Appendix K to Part 25 - Extended Operations (ETOPS)
14:1.0.1.3.12.12.121.1.16 : Appendix K
Appendix K to Part 25 - Extended Operations (ETOPS)
This appendix specifies airworthiness requirements for the
approval of an airplane-engine combination for extended operations
(ETOPS). For two-engine airplanes, the applicant must comply with
sections K25.1 and K25.2 of this appendix. For airplanes with more
than two engines, the applicant must comply with sections K25.1 and
K25.3 of this appendix.
K25.1 Design requirements.
K25.1.1 Part 25 compliance.
The airplane-engine combination must comply with the
requirements of part 25 considering the maximum flight time and the
longest diversion time for which the applicant seeks approval.
K25.1.2 Human factors.
An applicant must consider crew workload, operational
implications, and the crew's and passengers' physiological needs
during continued operation with failure effects for the longest
diversion time for which it seeks approval.
K25.1.3 Airplane systems.
(a) Operation in icing conditions.
(1) The airplane must be certificated for operation in icing
conditions in accordance with § 25.1419.
(2) The airplane must be able to safely conduct an ETOPS
diversion with the most critical ice accretion resulting from:
(i) Icing conditions encountered at an altitude that the
airplane would have to fly following an engine failure or cabin
decompression.
(ii) A 15-minute hold in the continuous maximum icing conditions
specified in Appendix C of this part with a liquid water content
factor of 1.0.
(iii) Ice accumulated during approach and landing in the icing
conditions specified in Appendix C of this part.
(b) Electrical power supply. The airplane must be
equipped with at least three independent sources of electrical
power.
(c) Time limited systems. The applicant must define the
system time capability of each ETOPS significant system that is
time-limited.
K25.1.4 Propulsion systems.
(a) Fuel system design. Fuel necessary to complete an
ETOPS flight (including a diversion for the longest time for which
the applicant seeks approval) must be available to the operating
engines at the pressure and fuel-flow required by § 25.955 under
any airplane failure condition not shown to be extremely
improbable. Types of failures that must be considered include, but
are not limited to: crossfeed valve failures, automatic fuel
management system failures, and normal electrical power generation
failures.
(1) If the engine has been certified for limited operation with
negative engine-fuel-pump-inlet pressures, the following
requirements apply:
(i) Airplane demonstration-testing must cover worst case cruise
and diversion conditions involving:
(A) Fuel grade and temperature.
(B) Thrust or power variations.
(C) Turbulence and negative G.
(D) Fuel system components degraded within their approved
maintenance limits.
(ii) Unusable-fuel quantity in the suction feed configuration
must be determined in accordance with § 25.959.
(2) For two-engine airplanes to be certificated for ETOPS beyond
180 minutes, one fuel boost pump in each main tank and at least one
crossfeed valve, or other means for transferring fuel, must be
powered by an independent electrical power source other than the
three power sources required to comply with section K25.1.3(b) of
this appendix. This requirement does not apply if the normal fuel
boost pressure, crossfeed valve actuation, or fuel transfer
capability is not provided by electrical power.
(3) An alert must be displayed to the flightcrew when the
quantity of fuel available to the engines falls below the level
required to fly to the destination. The alert must be given when
there is enough fuel remaining to safely complete a diversion. This
alert must account for abnormal fuel management or transfer between
tanks, and possible loss of fuel. This paragraph does not apply to
airplanes with a required flight engineer.
(b) APU design. If an APU is needed to comply with this
appendix, the applicant must demonstrate that:
(1) The reliability of the APU is adequate to meet those
requirements; and
(2) If it is necessary that the APU be able to start in flight,
it is able to start at any altitude up to the maximum operating
altitude of the airplane, or 45,000 feet, whichever is lower, and
run for the remainder of any flight .
(c) Engine oil tank design. The engine oil tank filler
cap must comply with § 33.71(c)(4) of this chapter.
K25.1.5 Engine-condition monitoring.
Procedures for engine-condition monitoring must be specified and
validated in accordance with Part 33, Appendix A, paragraph
A33.3(c) of this chapter.
K25.1.6 Configuration, maintenance, and procedures.
The applicant must list any configuration, operating and
maintenance requirements, hardware life limits, MMEL constraints,
and ETOPS approval in a CMP document.
K25.1.7 Airplane flight manual.
The airplane flight manual must contain the following
information applicable to the ETOPS type design approval:
(a) Special limitations, including any limitation associated
with operation of the airplane up to the maximum diversion time
being approved.
(b) Required markings or placards.
(c) The airborne equipment required for extended operations and
flightcrew operating procedures for this equipment.
(d) The system time capability for the following:
(1) The most limiting fire suppression system for Class C cargo
or baggage compartments.
(2) The most limiting ETOPS significant system other than fire
suppression systems for Class C cargo or baggage compartments.
(e) This statement: “The type-design reliability and performance
of this airplane-engine combination has been evaluated under 14 CFR
25.1535 and found suitable for (identify maximum approved diversion
time) extended operations (ETOPS) when the configuration,
maintenance, and procedures standard contained in (identify the CMP
document) are met. The actual maximum approved diversion time for
this airplane may be less based on its most limiting system time
capability. This finding does not constitute operational approval
to conduct ETOPS.”
K25.2. Two-engine airplanes.
An applicant for ETOPS type design approval of a two-engine
airplane must use one of the methods described in section K25.2.1,
K25.2.2, or K25.2.3 of this appendix.
K25.2.1 Service experience method.
An applicant for ETOPS type design approval using the service
experience method must comply with sections K25.2.1(a) and
K25.2.1(b) of this appendix before conducting the assessments
specified in sections K25.2.1(c) and K25.2.1(d) of this appendix,
and the flight test specified in section K25.2.1(e) of this
appendix.
(a) Service experience. The world fleet for the
airplane-engine combination must accumulate a minimum of 250,000
engine-hours. The FAA may reduce this number of hours if the
applicant identifies compensating factors that are acceptable to
the FAA. The compensating factors may include experience on another
airplane, but experience on the candidate airplane must make up a
significant portion of the total service experience.
(b) In-flight shutdown (IFSD) rates. The demonstrated
12-month rolling average IFSD rate for the world fleet of the
airplane-engine combination must be commensurate with the level of
ETOPS approval being sought.
(1) For type design approval up to and including 120 minutes: An
IFSD rate of 0.05 or less per 1,000 world-fleet engine-hours,
unless otherwise approved by the FAA. Unless the IFSD rate is 0.02
or less per 1,000 world-fleet engine-hours, the applicant must
provide a list of corrective actions in the CMP document specified
in section K25.1.6 of this appendix, that, when taken, would result
in an IFSD rate of 0.02 or less per 1,000 fleet engine-hours.
(2) For type design approval up to and including 180 minutes: An
IFSD rate of 0.02 or less per 1,000 world-fleet engine-hours,
unless otherwise approved by the FAA. If the airplane-engine
combination does not meet this rate by compliance with an existing
120-minute CMP document, then new or additional CMP requirements
that the applicant has demonstrated would achieve this IFSD rate
must be added to the CMP document.
(3) For type design approval beyond 180 minutes: An IFSD rate of
0.01 or less per 1,000 fleet engine-hours unless otherwise approved
by the FAA. If the airplane-engine combination does not meet this
rate by compliance with an existing 120-minute or 180-minute CMP
document, then new or additional CMP requirements that the
applicant has demonstrated would achieve this IFSD rate must be
added to the CMP document.
(c) Propulsion system assessment. (1) The applicant must
conduct a propulsion system assessment based on the following data
collected from the world-fleet of the airplane-engine
combination:
(i) A list of all IFSD's, unplanned ground engine shutdowns, and
occurrences (both ground and in-flight) when an engine was not shut
down, but engine control or the desired thrust or power level was
not achieved, including engine flameouts. Planned IFSD's performed
during flight training need not be included. For each item, the
applicant must provide -
(A) Each airplane and engine make, model, and serial number;
(B) Engine configuration, and major alteration history;
(C) Engine position;
(D) Circumstances leading up to the engine shutdown or
occurrence;
(E) Phase of flight or ground operation;
(F) Weather and other environmental conditions; and
(G) Cause of engine shutdown or occurrence.
(ii) A history of unscheduled engine removal rates since
introduction into service (using 6- and 12-month rolling averages),
with a summary of the major causes for the removals.
(iii) A list of all propulsion system events (whether or not
caused by maintenance or flightcrew error), including dispatch
delays, cancellations, aborted takeoffs, turnbacks, diversions, and
flights that continue to destination after the event.
(iv) The total number of engine hours and cycles, the number of
hours for the engine with the highest number of hours, the number
of cycles for the engine with the highest number of cycles, and the
distribution of hours and cycles.
(v) The mean time between failures (MTBF) of propulsion system
components that affect reliability.
(vi) A history of the IFSD rates since introduction into service
using a 12-month rolling average.
(2) The cause or potential cause of each item listed in
K25.2.1(c)(1)(i) must have a corrective action or actions that are
shown to be effective in preventing future occurrences. Each
corrective action must be identified in the CMP document specified
in section K25.1.6. A corrective action is not required:
(i) For an item where the manufacturer is unable to determine a
cause or potential cause.
(ii) For an event where it is technically unfeasible to develop
a corrective action.
(iii) If the world-fleet IFSD rate -
(A) Is at or below 0.02 per 1,000 world-fleet engine-hours for
approval up to and including 180-minute ETOPS; or
(B) Is at or below 0.01 per 1,000 world-fleet engine-hours for
approval greater than 180-minute ETOPS.
(d) Airplane systems assessment. The applicant must
conduct an airplane systems assessment. The applicant must show
that the airplane systems comply with § 25.1309(b) using available
in-service reliability data for ETOPS significant systems on the
candidate airplane-engine combination. Each cause or potential
cause of a relevant design, manufacturing, operational, and
maintenance problem occurring in service must have a corrective
action or actions that are shown to be effective in preventing
future occurrences. Each corrective action must be identified in
the CMP document specified in section K25.1.6 of this appendix. A
corrective action is not required if the problem would not
significantly impact the safety or reliability of the airplane
system involved. A relevant problem is a problem with an ETOPS
group 1 significant system that has or could result in, an IFSD or
diversion. The applicant must include in this assessment relevant
problems with similar or identical equipment installed on other
types of airplanes to the extent such information is reasonably
available.
(e) Airplane flight test. The applicant must conduct a
flight test to validate the flightcrew's ability to safely conduct
an ETOPS diversion with an inoperative engine and worst-case ETOPS
Significant System failures and malfunctions that could occur in
service. The flight test must validate the airplane's flying
qualities and performance with the demonstrated failures and
malfunctions.
K25.2.2 Early ETOPS method.
An applicant for ETOPS type design approval using the Early
ETOPS method must comply with the following requirements:
(a) Assessment of relevant experience with airplanes
previously certificated under part 25. The applicant must
identify specific corrective actions taken on the candidate
airplane to prevent relevant design, manufacturing, operational,
and maintenance problems experienced on airplanes previously
certificated under part 25 manufactured by the applicant. Specific
corrective actions are not required if the nature of a problem is
such that the problem would not significantly impact the safety or
reliability of the airplane system involved. A relevant problem is
a problem with an ETOPS group 1 significant system that has or
could result in an IFSD or diversion. The applicant must include in
this assessment relevant problems of supplier-provided ETOPS group
1 significant systems and similar or identical equipment used on
airplanes built by other manufacturers to the extent such
information is reasonably available.
(b) Propulsion system design. (1) The engine used in the
applicant's airplane design must be approved as eligible for Early
ETOPS in accordance with § 33.201 of this chapter.
(2) The applicant must design the propulsion system to preclude
failures or malfunctions that could result in an IFSD. The
applicant must show compliance with this requirement by analysis,
test, in-service experience on other airplanes, or other means
acceptable to the FAA. If analysis is used, the applicant must show
that the propulsion system design will minimize failures and
malfunctions with the objective of achieving the following IFSD
rates:
(i) An IFSD rate of 0.02 or less per 1,000 world-fleet
engine-hours for type design approval up to and including 180
minutes.
(ii) An IFSD rate of 0.01 or less per 1,000 world-fleet
engine-hours for type design approval beyond 180 minutes.
(c) Maintenance and operational procedures. The applicant
must validate all maintenance and operational procedures for ETOPS
significant systems. The applicant must identify, track, and
resolve any problems found during the validation in accordance with
the problem tracking and resolution system specified in section
K25.2.2(h) of this appendix.
(d) Propulsion system validation test. (1) The installed
engine configuration for which approval is being sought must comply
with § 33.201(c) of this chapter. The test engine must be
configured with a complete airplane nacelle package, including
engine-mounted equipment, except for any configuration differences
necessary to accommodate test stand interfaces with the engine
nacelle package. At the conclusion of the test, the propulsion
system must be -
(i) Visually inspected according to the applicant's on-wing
inspection recommendations and limits; and
(ii) Completely disassembled and the propulsion system hardware
inspected to determine whether it meets the service limits
specified in the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness submitted
in compliance with § 25.1529.
(2) The applicant must identify, track, and resolve each cause
or potential cause of IFSD, loss of thrust control, or other power
loss encountered during this inspection in accordance with the
problem tracking and resolution system specified in section K25.2.2
(h) of this appendix.
(e) New technology testing. Technology new to the
applicant, including substantially new manufacturing techniques,
must be tested to substantiate its suitability for the airplane
design.
(f) APU validation test. If an APU is needed to comply
with this appendix, one APU of the type to be certified with the
airplane must be tested for 3,000 equivalent airplane operational
cycles. Following completion of the test, the APU must be
disassembled and inspected. The applicant must identify, track, and
resolve each cause or potential cause of an inability to start or
operate the APU in flight as intended in accordance with the
problem tracking and resolution system specified in section
K25.2.2(h) of this appendix.
(g) Airplane demonstration. For each airplane-engine
combination to be approved for ETOPS, the applicant must flight
test at least one airplane to demonstrate that the airplane, and
its components and equipment are capable of functioning properly
during ETOPS flights and diversions of the longest duration for
which the applicant seeks approval. This flight testing may be
performed in conjunction with, but may not substitute for the
flight testing required by § 21.35(b)(2) of this chapter.
(1) The airplane demonstration flight test program must
include:
(i) Flights simulating actual ETOPS, including flight at normal
cruise altitude, step climbs, and, if applicable, APU
operation.
(ii) Maximum duration flights with maximum duration
diversions.
(iii) Maximum duration engine-inoperative diversions distributed
among the engines installed on the airplanes used for the airplane
demonstration flight test program. At least two
one-engine-inoperative diversions must be conducted at maximum
continuous thrust or power using the same engine.
(iv) Flights under non-normal conditions to demonstrate the
flightcrew's ability to safely conduct an ETOPS diversion with
worst-case ETOPS significant system failures or malfunctions that
could occur in service.
(v) Diversions to airports that represent airports of the types
used for ETOPS diversions.
(vi) Repeated exposure to humid and inclement weather on the
ground followed by a long-duration flight at normal cruise
altitude.
(2) The airplane demonstration flight test program must validate
the adequacy of the airplane's flying qualities and performance,
and the flightcrew's ability to safely conduct an ETOPS diversion
under the conditions specified in section K25.2.2(g)(1) of this
appendix.
(3) During the airplane demonstration flight test program, each
test airplane must be operated and maintained using the applicant's
recommended operating and maintenance procedures.
(4) At the completion of the airplane demonstration flight test
program, each ETOPS significant system must undergo an on-wing
inspection or test in accordance with the tasks defined in the
proposed Instructions for Continued Airworthiness to establish its
condition for continued safe operation. Each engine must also
undergo a gas path inspection. These inspections must be conducted
in a manner to identify abnormal conditions that could result in an
IFSD or diversion. The applicant must identify, track and resolve
any abnormal conditions in accordance with the problem tracking and
resolution system specified in section K25.2.2(h) of this
appendix.
(h) Problem tracking and resolution system. (1) The
applicant must establish and maintain a problem tracking and
resolution system. The system must:
(i) Contain a process for prompt reporting to the FAA office
responsible for the design approval of each occurrence reportable
under § 21.4(a)(6) encountered during the phases of airplane and
engine development used to assess Early ETOPS eligibility.
(ii) Contain a process for notifying the FAA office responsible
for the design approval of each proposed corrective action that the
applicant determines necessary for each problem identified from the
occurrences reported under section K25.2.2. (h)(1)(i) of this
appendix. The timing of the notification must permit appropriate
FAA review before taking the proposed corrective action.
(2) If the applicant is seeking ETOPS type design approval of a
change to an airplane-engine combination previously approved for
ETOPS, the problem tracking and resolution system need only address
those problems specified in the following table, provided the
applicant obtains prior authorization from the FAA:
If the change does not
require a new airplane type certificiate and . . . |
Then the Problem Tracking and
Resolution System must address . . . |
(i) Requires a new
engine type certificate |
All problems applicable to the
new engine installation, and for the remainder of the airplane,
problems in changed systems only. |
(ii) Does not
require a new engine type certificate |
Problems in changed systems
only. |
(i) Acceptance criteria. The type and frequency of
failures and malfunctions on ETOPS significant systems that occur
during the airplane flight test program and the airplane
demonstration flight test program specified in section K25.2.2(g)
of this appendix must be consistent with the type and frequency of
failures and malfunctions that would be expected to occur on
currently certificated airplanes approved for ETOPS.
K25.2.3. Combined service experience and Early ETOPS
method.
An applicant for ETOPS type design approval using the combined
service experience and Early ETOPS method must comply with the
following requirements.
(a) A service experience requirement of not less than 15,000
engine-hours for the world fleet of the candidate airplane-engine
combination.
(b) The Early ETOPS requirements of K25.2.2, except for the
airplane demonstration specified in section K25.2.2(g) of this
appendix; and
(c) The flight test requirement of section K25.2.1(e) of this
appendix.
K25.3. Airplanes with more than two engines.
An applicant for ETOPS type design approval of an airplane with
more than two engines must use one of the methods described in
section K25.3.1, K25.3.2, or K25.3.3 of this appendix.
K25.3.1 Service experience method.
An applicant for ETOPS type design approval using the service
experience method must comply with section K25.3.1(a) of this
appendix before conducting the airplane systems assessment
specified in K25.3.1(b), and the flight test specified in section
K25.3.1(c) of this appendix.
(a) Service experience. The world fleet for the
airplane-engine combination must accumulate a minimum of 250,000
engine-hours. The FAA may reduce this number of hours if the
applicant identifies compensating factors that are acceptable to
the FAA. The compensating factors may include experience on another
airplane, but experience on the candidate airplane must make up a
significant portion of the total required service experience.
(b) Airplane systems assessment. The applicant must
conduct an airplane systems assessment. The applicant must show
that the airplane systems comply with the § 25.1309(b) using
available in-service reliability data for ETOPS significant systems
on the candidate airplane-engine combination. Each cause or
potential cause of a relevant design, manufacturing, operational or
maintenance problem occurring in service must have a corrective
action or actions that are shown to be effective in preventing
future occurrences. Each corrective action must be identified in
the CMP document specified in section K25.1.6 of this appendix. A
corrective action is not required if the problem would not
significantly impact the safety or reliability of the airplane
system involved. A relevant problem is a problem with an ETOPS
group 1 significant system that has or could result in an IFSD or
diversion. The applicant must include in this assessment relevant
problems with similar or identical equipment installed on other
types of airplanes to the extent such information is reasonably
available.
(c) Airplane flight test. The applicant must conduct a
flight test to validate the flightcrew's ability to safely conduct
an ETOPS diversion with an inoperative engine and worst-case ETOPS
significant system failures and malfunctions that could occur in
service. The flight test must validate the airplane's flying
qualities and performance with the demonstrated failures and
malfunctions.
K25.3.2 Early ETOPS method.
An applicant for ETOPS type design approval using the Early
ETOPS method must comply with the following requirements:
(a) Maintenance and operational procedures. The applicant
must validate all maintenance and operational procedures for ETOPS
significant systems. The applicant must identify, track and resolve
any problems found during the validation in accordance with the
problem tracking and resolution system specified in section
K25.3.2(e) of this appendix.
(b) New technology testing. Technology new to the
applicant, including substantially new manufacturing techniques,
must be tested to substantiate its suitability for the airplane
design.
(c) APU validation test. If an APU is needed to comply
with this appendix, one APU of the type to be certified with the
airplane must be tested for 3,000 equivalent airplane operational
cycles. Following completion of the test, the APU must be
disassembled and inspected. The applicant must identify, track, and
resolve each cause or potential cause of an inability to start or
operate the APU in flight as intended in accordance with the
problem tracking and resolution system specified in section
K25.3.2(e) of this appendix.
(d) Airplane demonstration. For each airplane-engine
combination to be approved for ETOPS, the applicant must flight
test at least one airplane to demonstrate that the airplane, and
its components and equipment are capable of functioning properly
during ETOPS flights and diversions of the longest duration for
which the applicant seeks approval. This flight testing may be
performed in conjunction with, but may not substitute for the
flight testing required by § 21.35(b)(2).
(1) The airplane demonstration flight test program must
include:
(i) Flights simulating actual ETOPS including flight at normal
cruise altitude, step climbs, and, if applicable, APU
operation.
(ii) Maximum duration flights with maximum duration
diversions.
(iii) Maximum duration engine-inoperative diversions distributed
among the engines installed on the airplanes used for the airplane
demonstration flight test program. At least two one
engine-inoperative diversions must be conducted at maximum
continuous thrust or power using the same engine.
(iv) Flights under non-normal conditions to validate the
flightcrew's ability to safely conduct an ETOPS diversion with
worst-case ETOPS significant system failures or malfunctions that
could occur in service.
(v) Diversions to airports that represent airports of the types
used for ETOPS diversions.
(vi) Repeated exposure to humid and inclement weather on the
ground followed by a long duration flight at normal cruise
altitude.
(2) The airplane demonstration flight test program must validate
the adequacy of the airplane's flying qualities and performance,
and the flightcrew's ability to safely conduct an ETOPS diversion
under the conditions specified in section K25.3.2(d)(1) of this
appendix.
(3) During the airplane demonstration flight test program, each
test airplane must be operated and maintained using the applicant's
recommended operating and maintenance procedures.
(4) At the completion of the airplane demonstration, each ETOPS
significant system must undergo an on-wing inspection or test in
accordance with the tasks defined in the proposed Instructions for
Continued Airworthiness to establish its condition for continued
safe operation. Each engine must also undergo a gas path
inspection. These inspections must be conducted in a manner to
identify abnormal conditions that could result in an IFSD or
diversion. The applicant must identify, track and resolve any
abnormal conditions in accordance with the problem tracking and
resolution system specified in section K25.3.2(e) of this
appendix.
(e) Problem tracking and resolution system. (1) The
applicant must establish and maintain a problem tracking and
resolution system. The system must:
(i) Contain a process for prompt reporting to the FAA office
responsible for the design approval of each occurrence reportable
under § 21.4(a)(6) encountered during the phases of airplane and
engine development used to assess Early ETOPS eligibility.
(ii) Contain a process for notifying the FAA office responsible
for the design approval of each proposed corrective action that the
applicant determines necessary for each problem identified from the
occurrences reported under section K25.3.2(h)(1)(i) of this
appendix. The timing of the notification must permit appropriate
FAA review before taking the proposed corrective action.
(2) If the applicant is seeking ETOPS type design approval of a
change to an airplane-engine combination previously approved for
ETOPS, the problem tracking and resolution system need only address
those problems specified in the following table, provided the
applicant obtains prior authorization from the FAA:
If the change does not
require a new airplane type certificate and . . . |
Then the Problem Tracking and
Resolution System must address . . . |
(i) Requires a new
engine type certificate |
All problems applicable to the
new engine installation, and for the remainder of the airplane,
problems in changed systems only. |
(ii) Does not
require a new engine type certificate |
Problems in changed systems
only. |
(f) Acceptance criteria. The type and frequency of
failures and malfunctions on ETOPS significant systems that occur
during the airplane flight test program and the airplane
demonstration flight test program specified in section K25.3.2(d)
of this appendix must be consistent with the type and frequency of
failures and malfunctions that would be expected to occur on
currently certificated airplanes approved for ETOPS.
K25.3.3 Combined service experience and Early ETOPS
method.
An applicant for ETOPS type design approval using the Early
ETOPS method must comply with the following requirements:
(a) A service experience requirement of less than 15,000
engine-hours for the world fleet of the candidate airplane-engine
combination;
(b) The Early ETOPS requirements of section K25.3.2 of this
appendix, except for the airplane demonstration specified in
section K25.3.2(d) of this appendix; and
(c) The flight test requirement of section K25.3.1(c) of this
appendix.
[Doc. No. FAA-2002-6717, 72 FR 1873, Jan. 16, 2007, as amended by
Doc. No. FAA-2018-0119, Amdt. 25-145, 83 FR 9169, Mar. 5, 2018]