aircraft conforms to type           BCAR A/B3-2            Part 21.A.181
           design and any repairs and changes conform to                 Paragraph 1.3          and 21.A.183
           appropriate data.
           The aircraft must be constructed under the supervision        BCAR A3-2              Part 145.A.42
           of an organisation approved by the CAA for the                Paragraph 4            and M.A.501
           purpose. The restorer or rebuilder must show proof
           that the major components proposed for use on the
           restored or rebuilt aircraft are original, i.e. were
           manufactured by or for the organisation who obtained
           the first Certificate of Airworthiness or Type Certificate
           for the aircraft or that they are an approved alternative.
           Failure to provide sufficient proof will result in the
           aircraft being refused either a Certificate of
           Airworthiness or a Permit to Fly.
           A Certificate of Release to Service shall only be issued      BCAR A/B6-2            ANO 2005 (as
           for overhaul, repair, replacement, modification or            Paragraph 8            amended)
           inspection when the signatory is satisfied that the           and ANO 2005           Article 16, 17,
           work has been properly carried out having due regard          (as amended)           Part 145.A.50
           to the use of manuals, drawings, specifications and the       Article 16 or 17       or M.A.801,
           use of calibrated tooling.                                    as applicable          as applicable
           In the case of structural repairs to aircraft, where the      BCAR A/B6-7            Part 21
           repairs are of a major nature or not covered in a             Paragraph 2            Sub Part M
           particular Repair Manual, the Approved Organisation or
           the appropriately licensed maintenance engineer
           concerned, must be able to demonstrate all repairs are
           appropriately approved.
           All modifications/ changes, except those which are            BCAR A/B2-5            Part 21
           agreed by the CAA to be of such a nature that                 Paragraph 2.1.4        Sub Part D
           airworthiness is not affected, shall be approved.
6 Procedures
6.1       In the case of a rebuilding or restoration project expected to exceed fifteen months
          duration, the local CAA Regional Office (see CAAIP General Information, Contact
          Details for UK Regional Office addresses) must be advised of the project at the
          earliest opportunity. This will allow for a preliminary assessment by a Regional Office
          Surveyor of the extent of the restoration work required and initial acceptance of the
          applicant's proposals regarding sourcing of parts and components to be used in the
          restoration.
6.2       Normally, if the Regional Office Surveyor decides that the restoration or rebuilding
          project is of such a magnitude that regular inspections will be necessary, a Special
          Survey will be needed. Alternatively, it may be necessary, by virtue of the extent of
          the rebuild or restoration required, that a major modification will be needed instead of
          a Special Survey to record and approve the proposed repairs or replacements. If this
          is the case the Regional Office Surveyor will advise the potential applicant
          accordingly.
6.3       An application for a Special Survey should be made by the owner to Applications and
          Approvals Department at Aviation House, Gatwick (see CAAIP General Information,
          Contact Details).
6.4       Following acceptance by CAA of an application for a Special Survey it will not be
          necessary to make an application for the subsequent issue of a Certificate of
          Airworthiness or the renewal of the Permit to Fly, as the case may be, until the final
          stages of completion unless a modification / change which has not previously been
          approved is to be embodied on the aircraft. In some cases it may be that following a
          Special Survey no recommendation can be made by the Regional Office Surveyor for
          the renewal of the Certificate of Airworthiness or Permit to Fly. In these cases the
          applicant will be advised of the reasons why the aircraft could not attain certification
          and any Certificate of Airworthiness or Permit to Fly fee already paid will be refunded.
          The cost of the Special Survey will, however, still have to be met by the applicant.
1 Introduction
          This Leaflet has been revised to advise of the implementation of changes that have
          been made to the requirements for BCAR A8-8, Group E3 Approvals.
2 Requirements
2.1       BCAR Sections A and B, Sub-sections A3-2 and B3-2, specify the requirements for the
          issue of Certificates of Airworthiness. These sub-sections have been revised for
          aircraft with a maximum take off weight above 15 000 kg to require a report to be
          submitted by an appropriate design organisation, certifying that the airworthiness
          standard of the aircraft conforms to, or differs in a defined manner from, a standard
          approved by the CAA for the issue of a Certificate of Airworthiness for that type. For
          the purposes of this Leaflet, an appropriate design organisation is an organisation
          approved in accordance with BCAR A8-8 Group E3 or it may be the Type Certificate
          holder if considered acceptable.
          NOTE:    In the case where the issue of a Certificate of Airworthiness is to be completed
                   outside the United Kingdom at a place where an Organisation is not specifically
                   approved to provide reports for the purpose, the overseas Organisation shall be one
                   that is acceptable to the CAA.
2.2       For other aircraft with a maximum take off weight below 15 000 kg, a suitably
          approved maintenance organisation, or, subject to CAA agreement, appropriately
          licensed aircraft maintenance engineers for aircraft types not listed in paragraph 17 of
          CAP 562 Leaflet 15-3 may be used. However, the use of the services of an E3
          approved organisation is recommended, particularly where the work to establish
          compliance is significant.
2.3       BCAR Section A, Sub-section A8 details the various organisation approvals. The
          requirements for design organisation approvals under Sub-section A8-8 have been
          amended to enable an E3 Design Organisation to provide reports and to certify that a
          particular aircraft conforms to, or differs in a defined manner from, a standard
          approved by the CAA for the issue of a Certificate of Airworthiness for that aircraft
          type. Previously the E3 approval was limited to the provision of reports and
          certification of compliance with design standards only. The amendment addresses all
          of the airworthiness standards associated with issue of a Certificate of Airworthiness
          and applicable operational requirements. Consequently an E3 Design Organisation
          will now be required to have suitable procedures and arrangements for the inspection
          of aircraft to establish compliance with the documented airworthiness standard.
2.4       The BCAR Chapter A8-8 requirement contains an appendix that gives guidance on the
          format and content of the report to be provided by the E3 Design Organisation.
          NOTE:    Organisations should note that for EASA Aircraft Types, the introduction of the non-
                   expiring C of A in accordance with Part 21 Sub-part H and Part M Sub-part I was
                   introduced on 28 September 2007. Following this date, the requirement for an E-3
                approval and associated report ceased for EASA aircraft. Following 28 September
                2007, organisations bringing EASA aircraft onto the register of an EASA member
                state, including the UK, are required to provide an Airworthiness Review in
                accordance with Part M, M.A.710. This review may in reality be presented in a
                similar format to an existing E-3 Report, but it must comply with the categories and
                requirements laid down under M.A.710.
1         There have been a number of accidents to aircraft in the above Category on which it
          was subsequently established that work had been done which was such that, under
          Article 10 of the Air Navigation Order 2005 (as amended), the Certificate of
          Airworthiness may have ceased to be in force.
2         Article 10 (a) of the Air Navigation Order 2005 (as amended), provides that a Certificate
          of Airworthiness issued in respect of an aircraft shall cease to be in force if the aircraft,
          or such of its equipment as is necessary for the airworthiness of the aircraft, is
          overhauled, repaired or modified, or if any part of the aircraft or of such equipment is
          removed or is replaced, otherwise than in a manner and with material of a type
          approved by the Authority either generally or in relation to a class of aircraft or to the
          particular aircraft.
3         Although Articles 16(5) and 16(6) of the Order specifically excludes certain Special
          Category aircraft from the requirements for the issue of Certificates of Release to
          Service, the provisions of Article 10 apply to all aircraft without exception. Any person,
          therefore, who intends to undertake work on an aircraft covered by this Leaflet should
          only do so when he is in possession of adequate knowledge of the tasks involved, has
          access to the necessary facilities and the relevant maintenance, overhaul or repair
          manuals, and uses parts or materials which are known to satisfy CAA requirements.
          If any doubt exists as to whether these conditions are met, the person concerned
          should seek advice from a CAA approved organisation or a licensed aircraft
          maintenance engineer.
          It is emphasised that a person who flies an aircraft when the Certificate of
          Airworthiness has ceased to be in force by virtue of Article 10 of the Air Navigation
          Order 2005 (as amended), may render himself liable to prosecution for contravention
          of Article 8 of the Order and there may be other serious consequences.
1 Introduction
1.1       For the purposes of this Leaflet, engines, engine modules, APUs, and propellers are
          hereafter referred to as Powerplants.
1.2       Article 10 of the Air Navigation Order 2005 states that a Certificate of Airworthiness
          shall cease to be in force if the aircraft is overhauled, repaired or modified otherwise
          than in a manner and with material of a type approved by the CAA.
1.3       Similarly, for non Commercial Air Transport, Article 16(10) (a) requires that a
          Certificate of Release to Service (CRS) be issued when an aircraft has been
          overhauled, repaired, modified or maintained in a manner and with material of a type
          approved by the CAA.
1.4       For aircraft which are subject to regulation by EASA under Regulation (EC) 216/2008,
          Part M Subpart E, M.A.501 and associated AMC/GM material detail how
          components, including Powerplants, from non-EASA approved sources are to be
          assessed. Those requirements must be followed for acceptance of such Powerplants
          for these aircraft and this Leaflet is not applicable.
1.5       For Powerplants to be used on aircraft that are not subject to regulation by EASA and
          are obtained from sources not under the direct airworthiness control of the CAA, this
          Leaflet defines a procedure which owners/operators must follow in order to meet the
          requirements of Article 10 or Article 16(10) of the Air Navigation Order 2005 (as
          amended). The procedure described below is only applicable to Powerplants for “non-
          EASA” aircraft as defined in CAP 747 Mandatory Requirements for Airworthiness.
1.6       Instructions are also included regarding both pool and lease/loan/power-by-the-hour
          arrangements and the alignment of maintenance programmes to be used on “non-
          EASA” aircraft.
2 General Requirements
          NOTE:        In the case of a Pool Powerplant only the Airworthiness Directives of the State of
                       Design are required as a minimum (see paragraph 8).
          f) any period of storage has been in accordance with the manufacturer’s
             recommendations and that the Powerplant has not become unserviceable due to
             operational abuse, damage or the removal of components;
          g) the hours and cycles accrued of any life limited parts are clearly defined;
          h) all modifications and repairs embodied in the Powerplant have been approved by
             the Type Certificating Authority of the Powerplant or the CAA.
4.1       Powerplants which meet the requirements of Paragraph 2 of this Leaflet and have not
          been operated since the last H.S.I/Refurbishment/Overhaul/Performance Restoration
          are acceptable for use if received with an Authorised Release Document as defined
          in a), b), c) or d):
          a) an EASA form 1;
          b) a JAA Form 1 issued by a JAR-145 Maintenance Organisation listed in the JAA
             publication 'JAR-145 Listed Organisations';
          c) an FAA Form 8130-3 from an EASA aproved FAR-145 Repair Station listed in EASA
             Foreign Part-145 organisations located in the United States;
          d) a Transport Canada Form 24-0078 from an EASA approved Transport Canada
             Approved AM573 Maintenance Organisation listed in EASA Foreign Part-145
             organisations located in Canada.
4.2       If the Powerplant satisfies all of the requirements of paragraphs 2 and 4.1 of this
          Leaflet, then the following statement, signed by the person issuing the CRS, must be
          entered into the appropriate log book:
                    ‘Part........... S/N............ has been accepted under procedures complying with
                    CAAIP Leaflet 11-48, paragraphs 2 and 4.’
5.1       Powerplants which meet the requirements of paragraph 2 and the Authorised
          Release Document requirements of paragraph 4 of this Leaflet, but which have been
          operated since last H.S.I./Refurbishment/Overhaul/Performance Restoration, will be
          acceptable for use provided that:
6.1       This paragraph applies when any of the following circumstances exist:
          a) it is not possible to satisfactorily confirm the origin, traceability or serviceability of
             the Powerplant;
          b) the Powerplant is obtained without an EASA, JAA, FAA or Transport Canada
             Authorised Release Document (as described in paragraph 4 of this Leaflet);
          c) the Powerplant has not been under the airworthiness control of EASA, JAA, FAA
             or Transport Canada operator since the last H.S.I./Refurbishment/Overhaul/
             Performance Restoration;
          d) the Powerplant does not meet all of the requirements of Section 2.
          NOTE:        Owners and operators are advised to review the requirements of paragraphs 6.2 and
                       6.4 of this Leaflet prior to entering into a commercial agreement to purchase a
                       Powerplant.
6.2       The owner’s or operator’s maintenance organisation or an appropriately type rated
          maintenance Licensed Aircraft Engineer, as appropriate, must demonstrate to the
          satisfaction of the CAA the Powerplant’s acceptability, taking into account the
          following:
          a) the details of any unapproved modifications and repairs which have been
             embodied in the Powerplant;
          b) confirmation that military Powerplants which are similar to a civil equivalent have
             been modified to comply with civil requirements in conjunction with the
             manufacturer in each particular case, unless agreed otherwise with the CAA;
          c) confirmation that the last H.S.I./Refurbishment/Overhaul/Performance Restoration
             was undertaken to a specification, and by an organisation or person, acceptable to
             the CAA;
          d) a statement certifying serviceability (i.e. an Authorised Release Document or
             equivalent), issued by either the last H.S.I./Refurbishment/Overhaul/Performance
             Restoration organisation or the previous operator’s maintenance organisation, as
             appropriate. This organisation must be appropriately authorised by its national
             airworthiness authority to make such a statement. Alternatively, a statement
             certifying serviceability issued by the appropriate national airworthiness authority
             may be acceptable.
6.3       If the CAA accepts the Powerplant, the following statement, signed by a CAA
          Surveyor, must be entered into the appropriate log book:
                    ‘Part........... S/N............... has been accepted by the CAA in accordance with
                    CAAIP Leaflet 11-48, paragraphs 2 and 6.2.’
6.4       If the serviceability cannot be adequately established then the Powerplant must be
          dismantled and inspected.
          A suitably approved maintenance organisation or an appropriately type rated Licensed
          Aircraft Maintenance Engineer must dismantle and inspect the Powerplant. The
          manufacturer’s recommendations must be used as the basis of the workscope for
          this activity, which must be sufficient to determine if either of the declarations below
          can be made. Rectification action must be taken where necessary.
          If it cannot be established that the records are accurate and complete, all life limited
          parts must be scrapped. In addition, the applicant must make reference to the CAA
          for a decision on whether any other parts should be scrapped in the absence of
          satisfactory records.
6.5       If serviceability is established one of the following statements, signed by the
          maintenance organisation or the appropriately type rated Licensed Aircraft
          Maintenance Engineer, as applicable, must be entered into the appropriate log book,
          either:
                    ‘Part.......... S/N........... has been examined in accordance with CAAIP Leaflet
                    11-48, paragraph 6.4, and no evidence of operational abuse, inadequate
                    maintenance or unsuitable storage has been revealed.’
          or
                    ‘Part....... S/N......... has been examined in accordance with CAAIP Leaflet 11-48,
                    paragraph 6.4, and appropriate action has been taken to restore serviceability.’
7 Lease/Loan/Power-by-the-Hour Powerplants
8 Pool Powerplant
1 Purpose
2 Applicability
3 Introduction
3.1       The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) as established in European Regulation
          (EC) No. 216/2008 commenced operation on 28 September 2003 and at the same
          time European Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1702/2003, laying down
          implementing rules for the airworthiness and certification of aircraft, entered into
          force. These regulations and implementing rules have affected the organisation
          approval requirements for design and production organisations currently approved to
          BCAR Sub-Section A8.
          NOTES: 1) For the purposes of this Leaflet, aircraft that are required to comply with
                    Regulation (EC) No. 216/2008 are specified as “EASA Aircraft”.
                    2) For the purposes of this Leaflet, aircraft that are not required to comply with
                       Regulation (EC) No. 216/2008 are specified as “Non-EASA Aircraft”.
                    3) Lists of EASA and Non-EASA aircraft can be found in CAP 747.
4 Effectivity
5 Requirements
Appendix 1
     1United Kingdom
     Civil Aviation Authority
                                                   UK CAA                                                  3   Form Tracking Number
APPROVED CERTIFICATE
13 Remarks
USER/INSTALLER RESPONSIBILITIES
  NOTES: 1. It is important to understand that the existence of the document alone does not automatically constitute authority to
            install the part/component/assembly.
            2. Where the user/installer works in accordance with the national regulations of another airworthiness authority it is
               essential that the user/installer ensure that his/her airworthiness authority accepts parts/components/assemblies from
               the UK CAA.
            3. Statement 14 and 19 do not constitute installation certification. In all cases the aircraft maintenance record shall contain
               an installation certification issued in accordance with the national regulations by the user/installer before the aircraft may
               be flown.
APPROVED CERTIFICATE
COMPLETION INSTRUCTIONS
These instructions relate only to the use of the UK CAA Approved Certificate for manufacturing
purposes.
          The primary purpose of the certificate is to release products, parts and appliances
          (hereafter referred to as 'item(s)') as identified in Blocks 7 through 11 as applicable
          after manufacture, or to release maintenance work carried out on items under the
          approval of the CAA.
          The Certificate serves as an official certificate for the delivery of items from the
          manufacturer to users. The Certificate is not, however, a delivery or shipping note.
          It may only be issued by organisations certificated by the CAA, within the scope of
          such an approval. Aircraft are not to be released using the Certificate. Products, Parts
          or Appliances for aircraft that are the responsibility of the European Aviation Safety
          Agency (EASA) are NOT to be released using the Certificate.
          A mixture of 'New' and 'Used' items is not permitted on the same Certificate.
          A mixture of items certified in conformity with 'approved data' and to 'non-approved
          data' is not permitted on the same Certificate, and consequently only one box in Block
          14 can be ticked.
2 General
          The Certificate must comply with the format attached including block numbers and
          the location of each Block. The size of each Block may however be varied to suit the
          individual application, but not to the extent that would make the Certificate
          unrecognisable. The overall size of the Certificate may be significantly increased or
          decreased so long as the Certificate remains recognisable and legible. The Certificate
          must be in 'Portrait' rather than 'Landscape' to help differentiate it from the EASA
          Form 1. If in doubt consult the CAA.
          Please note that the user responsibility statements can be placed on either the
          reverse or front of this Certificate.
          All printing must be clear and legible to permit easy reading and be in English.
          The Certificate may either be pre-printed or computer generated but in either case the
          printing of lines and characters must be clear and legible. Pre-printed wording is
          permitted in accordance with the attached model but no other certification
          statements are permitted.
          The details entered onto the Certificate must be in English and permit easy reading,
          and may be entered by hand, using block letters, or by a machine or computer.
          Abbreviations must be restricted to a minimum.
          The space remaining on the reverse side of the Certificate may be used by the
          originator for any additional information but must not include any certification
          statement.
          The original Certificate must accompany the items and correlation must be
          established between the Certificate and the item(s). A copy of the Certificate must be
          retained by the organisation that manufactured the item. Where the Certificate format
          and the data is entirely computer generated, subject to acceptance by the CAA, it is
          permissible to retain the Certificate format and data on a secure database.
          There is no restriction in the number of copies of the Certificate sent to the customer
          or retained by the originator.
          The Certificate that accompanies the item may be attached to the item by being
          placed in an envelope for durability.
          Except as otherwise stated, there must be an entry in all Blocks to make the
          document a valid certificate.
           Block 3      A unique number must be pre-printed in this Block for Certificate control and
                        traceability purposes except that in the case of a computer generated
                        document, the unique number need not be pre-printed where the computer
                        is programmed to produce the number.
                        Therefore, the name entered in the box is that of the organisation approval
                        holder who is responsible for making the final determination of conformity
                        or airworthiness, and whose Approval Reference Number is quoted in Block
                        16. The name must be entered in exactly the same form as appears in the
                        Approval Certificate held by the organisation.
                        This Block may be pre-printed. Logo of the production approval holder, etc.,
                        is permitted if it can be contained within the Block.
           Block 6    The Block is provided for the convenience of the organisation issuing the
                      Certificate to permit easy cross-reference to the 'Remarks' Block 13 by the
                      use of line item numbers. Block 6 must be completed where there is more
                      than one line item.
           Block 7    The name or description of the item must be given. Preference must be
                      given to use of the Illustrated Parts Catalogue (IPC) designation.
           Block 8    State the Part Number. Preference must be given to use of the IPC number
                      designation.
           Block 9    Used to indicate the type-approved applications for which the released items
                      are eligible for installation, based on information provided by the design
                      approval holder. The following entries are permitted:
                      Any information in Block 9 does not constitute authority to fit the item to a
                      particular aircraft, engine or propeller. The User/Installer must confirm via
                      documents such as the Parts Catalogue, Service Bulletins, etc., that the
                      item is eligible for the particular installation.
                      Any information in Block 9 does not necessarily mean that the product, parts
                      or appliances are only eligible for installation on the listed model(s). Nor does
                      it guarantee that the product, parts or appliances are eligible for installation
                      on all entries in Block 9. Eligibility may be affected by modification or
                      configuration changes.
           Block 11   State the Serial Number (or Batch Number) of the item if applicable. If not
                      applicable, state 'N/A'.
           Block 12   Enter one or a combination of appropriate standard words from the following
                      table. The table lists, in quotes, the standard words permitted for use when
                      releasing new items prior to entry into service, i.e. the items have not been
                      previously used in operational service. It also details the circumstances and
                      conditions under which they may be used. In all cases the certification rules
                      relating to Block 14 apply, the appropriate box is to be marked, and Block 15
                      is to be signed.
1 'MANUFACTURED'
2 'INSPECTED'/'TESTED'
3 'MODIFIED'
                       Provided that no change in design has occurred during the design data
                       approval process, the manufacturer may state that the design data has been
                       approved and that provided the specific component is still in the condition it
                       was when it was shipped to the user/installer, the component is now eligible
                       to be installed. The manufacturer must make this statement on a second
                       Approved Certificate where in addition to any other necessary remarks,
                       appropriate explanatory information must be provided. The following
                       wording must be used: 'RE-CERTIFICATION OF NEW PARTS FROM
                       CONFORMITY TO AIRWORTHINESS: THIS DOCUMENT ONLY CERTIFIES
                       THE APPROVAL OF THE DESIGN DATA TO WHICH THIS ITEM WAS
                       (THESE ITEMS WERE) MANUFACTURED, BUT DOES NOT COVER
                       CONFORMITY/CONDITION AFTER RELEASE OF THE INITIAL APPROVED
                       CERTIFICATE REF……..'
                       Approved Certificate (both for 'Conformity purposes' and for 'Airworthiness
                       purposes') must be generated by the same organisation, i.e. the original
                       manufacturer or prime manufacturer, whichever raised the original Approved
                       Certificate for Conformity purposes.
           Block 14   This Block may only be used to indicate the status of new items.
                      The main purpose of the Certificate is to release items for airworthiness
                      purposes, which means conformity with approved design data and in
                      condition for safe operation.
           Block 15   The hand-written normal signature of a person who has written authority
                      from an approved production organisation to make Certifications in respect
                      of new items. Use of a stamp instead of a signature is not permitted, but the
                      authorised person may add a stamp impression to his or her signature to aid
                      recognition. Subject to the agreement of the CAA in any particular case,
                      computer-generated signatures are permitted if it can be demonstrated that
                      an equivalent level of control, traceability and accountability exists.
           Block 16   State the full authorisation reference given by the CAA to the organisation
                      releasing the new items.
           Block 17   The name of the person signing Block 15, printed, typed, or written in a
                      legible form.
           Block 18   The date on which Block 15 is signed, in the format day/month/year. The
                      month must be stated in letters (sufficient letters must be used so there can
                      be no ambiguity as to the month intended).
Block 19 Not used and strike out for release of new items.
Block 20 Not used and strike out for release of new items.
Block 21 Not used and strike out for release of new items.
Block 22 Not used and strike out for release of new items.
Block 23 Not used and strike out for release of new items.
1 Introduction
1.1       In January 2003, JAR 145 amendment 5 (subsequently incorporated into EASA
          Part-145) introduced paragraph 145.A.60 – Occurrence Reporting, to require
          organisations to “establish an internal occurrence reporting system…to enable the
          collection and evaluation of such reports, [which have resulted, or may result, in an
          unsafe condition]. This procedure shall identify adverse trends, corrective actions
          taken or to be taken by the organisation to address deficiencies and include evaluation
          of all known relevant information relating to such occurrences and a method to
          circulate the information as necessary." CAA seeks to provide an environment in
          which such errors may be openly investigated in order that the contributing factors
          and root causes of maintenance errors can be addressed using a system that would
          complement, not supplant, the two current systems for reporting maintenance errors
          (MORS and CHIRP).
          NOTE:     Square brackets [ ] denote CAA insertion.
1.2       Mandatory Occurrence Reporting (MOR) scheme exists in order that significant
          safety issues are brought to the notice of the CAA. However, the MORs scheme is
          not intended to collect and monitor the normal flow of day-to-day defects/incidents
          etc. which, in remaining an industry responsibility (CAP 382 Mandatory Occurrence
          Reporting System, paragraph 5.4.5), forms an important part of the overall operational
          safety task. This Leaflet concerns, primarily, those events which fall below the MOR
          criteria but which, nevertheless, are important for an organisation to understand and
          control. However, the principles described in this Leaflet may also be applied by an
          organisation to their own internal investigation of incidents meeting the MOR criteria
          NOTE:     Organisations will still be required to report MORs to the CAA.
1.3       The Confidential Human Factors Incident Reporting Programme (CHIRP) scheme
          provides an alternate reporting mechanism for individuals who want to report safety
          concerns and incidents confidentially. However CHIRP should not be considered as
          an alternative to implementing a Maintenance Error Management System (MEMS)
          scheme. MEMS and CHIRP perform different functions albeit acting towards the
          same ultimate aim, i.e. improved flight safety.
1.4       Maintenance errors with serious consequences such as accidents or incidents are
          routinely investigated by organisations, Air Accident Investigation Branch or CAA.
          Other operationally significant events (e.g. technical delays, cancellations, etc.) may
          not be legally required to be reported externally but are frequently investigated by
          organisations albeit too often only to apportion responsibility for the event, rather than
          to determine cause. Below these levels are events without operational significance
          which may rarely be investigated (e.g. the omission of an oil filler cap which, by
          chance, is noticed and corrected before flight). In order to gain a better understanding
          of the problems and factors which contribute to errors it is necessary to investigate
          these and operationally significant events before they possibly contribute to or cause
          an incident or accident in the future.
1.5       It is important to examine not just what happened, but why it happened, in order to
          determine the root causes and problems.
2.1       AN 71 Issue 1 (2000) set out CAA policy on MEMS and, prior to the requirements
          introduced by JAR 145.60 and Part 145.A.60, encouraged maintenance organisations,
          in particular those maintaining large commercial air transport aircraft, to adopt MEMS
          concepts. Subsequently, the JAA Maintenance Human Factors Working Group
          incorporated very similar guidance into their report published in May 2001
          (reproduced in CAP 716 issue 2, 18/12/2003), with the key elements being
          incorporated into EASA Part 145.A.60(b) and AMC 145.A.60(b). Both key, and more
          detailed, elements are described below, in particular the importance of a 'just culture'
          for the successful functioning of a MEMS.
2.2       Prevailing industry best practice has shown that a MEMS should contain the following
          elements:
          • Clearly identified aims and objectives
          • Demonstrable corporate commitment with responsibilities for the MEMS clearly
            defined
          • Corporate encouragement of uninhibited reporting and participation by individuals
          • Disciplinary policies and boundaries identified and published
          • An event investigation process
          • The events that will trigger error investigations identified and published
          • Investigators selected and trained
          • MEMS education for staff, and training where necessary
          • Appropriate action based on investigation findings
          • Feedback of results to workforce
          • Analysis of the collective data showing contributing factor trends and frequencies.
2.3       The aim of the scheme is to identify the factors contributing to incidents, and to make
          the system resistant to similar errors. Whilst not essential to the success of a MEMS,
          it is recommended that for large organisations a computerised database be used for
          storage and analysis of MEMS data. This would enable the full potential of such a
          system to be utilised in managing errors.
2.4       For the purpose of this Leaflet a maintenance error is considered to have occurred
          when the maintenance system, including the human element, fails to perform in the
          manner expected in order to achieve its safety objectives. The human element
          includes technicians, engineers, planners, managers, store-keepers – in fact any
          person contributing to the maintenance process. The foregoing definition differs from
          that of a human error as it demands consideration of the system failings (e.g.
          inadequate staffing, organisational factors, tooling availability, ambiguous manuals
          etc.) as well as the error committed by a person.
3 CAA Assurances
3.1       It is recognised that the success of a MEMS programme is dependent on full and free
          investigation without fear of action by the CAA. Accordingly, the CAA gives the
          following assurances:
3.1.1     The CAA will be checking, as part of its approval audit process, that the organisation’s
          internal occurrence reporting and investigation process is functioning as described in
          the procedures approved by the CAA and in line with the objectives of the programme
          as explained in CAP 716 Issue 2. The CAA audit may involve the review of
          disidentified MEMS investigations such that the foregoing can be satisfied. However,
          the CAA makes the following assurances that it will:
          a) subject to b) not disclose the name of the person submitting the MEMS report, nor
             of a person to whom it relates, nor pass on a MEMS report to a third party, unless
             required to do so by law or unless the person(s) concerned authorises such
             disclosure.
          b) take all reasonable steps possible to avoid disclosing the identity of the reporter or
             of those individuals involved in the occurrence, should any follow-up action arising
             from a MEMS report be taken.
          c) not, as its policy, institute criminal proceedings in respect of unpremeditated or
             inadvertent breaches of the law or requirements which come to its attention only
             because they have been reported under the MEMS scheme, except in cases
             involving dereliction of duty amounting to gross negligence or recklessness. Such
             an assurance is similar to that provided under the MOR scheme.
3.2       As examples of what the CAA might require, as evidence that an organisation has a
          working MEMS programme in accordance with Part 145.A.60(b), a surveyor may ask
          to see the following documents and evidence, and in order to satisfy himself, he may
          wish to speak to individual members of staff at any level within the organisation:
          a) A copy of the company’s safety and disciplinary policy and determine that staff are
             aware of this policy, and believe that it will be, and has been, applied fairly.
          b) The procedure describing the company's process for reporting and investigating
             incidents and errors, and the types of occurrences that would normally be
             investigated.
          c) Evidence that occurrences meeting the criteria detailed above have been reported,
             and to assure himself that occurrences are not frequently going unreported.
          d) Evidence that occurrences meeting the criteria detailed above have been
             investigated, and to assure himself that occurrences are being, and have been,
             fairly investigated. It is hoped that an organisation would cooperate with a surveyor
             in putting him in touch with individuals who have been party to investigations, but
             only with the agreement of the individuals concerned.
          e) Within a large company, evidence that MEMS investigators had received
             appropriate training.
          f) Evidence that the organisation had acted, or was acting, upon results of MEMS
             investigations, based on risk assessment. This may mean that no action had been
             taken if a risk assessment has deemed that the causes were unlikely, in isolation
             or in combination, to result in a hazardous event in the future. A surveyor would
             expect to see evidence of action(s) to prevent root causes, and/or to mitigate the
             effects of error where appropriate.
          g) Evidence of feedback to the workforce, on both occurrences and their
             investigation, and remedial action taken, would also be expected.
3.3       For a small organisation, the surveyor would expect evidence as described above, but
          on a less structured basis.
3.4       If an organisation has no evidence to offer in the form of reported and investigated
          occurrences, the surveyor may wish to talk to staff to assure himself that there have
          been no such occurrences, as opposed to occurrences going unreported and
          uninvestigated. The surveyor would respect staff confidences in seeking such
          evidence.
4.1       The CAA encourages organisations to adopt the following code of practice regarding
          a MEMS:
4.1.1     Where an occurrence reported via MEMS indicates an unpremeditated or inadvertent
          lapse by an employee, as described below, the CAA would expect the employer to
          act reasonably, agreeing that free and full reporting is the primary aim in order to
          establish why the event happened by studying the contributory factors that led to the
          incident, and that every effort should be made to avoid action that may inhibit
          reporting.
4.1.2     In the context of error management it is considered that an unpremeditated or
          inadvertent lapse should not incur any punitive action, but a breach of professionalism
          may do so. As a guideline, individuals should not attract punitive action unless:
          a) the act was intended to cause deliberate harm or damage.
          b) the person concerned does not have a constructive attitude towards complying
             with safe operating procedures.
          c) the person concerned knowingly violated procedures that were readily available,
             workable, intelligible and correct.
          d) the person concerned has been involved previously in similar lapses.
          e) the person concerned has attempted to hide their lapse or part in a mishap.
          f) the act was the result of a substantial disregard for safety.
             “Substantial disregard”, for this purpose, means:
             • In the case of a certification authorisation holder (e.g. licensed engineer or
               Certifying Staff) the act or failure to act was a substantial deviation from the
               degree of care, judgement and responsibility reasonably expected of such a
               person.
             • In the case of a person holding no maintenance certification responsibility, the
               act or failure to act was a substantial deviation from the degree of care and
               diligence expected of a reasonable person in those circumstances.
          The degree of culpability would vary depending on any mitigating circumstances that
          are identified as a result of the MEMS investigation. It follows that any action taken
          by the organisation would also be on a sliding scale varying from corrective measures
          such as retraining through to dismissal of the individual.
4.1.3     In the case of incidents investigated via a MEMS, irrespective of whether or not such
          incidents were brought to the knowledge of the CAA, the CAA expects an
          organisation to address the problems which contributed to these incidents. The
          organisation should, where possible, implement appropriate measures to prevent the
          problem from re-occurring, or alternatively monitor future occurrences, according to
          the degree of risk and likelihood of re-occurrence. A supporting database is useful in
          these circumstances in helping to assess the frequency of occurrence and any
          associated trends.
4.1.4     The CAA would expect that identified safety issues would be acted upon. If the CAA
          becomes aware, by whatever means, that a significant safety problem existed and
          was not being addressed, it reserves the right to take appropriate action.
          NOTE:     The statement by an organisation that an incident is undergoing, or has undergone,
                    a MEMS investigation, without any additional information provided to explain why
                    the incident occurred, would not normally be an adequate basis for an MOR closure.
4.1.5     Organisations are encouraged to share their MEMS results with the CAA and with
          other maintenance organisations. It is hoped that by sharing such data the CAA and
          industry can jointly develop a better understanding of maintenance error causation
          and develop more focused human factors strategies. However, it is appreciated that
          some information in a MEMS may be considered sensitive to the organisation
          affected, and may need to be dis-identified before being shared with other
          organisations.
4.1.6     To support the sharing of MEMS results between organisations, members of the
          UKOTG (UK Operators Technical Group) and EIMG (European Independent
          Maintenance Group) in conjunction with the CAA and CHIRP have established a
          MEMS Review Board and a shared dis-identified database. The Board’s role is to
          facilitate, develop and guide this process. The CAA encourages UK maintenance
          organisations to participate in the programme and join the MEMS Group. Further
          details about the MEMS Review Board and how to join the MEMS Group can be
          found at the following website: http://www.chirp-mems.co.uk/MEMS/Index.htm
5 Further Information
5.1       More detailed guidance information, including where to obtain free MEMS software,
          is included in CAP 716 Issue 2.
5.2       Maintenance Organisations requiring further information or advice on how to
          establish a Maintenance Error Management System should contact their CAA Survey
          Department local Regional Office;
          or:
          Survey Department,
          Chief Surveyor’s Office,
          CAA
          Aviation House
          Gatwick Airport South
          West Sussex
          RH6 0YR
          Tel: 01293 573366
          Fax: 01293 573984
1 Introduction
1.1       The Air Navigation Order places a duty on the CAA to consider:
          a) the design, construction, workmanship and materials of aircraft and their
             associated equipment; and
          b) the results of flying trials and such other tests as are necessary;
          when it is satisfying itself that aircraft registered in the UK are fit to fly. In carrying out
          this duty the CAA, as it is empowered to do, makes extensive use of reports
          furnished to it by appropriately qualified persons.
1.2       Such reports may come in various forms and have a range of purposes. They may
          provide a physical description of anything from a complete aeroplane to a small item
          of equipment. They may specify performance or present test results. They may
          demonstrate that certain design or manufacturing standards are met.
2.1       However it is presented, the CAA’s interest in such information stems from its need
          to be satisfied that a given aircraft or aircraft type is fit to fly. Once satisfied, if the CAA
          is subsequently presented with another aircraft (or item of equipment or operating
          proposal etc.) which it knows to be identical in nature it cannot and should not ignore
          this state of knowledge and insist that the person seeking approval goes through the
          whole process of satisfying the CAA again.
2.2       The CAA is aware that there may be commercial implications to the policy described
          in paragraph 2.1, in that second or subsequent applications for a given approval may
          derive substantial benefit from the evidence provided when the first application was
          cleared. Technical data are frequently submitted with notes purporting to place
          restrictions on their use and it is possible that undue significance may be attached to
          such notes. One purpose of this Leaflet is, therefore, to make it clear that when an
          aircraft or item of equipment has once been shown fit for a particular purpose, the
          fact has been established: the CAA does not need to demand repetitive evidence
          from a later applicant for an identical certification and will not ask for it. The onus is,
          of course, upon such an applicant to demonstrate that the relevant circumstances are
          identical.
2.3       If safety depends on the way in which an aircraft (or item of equipment etc.) is used,
          the CAA may have considered and approved certain proposed operating limitations,
          or it may have required evidence that established operating procedures are
          acceptable; if so, it may require similar material to be provided by subsequent
          operators seeking a similar clearance. This is, however, a separate matter.
          proprietary modification would be passed on by the CAA to a third party without the
          express permission of its owners. Nor, if an operation depended upon certain
          proprietary Flight Manual limitations or data, would such information be passed on.
3.2       Having stated this, if the CAA were presented with details of a modification (or Flight
          Manual amendment etc.) which was identified as being identical to one which from
          prior experience it knew would satisfy an airworthiness requirement, such a
          modification would have to be considered acceptable. Where this involves a light
          aircraft type of which there exist or are likely to be numerous operators, the CAA may,
          for efficiency, issue a CAA Supplement to the Flight Manual or Pilot’s Operating
          Handbook, based on data or information supplied by a manufacturer or an Applicant.
          As with the situation described in paragraph 2, the CAA can have no justification for
          requiring further evidence once it has been established that its requirements can be
          satisfied in a particular way. The onus is, of course, still upon such an applicant to
          demonstrate that the relevant circumstances are identical.
4 Evidence of Identicality
Part 12 Specifications
1 Introduction
               Directorate of Standardisation
               Stan 13
               Ministry of Defence
               Montrose House
               187 George Street
               GLASGOW G1 1YU
5.1       Specifications prepared for a material by an Approved Design Organisation where the
          material is to be used in a part designed within the terms of the design approval
          should be submitted in duplicate for approval to the:
                    Civil Aviation Authority
                    Safety Regulation Group
                    Aviation House
                    Gatwick Airport
                    WEST SUSSEX RH6 0YR
5.2       A specification submitted for approval should, according to the material concerned,
          include such of the following information as appropriate:
          a) An identity or reference number, issue number and date.
          b) A title describing the material.
          c) The quality and/or chemical composition of the material.
          d) The mechanical and/or physical properties of the material.
          e) The method of determining the mechanical and/or physical properties of the
             material.
          f) Particulars of defects which render the material unsuitable.
          g) Particulars of heat treatment and/or other manufacturing processes.
          h) A table of manufacturing tolerances.
          i) Particulars of such markings which will ensure identification of the material.
5.2.1     A specification will be approved if the CAA accept that the material complies with
          such a specification having the essential properties assumed by the design in the
          associated technical investigation.
          The following specifications are available from the CAA web site at www.caa.co.uk
          under the Publications section. Paper copies are available from the CAA’s printers
          whose details are given on the inside cover of this publication.
1 Introduction
1.1       Standard Maintenance Practices (SMPs) contained within this part are produced by
          the Survey Department in consultation, where necessary, with other Sections of the
          CAA. They are intended to give guidance and information to originators of
          maintenance schedules submitted for Approval and the holders of Approved
          Maintenance Schedules, in respect of the minimum maintenance requirements
          acceptable to the CAA for the subjects addressed.
1.2       Holders of Approved Maintenance Schedules should review and update their
          schedules, using the normal 'B' amendment procedure, to comply with applicable
          SMPs.
          The purpose of this Standard Maintenance Practice is to ensure that the introductory
          pages of Maintenance Schedules are reasonably consistent and, where applicable,
          include the following items. Minor variation in the wording is acceptable providing that
          the intention remains clear.
1.1       In the preparation of this Maintenance Schedule Reference ....... to meet the
          requirements of the Air Navigation Order (ANO) and British Civil Airworthiness
          Requirements (BCAR), the recommendations made by the constructors and
          manufacturers have been evaluated and, where appropriate, have been incorporated.
          It is agreed that it is a duty of the Operator or his contracted Maintenance
          Organisation that subsequent maintenance recommendations, including
          airworthiness information promulgated in Service Bulletins, Service Letters, etc.,
          issued by the constructors and manufacturers, should be evaluated and, where
          appropriate, should be incorporated in this Schedule by approved amendment
          procedures.
1.2       The periods/frequencies of the maintenance tasks in this Schedule are generally
          based on an anticipated annual utilisation of ..... flying hours and large variations in the
          annual utilisation of individual aircraft could invalidate the effectiveness of certain
          tasks. If the annual utilisation varies by more than 25% from that anticipated, the
          Operator accepts that he, or his contracted maintenance organisation, must review
          the maintenance tasks and periods with a view to making any necessary adjustments.
1.3       In addition to variations in utilisation, the data contained in this Schedule will be
          reviewed at least annually by the Operator, or his contracted Maintenance
          Organisation, to ensure that the detailed requirements continue to be valid in the light
          of operating experience.
NOTE: Any changes in aircraft applicability must have prior approval by the CAA.
3 Flying Times
          All periods in this Schedule quoted in 'hours flying' are to be calculated and recorded
          on a 'Take-Off to Touch-Down' basis.
          Maintenance Schedules for aircraft not exceeding 2730 kg MTWA are additionally
          required to include the Certification requirements contained in CAP 520 Light Aircraft
          Maintenance.
5 Certification of Maintenance
          The periods prescribed by this Schedule may be varied subject to the conditions and
          limits contained in Appendix A to this SMP.
7.1       European Commission Regulation (EC) No. 2042/2003 Annex I requires Operators to
          institute a system for the assessment of continuing airworthiness information. This
          information will originate from the Responsible Authority of the State of Manufacture
          in the form of Airworthiness Directives (or documents of comparable intent) and from
          the manufacturer in the form of Service Bulletins, Letters, Information Leaflets, etc.
          resulting from In-Service experience.
7.2       Compliance with the mandatory requirements of the Responsible Authority of the
          country of origin must be achieved unless this requirement is varied by the CAA.
7.3       Continuing Airworthiness and other Service Information must be continuously
          evaluated by the Operator or the contracted Maintenance Organisation and, where
          necessary, appropriate action must be taken to amend the Maintenance Schedule.
8.1       Structural 'fatigue' lives published by the manufacturer or by the CAA are mandatory
          for aircraft on the UK register (see also BCAR Section A and B). In the case of foreign
          products the CAA may vary the lives published by the manufacturer or itself publish
          a life, normally as a CAA Additional Airworthiness Directive.
8.2       All other life limitations classified as mandatory by the manufacturer must also be
          observed unless varied by the CAA.
10.1      Whenever inspections are made or work is undertaken on vital points in flying or
          engine control systems, a detailed investigation must be made on completion of the
          task to ensure that all tools, rags or any other loose articles which could impede the
          free movement and safe operation of the system(s) have been removed and that the
          system(s) and installation in the work area are clean and unobstructed.
10.2      If, as a result of the application of this Schedule, any part of either the main or any
          associated system is dismantled, adjusted, repaired or renewed, that part of the
          system(s) which has been disturbed shall be subjected to a duplicate inspection, with
          free movement, range, direction and tension checks and shall be certified in
          accordance with British Civil Airworthiness Requirements, Section A Chapter A6–2 or
          Section B Chapter B6–2 (A5–3).
          The following check must be made to establish that fuel systems are free from
          contamination:
          Fuel system water drain checks are to be carried out at periods not exceeding 24
          hours elapsed time and in accordance with Company instruction.
          NOTE: The operator must be satisfied with the quality of all fuel taken on board his
                aircraft, particularly in respect of water contamination and monitor the
                supplier’s quality performance.
          At the appropriate Overhaul Period ten percent of all liferafts installed in fleets using
          system bottle and release mechanism are to be inflated and tested. Ensure that
          deployment and inflation is satisfactory.
          Where the term 'AREA' or 'ZONAL' is used in this Schedule, this is to be interpreted
          to mean that a general visual inspection is made for general condition, security and
          leaks in the structure, systems and components and their installation in the specified
          zone or area. The inspection must be of sufficient depth to establish that any
          significant deterioration is identified and rectified to ensure that the general quality/
          condition of the zone/area is satisfactory until the next higher inspection becomes
          due.
14 Inspection Standards
14.1      Unless otherwise stated, all inspection requirements are to be applied without
          removing an item from the aircraft or dismantling the item, group or sub-assembly
          unless dismantling is considered essential in order to ensure airworthiness. Where
          dismantling is required by this Schedule, this is stated against the item concerned.
14.2      All significant terms and abbreviations used within this Schedule to define each
          maintenance task are defined in accordance with the Type Certificate holder’s
          definitions, current JAR, CAA BCAR definitions or, in the absence of formal
          definitions, those quoted in World Airlines Technical Operations Glossary.
14.3      The inspection standards applied to individual task inspections must meet the
          requirements of the Type Certificate holder’s recommended standards and practices.
          In the absence of specific manufacturers guidance, refer to this CAP 562 (Civil Aircraft
          Airworthiness Information and Procedures) or FAA AC 43–13–1A Aircraft Inspection
          and Repair or other approved data, as appropriate.
          The method of data collection, analysis, corrective actions and reporting specified for
          the implementation of this programme is prescribed in the current Document ........
          'CMM/Reliability Programme', which constitutes part of this Approved Maintenance
          Schedule.
Appendix A
1         The Operator or their contracted Maintenance Organisation, may vary the periods
          prescribed by this Schedule provided that such variations are within the limits of sub-
          paragraphs a) to e) of this Appendix A.
2         Variations shall be permitted only when the periods prescribed by this Schedule (or
          documents in support of this Schedule) cannot be complied with due to
          circumstances which could not reasonably have been foreseen by the Operator or by
          the contracted Maintenance Organisation.
3         The decision to vary any of the prescribed periods shall be taken only by the Chief
          Inspector/Quality Manager or person of equivalent status on behalf of the Operator or
          the contracted Maintenance Organisation. Particulars of every variation so made shall
          be entered in the appropriate Log Book(s).
          d) Items Controlled by More Than One Limit. For items controlled by more than
             one limit, e.g. items controlled by flying hours and calendar time or flying hours and
             landings/cycles, the more restricted limit shall be applied.
1 Introduction
1.1       This SMP establishes minimum requirements relating to maintenance tasks and their
          intervals for the Fairchild A100 Series Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) System. These
          requirements take account of the Component Maintenance Manual 23–70–01, latest
          issue. Account is also taken of the lack of failure detection within the system other
          than that provided by the limited pre-flight test facility.
1.2       The maintenance intervals stated in this SMP are based on elapsed calendar time.
          These intervals should be interpreted as the maximum permissible periods between
          the maintenance tasks specified. Operators may submit Maintenance Schedules
          based on flight hours provided that fleet operating statistics show that the calendar
          time limits are unlikely to be exceeded.
1.3       Operators will need to review the results of their CVR sampling programme (see
          paragraph 8) and, where shown to be necessary, reduce maintenance intervals until
          an acceptable level of serviceability has been re-established. Such a review should be
          made annually and a report should be sent to the CAA.
                                                     Maximum
 Item           Equipment       Task                                   Interpretation
                                                     Interval
                                                       Maximum
 Item            Equipment        Task                                   Interpretation
                                                       Interval
                                                                         NOTES:
                                                                         1) Before cleaning is attempted,
                                                                            the quality of the recording
                                                                            already on the tape should be
                                                                            evaluated. Where indicated by
                                                                            the evaluation, appropriate
                                                                            maintenance should be
                                                                            performed on the aircraft from
                                                                            which the CVR was removed.
                 * NOTES: (1)     The objective of this sample check is to confirm the adequacy of
                                  maintenance and to detect any deterioration of recording quality, e.g.
                                  due to vibration, electrical interference, acoustic noise or intermittent
                                  defects.
                            (2)   Operators will need to submit, to the CAA, proposals for their CVR
                                  sampling programme. Account will need to be taken of route
                                  structure, number of aircraft in the fleet type, and their annual
                                  utilisation. See also paragraph 1.3.
1 Introduction
1.1       The following information may be used to establish a consistent CAA policy
          appertaining to the maintenance of seat belts and harnesses.
1.2       In the absence of manufacturer’s recommendations the following conditions must be
          satisfied by an operator deciding to adopt the 'on-condition' philosophy in preference
          to load testing:
          a) A detailed visual inspection including the seat attachments for security of
             installation and integrity of fittings. Check for signs of distress, wear or biochemical
             staining at intervals not exceeding 6 months.
          b) Whenever seat belts or harnesses are removed for repair or re-conditioning, the
             requirements of CAA’s Specification No. 1 – Safety Belts – as an example must be
             observed. (See Attachment.)
               The CAA will accept the following values, depicted in the table below, as an
               acceptable sample of the work completed in respect of the maintenance of safety
               belts and harnesses:
Requirement Sample
                                                                                     United Kingdom
                                                                             Civil Aviation Authority
Specification No. 1
Issue 6
12 March 2004
                                               Safety Belts
1 Introduction
1.1       Although this Specification was written originally for aeroplanes, a safety belt
          designed to this Specification is also acceptable to the CAA for use in a Rotorcraft.
2 Applicability
2.1       Safety belts shall comply with this Specification or with such other Specifications as
          the CAA may approve. Alternative Specifications, submitted for approval, shall
          provide at least the same amount of protection. FAA TSO C.22(f) is considered to be
          an acceptable specification provided that compliance with paragraphs 3.8, 4.2, 5.3,
          5.4, 5.5 and 5.6 of this Specification is also demonstrated.
2.2       FAA TSO-C22g or JTSO-C22g qualified safety belts are considered acceptable for
          installation with no further consideration of the requirements of this Specification.
2.3       The installation of safety belts shall be done in accordance with the certification
          requirements for the aircraft.
3 Form
3.1       The belts shall be individual to a single occupant and shall be suitable in every respect
          for installation in an aeroplane for the purpose of restraining the wearer, without
          causing significant injury, against the ultimate inertia forces prescribed.
3.2       The correct method of using the belt shall be rapid and obvious.
3.3       Parts, made of metal or similar unyielding material, which come into contact with the
          wearer, shall be well rounded where necessary.
          NOTE:    Consideration should be given to the fact that the wearer does not remain in the
                   normal sitting position during the application of the higher accelerations.
3.4       No part of a safety belt shall pass between the wearer’s legs or shall appreciably
          restrict the movement of the wearer’s limbs.
3.5       The belt shall, when correctly adjusted to the wearer, remain in position irrespective
          of variation of load.
3.6       Those parts of the belt which under the prescribed accelerations restrain, and are in
          contact with the wearer, shall be not less than 50 mm (2 in.) wide.
          NOTE:    However for belts not needing TSO approval an approved military belt 44 mm
                   (1·75 in) minimum width which is otherwise acceptable will not be rejected by the
                   CAA.
3.7       Those parts defined in paragraph 3.6 shall be such that the whole of the minimum
          width specified is effective in transmitting load from the parts to the wearer.
3.8       When correctly installed, the belt, when worn, shall lie across the groin of the wearer.
          The belt when so worn shall lie in a plane which is approximately at 45° to the plane
          of the longitudinal and lateral axes of the aeroplane.
3.9       Throughout this Specification, a belt is regarded as being divisible into various
          members (e.g. left strap, right strap, release mechanism, etc.) which are liable to be
          detached from each other for purposes of storage or replacement. It is further
          envisaged that more than one firm may be concerned in the manufacture of the
          completed belt; for example, a release box may be made by a different firm from that
          responsible for the webbing parts.
4 Strength
          NOTES:    1)   The certified strength required of each member will depend upon the
                         manner in which the belt is installed in the aeroplane and upon the
                         emergency alighting accelerations appropriate to the particular aeroplane.
4.2       The strength of belts with self-aligning and fittings, fitted in a normal forward-facing
          installation, however, may be designed for the loads prescribed in paragraph 4.3. The
          loads of paragraph 4.3 may not be used and the installation shall be conservatively
          represented in the tests as required by paragraph 7 if:
          a) When restraining an occupant, the vertical projection of the angle between any strap
             (at its attachment point) and the fore and aft axis of the aircraft exceeds 15° , or, if
             the end fittings are not self-aligning,
          or
          b) The installation is not a forward facing seat installation.
4.3       For unit value of forward g the basis of certified strength required of a member is 670
          N/g (150 lbf/g), this load shall be multiplied by the prescribed forward g for the
          aeroplane type. Safety belt attachment fittings shall have an additional strength factor
          of 1·33.
5.1       The belt adjustment shall be either in the buckle or adjacent to it. The adjustment
          provided in this way shall be such as to suit all persons likely to use the belt. A
          separate action shall not be necessary to lock the means of adjustment.
          NOTE:    The load required to vary the adjustment, i.e. tighten or loosen the belt, should not
                   exceed 134 N (30 lbf) and the design should be such that it is easy to operate.
5.2       The means of fastening and releasing shall be rapid and obvious and shall be of the
          metal to metal positive latching type. The design shall be such that the possibility of
          the means of locking, releasing or adjustment being jammed by loose clothing or by
          twisting of the belt, is extremely remote. The fastening means shall be designed to
          preclude incorrect latching by the wearer.
          NOTE:    Instructions may be marked on the belt to facilitate its use. However, the action
                   should not be such as to demand instructions.
5.3       The wearer, shall be able to release the belt with either hand, regardless of aircraft
          orientation in an otherwise survivable accident without undue difficulty.
5.4       The force required to effect release from the belt shall be assessed when, after the
          belt has been subjected to a load as near as practical to the ultimate load (see
          paragraph 7.2.2), it is under a residual load of 1112 N (250 lbf).
5.4.1     Where a conventional lever operated release mechanism is used (i.e. one which can
          be grasped with all the fingers of one hand) the load to effect release under the
          conditions defined in paragraph 5.4 shall not exceed 90 N (20 lbf).
          NOTE:    In addition to the requirements of 5.4.2 it is also recommended that the minimum
                   release load should not be less than 22.5N (5 lbf).
5.4.2     To avoid inadvertent release there shall be a free movement of the lever and the belt
          shall remain fastened until the lever attains an angle of not less than 70° or not more
          than 95° to its position at rest. The lever shall be spring loaded to the position it
          normally assumes when the belt is fastened.
          NOTE:    Release at a lever angle of less than 70° may be acceptable where the design is such
                   that it can be demonstrated that the lever is unlikely to be caught and moved by
                   clothing.
5.5       Where means of release other than by a conventional lever are employed the
          functional characteristics and release loads of such means shall be agreed with the
          CAA.
5.6       Where the positive locking action of the buckle is dependent upon a spring element,
          no single failure shall cause or permit the belt to release, unless an adequate fatigue
          life has been established.
5.7       The means of fastening shall be such that the responsible crew member will be able
          to see at a glance whether the belt is securely fastened or not.
5.8       Extension pieces shall be identified as to the type of belt with which they are to be
          used. Extension pieces shall be designed and tested to the same standards as are
          established for belts submitted in compliance with this Specification.
          This paragraph 6 is applicable only to parts which contribute to strength, and to parts
          which are functionally important.
6.1       Only materials to a suitable approved specification1, or obtained from a source
          approved by the CAA, shall be used.
6.2          Fittings shall be made of metal or of materials that have been demonstrated to be
             equally satisfactory for their intended function.
6.3          Materials which may deteriorate in service or materials the properties of which may
             be significantly affected by ambient conditions (e.g. leather) shall not be used.
6.4          Where such processes as soldering, brazing, welding and casting are used, suitable
             factors and safeguards acceptable to the CAA shall be employed. Primary load
             carrying castings shall comply with the requirements for critical castings.
6.5          The choice of materials and of protective treatments for those parts which cannot
             readily be inspected shall be such as to minimise the risk of corrosion or deterioration.
6.6          Materials shall be flame resistant to the appropriate standard defined in the
             certification basis of the aircraft.
7 Tests
7.1          General
             Each member shall be tested in a manner which is agreed by the CAA to represent
             adequately the conditions of the installation. Accurate representation may be
             necessary for cases where unusual geometry or eccentricity of loading could affect
             the ultimate load or the functioning of the means of release. Tests shall be arranged
             so that the friction effects in the test apparatus do not significantly relieve the stress
             in any member under test.
             The load in a member shall be taken as the load applied to the end nearest to the point
             of attachment to the airframe or seat.
7.2          Prototype Belts
7.2.1        Each member shall be tested to the ultimate load: the member will be accepted if
             each part supports the load required of it without significant slipping of any adjusting
             mechanisms it may include.
             NOTE:       If, at the point during this test when one half of the certified strength is reached, an
                         inspection is made of those members utilising webbing or similar material in a load-
                         bearing capacity, it may be possible to obtain some confirmation whether or not it
                         will be possible to carry out the production test of 7.3.2.1 without damage to
                         otherwise satisfactory series belts.
7.2.1.1      The load to be applied shall be that of paragraph 4.3 multiplied by a factor of 1·2.
             Where significantly new designs are being tested the CAA may require more than one
             specimen to be tested.
7.2.2        Compliance with the requirements of paragraph 5.4 shall be demonstrated by tests
             in which the release mechanism is first loaded by means of the members normally
             assembled to it, to as near as is practical to the ultimate load of the belt (in no case to
             less than its certified strength). The load shall then be reduced to not less than that
             prescribed in paragraph 5.4, and the release mechanism operated. The force required
             to operate it shall be assessed and shall be such that it can be applied without
             difficulty by a wearer of the belt. This test shall be made for each combination of loads
             liable to be critical.
1.   British Standards Specifications issued by the British Standards Institution and D.T.D. Specifications obtainable from
     HMSO are approved. Other specifications will be approved by the CAA if, in its opinion, materials accepted as complying
     with these Specifications have the essential properties assumed in the technical investigation associated with the design
     approval.
9         Marking
          Each normally detachable member of a belt certified as complying with this
          Specification shall be indelibly marked with:
          • the manufacturer’s approved inspection mark,
          • the part number and/or model number,
          • the serial or batch number.
1         This SMP has been raised to implement the results and recommendations of Dukane,
          in respect of their N15F210B Underwater Locating Beacon.
2         Dukane’s ongoing reliability programme has identified a significant age related
          reduction in the output of beacons that are greater than 12 years of age. The reduced
          acoustic output will have a detrimental effect on being able to locate the beacon and
          its associated flight recorder.
3         Action to be Taken
          Serial Nos 1 thro 14500                        Remove from service at the time of their
                                                         next battery change.
          Any one or two letters before the Serial No.   Manufactured after 1978 and are not
                                                         immediately affected.
          Serial Nos 14500 thro C5500 to include all     Receive one more battery change and then
          Serial Nos with 5 digits and Serial Nos with   be removed from service at the following
          one letter plus 4 digits.                      battery change.
4         The N15F210B beacon, when removed from service can be returned to Dukane for
          refurbishment and recertification.
5         A new DK100 beacon can be purchased from Dukane to replace each N15F210B
          beacon removed from service.
6         Exclusions – Attached are two Appendices listing N15F210B Beacons by Serial
          Numbers which were built prior to 1979 and from 1979 to 1983 which have since
          been refurbished with the new potting material and are, therefore, not affected.
1 Introduction
1.1       The purpose of this Standard Maintenance Practice is to identify the maintenance
          requirements for aircraft that are not operated for the purpose of commercial air
          transport. The maintenance of the aircraft including its engines, propellers and
          equipment (as applicable) shall be in accordance with the Type Certificate holder’s
          inspection standards, recommended maintenance programme or schedule and the
          requirements of this SMP where the manufacturer’s schedules may not encompass
          the additional maintenance items covered by this SMP.
1.2       It is the responsibility of the operator to ensure that this document is completed and
          submitted to the CAA Regional Office for approval.
1.3       The contents of this document shall not be amended without the approval of the Civil
          Aviation Authority except where changes only affect Appendix B.
          Manufacturer’s
                                                   Airframe                           Engine                         Propeller
          manual reference
                                           ..........................       ..........................       ..........................
          Revision Status                  ..........................       ..........................       ..........................
3 Compliance Statement
          The contents of this schedule and its associated appendices address the
          manufacturer’s minimum maintenance requirements for the aircraft listed above.
4.1       In order to meet the requirements of the Air Navigation Order (ANO), British Civil
          Airworthiness Requirements (BCAR) and Joint Aviation Requirements (JAR) where
          appropriate, the recommendations made by the manufacturers as amended, have
          been evaluated and where appropriate are included. It is the duty of the operator or
          his contracted maintenance organisation to ensure that subsequent maintenance
          recommendations, including airworthiness information promulgated in Airworthiness
          Directives, Service Bulletins, Service Letters, Maintenance Manuals, and other
          regulatory material as issued by the State of Manufacture or the United Kingdom
          CAA, are evaluated for applicability to this approved schedule.
4.2       Anticipated annual utilisation ................ (flying hours)/ ................. (flight cycles).
          If the annual utilisation varies by more than 25% from that anticipated, the operator
          accepts that he, or his contracted maintenance organisation, must review the
          maintenance tasks and periods with a view to making any necessary adjustments.
          NOTE: If the manufacturer produces a special utilisation (e.g. low utilisation) or a
                schedule based on a specific annual utilisation then this must be used. If this
                does not align with the anticipated annual utilisation stated above, then the
                operator accepts that he, or his contracted maintenance organisation, must
                review the maintenance tasks and periods with a view to making any
                necessary adjustments.
5 Pre-Flight Inspections
          These checks are to be carried out in accordance with the aircraft flight or operations
          manual, or as specified in the manufacturer’s maintenance schedule.
6 Tyre Maintenance
          Tyre reliability is dependant on regular checks being carried out. The pre-flight
          inspection should include a check of the tyres for condition and correct inflation.
          NOTE: For large transport aircraft with multi wheel installations see CAP 562 -
                CAAIP Leaflet 11-22 Appendix 32-2.
7 Avionic Installations
7.1       In the absence of the aircraft manufacturer’s maintenance requirements for Radio
          Navigation and Communication equipment, and Radar equipment, an appropriate
          programme of maintenance shall be included.
7.2       Compass systems will require check swings at periods not exceeding;
                 i) for aircraft of 5700 kg MTWA or below, 2 years.
                 ii) for aircraft above 5700 kg MTWA, 3 years.
          Where the aircraft system uses an inertial reference system which can be used to
          cross check compass error in flight, this requirement may be varied subject to
          approval by the CAA.
8 CVR/FDR
10 Safety Equipment
          Where the aircraft is required to carry safety equipment this should be checked for
          serviceability at regular intervals. Overhaul and retirement periods are those specified
          by the equipment manufacturer.
11 Modifications to Aircraft
11.1      Where equipment has been fitted to the aircraft after original manufacture, e.g.
          autopilots, flight directors etc., the Supplementary Maintenance Appendix A, is
          required to be amended to take into account the equipment manufacturer’s
          requirements.
11.2      Where the aircraft structure has been modified from the original design standard, this
          must be taken into account when assessing the maintenance requirements.
          All fatigue lives and mandatory life limits published by the manufacturer or by the CAA
          shall be complied with. In the case of foreign products, the CAA may vary the lives
          published by the manufacturer or itself publish a life, normally as a CAA Additional
          Airworthiness Directive.
15 Certification of Maintenance
15.1      The certificate of release to service for checks carried out in accordance with the
          manufacturer’s programme, should cross refer to the CAA Maintenance Schedule
          Approval reference number.
15.2      An annual review of the maintenance shall be completed. The review shall as a
          minimum, include the following items:
15.3      On successful completion of the annual review the following statement shall be made
          in the Aircraft Log Book.
          Annual review carried out in accordance with:
          CAA APPROVED MAINTENANCE SCHEDULE REF: _____________________________
          Signed: _____________________________ Approved Organisation Ref:___________
          This certification shall be made in accordance with the requirements of the AD271,
          Schedule Approval Document.
          The periods prescribed by the manufacturer may be varied subject to the conditions
          and limits contained in Appendix C to this SMP.
17 Inspection Standards
17.1      Unless otherwise stated, all inspection requirements are to be applied without
          removing an item from the aircraft or dismantling the item, group or sub-assembly
22 June 1998
                               DATE
                                                                  SYSTEM               DETAIL                                      REFERENCE INFORMATION
                               ENTERED
..................................................... .........................................
22 June 1998
                               DATE
                                                                  SYSTEM               DETAIL                                      REFERENCE INFORMATION
                               ENTERED
..................................................... .........................................
Supplementary Appendix C
1         The operator or their contracted Maintenance Organisation, may vary the periods
          prescribed by this Schedule provided that such variations are not included in the
          manufacturer’s programme within the limits of sub-paragraphs 3 a) to d) of this
          Appendix C.
2         Variations shall be permitted only when the periods prescribed by the manufacturer
          cannot be complied with due to circumstances which could not reasonably have been
          foreseen by the Operator or by the contracted Maintenance Organisation.
3         The decision to vary any of the prescribed periods with the exception of the Annual
          Maintenance Review shall be taken only by the Chief Inspector/Quality Manager or
          person of equivalent status acceptable as a signatory for the prescribed check, on
          behalf of the Operator or the contracted Maintenance Organisation. Particulars of
          every variation so made shall be entered in the appropriate Log Book(s).
          d) Items Controlled by More Than One Limit. For items controlled by more than
             one limit, e.g. items controlled by flying hours and calendar time or flying hours and
             landings/cycles, the more restricted limit shall be applied.
          NOTES:     1) CAP 747 - Mandatory Requirements for Airworthiness may override these
                        conditions .
                         Those components for which an ultimate (scrap) or retirement life has been
                         prescribed (e.g. primary structure or components with limited fatigue lives
                         and high energy rotating parts of which containment is not provided).
                         Details concerning all items of this nature are included in the manufacturer’s
                         documents or manuals.
1 General
1.1       Dates and venues of written examinations are shown in Appendix 1 of this Leaflet
          which is correct at the time of publication. This and other detailed information on
          licensing are published on the Personnel Licensing area of the CAA web site
          www.srg.caa.co.uk. This site is updated frequently and engineers preparing to apply
          for exams or licence issue/extension are strongly advised to view it for current
          information on policy, procedures or exam schedules. Application forms may also be
          downloaded from the site.
1.2       Additional information relating to Part-66 and the cessation of BCAR Section L has
          been added to the Engineering Licensing part of the Personnel Licensing web site.
1.3       Following the UK CAA introduction of the Part-66 licence, the majority of BCAR
          Section L licences require conversion by 28 September 2008 for certification on
          aircraft of 5700 kg and below.
          For information on conversion visit www.caa.co.uk/srg/licensing and then click on
          engineer licensing and then 'making your application for Part-66'.
          Existing JAR-66 licenses do not require conversion. If you do not convert your
          BCAR Section L licence you will not be able to continue to issue a CRS after the
          date above.
1.4       Upon conversion of a BCAR licence to a Part-66 licence, where protected rights do
          not convert to a full Part-66 category or sub-category licence, limitations will be
          applied. Part-66 limitations may be removed by completing the appropriate
          conversion examinations, either before or after the conversion (refer to Section B of
          the ELGD at www.caa.co.uk/ELGD).
2.1       The European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) has commenced operations introducing
          phased changes in respect of the licensing of aircraft maintenance engineers.
2.2       The UK CAA issued the first EASA Part-66 licence for aircraft above 5700 kg MTOM
          on 1 June 2004 and the first EASA Part-66 licence to include aircraft above and below
          5700 kg MTOM on 29 November 2004.
2.3       The holder of a JAR-66 AML will be deemed to be compliant with this Part and
          certification privileges held under JAR-66 may continue to be exercised. Existing
          JAR-66 licences held will be automatically converted to Part-66 licences at the next
          licensing event. It is not necessary for existing JAR-66 licence holders to convert their
          licence to Part-66.
2.4       Part 145.A.30 (g), Part 145.A.30 (h)(1) and Part 145.A.30 (h)(2) will be implemented by
          28 September 2008. Line maintenance certifying staff on aircraft below 5700 kg
          MTOM, base maintenance certifying staff and B1, B2 support staff for multi engine
          helicopters at or below 5700 kg MTOM and base maintenance certifying staff and B1,
          B2 support staff for aircraft at or below 5700 kg MTOM are to be Part-66 qualified by
          this date.
2.5       Maintenance certification for some aircraft categories e.g. Annex II aircraft and
          airships will continue for the time being to be regulated by the UK CAA under National
          Requirements of BCAR Section L.
          NOTE:    Annex II and State aircraft are aircraft that are not included under EC Regulation
                   216/2008 and therefore Part-145 and Part-M do not apply.
3.1       EASA Part-66 licences now include aircraft both above and below 5700 kg. The CAA,
          therefore, recommends that remaining BCAR Section L licence holders convert to
          Part-66 without delay, even if the licence is not due for renewal. The appropriate
          Form 19 (SRG1014) and Support Document (SRG/1020) can be downloaded from our
          web site.
3.2       Applicants may still renew their BCAR Section L licences where a need can be
          shown, e.g. for Annex II type aircraft ratings or airships.
4.1       The latest version of this document and all applicable updates are available on our
          website www.caa.co.uk/ELGD.
4.2       The ELGD was designed to assist Aircraft Maintenance Engineers and those involved
          with aircraft maintenance engineering by providing guidance on existing Aircraft
          Maintenance Engineering licensing requirements.
5.1       The workshop is designed for assessors, referees and quality personnel, primarily to
          provide first-hand guidance in their role of supporting aircraft maintenance engineers
          making application for licence issue and/or type ratings.
5.2       These individuals may be working within approved maintenance organisations, being
          employed by, or in the case of the assessor nominated by, their organisation.
          Assessors working independently within industry are directly approved by the UK
          CAA as logbook assessors by submitting CAA Form SRG/1016 available at
          www.caa.co.uk/SRG1016.
5.3       Depending on the individual’s role within industry, their responsibilities could include
          assisting engineers to complete their logbooks, conducting practical experience
          assessment following type training, or completion of application forms for both initial
          licence issue and/or type ratings.
5.4       The training provides focused guidance for those individuals involved in the majority
          of activities associated with licence applications, including the logbook validator,
          logbook assessor and quality personnel, either new to the role of supporting
          applications for a Part-66 licence or personnel requiring refreshment.
A list of written examination dates and venues is given in Appendix 1 to this Leaflet.
All Engineer Licensing written examinations are held at the main Personnel Licensing
Department examination venues at Gatwick, Oxford, Manchester Britannia Airport Hotel,
Glasgow and Shuttleworth College. The venues can seat, in total, a minimum of 500
candidates per month. Venue details will be sent with each examination confirmation.
Arrangements for oral examinations remain unchanged and are conducted at the Regional
Offices.
                                              Manchester
                                                                                        Shuttleworth
                Gatwick         Oxford          Britannia            Glasgow
                                                                                          College
 Date                                         Airport Hotel
April 09 14 14 14 14 14
May 09 11 11 11 8 11
June 09 5 5 5 8 5
July 09 10 10 10 10 10
Aug 09 7 7 7 7 7
Sept 09 11 11 11 11 11
Oct 09 9 9 9 9 9
Nov 09 6 6 6 6 6
Dec 09 11 11 11 11 11
Please note that published examination dates may be subject to alteration or cancellation.
The time between the closing date for applications and the examination sitting is two weeks.
Personnel Licensing Department will aim to send booking confirmations, venue details and
examination timetables to reach candidates within 2 days of the booking and in any case at
least 1 week prior to the sitting.
Bookings close ten clear working days prior to the examination date. However, exams at
Gatwick, Oxford and Manchester are usually fully booked 3-4 months in advance.
Please do not make any travel arrangements until your booking is confirmed in writing.
(Previously issued as AN 3)
          NOTE:    This previously published information has not been amended at this time though it
                   should be noted that, due to the licensing requirements that will be in force after
                   September 2008, the UK CAA national licence and all supporting documentation will
                   undergo significant change at that time. Further information will be available on the
                   CAA website at www.caa.co.uk/pldwhatsnew from June 2008.
                   This Leaflet will be updated at the next amendment to include any new information
                   regarding future changes.
1.3       Although many terms in common usage describe the various aspects of aircraft
          engineering, the meanings assigned to such terms are not always the same. For the
          purpose of this Leaflet, in relation to airworthiness, the following definitions apply:
          a) Condition – the physical state of an item.
          b) Assembly – that items are fitted, assembled, attached, installed, connected,
             secured or adjusted in the approved manner.
          c) Functioning – operation in the approved manner achieving such performance,
             range of movement and freedom of movement as may be specified.
          The certifying engineer shall be responsible for the condition, assembly and
          functioning of the aircraft or its components for maintenance that has been certified
          under the privileges of a Type Rated Licence or an authorisation.
1.4       The certifying engineer shall be responsible for ensuring that work is performed and
          recorded in a satisfactory manner taking into account the following:
          a) Whenever work is carried out on an aircraft, it is the duty of all persons to whom
             this Leaflet applies to ensure that the work, for which they are responsible,
          NOTES: 1) With the exception of certification of aircraft excluded from the requirements of
                    EC Regulation 216/2008 (Annex II and state aircraft as defined in article 1(2)
                    thereof), all persons issuing Certificates of Release to Service on aircraft below
                    5700 kg must comply with the provisions of EC Regulation 2042/2003 Article 7(d)
                    by way of derogation until 28 September 2008. For information on conversion
                    requirements refer to the ELGD booklet or visit our website at
                    www.srg.caa.co.uk
                   2) This paragraph must be read in conjunction with paragraph 1 of this Leaflet.
2.1       The holder of a BCAR Section L Category 'A' licence may issue Certificates of Release
          to Service in respect of maintenance in relation to non-commercial air transport
          aeroplanes (but not including engines) for which the licence is Type Rated.
2.2       In connection with the certification of maintenance the holder of a Type Rated
          Licence in Category 'A' is responsible for all parts of the aeroplane subject to the
          limitations detailed below (excluding those parts which are the responsibility of the
          holder of a Type Rated Licence in Category 'C').
2.3       The holder of a Type Rated Licence in Category 'A' may issue Certificates of Release
          to Service relating to maintenance (excluding overhaul) of parts of the aeroplane for
          which the holder is responsible, providing that the work has not involved any of the
          following:
          a) Bolted joints requiring special techniques;
          b) Complete riveted joints in primary structures;
          c) Complete glued joints in primary structures;
          d) Bonded assemblies in primary structures;
          e) Composite material primary structures;
          f) Welded and brazed joints, other than minor weld repairs carried out by an
             Approved Welder, but excluding replacement of structural members or repairs to
             flying control components;
          g) Cotton, linen, polyester and glass fibre fabric covering of a complete fuselage or
             aerofoil;
          h) The disturbing of individual parts of units which are supplied as bench tested units,
             except for the replacement or adjustment of items normally replaceable or
             adjustable in service.
2.4       In connection with the maintenance of instrument, electrical, automatic pilot and radio
          systems installed in aeroplanes (excluding overhaul or such systems as are
          associated with the engine(s) and auxiliary power unit(s)) the holder of a Type Rated
          Licence in Category 'A' is entitled to issue Certificates of Release to Service for
          aircraft for which he holds a Type Rating, subject to the limitations detailed in sub-
          paragraphs 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 2.4.3, 2.4.4 and 2.4.5.
          NOTE:    Where no limitations are shown, Certificates of Release to Service may be issued
                   for repair, replacement, modification, mandatory inspection or scheduled
                   maintenance inspection. In respect of the certification of scheduled maintenance
                   inspections, reference should also be made to the Maintenance Schedule Approval
                   Document which may require certification specifically by an engineer licensed in the
                   appropriate 'X' or 'R' Category. However, in the absence of such a requirement, the
                   holder of a Type Rated Licence in Category 'A' Aeroplanes assumes the
                   responsibility for establishing compliance with the maintenance schedule
                   requirements on the systems before issuing the Certificate of Release to Service.
          NOTE:    This paragraph must be read in conjunction with paragraph 1 of this Leaflet.
3.1       The holder of a Section L Category ‘B’ licence may issue Certificates of Release to
          Service in respect of overhaul, repair, replacement, modification and mandatory
          inspection in relation to non-commercial air transport aeroplanes or rotorcraft (but not
          including engines) for which the licence is Type Rated, subject to the limitations of
          sub-paragraphs 3.2 and 3.3.
          NOTE:    This paragraph must be read in conjunction with paragraph 1 of this Leaflet.
4.1       The holder of a Section L Category 'C' licence may issue Certificates of Release to
          Service in respect of maintenance in relation to non-commercial air transport engines
          and auxiliary power units for which the licence is Type Rated.
4.2       In connection with the certification of maintenance (excluding overhaul) the holder of
          a Type Rated Licence in Category 'C' is responsible for all parts of the engine(s), the
          engine installation(s), auxiliary power unit(s), other propulsive device(s) and all
          associated systems and devices which are concerned with their operation, subject to
          the limitations detailed in sub-paragraphs 4.3, 4.4, 4.5 and 4.6 (excluding those parts
          which are the responsibility of the holder of a Type Rated Licence in Category 'D').
4.3       The holder of a Type Rated Licence in Category 'C' may issue Certificates of Release
          to Service relating to maintenance (excluding overhaul) of components or parts for
          which the holder is responsible, providing that the work has not involved:
          a) Dismantling of a piston engine other than to obtain access to the piston/cylinder
             assemblies or the removal of the engine rear accessory cover to inspect and/or
             replace oil pump assemblies where such work does not involve the removal and
             refitment of internal gears;
          NOTE:    This paragraph must be read in conjunction with paragraph 1 of this Leaflet.
5.1       The holder of a Section L Category 'D' Licence may issue Certificates of Release to
          Service in respect of non-commercial air transport engines for which the Licence is
          Type Rated in respect of overhaul, repairs, replacements, modification and mandatory
          inspection, subject to the limitations of sub-paragraphs 5.2 and 5.3.
5.2       In connection with overhaul, repair, replacement, modification and mandatory
          inspection, the holder of a Type Rated Licence in Category 'D' is responsible for all
          parts of the engine including functioning only insofar as test bed performance is
          concerned. The certification of functioning insofar as an installed engine is concerned
          must be made in conjunction with a holder of a Type Rated Licence in Category 'C'.
5.3       The holder of a Category 'D' Licence may issue Certificates of Release to Service
          relating to all aspects of overhaul, repair, replacement, modification and mandatory
          inspection of components and parts of the engine only (excluding overhaul, repair,
          NOTES: 1) This paragraph must be read in conjunction with paragraph 1 of this Leaflet.
                   2) A Category 'A' and 'C' Rotorcraft Licence may not be used to certify for piston or
                      jet turbine engines installed in aeroplanes.
6.1       The holder of a Section L Categories 'A' and 'C' Rotorcraft Licence may issue
          Certificates of Release to Service in respect of maintenance in relation to non-
          commercial air transport rotorcraft and its engines for which the licence is Type
          Rated.
6.2       In connection with the certification of maintenance the holder of a Type Rated
          Licence in Categories 'A' and 'C' Rotorcraft is responsible for all parts of the rotorcraft
          subject to the limitations detailed in sub-paragraphs 6.3, 6.4 and 6.5.
6.3       The holder of a Type Rated Licence in Category 'A' and 'C' Rotorcraft may issue
          Certificates of Release to Service relating to maintenance (excluding overhaul) of
          parts of the rotorcraft for which the holder is responsible, providing that the work has
          not involved any of the following:
          a) Bolted joints requiring special techniques;
          b) Complete riveted joints in primary structures;
          c) Complete glued joints in primary structures;
          d) Bonded assemblies in primary structures;
          e) Composite material primary structures;
          f) Welded and brazed joints, other than minor weld repairs to aircraft structure or
             exhaust units carried out by an Approved Welder but excluding structural or
             component replacement;
          g) Dismantling of a piston engine other than to obtain access to the piston/cylinder
             assemblies or the removal of the engine rear accessory case cover to inspect
             and/or replace oil pump assemblies where such work does not involve the removal
             and refitment of internal gears;
          h) Dismantling of main casings or main rotating assemblies of a turbine engine,
             except as detailed in sub-paragraph 6.4;
          i) Dismantling of gearbox casings, except that separation of casings to obtain access
             for the purposes of internal inspections in accordance with the manufacturer’s
             instruction is permitted;
          j) The disturbing of individual parts of units which are supplied as bench tested units,
             except for the replacement or adjustment of items normally replaceable or
             adjustable in service.
6.4       Where the maintenance manual for the particular engine provides instruction for the
          task, replacement of main casings and/or rotating assemblies comprising the whole
          or part of a particular rotating system will be permitted provided that removal from the
          engine is achieved solely by disconnecting the flanges of main casings. In accordance
          with the above principles, some engines have been assigned the following symbols,
          ~ or  in CAP 562 Leaflet 15-3. Dismantling of these engines is permissible, but is
          limited to:
          a) ~ – Removal/replacement of main casings, excluding those whose removal
             results in concurrent removal of a rotating assembly from the engine. No
             dismantling of main rotating assemblies is permitted.
          b)  – Removal/replacement of main casings including those whose removal results
             in concurrent removal of a rotating assembly from the engine, provided this is
             accomplished solely by disconnecting at the casing flanges. No dismantling of
             main rotating assemblies is permitted.
6.5       In connection with the maintenance of instrument, electrical, automatic pilot and radio
          systems installed in rotorcraft (excluding overhaul) the holder of a Type Rated Licence
          in Categories 'A' and 'C' Rotorcraft is entitled to issue Certificates of Release to
          Service for rotorcraft for which he holds a Type Rating, subject to the limitations
          detailed in sub-paragraphs 6.5.1, 6.5.2, 6.5.3 and 6.5.4.
          NOTE:    Where no limitations are shown, Certificates of Release to Service may be issued
                   for replacement, modification, repair, mandatory inspection or scheduled
                   maintenance inspection. In respect of the certification of scheduled maintenance
                   inspections, reference should also be made to the Maintenance Schedule Approval
                   Document which may require certification specifically by an engineer licensed in the
                   appropriate 'X' or ‘R’ Category. However, in the absence of such a requirement, the
                   holder of a Type Rated Licence in Categories 'A' and 'C' Rotorcraft assumes the
                   responsibility for establishing compliance with the maintenance schedule
                   requirements on the systems before issuing the Certificate of Release to Service.
6.5.1     In respect of instrument systems in the rotorcraft if the rotorcraft is specified in sub-
          paragraph 7.4 of CAP 562 Leaflet 15-3, Certificates of Release to Service may be
          issued relating to replacements only, provided that functioning checks to prove
          serviceability do not require the use of test apparatus.
6.5.2     In respect of electrical systems in the rotorcraft, if the rotorcraft is specified in sub-
          paragraph 7.4 of CAP 562 Leaflet 15-3, Certificates of Release to Service may be
          issued relating to replacements only, provided that functioning checks to prove
          serviceability do not require the use of test apparatus.
6.5.3     In respect of automatic pilot/automatic stabiliser systems in rotorcraft, if the rotorcraft
          has an automatic pilot/automatic stabiliser system specified in sub-paragraph 13.4 or
          13.5 of CAP 562 Leaflet 15-3 installed, Certificates of Release to Service may be
          issued relating to replacements only, provided that functioning checks to prove
          serviceability do not require the use of test apparatus.
6.5.4     Certificates of Release to Service may not be issued in respect of radio systems,
          except that if the rotorcraft has a MTOM not exceeding 2730 kg, certificates may be
          issued in respect of the replacement of VHF communication equipment only.
          NOTE:    This paragraph must be read in conjunction with paragraph 1 of this Leaflet and
                   particular attention paid to sub-paragraphs 1.3, 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6 which are concerned
                   with areas of responsibility.
7.1       The holder of a Section L Category ‘X’ – Instruments Licence may issue Certificates
          of Release to Service in respect of maintenance in relation to non-commercial air
          transport aircraft instrument systems for which the licence is Type Rated, subject to
          the limitations detailed in sub-paragraph 7.3.
7.2       In connection with the certification of maintenance, excluding overhaul, the holder of
          a Type Rated Licence in Category ‘X’ – Instruments is responsible for all parts of
          instrument systems included in the Type Rating.
7.3       The holder of a Type Rated Licence in Category ‘X’ – Instruments may issue
          Certificates of Release to Service in respect of maintenance, excluding overhaul, of
          components and parts for which the holder is responsible provided that units which
          are supplied as bench tested units may not have their individual parts disturbed,
          except for the replacement or adjustment of items normally replaceable or adjustable
          in service.
          NOTE:    This paragraph must be read in conjunction with paragraph 1 of this Leaflet.
8.1       The holder of a Section L Category 'X' – Electrical Licence may issue Certificates of
          Release to Service in respect of maintenance in relation to non-commercial air
          transport aircraft electrical systems for which the licence is Type Rated, subject to the
          limitations detailed in sub-paragraph 8.3.
8.2       In connection with the certification of maintenance, excluding overhaul, the holder of
          a Type Rated Licence in Category 'X' – Electrical is responsible for all parts of electrical
          systems included in the Type Rating.
8.3       The holder of a Type Rated Licence in Category 'X' – Electrical may issue Certificates
          of Release to Service in respect of maintenance, excluding overhaul, of components
          and parts for which the holder is responsible provided that units which are supplied
          as bench tested units may not have their individual parts disturbed, except for the
          replacement or adjustment of items normally replaceable or adjustable in service.
          NOTES: 1) This paragraph must be read in conjunction with paragraph 1 of this Leaflet.
                   2) For the purpose of certification, automatic stabilisation systems are deemed to
                      be automatic pilots.
                   2) Automatic pilots include related systems such as yaw and or roll dampers, mach
                      trim systems, and automatic throttles.
9.1       The holder of a Section L Category 'X' – Automatic Pilots Licence may issue
          Certificates of Release to Service in respect of maintenance in relation to non-
          commercial air transport aircraft automatic pilot systems for which the licence is Type
          Rated, subject to the limitations detailed in sub-paragraph 9.3.
9.2       In connection with the certification of maintenance, excluding overhaul, the holder of
          a Type Rated Licence in Category 'X' – Automatic Pilots is responsible for all parts of
          the automatic pilot systems included in the Type Rating.
9.3       The holder of a Type Rated Licence in Category 'X' – Automatic Pilots may issue
          Certificates of Release to Service in respect of maintenance, excluding overhaul, of
          components and parts for which the holder is responsible provided that units which
          are supplied as bench tested units may not have their individual parts disturbed,
          except for the replacement or adjustment of items normally replaceable or adjustable
          in service.
          NOTE:    This paragraph must be read in conjunction with paragraph 1 of this Leaflet.
11.1      The holder of a Section L Category 'R' – Radio Licence may issue Certificates of
          Release to Service in respect of maintenance in relation to non-commercial air
          transport aircraft radio systems for which the licence is Type Rated, subject to the
          limitations detailed in sub-paragraph 11.3.
11.2      In connection with the certification of maintenance, excluding overhaul, the holder of
          a Type Rated Licence in Category 'R' – Radio is responsible for all parts of the radio
          systems included in the Type Rating.
11.3      The holder of a Type Rated Licence in Category 'R' – Radio may issue Certificates of
          Release to Service in respect of maintenance, excluding overhaul, of components and
          parts for which the holder is responsible provided that units which are supplied as
          bench tested units may not have their individual parts disturbed, except for the
          replacement or adjustment of items normally replaceable or adjustable in service.
11.4      The holder of a Type Rated Licence in Category 'R' – Radio, endorsed to include the
          overhaul of radio apparatus, is responsible for and may issue Certificates of Release
          to Service in respect of the maintenance of components and parts of all radio
          apparatus undergoing periodic check, repair or overhaul in workshop for which the
          Licence is Type Rated, provided that the work done does not involve the making of
          radio components or parts.
11.5      The holder of a Type Rated Licence in Category 'R' – Radio endorsed including GPWS
          may issue Certificates of Release to Service in respect of maintenance, excluding
          overhaul or scheduled maintenance inspection, of Ground Proximity Warning
          Systems for aircraft for which the licence is Type Rated in respect of its radio
          systems, subject to the limitations of sub-paragraph 11.3.
          The Paragraph 15 type rating of CAP 562 Leaflet 15-3 permits the issue of Certificates
          of Release to Service by the holder in respect of the compensation and adjustment
          of direct and remote reading compasses on any aircraft.
          NOTE:    A JAR-66 licence is deemed to be compliant with Part-66 and therefore certification
                   privileges held under JAR-66 may continue to be exercised. Existing JAR-66 licences
                   held will be automatically converted to a Part-66 licence at the next licensing event.
                   It is not necessary for JAR-66 licence holders to convert to Part-66.
13.1      A Part-66 Category A Aircraft Maintenance Licence (AML) may be issued to a person
          who has demonstrated a competence to complete minor scheduled line maintenance
          and simple defect rectification. The licence does not entitle the holder to exercise any
          certification privileges in respect of aircraft unless and until the holder is issued with
          a corresponding Certification Authorisation. Such authorisations will be issued by a
          Part-145 maintenance organisation appropriately approved by the Competent
          Authority of a European Union Member State (EU Competent Authority) or EASA.
          This means that the Part-66 Aircraft Maintenance Licence issued by the UK CAA can
          readily be used as the basis for a certification authorisation throughout European
          Union Member States.
          NOTES: 1) It should be noted that a Part-66 licence may not provide for full equivalence in
                    another Member State to certify for work relating to any National legislation
                    which sits outside of Part-145. Additional language requirements may also apply.
                   2) The holder of an unrestricted Category B1 licence is also qualified as a Category
                      A licence holder in the same sub-category, e.g. Aeroplanes Turbine, and may be
                      issued with Category A certification authorisation.
13.2      These Category A privileges will be limited to the performance and certification of
          specific simple maintenance tasks, either individually or in combination, as defined in
          Part 145 AMC 145.A.30 (g) and will require a combination of theoretical and practical
          training to be undertaken on each aircraft type to qualify for the task authorisation.
          Such authorisation, issued by an Approved Part-145 Maintenance Organisation will
          specify the limitations of the privileges that may be applicable. Licence holders will
          therefore be required to act in accordance with the authorisation procedures of the
          company concerned.
14.1      A Part-66 Category B1 Aircraft Maintenance Licence (AML) may be issued to a person
          who has demonstrated a competence to complete maintenance, including aircraft
          structure, powerplant and mechanical and electrical systems. Replacement of avionic
          line replaceable units, requiring simple tests to prove their serviceability, shall also be
          included in the privileges. The Category B1 licence is primarily intended to be used for
          the purposes of qualification of line maintenance staff for authorisation. The licence,
          in its own right, does not entitle the holder to exercise any certifying privileges in
          respect of aircraft and will be used in conjunction with a Part-145 or Part-M subpart F
          certification authorisation.
          NOTE:    Notwithstanding paragraph 14.1 above, certain limited certification privileges based
                   on a Type Rated Part-66 Licence may be exercised in accordance with Part
                   M.A.801(b)2. (See also CAP 562 Leaflet 15-3, paragraph 1.2 Note 2.)
          the Competent Authority, and will specify any limitations to the authorisation
          accordingly.
          NOTES: 1) As of 28 September 2008 a Certificate of Release to Service may be issued for
                    maintenance on a non-large aircraft, not operating as commercial air transport,
                    based on a Part-66 licence extended with the appropriate type rating in
                    accordance with Part-M. This maintenance is limited to items not included in the
                    list at Part-M Appendix VII.
                   2) A Part-66 licence issued on the basis of protected rights may contain technical
                      restrictions equivalent to the limitations of any BCAR Section L licence or
                      company authorisations previously held. These protected rights under Part-66 are
                      a continuation of certifying privileges under an existing licence or certifying
                      authorisation which allows current personnel to continue working and certifying
                      without the need to re-qualify. Authorisations issued by a Part-145 organisation
                      should therefore be similarly restricted in scope. It should be noted that
                      conversion to the full Part-66 licence standard is optional.
14.6      Part-66 Category B1 licences issued by the UK CAA may also allow the certification,
          under the provisions of Articles 14 and 16 of the Air Navigation Order 2005 (as
          amended), for work outside of a CAA approved maintenance organisation on aircraft
          which are not operated for commercial air transport. Such privileges are limited to UK
          registered aircraft only. Certifications may only be made for those aircraft types which
          are endorsed individually or as Group Type Ratings on the licence. The privileges will
          reflect the current limitations for relevant BCAR Section L licence categories
          highlighted earlier in the appropriate paragraphs of this Leaflet unless specified
          otherwise.
15.1      A Part-66 Category B2 Aircraft Maintenance Licence (AML) may be issued to a person
          who has demonstrated a competence to complete maintenance on avionic and
          electrical systems. The Category B2 licence is primarily intended to be used for the
          purposes of qualification of avionic line maintenance staff for authorisation. The
          licence, in its own right, does not entitle the holder to exercise any certifying
          privileges in respect of aircraft and will be used in conjunction with a Part-145 or Part-
          M subpart F certification authorisation.
15.2      Such authorisations will be issued by a Part-145 or Part-M subpart F maintenance
          organisation appropriately approved by the competent Authority of a EU Member
          State. This means that the Part-66 Aircraft Maintenance Licence issued by the UK
          CAA can readily be used as the basis for a certification authorisation throughout the
          EU Member States. Part 145.A.30 (h) also requires it to be used as a prerequisite for
          authorisation of staff acting as inspectors or supervisors within base maintenance.
          Licence holders will therefore act in accordance with the authorisation procedures of
          the company concerned.
          NOTES: 1) It should be noted that a Part-66 licence may not provide for full equivalence in
                    another EU Member State to certify for work relating to any National legislation
                    which sits outside of EASA requirements.
                   2) A Category B2 licence cannot be used for the purposes of a Category A
                      certification authorisation unless the Category A licence is also held.
                   2) As of 28 September 2008 a Certificate of Release to Service may be issued for
                      maintenance on a non-large aircraft, not operating as commercial air transport,
                      based on a Part-66 licence extended with the appropriate type rating in
                      accordance with Part-M. This maintenance is limited to items not included in the
                      list at Part-M Appendix VII.
16.1      A Part-66 Category C Aircraft Maintenance Licence (AML) may be issued to a person
          who has demonstrated a competence to release an aircraft following Base
          Maintenance. The privileges apply to the aircraft in its entirety in a Part-145
          organisation. The licence, in its own right, does not entitle the holder to exercise any
          certifying privileges in respect of aircraft and will be used in conjunction with a Part-
          145 certification authorisation.
17 Part-66 General
1 Introduction
1.1       When reading this document, the reader must take into account Commission
          Regulation (EC) No. 2042/2003. The Commission Regulation is a legal document,
          which applies to the UK aviation industry.
1.2       This Leaflet sets out the Type Ratings that may be endorsed upon a BCAR Section L
          for Aircraft Maintenance Engineers' Licence or a Part-66 Aircraft Maintenance
          Licence issued by the United Kingdom Civil Aviation Authority in respect of the
          certification of aircraft registered in the United Kingdom, including also their engines
          and systems.
          NOTES: 1) A licence can only be used to certify for non-commercial air transport. Aircraft
                    which are operated for commercial air transport must be maintained by a
                    Part-145 Approved Organisation and all staff who certify for maintenance within
                    those organisations must be in possession of a valid certifying authorisation (see
                    CAP 562 Leaflet 1-1).
                   2) As of 28 September 2008 Certification of Maintenance on aircraft using a licence
                      as authority is limited to items which are not listed at Part-M Appendix VII.
1.3       Following the full implementation of JAR-66 on 1 June 2001, type ratings in respect
          of types of aircraft of 5700 kg MTOM and above, or the engines or systems fitted to
          such aircraft, are not available to holders of Aircraft Maintenance Engineers’ Licences
          issued under Issue 14 and subsequent issues of BCAR Section L which came into
          effect on 1 June 2001. Part-66 replaced JAR-66 in the UK as of June 2004 for
          aeroplanes above 5700 kg and November 2004 for all other aircraft. Holders of
          licences granted under earlier issues of Section L, and which already include the
          appropriate LWTR, may continue to apply for such type ratings until the privileges are
          transferred to a Part-66 licence. Full information may be found in BCAR Section L
          Issue 15.
2 General
2.1       The requirements for the grant, extension and renewal of BCAR Section L Aircraft
          Maintenance Engineers' Licences are contained in the current Issue of BCAR
          Section L. For full understanding of the requirements, Section L must be read in
          conjunction with this Leaflet.
          NOTE:    As of November 2006, new BCAR Section L Licences shall not be issued except
                   where required to certify (EC) Regulation 216/2008 Annex II aircraft. Current BCAR
                   Section L Licences may be extended in accordance with current BCAR Section L
3 Applicability
3.1       Where a type of aircraft (or its engines or systems) is defined by one of the Group
          Type Ratings in paragraphs 5 to 9, 12, 13 or 15 of this Leaflet, an engineer may
          exercise the certification privileges in respect of that type, subject in particular to the
          provisions of CAP 562 Leaflet 15-2 and provided that:
          a) he holds a valid UK CAA issued Type Rated Licence, and
          b) an aircraft of the type is registered in the United Kingdom and holds a United
             Kingdom issued Certificate of Airworthiness.
3.2       Where a type of aircraft (or its engines or systems) is listed individually within
          paragraphs 5, 6, 7 and 10 of this Leaflet, the licence holder has certification privileges
          in respect of the individual types as listed on the licence, subject in particular to the
          provisions of CAP 562 Leaflet 15-2.
3.3       Where a type of aircraft (or its engines or systems) is not defined by a Group Type
          Rating or is not listed by name, an application for the Type Rating of a licence in
          respect of that type of aircraft, engines or systems, will be considered provided that:
          a) an aircraft of the type is registered in the United Kingdom and holds a United
             Kingdom issued Certificate of Airworthiness; and
          b) the aircraft does not exceed 5700 kg MTOM.
3.4       In respect of aircraft types maintained under Part-145, the CAA will consider
          applications for the endorsement of type ratings on a BCAR Section L licence where
          the aircraft type rating is required for the issue of a Part-145 certification authorisation
          and:
          a) the aircraft is a type which is not registered in the United Kingdom and does not
             hold a United Kingdom issued Certificate of Airworthiness but is registered in an
             EU member state; and
          b) the aircraft does not exceed 5700 kg MTOM.
5.0       Composite Materials Aeroplanes Not Exceeding 5700 kg MTOM (not available in
          Category B).
5.1       Wooden and Wood and Metal Aeroplanes:
          Aeroplanes where the primary structure is manufactured from wood or combinations
          of wood and metal.
5.2       *Unpressurised metal aeroplanes not exceeding 2730 kg MTOM.
5.2.1     *Unpressurised metal aeroplanes not exceeding 2730 kg MTOM with fixed landing
          gear only.
8.1       General aircraft instrument systems but excluding instruments installed on any
          aircraft which has installed a Flight Director System.
8.2       Smiths Flight System
          Sperry Zero Reader ZL1, ZL2 Flight Director System.
8.3       Flight Director Systems employing air driven gyroscopes (attitude).
8.4       Flight Director Systems employing electrically driven gyroscopes (attitudes) but
          excluding those systems defined in sub-paragraph 8.2.
8.5       Reserved.
8.6       Reserved.
8.7       Reserved.
8.8       'X' Instruments (compasses)
          Compensation and adjustment of airborne compass and compass systems.
10 Reserved
11 Reserved
14 Reserved
          The requirements for the grant, variation or renewal of Aircraft Maintenance Licences
          are contained in Commission Regulation (EC) No. 2042/2003. It is possible to obtain
          aircraft type ratings in accordance with the provisions of this requirement. This
          includes aircraft which are listed above in paragraph 14 of this Leaflet and aircraft
          which are registered and operated in another JAA member state but which are
          maintained under a Part-145 approval.
          The aircraft types are listed in Appendix 1 to Part-66 (AMC) and will be granted only
          where Part-147 approved type training has been completed to the appropriate
1 General
1.1       This Leaflet permits persons to be granted, by the holder of a Part M Subpart F
          approval issued by the CAA, Authorisations to issue Certificates of Release to Service
          when the CAA has agreed the conditions of such Authorisations. This Leaflet provides
          guidance to assist organisations in determining the conditions, which may be agreed
          by the CAA.
          NOTES: 1) Compliance with this Leaflet does not provide a basis for the grant of personnel
                    certification privileges outside of a Part-M Subpart F organisation.
                     2) The introduction of specific requirements for sailplanes and balloons into Part 66
                        would put in place European legislative provisions that render the Authorisation
                        concept defined here obsolete. Authorisations systems agreed under this Leaflet
                        may not therefore be used once any new legislation comes into effect.
          Approved organisations wishing to issue certifying staff Authorisations shall develop
          suitable procedures to determine the competence of staff to hold such
          authorisations, and to manage and control the process within their organisation.
          These procedures shall clearly define the limits to which Authorisations can be
          granted. The proposed procedure shall be submitted initially through the responsible
          CAA Regional Office for approval and when approved shall be contained within an
          organisation’s Maintenance Organisation Manual.
1.2       The CAA has chosen not to define, in detail, acceptable boundaries in respect of
          defect diagnosis and the types of test equipment that are compatible with the
          Authorisation concept. Such definitions would inevitably produce a set of
          unnecessarily restrictive requirements.
1.3       The following shall be observed when developing suitable procedures:
1.3.1     Age
          An applicant shall be not less than 18 years of age.
1.3.2     Experience
          An applicant for an Authorisation shall have had the following minimum experience in
          the inspection, servicing and maintenance of sailplanes or balloons, as appropriate:
          a) For the issue of Authorisation privileges for a sailplane or balloon in its entirety, at
             least:
                i) four years of relevant maintenance experience; or
                ii) two years if the applicant has satisfactorily completed an approved training
                    course.
          b) For the issue of a restricted Authorisation, a period of time agreed by the CAA that
             will enable a level of competency equivalent to that required by a) to be obtained,
             provided that this is not less than two years.
1.3.3     Knowledge
          It shall be established by the organisation that applicants have an adequate
          knowledge of a relevant sample of the type(s) of sailplanes or balloons gained through
          a formalised training course including documented evidence of practical experience.
          Formalised training courses may be replaced by demonstration of knowledge, by
          documented evidence of experience and by an assessment performed by a Part M
          Subpart F organisation in accordance with procedures agreed by the CAA.
          This assessment shall include:
          a) relevant parts of initial and continuing airworthiness regulations;
          b) relevant parts of operational requirements and procedures, if applicable;
          c) the organisation’s maintenance organisation manual;
          d) knowledge of a relevant sample of the type(s) of sailplanes/balloons/airships
             gained through training and/or work experience;
          e) maintenance practices and techniques.
          Records shall be maintained including:
          • results of assessments;
          • records of syllabi;
          • names and position of assessors.
1.3.4     Continued validity
          The organisation shall ensure that all certifying staff are involved in at least six months
          of actual relevant sailplane or balloon component maintenance experience in any
          consecutive two year period. For the purpose of this supplement ‘involved in actual
          relevant sailplane or balloon maintenance’ means that the person has worked in a
          sailplane or balloon maintenance environment and has exercised the privileges of the
          certification authorisation and/or has actually carried out maintenance on at least
          some of the sailplane/balloon type systems specified in the particular certification
          authorisation.
1 Introduction
1.1       The information contained in this Leaflet has been developed in conjunction with the
          Department for Transport, the Home Office and the Police, and is consistent with the
          criteria contained in the Police Protocol. It is anticipated that this will facilitate a
          consistent approach by relevant parties.
1.2       The aim of this Leaflet is to inform Licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineers of this
          new legislation and how it affects them in the performance of their duties.
2 Legislative Background
2.1       The effect of intoxication, through alcohol or drugs, on aviation personnel has
          significant safety implications. The Air Navigation Order (ANO), which is the main
          aviation safety regulatory legislation, provides that no member of an aircraft’s crew, a
          licensed aircraft maintenance engineer or an air traffic control officer shall be under
          the influence of alcohol or drugs to such an extent as to impair his/her capacity to carry
          out their duties. The ANO, however, does not set a blood alcohol limit nor does it
          require a person who is suspected of an alcohol or drugs offence to be subjected to
          a test.
2.2       In 1996, the Government issued a Consultation Paper on alcohol and drug testing for
          aircraft crew and other safety critical civil aviation personnel, which proposed the
          introduction of a blood/alcohol limit for certain aviation personnel, together with
          corresponding Police powers of enforcement. Responses to the consultation were
          broadly supportive of the Government's approach. Part 5 of the Railways and
          Transport      Safety    Act    2003    www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts2003/
          20030020.htm represents the first suitable legislative opportunity to take forward
          these proposals and now brings aviation into line with other transport modes in
          seeking to tackle alcohol or drug misuse among key personnel. The Police testing and
          enforcement powers broadly mirror those currently applied on our roads and railways
          and are based on an officer's reasonable suspicion that an offence either has been,
          or is in the process of being, committed.
2.3       The blood/alcohol limit for aviation personnel is lower than that in shipping or on our
          roads or railways, but for pilots reflects the Joint Aviation Requirement on
          Commercial Air Transportation (JAR-OPS) - adopted by the Joint Aviation Authorities
          (JAA) in 1996 - which requires that crew members of commercial aircraft should not
          commence a flight duty period with a blood/alcohol level in excess of 20mg of alcohol
          per 100ml of blood. The adoption of this limit will go towards the harmonisation of
          standards across most of Europe.
2.4       Enforcement of the provisions of the Act is the responsibility of the Police and the
          Crown Prosecution Service. There is no provision for random testing.
3 Implementation
4         Summary of Part 5 of The Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003 and
          Commentary on Enforcement
          This Part extends to the flight and cabin crew of an aircraft, air traffic controllers and
          licensed aircraft maintenance engineers in the United Kingdom. It also applies to the
          crew of an aircraft registered in the United Kingdom wherever it may be in the world.
          An Explanatory Note may be found at:
          www.legislation.hmso.gov.uk/acts/en/03en20-b.htm.
6.1       This Section makes it an offence to perform or prepare to perform certain aviation-
          related functions with more than a prescribed level of alcohol in the body.
6.2       The prescribed blood/alcohol alcohol limits are 20 milligrammes of alcohol per 100
          millilitres of blood for those activities carried out by aircrew and air traffic controllers,
          and 80 milligrams per 100 millilitres for licensed aircraft maintenance engineers. The
          different limits reflect the fact that although licensed aircraft maintenance engineers
          perform a safety critical role in aviation, they do not necessarily require the same
          speed of reaction as aircrew or air traffic controllers may need in an emergency
          situation.
          The equivalent limits in respect of breath and of urine are also set out in this section.
6.3       Detailed limits are:
          a) When:
                • acting as a pilot, cabin crew, flight engineer, flight navigator or flight radio-
                  telephony operator of an aircraft during flight;
                • attending the flight deck of an aircraft during flight to give or supervise training,
                  to administer a test, to observe a period of practice or to monitor or record the
                  gaining of experience; or
                • acting as an air traffic controller in pursuance of a licence granted under or by
                  virtue of an enactment (other than a licence granted to a student):
                the prescribed limit of alcohol is:
                i) In the case of breath:      9 microgrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres.
                ii) In the case of blood:      20 milligrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres.
                iii) In the case of urine:     27 milligrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres.
          b) When acting as a licensed aircraft maintenance engineer the prescribed limit of
             alcohol in respect of the above is:
                i) In the case of breath:      35 microgrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres.
7.1       This section applies the offences of being either over the limit or unfit, to people
          preparing to carry out an aviation function or otherwise holding themselves ready to
          carry out one of those functions by virtue of being on duty or standby.
7.2       An activity shall be treated as an ancillary function if it is undertaken by a person
          commencing a period of duty in respect of the function, and as a requirement of, for
          the purpose of or in connection with the performance of the function during the
          period of duty. For example, the pre-flight briefing of the flight and cabin crew and any
          post-flight activity such as filing reports is considered to be an ‘ancillary’ function.
9.1       Reasonable grounds for suspicion depend upon the circumstances in each case.
          There must be an objective basis for that suspicion based on facts, information and/
          or intelligence that are relevant to the likelihood of an offence. Reasonable suspicion
          cannot be based on generalisations or stereotypical images of certain groups or
          categories of people as more likely to be involved in criminal activity.
9.2       Reasonable suspicion can sometimes exist without specific information or
          intelligence and on the basis for some level of generalisation stemming from the
          behaviour of a person. Reasonable suspicion should normally be linked to accurate
          and current intelligence or information. For example, evidence of impairment from
          witnesses or from the result of a primary test of an employee by an employer could
          be sufficient.
10.1      If, as a result of an initial Police breath test, an officer has reasonable cause to suspect
          that a person has more than the prescribed proportion of alcohol in their body, then
          they can expect to be arrested and taken to a Police station. There, they will be asked
          to provide a further specimen of breath, blood or urine for laboratory analysis. In
          practice, this will usually be a specimen of blood, taken by a Police doctor. Failure to
          provide a specimen without reasonable cause is an offence. Where a sample of blood
          or urine is taken, he/she will be entitled to request a part of the sample for
          themselves. He/she will be supplied with a booklet of analysts where they can have
          their specimen privately analysed if they wish.
10.2      Once a blood sample has been taken he/she will probably be released from the Police
          station on a condition to return at a later date, by which time the Police part of the
          sample will have been analysed. If the sample is under the limit he/she will probably
          be told not to attend. If, when he/she attends, the results of the analysis of the sample
          shows that he/she was over the limit, he/she will be charged with the offence and be
          given a date to attend court.
10.3      After giving a specimen, the Police may detain the individual at the Police station until
          it appears to the officer that there is no likelihood of them carrying out, or attempting
          to carry out, an aviation function of the kind for which they have provided a sample,
          whilst still over the prescribed limit or otherwise impaired through alcohol or drugs.
11 Advice to Engineers
          This Leaflet should be read in conjunction with CAP 562 Leaflet 15-6, that contains
          further information on the Licensed Aircraft Maintenance Engineer’s responsibilities
          when medically unfit or under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
13 Disclosure of Information
13.1      In exercising their powers under this Act, the Police may acquire information that
          gives cause for serious concern that a person performing a safety critical aviation
          function is unsuited to hold that position of trust. This acquisition may occur even
          before their sample of blood or urine has been analysed or they have been charged,
          for example, where such a person has provided a positive preliminary test.
13.2      Such information may be passed to that person’s employer or professional body on
          grounds of public safety or for the prevention or detection of crime. This will only be
          carried out with the authority of an officer of Assistant Chief of Police rank.
13.2.1    Any disclosure should provide only that information required to determine whether
          the offender should continue in their present role pending trial.
13.2.2    If authority to disclose is refused, Police should provide for the analysis of samples to
          be fast-tracked by the Forensic Science Service and for the offender to be charged, if
          appropriate, at the earliest opportunity.
13.3      In reality it is likely that if an individual is tested positive whilst on a duty, this will have
          an immediate impact on their ability to perform their function and will quickly come to
          the attention of the employer.
          In cases where a licensed engineer may be misusing alcohol or drugs, a decision will
          be made whether there is alcohol or drug dependency that could be a risk to flight
          safety. If so, the licence may be suspended, or where the licence has been issued by
          another state, a recommendation to suspend will be sent to the issuing authority. If
          that is so, he/she will then be invited to take part in a treatment and rehabilitation
          schedule. If that is successful, the suspension will be lifted. For non-UK licence
          holders a recommendation will be sent to the issuing authority that a rehabilitation
          schedule was completed.
1 Introduction
1.1       The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) has introduced an amendment to
          Annex 1 to the convention on international civil aviation which will have the effect of
          extending certain standards and recommended practices to all licence holders. The
          changes resulting from the amendment are concerned with medical fitness and the
          use or abuse of intoxicating liquor, narcotics or drugs.
1.2       To implement these changes the Air Navigation No. 2 Order 1995 (ANO) introduced
          two new Articles. Article 13(7) (now Article 18(7) of the Air Navigation Order 2005, as
          amended) which prohibits the exercise of the privileges of an aircraft maintenance
          engineer’s licence when the holder knows or suspects that their physical or mental
          condition renders them unfit to exercise such privileges, and Article 13(8) (now Article
          18(8) of the Air Navigation Order 2005, as amended) which prohibits the exercise of
          licence privileges when the holder is under the influence of drink and/or drugs to such
          an extent as to impair their capacity to exercise such privileges.
1.3       The Commission Regulation (EC) 2042/2003 (The Continuing Airworthiness
          Regulation) entered into force on 29 November 2003 and introduced new
          requirements applicable to licensed aircraft engineers in the U.K.
          Annex III Part 66.B.500 to the Continuing Airworthiness Regulation requires a
          competent authority to suspend, limit or revoke an aircraft maintenance licence in all
          cases where it has clear evidence that the license holder has carried out maintenance
          or issued a certificate of release to service when adversely affected by alcohol or
          drugs.
2 General
2.1       An aircraft maintenance engineer’s licence authorises the holder, subject to any
          conditions that may be specified on the licence, to issue various certificates relating
          to aircraft maintenance. The process of issuing these certificates (Certificates of
          Maintenance Review, Certificates of Release to Service and Certificates of Fitness for
          Flight under the 'A' Conditions Flight Release Certificate) and similar certificates for
          those aircraft detailed within Annex II of Commission Regulation (EC) 216/2008
          require clear decisions to be made that directly affect the airworthiness of the aircraft
          to which they relate. It follows that the quality of these decisions is directly influenced
          by the physical and mental state of the certifier at the time of certification, and
          whether or not they are subject to the adverse effects of drink and/or drugs.
2.2       The corporate management of all approved maintenance organisations are required
          to review this Leaflet and implement suitable policies and procedures to make all
          maintenance staff aware of them. The requirements of Articles 18(7) and 18(8) of the
          Air Navigation Order (2005) as amended, in addition to an understanding of the
          requirements placed upon the UK CAA within Part 66.B.500, fall on those who certify
          the completion of maintenance. The guidance material contained in this Leaflet is
3 Guidance
3.1       Fitness In most professions there is a duty of care by the individual to assess their
          own fitness to carry out professional duties. This has been a legal requirement for
          some time for doctors, flight crew members and air traffic controllers. Licensed
          aircraft maintenance engineers are also now required by law to take a similar
          professional attitude.
          Cases of subtle physical or mental illness may not always be apparent to the individual
          but as engineers often work as a member of a team any sub-standard performance
          or unusual behaviour should be quickly noticed by colleagues or supervisors who
          should notify management so that appropriate support and counselling action can be
          taken. In particular, a decrease in mental fitness in many cases may be related to
          stress from within the working environment or to the personal circumstances of the
          individual. Instances of aggressive behaviour, vagueness and slippage of personal
          standards (cleanliness, appearance etc.) may be indicative of more serious mental
          issues. Such issues may bring into question the ability of the individual to be trusted
          or to maintain the necessary levels of concentration to take appropriate decisions on
          airworthiness matters.
3.2       Fatigue Tiredness and fatigue can adversely affect performance. Excessive hours
          of duty and shift working, particularly with multiple shift periods or additional
          overtime, can lead to problems. Whilst the safety management aspects of these
          matters are being addressed through the UK Operators Technical Group individuals
          should be fully aware of the dangers of impaired performance due to these factors
          and of their personal responsibilities.
3.3       Stress Everyone is subject to various stresses in their life and work. Stress can
          often be stimulating and beneficial but prolonged exposure to chronic stress (high
          levels or differing stress factors) can produce strain and cause performance to suffer
          allowing mistakes to occur.
          Stress factors can be varied, physical – e.g. heat, cold, humidity, noise, vibration; they
          can be due to ill-health or worries about possible ill-health; from problems outside the
          workplace – e.g. bereavements, domestic upsets, financial or legal difficulties. A
          stress problem can manifest itself by signs of irritability, forgetfulness, sickness
          absence, mistakes, or alcohol or drug abuse. Management have a duty to identify
          individuals who may be suffering from stress and to minimise workplace stresses.
          Individual cases can be helped by sympathetic and skilful counselling which allows a
          return to effective work and licensed duties.
3.4       Eyesight A reasonable standard of eyesight is needed for any aircraft engineer to
          perform their duties to an acceptable degree. Many maintenance tasks require a
          combination of both distance and near vision. In particular, such consideration must
          be made where there is a need for the close visual inspection of structures or work
4 Summary
4.1       The effects of illness, injury or medication on work performance are the direct
          concern of the individual. Where there is doubt about the ability of an individual to
          make sound technical decisions, the implications of Article 18(7) and 18(8) of the Air
          Navigation Order (2005) as amended or Part 66.B.500 must be taken into account, i.e.
          the individual must not exercise the privileges of their licence or authorisation whilst
          unfit. While this Leaflet gives some guidance on the issues to be considered it cannot
          be comprehensive. If individual licence holders or their managers have any doubt they
          should consult the medical sources mentioned for advice. If there is difficulty in
          obtaining this advice, the local CAA regional office or the CAA Personnel Licensing
          Department should be contacted in the first instance and they in turn may seek
          guidance from the CAA Medical Department. The contact details of the CAA regional
          offices are provided in CAP 562 (CAAIP) under General Information.
Appendix 1