14._T-6A_ADS-B_Certification_Basis_Final.pdf

MDS: T-6A

CERTIFICATION BASIS

for

T-6A ADS-B Out Modification

Version: 2

516CN-4 11/23/15

Date: 15 May 2015

Date:

3/15/2016

X Rich Johnson Richard C. Johnson Program Manager Signed by: JOHNSON.RICHARD.C.1065312570

3/9/2016

X Kevin J. Kemper Kevin J. Kemper Chief Engineer DTA Signed by: KEMPER.KEVIN.J.1230141220

System Information

The T-6A is a commercial derivative aircraft that is certified by the FAA. For military airworthiness certification, the certification basis defined by this document was derived from of MIL-HDBK-516C, Airworthiness Certification Criteria, dated 12 Dec 2014.

Limitations:

Certification Basis:

System Description:

The T-6A is a FAA 14 CFR Part 23 certified single engine two-seat primary trainer that is a commercial derivative of the Hawker Beechcraft Model 3000. Primary design purpose is to train student pilots and navigators in basic skills common to Air Force and Naval aviation.

Produced by Beechcraft Defense Company, LLC (BDC), the T-6A is a military trainer that replaced the T-37B and is replacing the T-34C trainer aircraft. The avionics suite is a federated non-integrated design utilizing a Bendix/King KLN900 GPS, MST-67A Mode S transponder and a RMS-555 Radio Management System. Neither the KLN900 GPS or the MST-67A transponder are ADS-B capable and therefore need to be upgraded or replaced. There are two potential approaches for the ADS-B Out modification. The first approach is an integrated approach which requires a modification/update of the existing KLN 900 GPS, MST-67A transponder and the RMS-555 Radio Management System.

The second potential approach is a non-integrated approach requiring the addition of a standalone and independent ADS-B system consisting of a WAAS enabled GPS, ADS-B out capable transponder and human interface.

None

TACC

Para# Mil-HDBK-516C Certification Criteria

A pplicable (Y/N

Rationale for Non- Applicable Criteria Standard Method of Compliance Substantiating Data References

Program Office Responsible

Engineer

C om pliant (Y/N

Risk Assessment Level for Non-

Compliances (RHI)

EZ

Quicklook Comments (Is the package complete, data available, non-compliances and risks ID'ed)

EZ Quicklook Implications/Impa ct

EZ SME

Compliance

Assessment (Y/N)

EZ Issue With Compliance

(include rationale for any difference in risk assessment)

EZ Proposed Restrictions for Non-compliance

EZ Hazard & Predicted Severity

EZ TA comments EZ TD comments PO Response to

SME

Assessment

Applicable = 20

NonApplicable =

Non Compliant = 0

Compliant = 0

High = 0 Serious = 0 Medium = 0 Low = 0 Error = 0

4 4. SYSTEMS ENGINEERING

EXAMPLES OF TYPICAL CERTIFICATION

SOURCE DATA

1. Reliability, quality, and manufacturing program plans.

2. Contractor policies and procedures.

3. Durability and damage tolerance control plans.

4. Work instructions.

5. Process specifications.

6. Production/assembly progress reports.

7. Quality records.

8. Defect/failure data.

9. Failure modes, effects, and criticality analysis (FMECA) documentation.

10. Tech data package.

11. As-built list to include part numbers/serial numbers for all critical safety items/components.

12. List of deviations/waivers and unincorporated design changes.

13. List of approved class I engineering change proposals (ECPs).

14. DD Form 250, Material Inspection and Receiving Report.

15. Configuration management plans/process description documents.

16. Diminishing Manufacturing Sources Plan.

17. Obsolete Parts Plan.

18. Test reports.

19 Test plans

4.1 4.1 Design criteria.

4.1.1 4.1.1 Requirements allocation.

Criterion: Verify that the design criteria, including requirements and ground rules, adequately address airworthiness and safety for mission usage, full permissible flight envelope, duty cycle, interfaces, induced and natural environment, inspection capability, and maintenance philosophy.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.1.2 4.1.2 Safety critical hardware and software.

Criterion: Verify that airworthiness and safety design criteria are adequately addressed at component, subsystem and system levels, including interfaces, latencies, software and information assurance.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.1.3 4.1.3 Commercial derivative aircraft.

Criterion: Verify that, for commercial derivative air vehicles, the air vehicle's certification basis addresses all design criteria appropriate for the planned military usage.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.1.4 4.1.4 Failure conditions.

Criterion: Verify that safety of flight related failure conditions have been adequately addressed in the design criteria.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.1.5 4.1.5 Operating environment.

Criterion: Verify that the air system is designed to operate in the natural and induced environments for which it is intended.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.1.6 4.1.6 Flight and safety critical functions.

Criterion: Verify that the air systems design criteria identify flight and safety critical functions, and their degraded and failed modes and states.

Verify that the air system and air vehicle detect and respond appropriately, predictably, safely and in a timely manner to flight and safety critical function degraded states or failures.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.1.7 4.1.7 Flight termination system.

Criterion: Verify that the flight termination function, if incorporated into the design, is safe, secure and reliable.

N Aircraft has no flight termination system

Standard: Design criteria ensure that the flight termination function operates reliably and in a timely manner when commanded. The flight termination function results in a defined air vehicle flight state (e.g., zero lift, zero thrust).

The likelihood of uncommanded flight termination is remote. A minimum of two operator actions is required to execute the flight termination function.

Method of Compliance: Inspection of documentation verifies that design criteria are in place to ensure that the flight termination function operates reliably and appropriately, and only when required. Inspection of test and simulation data verifies that the flight termination function operates appropriately, only when required, and results in the expected defined flight state(s). Inspection of analysis documentation indicates that the flight termination function operates reliably.

Reference: RCC 319-14

0 1 0 0

4.2 4.2 Tools and databases.

4.2.1 4.2.1 Tool and database processes.

Criterion: Verify that all tools, methods, and databases used in the requirements management, design, risk control and assessments of safety are applied appropriately and exhibit accuracy commensurate with their application.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.3 4.3 Materials selection.

4.3.1 4.3.1 Selection of materials.

Criterion: For Army and Navy air systems, verify that the material selection process uses validated and consistent material properties data, including design mechanical and physical properties such as material defects, and corrosion and environmental protection requirements (see also Section 19, Materials;

Section 5, Structures; and Section 7, Propulsion;

Section 8, Air Vehicle Subsystems of this document).

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.4 4.4 Manufacturing and quality.

4.4.1 4.4.1 Key characteristics.

Criterion: Verify that key product characteristics (including critical characteristics) have been identified.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.4.2 4.4.2 Critical processes.

Criterion: Verify that all critical process capabilities exist to meet key product characteristic requirements (including critical characteristics).

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.4.3 4.4.3 Critical process controls.

Criterion: Verify that all critical process controls exist to assure key product characteristic requirements (including critical characteristics) are met.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.4.4 4.4.4 Quality system.

Criterion: Verify that the as-built configuration matches the as-designed configuration.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.4.5 4.4.5 Nondestructive inspections.

Criterion: Verify that nondestructive inspection (NDI) processes have been validated to assure conforming parts.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.5 4.5 OperatorÆs and maintenance manual/technical orders.

4.5.1 4.5.1 Procedures and limitations.

Criterion: Verify that processes are in place to identify and document normal and emergency procedures, limitations, restrictions, warnings, cautions and notes.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.5.2 4.5.2 Technical data.

Criterion: Verify that processes are in place to identify and document the technical data, and that the technical data are consistent with the defined functional and product baseline.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.5.3 4.5.3 Maintenance of safety.

Criterion: Verify that procedures are in place for establishing and maintaining air system flight safety, as affected by product design changes, safety issues, changes in operations, maintenance, transportation or storage.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.6 4.6 Configuration management (CM).

Para# Mil-HDBK-516C Certification Criteria

A pplicable (Y/N

Rationale for Non- Applicable Criteria Standard Method of Compliance Substantiating Data References

Program Office Responsible

Engineer

C om pliant (Y/N

Risk Assessment Level for Non-

Compliances (RHI)

EZ

Quicklook Comments (Is the package complete, data available, non-compliances and risks ID'ed)

EZ Quicklook Implications/Impa ct

EZ SME

Compliance

Assessment (Y/N)

EZ Issue With Compliance

(include rationale for any difference in risk assessment)

EZ Proposed Restrictions for Non-compliance

EZ Hazard & Predicted Severity

EZ TA comments EZ TD comments PO Response to

SME

Assessment

Applicable = 20

NonApplicable =

Non Compliant = 0

Compliant = 0

High = 0 Serious = 0 Medium = 0 Low = 0 Error = 0

4.6.1 4.6.1 Functional baseline.

Criterion: Verify that the functional baseline is established and under configuration control to preclude unauthorized changes.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.6.2 4.6.2 Allocated baseline.

Criterion: Verify that the allocated baseline is established and under configuration control to preclude unauthorized changes.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.6.3 4.6.3 Product baseline.

Criterion: Verify that the product baseline is established and under configuration control to preclude unauthorized changes.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

4.6.4 4.6.4 Safety critical item configuration management.

Criterion: Verify that all safety-critical items are tracked and under configuration control.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

Para# Mil-HDBK-516C Certification Criteria

A pplicable (Y/N

Rationale for Non- Applicable Criteria Standard Method of Compliance Substantiating Data References

Program Office Responsible

Engineer

C om pliant (Y/N

Risk Assessment Level for Non-

Compliances (RHI)

EZ

Quicklook Comments (Is the package complete, data available, non-compliances and risks ID'ed)

EZ Quicklook Implications/Impa ct

EZ SME

Compliance

Assessment (Y/N)

EZ Issue With Compliance

(include rationale for any difference in risk assessment)

EZ Proposed Restrictions for Non-compliance

EZ Hazard & Predicted Severity

EZ TA comments EZ TD comments PO Response to

SME

Assessment

Applicable = 16

NonApplicable =

Non Compliant = 0

Compliant = 0

High = 0 Serious = 0 Medium = 0 Low = 0 Error = 0

5 5. STRUCTURES

The air vehicle structure, herein referred to as the aircraft, includes the fuselage, cockpit, wing, main and tail rotor, proprotor, empennage, tail pylon, structural elements of landing gear, the control system, control surfaces, drive system, rotor control systems, radomes, antennas, engine mounts, nacelles, pylons, thrust reversers (if not part of the engine), inlets, aerial refueling mechanisms, shipboard related airborne apparatus/devices (fixed wing catapult and arresting components; rotary wing/tiltrotor recovery assist, securing probe/harpoon system components and backup structure), structural operating mechanisms, structural provisions for seats, equipment, medical evacuation equipment, storage and on-board facilities payload, cargo, personnel accommodations, etc.

EXAMPLES OF TYPICAL CERTIFICATION

SOURCE DATA

1. Design criteria.

2. Loads analyses.

3. Internal load and stress analyses.

4. Materials, processes, corrosion prevention, nondestructive evaluation and repair data.

5. Results from any design development tests conducted.

6. Proof test results.

7. Flutter, mechanical stability and aeroservoelastic analyses.

8 Loads wind tunnel test data

5.1 5.1 Loads.

5.1.1 5.1.1 Design flight and ground loads.

Criterion (Army, Navy and Air Force): Verify that the loads used in the design of the aircraft include the maximum, minimum and most critical combination of loads that can result from authorized ground and flight loading conditions for the air vehicle. These include loads during piloted or autonomous maneuvers, loss of control maneuvers, gusts, pressurization, turbulence, take-off, landing, catapult (if applicable), shipboard and land based arrestments (if applicable), ground operations, maintenance activity, systems failures from which recovery is expected (to include rapid depressurization) and loads expected to be seen throughout the specific lifetime of usage.

N ADS-B modification does not affect, alter or change any of these systems or performance characteristics.

Standard (Army, Navy and Air Force): Flight loading conditions are based on aircraft response to pilot induced or autonomous maneuvers, loss of control maneuvers, pressurization and turbulence. These conditions consider both required, and expected to be encountered, critical combinations of configurations, gross weights, centers of gravity, thrust, power, altitudes, speeds, critical combinations of control system (surfaces and rotor system) deflections, control input variation and environmental factors and are used in the design of the aircraft. Flight loading conditions reflect symmetric and asymmetric flight operations and are established for both primary and secondary structural components by selection of flight parameters likely to produce critical applied loads. Symmetric and asymmetric flight operations include symmetric and unsymmetrical fuel and payload loadings and adverse trim conditions. Such loads also address normal and failure modes of operation, including rapid pressurization (Navy only) and depressurization, and loads expected to be seen throughout the specific lifetime of usage.

Method of Compliance (Air Force): Verification methods include analysis and inspection of documentation. Multiple variables and factors account for development of maximum and minimum load factors. The following compliance paragraphs are applicable to all standards.

a. Load factor selection considers the following items:

(1) Mission and flying techniques employed to execute the required mission.

(2) Weapon types and possible delivery methods.

(3) Anticipated weight and power plant growth.

(4) Maximum speed and time spent at maximum speed.

(5) Utilization of external stores and external fuel tanks.

(6) Training.

(7) Past experience with similar types of aircraft, mission, etc..

b. Load factors are defined which include appropriate ranges for symmetrical, asymmetrical, directional maneuvers, and atmospheric turbulence for each configuration.

Analysis verifies that the load factors are attainable by the air vehicle.

Method of Compliance (Army and Navy):

Verification methods include analyses and inspection of documentation, wind tunnel tests, simulation, and flight testing. Compliance is shown for each combination of configurations at

0 1 0 0

5.1.2 5.1.2 Use of probabilistic vs deterministic loads.

Criterion: Verify that the limit loads used in the design of dynamic components and elements of the airframe subject to deterministic design criteria are the maximum and most critical combination of loads that can result from authorized ground and flight use of the air vehicle. These include loads during maintenance activity, system failures from which recovery is expected, and loads experienced throughout the specific lifetime usage.

N ADS-B modification does not affect, alter or change any of these systems or performance characteristics.

Standard (Navy and Air Force): Only where deterministic values have no precedence or basis, is a combined load-strength probability analysis to predict the risk of detrimental structural deformation and structural failure used.

In those cases, the airframe may not experience detrimental structural deformations with a probability of occurrence equal to or greater than that specified in the AVPS Addendum for the respective air vehicle. The resulting limit design loads are the maximum loads anticipated on the aircraft during its lifetime of service (see 5.1.1).

Standard (Army): Limit design loads are the maximum loads anticipated on the aircraft during its lifetime of service. For rotorcraft, the air vehicle structure is designed for load factors and airspeeds such that the structural design envelope exceeds the aircraft aerodynamic capability or operational limits. Limit loads for certain dynamic components may also require consideration of altitudes between sea level and service ceiling.

Method of Compliance: Verification methods include analysis, test, demonstration and inspection of documentation.

a. Correlated ground and flight loads analyses are provided in which details of magnitudes and distribution of all applied external loads are identified for multiple air vehicle configurations, weights, center of gravity, and maneuvers covering all attainable altitudes, speeds and load factors. Service and maximum loads expected to be encountered are established for operation under all flight conditions. Wind tunnel tests are utilized for development of aerodynamic loads.

Stiffness and ground vibration tests are utilized to update flexibility vs. rigid characteristics of loads analytical model. Flight controls and aerodynamic flight tests are utilized to update aircraft simulation models. Loads calibration tests are utilized to develop ground/flight load equations. 80% and 100% flight loads surveys/demonstrations are utilized to correlate analytical model and to substantiate the design loads.

b. For rotorcraft, loads analysis is performed for design load conditions specified in ADS-29 (cancelled). Structural demonstration flight testing is performed in accordance with ADS-24 (cancelled)) to demonstrate the safe operation of the aircraft to the maximum attainable operating limits consistent with the structural design and to verify that loads used in the structural analysis

0 1 0 0

5.1.3 5.1.3 Foreign object damage (FOD).

Criterion: Verify that loads used in the design of the airframe include loads due to FOD from birds, hail, runway, taxiway, and ramp debris.

N ADS-B modification does not affect, alter or change any of these systems or performance characteristics.

Standard: The aircraft is designed to withstand the impact of FOD during any phase of taxi, takeoff, flight and landing without loss of the air vehicle, incapacitation of the pilot or crew and without detectable or undetectable damage to structural elements that result in reductions in structural strength below ultimate load carrying capability throughout the flight envelope (including maneuvers). The aircraft, including main and tail rotor systems, is designed to ensure the capability of continued safe flight and landing following impact; windshields are designed to withstand impact, without penetration; and fairings that may be used to shield or enclose flight critical components (for example, flight control computers) are designed with sufficient strength to ensure capability of continued safe flight and landing.

Method of Compliance: Verification methods include analysis, test, and inspection of documentation. Probabilistic analyses are performed to address FOD occurrences. Lab tests such as bird strike tests are performed to validate analytical model(s) and/or structural capabilities.

References: (Air Force fixed wing) JSSG-2006:

A.3.2.1; A.3.2.18, A.4.2.18; A.3.2.22, A.4.2.22;

A.3.2.24, A.4.2.24 (Army rotary wing) ADS-10-SP, ADS-24 (cancelled), ADS-27-SP, ADS-29 (cancelled), ADS-51, ADS-64-SP (inactive), AR-70-62 (Navy rotary wing) As identified in the AVPS Addendum for the respective air vehicle and/or

JSSG-2006: A.3.2.24, A.4.2.24; AR-56, AR-89,

MIL-D-23222

14 CFR 23, 25, 27, 29

STANAG 4671: USAR 321

0 1 0 0

5.1.4 5.1.4 Repeated loads.

Criterion: Verify that the air vehicle structure is designed such that all sources of repeated loads are considered and included in the development of the service loads spectra and do not detract from the airframe service life or dynamic component retirement intervals.

N ADS-B modification does not affect, alter or change any of these systems or performance characteristics.

Standard (Army and Air Force):

a. Maneuvers - Designed such that final spectra accounts for variables such as maneuver capability, tactics, and flight control laws reflecting projected average usage with the design utilization distribution and also usage such that 90% of the fleet (95% for all fatigue damaging conditions for rotorcraft) is expected to meet the service life.

b. Gusts - Designed such that gust load spectra developed by continuous turbulence analysis methods.

c. Suppression system which enhances ride qualities such as active oscillation control, gust alleviation, flutter suppression and terrain following.

d. Vibration and aeroacoustics.

e. Landings - Designed with cumulative occurrences of sink speed per 1000 landings, by type of landing, typical of projected service usage.

f. For rotorcraft - Designed with consideration of CF loads due to rotor start and stop cycle and torsional loads due to rotor braking cycles.

g. Buffet due to non-linear flow caused by vortex shedding during high angle of attack maneuvers, rotary-wing blade stall and transonic shock instabilities - Designed such that analytical predictions of the structural response are generated during flight operations in the buffet regime and adjusted as needed by test data

Method of Compliance (Army and Air Force):

Verification methods include analysis, test, and inspection of documentation.

a. The following methods of compliance are applicable to all of the conditions of the standard:

(1) Ground and flight loads analyses are correlated with test data.

(2) For rotorcraft, flight load survey testing is performed to gather loads for each regime in the usage spectrum.

b. The following two compliances are applicable to condition #7 of the standard:

(1). Wind tunnel tests are utilized for development of buffet loads.

(2). Buffet flight tests are utilized to verify analytical buffet predictions.

c. The following compliance is applicable to condition #4 of the standard:

(1) Updated predictions of the vibration and aeroacoustic environments are accomplished.

Method of Compliance (Navy): Verification methods include ground and flight loads analyses, inspection of documentation, simulation, wind tunnel testing, static testing and flight test.

References: (Navy/Air Force fixed wing) JSSG- 2006: A.3.2.14.3, A.4.2.14.3; A.3.2.24, A.4.2.24 (Army rotary wing) ADS-10-SP, ADS-24 (cancelled), ADS-27-SP, ADS-29 (cancelled), ADS 51 ADS 64 SP (inactive) AR 70 62

0 1 0 0

5.1.5 5.1.5 Propulsion loads.

Criterion: Verify that the air vehicle structure is designed such that the power or thrust of the installed propulsion system is commensurate with the ground and flight conditions of intended use, including system failures, and the capabilities of the propulsion system and crew.

N ADS-B modification does not affect, alter or change any of these systems or performance characteristics.

Standard: See 5.1.1. Method of Compliance: See 5.1.1.

References: (Navy/Air Force fixed wing) JSSG- 2006: A.3.2.17, A.4.2.17 (Army rotary wing) ADS-29 (cancelled) (Navy rotary wing) As identified in JSSG-2006:

A.3.2.17, A.4.2.17; and as identified in the Addendum to the AVPS for the respective air vehicle and/or AR-56, AR-89, and MIL-D-23222

0 1 0 0

Para# Mil-HDBK-516C Certification Criteria

A pplicable (Y/N

Rationale for Non- Applicable Criteria Standard Method of Compliance Substantiating Data References

Program Office Responsible

Engineer

C om pliant (Y/N

Risk Assessment Level for Non-

Compliances (RHI)

EZ

Quicklook Comments (Is the package complete, data available, non-compliances and risks ID'ed)

EZ Quicklook Implications/Impa ct

EZ SME

Compliance

Assessment (Y/N)

EZ Issue With Compliance

(include rationale for any difference in risk assessment)

EZ Proposed Restrictions for Non-compliance

EZ Hazard & Predicted Severity

EZ TA comments EZ TD comments PO Response to

SME

Assessment

Applicable = 16

NonApplicable =

Non Compliant = 0

Compliant = 0

High = 0 Serious = 0 Medium = 0 Low = 0 Error = 0

5.1.6 5.1.6 Flight control and automatic control device loads.

Criterion: Verify, in the generation of loads, that flight control and automatic control devices, including load alleviation and ride control devices, are to be in all modes (operative, inoperative, and transient) for which use is required. This includes use due to or likely due to single or multiple system failure conditions.

N ADS-B modification does not affect, alter or change any of these systems or performance characteristics.

Standard: Stability augmentation; load and flutter alleviation; pilot cueing software and vibration control devices do not affect the short or long term strength and durability of the aircraft.

Loads generated by these devices in all modes of operation are considered in the design, (on, off, system failure and/or overridden condition, if available) to ensure adequate structural integrity exists.

Method of Compliance (Air Force): Verification methods include analyses, tests, and inspection of documentation.

Method of Compliance (Army and Navy):

Verification methods include analyses, inspection of documentation, simulations, wind tunnel, ground and flight test.

Method of Compliance (All): Analyses and tests verify the normal operation as well as some potential modes of operation. Analyses and ground tests verify the emergency associated modes of operation. Correlated ground and flight loads analyses are accomplished. Wind tunnel tests are utilized for development of aerodynamic loads. Flight controls and aerodynamic flight tests are utilized to update aircraft simulation models. Per JSSG 2006, 80% and 100% flight loads surveys/demonstrations are utilized to correlate analytical model.

References: (Navy/Air Force fixed wing) JSSG- 2006: A.3.2.18, A.4.2.18 (Army rotary wing) ADS-29 (cancelled) (Navy rotary wing) As identified in the JSSG- 2006: A.3.2.18 and A.4.2.18 and as identified in the Addendum to the AVPS for the respective air vehicle and/or AR-56, AR-89, MIL-D-23222

0 1 0 0

5.1.7 5.1.7 Analysis and testing of realistic flight loading conditions.

Criterion: Verify that flight loading conditions are based upon realistic conditions of air vehicle structural response to pilot induced or autonomous maneuvers, loss of control maneuvers, gusts, and turbulence. Also verify that the realistic conditions considered are both required and expected to be encountered critical combinations of configurations, gross weights, centers of gravity, thrust or power, altitudes, speeds, and type of atmosphere and are used in the design of the air vehicle structure.

N ADS-B modification does not affect, alter or change any of these systems or performance characteristics.

Standard (Army and Air Force):

a. Air vehicle structure is designed such that flight loading conditions reflect symmetric and asymmetric flight operations. Flight loading conditions are also established for both primary and secondary structural components by careful selection of flight parameters likely to produce critical applied loads. Symmetric and asymmetric flight operations include symmetric and unsymmetric fuel and payload loadings (including external stores) and adverse trim conditions.

b. Fixed wing air vehicle structure is designed such that symmetric maneuver conditions accomplished with and without a specified roll rate command above 80 percent maximum symmetric Nz providing acceptable roll capability throughout the specified flight envelope.

c. Air vehicle structure is designed such that symmetric maneuvers are performed with and without a 50 degrees per second roll rate command for A (attack aircraft), F (fighter aircraft), TF (trainer/fighter aircraft), O (observer aircraft) and T (trainer aircraft) fixed-wing aircraft and 30 degrees per second for all other fixed-wing aircraft. Symmetric maneuvers include steady pitching, abrupt pitching, flaps down pullouts, aerial delivery pullouts, and emergency stores release. For rotorcraft see ADS-29 (cancelled).

d Air vehicle structure is designed such that

Method of Compliance (Army and Air Force):

Verification methods include analyses, tests, and inspection of documentation. The flight loading conditions used in the design of the airframe as defined in the standards are verified by a series of analyses and tests.

a. Correlated flight loads analyses are provided in which details of magnitudes and distribution of all applied external loads are identified for multiple air vehicle configurations, weights, center of gravity, and maneuvers covering all attainable altitudes, speeds and load factors.

Service and maximum loads expected to be encountered are established for operation under all flight conditions. Wind tunnel tests are utilized for development of aerodynamic loads. Stiffness and ground vibration tests are utilized to update flexibility vs. rigid characteristics of loads analytical model. Flight controls and aerodynamic flight tests are utilized to update aircraft simulation models. Loads calibration tests are utilized to develop flight load equations.

80% and 100% flight loads surveys/demonstrations are utilized to correlate analytical model and substantiate the design loads.

b. For rotorcraft, loads analysis is performed for design load conditions specified in ADS-29 (cancelled). Structural demonstration flight testing is performed in accordance with ADS-24 (cancelled) to demonstrate the safe operation of

0 1 0 0

5.1.8 5.1.8 Analysis and testing of realistic ground loading conditions.

Criterion (Army, Navy and Air Force): Verify that the aircraft is designed for ground loading conditions that reflect fleet operations. Verify that the airframe has sufficient structural integrity to take-off, catapult, land, arrest, and operate on the ground, ship, or other remote operating facilities.

N ADS-B modification does not affect, alter or change any of these systems or performance characteristics.

Standard (Army and Air Force):

a. For Fixed-Wing Aircraft:

(1) The airframe is designed such that the maximum landing touchdown vertical sink speeds of the air vehicle center of mass used in the design of the airframe and landing gear are:

(a) 13 feet per second (fps) for landing design gross weights of primary and basic trainers; 10 fps for all other classes.

(b) 10 fps for maximum landing design weights of primary and basic trainers; 6 fps for all other classes

(2) The airframe is designed such that crosswinds at take-off and landing are those components of surface winds perpendicular to the runway centerline with the landing gear loads being 80% of the vertical reaction for the inboard acting load and 60% of the vertical reaction of the outboard acting load. This is based on the vertical reaction being 50% of the maximum vertical reaction from two point and level symmetrical landings.

(3) The airframe is designed such that the landing touchdown roll, yaw, pitch attitude, and sink speed combinations are based on a joint probability within an ellipsoid with axes of roll, yaw, and pitch.

(4) The airframe is designed such that taxi discrete bumps and dips are as defined in JSSG 2006 for wave length, amplitude and shape for the maximum ground weight It is also designed

Method of Compliance (Army and Air Force):

Verification methods include analyses, tests, and inspection of documentation. The ground loading conditions used in the design of the airframe as defined in the standards are verified by a series of analyses and tests.

a. Correlated ground loads analyses including dynamic response analyses are provided in which details of magnitudes and distribution of all critical design loads are established. Dynamic stability/taxi analyses are provided to assess shimmy and development of design loads.

Ground vibration tests and landing gear shimmy lab tests are utilized to define the dynamic characteristics of the gear. Loads calibration tests are utilized to develop ground load equations. Ground loads test demonstrations, shimmy ground tests, and rough runway tests are utilized to correlate analytical model and substantiate the design loads.

a. For rotorcraft, loads analysis is performed for design load conditions specified in ADS-29 (cancelled). Structural demonstration flight testing (which includes hard landings) is performed in accordance with ADS-24 (cancelled) to demonstrate the safe operation of the aircraft to the maximum attainable operating limits consistent with the structural design and to verify that loads used in the structural analysis and static tests are not exceeded at the structural design limits of the airspeed and load

0 1 0 0

5.1.9 5.1.9 Crash loads.

Criterion (Army): Verify that in the generation of loads the air vehicle structure is able to withstand crashes and to protect personnel to the extent reflected by the ultimate loading conditions and parameters sufficient to prevent injury to occupants and to maintain the integrity of egress paths.

Criterion (Navy and Air Force): Verify that in the generation of loads the air vehicle structure, (including large mass items and their attachments (gearboxes, engines, APU etc.) is able to withstand crash and emergency water landings and to protect personnel sufficient to prevent injury to occupants and to maintain the integrity of egress paths.

N ADS-B modification does not affect, alter or change any of these systems or performance characteristics.

Standard (Army and Air Force):

a. For Fixed Wing Aircraft:

(1) The air vehicle structure is designed such that crash requirements are defined in terms of longitudinal, vertical and lateral crash load factors.

(2) The air vehicle structure is designed such that the minimum longitudinal, vertical and lateral crash load factors are equal to the ultimate load factors required for strength of crew and passenger seats. This is as specified in the applicable specifications for seats or is in accordance with Table XIV of JSSG 2006.

Ultimate loads are based on load factor times the combination of an appropriate amount of mass, the man plus personal equipment and the weight of any seat armor.

(3) The air vehicle structure is designed such that all internal fuel tanks, including all critical amounts of fuel up to two-thirds of the individual tank capacities, are able to withstand the ultimate load factor requirements.

(4) The air vehicle structure is designed such that all fixed and removable miscellaneous and auxiliary equipment and their subcomponent installations are able to withstand the following air vehicle load factors: Longitudinal 9.0 fwd,

1.5 aft; Lateral 1.5 right and left; Vertical 4.5 down and 2.0 up.

(5) The air vehicle structure is designed such that the airframe attachments and carry through

Method of Compliance (Army and Air Force):

Verification methods include analyses, tests, and inspection of documentation. The ground loading conditions and subsequent analyses and tests used in the design of the airframe are utilized to develop the crash loads.

a. Correlated ground loads analyses are provided in which details of magnitudes and distribution of all critical design loads are established. Ground loads test demonstrations are utilized to correlate analytical model and substantiate the design loads.

b. For rotorcraft, aircraft crash loads analysis is performed for various crash impact design conditions in accordance with applicable platform specifications typically based on MIL-STD-1290.

Crash load factors applicable to retention of high mass items, occupants, cargo, and ancillary equipment are used in structural analysis in accordance with applicable platform specifications, typically based on MIL-STD- 1290.

Method of Compliance (Navy): Verification methods include analyses, inspection of documentation, simulation, component and/or static testing. Dynamic ground testing including full scale airframe drop tests, and airframe or component level dynamic impact and sled testing may be required. For rotorcraft, aircraft crash loads analysis is performed for various crash impact design conditions in accordance with the

0 1 0 0

5.2 5.2 Structural dynamics.

5.2.1 5.2.1 Aeroelastic design - general.

Criterion (Army and Air Force): Verify that the air vehicle, in all configurations including store carriage and system failures, is free from flutter, whirl flutter, divergence, and other related aeroelastic or aeroservoelastic instabilities, including transonic aeroelastic instabilities, for all combinations of altitude and speed encompassed by the limit speed (VL/ML) versus altitude envelope enlarged at all points by the airspeed margin of safety. Also, verify that all aerodynamic surfaces and components of the air vehicle are free from aeroelastic divergence and that the inlet, transparency, and other aerodynamically loaded panels are designed to prevent flutter and limited amplitude oscillations when exposed to high transonic or supersonic flow.

Criterion (Navy): Verify that the air vehicle in all configurations including store carriage and system failures, and its components such as wings, main and tail rotors, vertical and horizontal tails, pylons, external stores, externally slung loads, control surfaces, drive systems, drive shafts, are free from flutter, stall flutter, whirl flutter, divergence, buzz, coupled rotor/pylon instabilities, air and/or ground resonances, landing gear shimmy and other aeroelastic, aeroservoelastic, aerothermoelastic instabilities, including transonic aeroelastic instabilities for all combinations of altitude and

Y

Para# Mil-HDBK-516C Certification Criteria

A pplicable (Y/N

Rationale for Non- Applicable Criteria Standard Method of Compliance Substantiating Data References

Program Office Responsible

Engineer

C om pliant (Y/N

Risk Assessment Level for Non-

Compliances (RHI)

EZ

Quicklook Comments (Is the package complete, data available, non-compliances and risks ID'ed)

EZ Quicklook Implications/Impa ct

EZ SME

Compliance

Assessment (Y/N)

EZ Issue With Compliance

(include rationale for any difference in risk assessment)

EZ Proposed Restrictions for Non-compliance

EZ Hazard & Predicted Severity

EZ TA comments EZ TD comments PO Response to

SME

Assessment

Applicable = 16

NonApplicable =

Non Compliant = 0

Compliant = 0

High = 0 Serious = 0 Medium = 0 Low = 0 Error = 0

5.2.2 5.2.2 Aeroelastic design - aeroservoelasticity.

Criterion (Navy and Air Force): Verify that the air vehicle is free from the occurrence of any aeroservoelastic instability resulting from the interactions of air vehicle systems, such as aerodynamics, commanded or uncommanded control systems coupling with the airframe, rotor systems and/or external slung loads, as appropriate.

Criterion (Army): Verify that the air vehicle is free from the occurrence of any aeroservoelastic instability resulting from the interactions of air vehicle systems, such as the control systems coupling with the airframe.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

5.2.3 5.2.3 Aeroelastic design - control surfaces and other components.

Criterion (Army and Air Force): Verify that the control surfaces and tabs contain sufficient static and dynamic mass balance, or sufficient bending, torsional, and rotational rigidity; or a combination of these means to prevent flutter; or limited-amplitude instabilities of all critical modes under all flight conditions for normal and failure operating conditions of the actuating systems.

Verify that all control surfaces and parts thereof are free from single-degree-of-freedom flutter, such as buzz. Also verify that all other air vehicle components exposed to the airstream, such as spoilers, dive brakes, scoops, landing gear doors, weapon bay doors, ventral fins, movable inlet ramps, movable fairings, and blade antennae are free from aeroelastic instability.

Criterion (Navy): Verify that the control surfaces and tabs contain sufficient static and dynamic mass balance, or sufficient bending, torsional, and rotational rigidity; or a combination of these means to prevent flutter; and limit cycle instabilities of all critical modes under all ground and flight conditions for normal and failure operating conditions. Normal wear of control system components and actuating systems does not result in adverse free-play or hysteresis that would degrade control or alter stability characteristics. All fixed or movable control surfaces and parts thereof and tail rotor

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

5.2.4 5.2.4 Aeroelastic design - fail safe.

Criterion (Navy and Air Force): Verify that, after each of the failures listed below as well as for air vehicle augmentation system failures, the air vehicle is free from flutter, limited amplitude oscillations, divergence, and other related aeroelastic or aeroservoelastic instabilities, including limit cycle oscillations.

a. Failure, malfunction, or disconnection of any single element or component of the main flight control system, augmentation systems, automatic flight control systems, tab control system, or hydraulic system affecting individual flight control system components.

b. Failure, malfunction, or disconnection of any single element of any flutter damper connected to a control surface or tab, single failure of any individual main rotor or tail rotor damper, as applicable.

c. Failure of any single element in any hinge mechanism and its supporting structure of any control surface, tab or tail plane.

d. Failure of any single element in any actuator's mechanical attachment to the structure of any control surface, tab or tail plane.

e. Failure of any single element in the supporting structure of any pylon, rack, external store or externally slung load, as applicable.

f. Failure of any single element in the supporting structure of any large auxiliary power unit.

g Failure of any single element in the airframe

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

5.2.5 5.2.5 Environment design - sonic fatigue.

Criterion: Verify that the airframe structure (including cavities), equipment, and equipment provisions withstand the aeroacoustic loads and vibrations induced by the aeroacoustic environment for the air vehicle specified service life and usage without cracking or functional impairment.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

5.2.6 5.2.6 Environment design - cavity flows.

Criterion: Verify that the structures, equipment, and equipment provisions in, adjacent to, or immediately downstream of cavities open to the airstream during flight are designed for the effects of oscillatory air forces.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

5.2.7 5.2.7 Environment design - personnel exposure to aircraft noise.

Criterion: Verify that sound pressure levels in areas of the air vehicle occupied by personnel during flight are controlled as required by human factors requirements.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

5.2.8 5.2.8 Environment design - vibration.

Criterion (Army and Air Force): Verify that the airframe is designed such that it can operate in the vibration environments induced by the operational use for the specified service life.

Also verify that the airframe is designed such that no fatigue cracking or excessive vibration of the airframe structure or components occurs that would result in the air vehicle or the components of the air vehicle systems not being fully functional.

Criterion (Navy): Verify that the aircraft is designed such that it can operate in the vibration environments induced by the operational usage environment for the specified service life. The aircraft, for all flight conditions, specified gross weight, centers of gravity, airspeeds, and when for rotorcraft operating at the specified rotor speed(s), is designed such that no fatigue cracking or excessive vibration of the airframe structure or components occurs that would result in the air vehicle or the components of the air vehicle systems not being fully functional. The vibration spectrum provided for design and qualification of equipment to be installed on the aircraft is acceptable. A separate set of spectra, addressing each portion of the flight envelope including maneuvers, is defined.

(Aircraft are typically divided into selected zones based upon regions of influence of the source of (vibration) )

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

5.2.9 5.2.9 Environment design - vents and louvers.

Criterion: Verify that equipment and structure behind and near vents and louvers are designed for the effects of flow through the vents and louvers during conditions of normal and reverse flows.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

5.3 5.3 Strength

Para# Mil-HDBK-516C Certification Criteria

A pplicable (Y/N

Rationale for Non- Applicable Criteria Standard Method of Compliance Substantiating Data References

Program Office Responsible

Engineer

C om pliant (Y/N

Risk Assessment Level for Non-

Compliances (RHI)

EZ

Quicklook Comments (Is the package complete, data available, non-compliances and risks ID'ed)

EZ Quicklook Implications/Impa ct

EZ SME

Compliance

Assessment (Y/N)

EZ Issue With Compliance

(include rationale for any difference in risk assessment)

EZ Proposed Restrictions for Non-compliance

EZ Hazard & Predicted Severity

EZ TA comments EZ TD comments PO Response to

SME

Assessment

Applicable = 16

NonApplicable =

Non Compliant = 0

Compliant = 0

High = 0 Serious = 0 Medium = 0 Low = 0 Error = 0

5.3.1 5.3.1 Strength verification.

Criterion (Army and Air Force): Verify that sufficient static strength is provided to react to all design loading conditions without yielding and detrimental deformations (including delamination) at limit load, unless higher loads are specified, and without structural failure at ultimate loads.

Verify that sufficient strength exists for operations, maintenance functions, occurrences of system failures, and any tests that simulate load conditions. This includes modifications, new or revised equipment installations, major repairs, extensive reworks, extensive refurbishment, or remanufacture.

Criterion (Navy): Verify that sufficient static strength is provided in the airframe, landing gear, rotor and control system structure to react all loading conditions without yielding, detrimental deformations (including delamination) or failures degrading the structural performance capability of the airframe. The air vehicle has sufficient strength for operations, maintenance functions (to include modifications, new or revised equipment installations, major repairs, extensive reworks, extensive refurbishment, or remanufacture), occurrences of systems failures, and any tests that simulate load conditions.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

5.3.2 5.3.2 Materials and processes.

Criterion: Verify that the allowables for materials are estimated minima derived using statistical compensations appropriate to part criticality and the nature of the material; are established considering component and assembly variability, the expected environmental extremes, fabrication processes, repair techniques, and quality assurance procedures; and are validated.

Verify that conditions and properties associated with material repairs satisfy design requirements.

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

5.3.3 5.3.3 Stress and strain design controls.

Criterion: Verify that stresses and strains in structural members are controlled through proper sizing, detail design, and materials selection.

Verify that for all limit, design (including the Navy design landing condition, where applicable), and ultimate loads are reacted resulting in zero or positive margins of safety for all configurations within allowable operating conditions (including probable failure and defined emergency conditions).

Y

FAA Certification FAA finding of compliance with FAA Rules

1 0 0 0

5.4 5.4 Damage tolerance and durability (fatigue).

Damage tolerance is a means for preventing catastrophic structural failure or loss of control of the aircraft after a predefined limit of structural damage has occurred as a result of, but not limited to, low energy impact, in-service damage, loads environment, inherent materials defects, sub-critical cracks, manufacturing defects, repeated loads application, and ballistic damage.

5.4.1 5.4.1 Damage tolerance.

Criterion (Army and Air Force): Verify that all safety-of-flight (SOF) structure, including dynamic components, have adequate safe life or damage tolerance capability (depending on certification authority) for the required service life.

Criterion (Navy): Verify that all SOF aircraft structure(s), including dynamic components, have sufficient damage tolerance and/or safe life capability for the required service life. Damage tolerance is in addition to, rather than in lieu of, provisions for adequate structural fatigue life, flaw tolerance and fail safe characteristics.

NOTE: Methodologies and criteria…