|91-75||AFS-400||Attitude Indicator Provides a method to substitute an approved attitude indicator for the rate-of-turn indicator mandated by Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 91, section 91.205(d)(3). This AC excludes airplanes covered by section 91.205(d)(3)(i) and (ii). This AC is applicable to part 23-certificated airplanes (or airplanes certificated under earlier equivalent regulations) that weigh less than 12,500 pounds and are operated under part 91.||06-25-2003|
|91-76A||AAM-630||Hazard Associated with Sublimation of Solid Carbon Dioxide (Dry Ice) Aboard Aircraft||05-22-2009|
|91-77||AJR-1||General Aviation, Coded Departure Routes (CDR) Provides guidance to customers of the National Airspace System on the use of Coded Departure Routes. CDRs provide more flexibility for selecting an alternate departure for specific airport when traffic constraint such as thunderstorms, turbulence, and periods of excessive demand exist. Use of a CDR reduces key-entry inputs for controllers and minimizes read-back time between tower staff and pilots, which creates an abbreviated clearance. These abbreviated clearances provide an efficient means for air traffic control (ATC) to provide alternate routes if an airspace constraint occurs.||06-01-2007|
|91-78||AFS-800||Use of Class 1 or Class 2 Electronic Flight Bag (EFB) This advisory circular (AC) provides aircraft owners, operators, and pilots operating aircraft under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 91, with information for removal of paper aeronautical charts and other documentation from the cockpit through the use of either portable or installed cockpit displays (electronic flight bags (EFB).||07-20-2007|
Mitigating the Risks of a Runway Overrun Upon Landing
This advisory circular (AC) provides ways for pilots and airplane operators to identify, understand, and mitigate risks associated with runway overruns during the landing phase of flight. It also provides operators with detailed information that operators may use to develop company standard operating procedures (SOP) to mitigate those risks.
Air Traffic Control System Command Center (ATCSCC) Hotlines
This advisory circular provides guidance to customers of the National Airspace System (NAS) in regard to the use of and participation on ATCSCC hotlines.
|91-81||AJR-1||Dual J80 Route Procedure This advisory circular provides information to customers of the National Airspace System (NAS) in regards to the implementation and use of the dual J80 route procedure. The concept of the dual J80 route is to provide a near-term alternative for aircraft that normally file their flight on J80, westbound from New York and Philadelphia area airports. The dual J80 route virtually parallels the current J80 airway. This new procedure will be implemented as an unpublished route available on May 15, 2008. This route will be established and published as a “Q-Route” or Area area Navigation navigation (RNAV) route at a later date. The objective is to provide additional departure capability for westbound aircraft by alleviating constraints associated with airport departure flows that compete for J80, i.e., New York metropolitan and Philadelphia departures, and over flights from points north of the New York area. Current routes through this airspace transit very busy air traffic sectors, and delays are frequently encountered due tobecause of the large volume of aircraft that use these routes everyday. During summer months, these paths can be constrained by thunderstorms and turbulence. New York area departures will benefit from the additional route and increased flexibility, allowing our customers to receive more efficient air traffic services.||05-13-2008|
Fatigue Management Programs for Airplanes with Demonstrated Risk of Catastrophic Failure Due to Fatigue
a. This advisory circular (AC) provides guidance on developing and implementing a Fatigue Management Program (FMP). An applicant may develop an FMP as one method to address the unsafe condition that arises when the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has determined an airplane type design has an unsafe condition associated with a demonstrated risk of catastrophic failure due to fatigue (hereinafter referred to as demonstrated risk). An FMP incorporates damage-tolerance based inspections or a part replacement/modification program to mitigate the demonstrated risk. An FMP also incorporates inspections based on service history and engineering judgment to address the broader risk posed by potential cracking of other fatigue critical structure in the airplane. The FAA may mandate an FMP by Airworthiness Directive (AD) only in cases in which the FAA has determined that airworthiness action is necessary to address an unsafe condition. The FAA may also approve an FMP as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) to an AD. b. This AC provides guidance for actions once the FAA determines that an AD is necessary to address the unsafe condition associated with a demonstrated risk. Existing FAA guidance supports development of damage-tolerance based inspection programs for transport category airplanes to look proactively for potential cracks. Such guidance includes AC 91-56B, Continuing Structural Integrity Program for Airplanes, and AC 25.571-1C, Damage Tolerance and Fatigue Evaluation of Structure. These existing ACs do not describe all the actions that should be used to address a demonstrated risk. c. This AC is not mandatory and does not constitute a regulation. It describes an acceptable means, but not the only means, for maintaining the continued operational safety for airplane type designs that have a demonstrated risk. However, if you use the means described in this AC, you must follow it in all important aspects. In this AC, we use terms such as “must” or “require” only in the sense of ensuring applicability of a particular method of compliance when you use a specific acceptable method of compliance described herein.
Fatigue Management Programs for In-Service Issues
a.This advisory circular (AC) provides guidance on developing and implementing a Fatigue Management Program (FMP) to address in-service issues for metallic fatigue critical structure. An applicant may develop an FMP as one method to address an unsafe condition when the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) determines an airplane type design has a demonstrated risk of catastrophic failure due to fatigue. In such cases, the FMP should incorporate damage-tolerance based inspections or a part replacement/modification program to mitigate the demonstrated risk. The FMP should also incorporate other fatigue critical structure inspections to address the broader risk posed by potential cracking of these structures in the airplane. The FAA will mandate the FMP by Airworthiness Directive (AD). The FAA may also approve the FMP as an alternative method of compliance (AMOC) to an AD.
b.This AC includes guidance relevant to developing FMPs for other purposes such as life extensions, type certification requirements, or non-mandatory maintenance programs. This guidance supplements other ACs that contain guidance for developing damage-tolerance based inspection programs to look proactively for potential cracks. Such guidance includes AC 91?56B, Continuing Structural Integrity Program for Airplanes, AC 25.571?1D, Damage Tolerance and Fatigue Evaluation of Structure, and AC 23?13A, Fatigue, Fail-Safe, and Damage-Tolerance Evaluation of Metallic Structure for Normal, Utility, Acrobatic, and Commuter Category Airplanes. Applicants should use product specific guidance in conjunction with this AC.
c. This AC is not mandatory and does not constitute a regulation. It describes an acceptable means, but not the only means, for maintaining the continued operational safety for airplane type designs that have a demonstrated risk. In this AC, the FAA uses terms such as “must” or “require” only in the sense of ensuring applicability of a particular method of compliance when using a specific acceptable method of compliance described herein.
|91-84||AFS-800||Fractional Ownership Programs This advisory circular (AC) provides backgroung information, and describes fractional ownership programs and te application process for obtaining management specifications (MSpecs) to operate under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14CFR) part 91 subpart k (part 91K)||03-31-2009|
|91-85||AFS-400||Approval of Aircraft and Operators for flight in Reduced Vertical||08-21-2009|
Guidance on Carrying Noise Certification Documents On Board Aircraft Operating Outside the United States
a. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is amending its operating rules to require U.S. operators flying outside the United States to carry aircraft noise certification information on board the aircraft.
b. This Advisory Circular (AC) provides guidance to affected U.S. operators that operate aircraft outside the United States with aircraft that were never required to be noise certified. If you have such an aircraft, this AC outlines the noise certification requirement dates so you can confirm that your aircraft indeed pre-dates the requirements and should be considered acceptable. We use the term “grandfathered” for these aircraft. We strongly recommend operators of such aircraft to use the FAA form in Appendix 1 that includes a grandfather clause.
|91.11-1||AAM-620||Guide to Drug Hazards in Aviation Medicine Lists all commonly used drugs by pharmacological effect on airmen with side effects and recommendations.||07-19-1963|
|91.21-1B||AFS-350||Use of Portable Electronic Devices Aboard Aircraft Provides aircraft operators with information and guidance for assistance in the compliance to FAR Section 91.21.||08-25-2006|
|93-2||AEE-100||Noise Levels for Aircraft used for Commercial Operations in Grand Canyon National Park Special Flight Rules Area||06-13-2006|
|93-3||AJR-1||This AC describes the communication process between a pilot-in-command of a TARMAC delayed aircraft and local air traffic control (ATC). In addition, air carrier (Air Carrier Operations Center/Dispatch) communications related to TARMAC delayed aircraft with the Air Traffic Control System Command Center (ATCSCC) are addressed||03-23-2010|
|97-1A||AFS-400||Runway Visual Range (RVR) This advisory circular is issued to describe RVR measuring equipment and its operating use.||09-28-1977|
|99-1D||AJR-2||Plan for the Emergency Security Control of Air Traffic (ESCAT) Provides direction for the security control of civil and military air traffic during an air defense emergency. The ESCAT Plan provides policy, assigns responsibilities, and prescribes procedures to be taken in the interest of national security.||01-18-2007|
Reporting of Laser Illumination of Aircraft
a. This Advisory Circular (AC) provides information to the aviation community, particularly aircrews operating within the National Airspace System (NAS) on measures taken by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to address incidents of unauthorized illumination of aircraft by lasers. The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, passed into public law on February 14, 2012, established a prohibition against aiming a laser pointer at an aircraft.
b. In addition, this AC provides guidance to aircrews and reflects current guidance for air traffic control (ATC) on the formal reporting of laser illumination incidents. Reporting laser incidents assists law enforcement and provides support for recommended mitigation actions to be taken to ensure continued safe and orderly flight operations.
c. This AC is issued in serious response to the significant increase of unauthorized laser illumination of aircraft incidents, as well as the proliferation and increased sophistication of laser devices available to the general public and other parties. FAA and other governmental studies show the exposure of aircrews to laser illumination may cause hazardous effects (e.g., distraction, glare, afterimage, flash blindness, and, in extreme circumstances, persistent or permanent visual impairment), which could compromise safety by adversely interfering with the ability of aircrews to carry out their responsibilities. ATC regards a laser illumination incident as an in-flight emergency, and will treat them as such, until the aircrew states otherwise.
d. The FAA, in coordination with local law enforcement, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and other governmental agencies, such as the Department of Homeland Security, Transportation Security Administration (TSA), is taking immediate action to safeguard flights against these unauthorized illuminations and expeditiously locate the source of unauthorized laser transmissions.