1、Designation: F 2295 06Standard Practice forContinued Operational Safety Monitoring of a Light SportAircraft1This standard is issued under the fixed designation F 2295; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year oforiginal adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of las
2、t revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. Asuperscript epsilon (e) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.1. Scope1.1 This practice establishes the standard practice for thecontinued operational safety monitoring of a light sport air-craf
3、t.1.2 This standard does not purport to address all of thesafety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is theresponsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro-priate safety and health practices and determine the applica-bility of regulatory limitations prior to use.2. Referenced
4、 Documents2.1 ASTM Standards:2F 2245 Specification for Design and Performance of a LightSport AirplaneF 2564 Specification for Design and Performance of a LightSport Glider3. Terminology3.1 Definitions:3.1.1 LSA (light sport aircraft)used herein to refer to bothLSA airplanes and LSA gliders.3.1.2 LS
5、A airplane (light sport aircraft airplane)poweredaircraft designed in accordance with Specification F 2245 thatis manufactured and delivered ready to fly.3.1.3 LSA glider (light sport aircraft glider)aircraft de-signed in accordance with Specification F 2564 that is manu-factured and delivered ready
6、 to fly.3.1.4 manufacturerany entity engaged in the productionof a LSA.4. Significance and Use4.1 The purpose of this practice is to establish a method bywhich safety of flight issues are discovered, evaluated, andcorrected for the purpose of maintaining operational safety ofa LSA.5. Continued Airwo
7、rthiness Support5.1 The manufacturer of a LSA shall maintain an Opera-tional Safety Monitoring System as a normal business conduct.5.2 Assignment Of DutiesManufacturers may assign op-erational safety monitoring and continued airworthiness sup-port duties to other entities.5.3 Manufacturers Responsib
8、ilitiesLSA manufacturersshall develop and implement a system of receiving, evaluating,and correcting safety of flight and service difficulty issues.5.3.1 Manufacturer shall evaluate all safety of flight andservice difficulty reports and shall initiate corrective action asneeded to correct any safety
9、 of flight related issues.5.3.2 Manufacturer shall not use notices of corrective actionto promote or make mandatory non-safety of flight relatedequipment upgrades or additions.5.3.3 The manufacturer shall provide with the delivery ofeach LSA documented continued airworthiness instructions inthe Engl
10、ish language. These instructions shall include at leastthe following:5.3.3.1 A method for the owner/operator to report mainte-nance, service, and safety difficulties to the manufacturer, inaccordance with 5.4.5.3.3.2 A method for the owner/operator to obtain andverify that they have the latest safet
11、y of flight informationdeveloped by the manufacturer, in accordance with 5.4.5.3.3.3 Instructions pertaining to annual and 100-h inspec-tion items as needed.5.4 Owner/Operator Responsibilities:5.4.1 Each owner/operator of a LSA shall read and complywith the maintenance and continued airworthiness in
12、formationand instructions provided by the manufacturer.5.4.2 Each owner/operator of a LSA shall be responsible forproviding the manufacturer with current contact informationwhere the manufacturer may send the owner/operator supple-mental notification bulletins.5.4.3 The owner/operator of a LSA shall
13、 be responsible fornotifying the manufacturer of any safety of flight issue orsignificant service difficulty upon discovery.5.4.4 The owner/operator of a LSA shall be responsible forcomplying with all manufacturer issued notices of correctiveaction and for complying with all applicable aviation auth
14、orityregulations in regard to maintaining the airworthiness of theLSA.1This practice is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee F37 on Light SportAircraft and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee F37.20 on Airplane.Current edition approved Aug. 15, 2006. Published August 2006. Originallyapp
15、roved in 2003. Last previous edition approved in 2003 as F 2295 03.2For referenced ASTM standards, visit the ASTM website, www.astm.org, orcontact ASTM Customer Service at serviceastm.org. For Annual Book of ASTMStandards volume information, refer to the standards Document Summary page onthe ASTM we
16、bsite.1Copyright ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.5.4.5 An owner of a LSA shall ensure that any neededcorrective action be completed as specified in a notice, or bythe next scheduled annual inspection.5.4.6 Should an owner/operat
17、or not comply with any man-datory service requirement, the LSA shall be considered not incompliance with applicable ASTM standards and may besubject to regulatory action by the presiding aviation authority.6. Determination Of Corrective Action6.1 The manufacturer of a LSAshall evaluate and determine
18、appropriate corrective action for a safety of flight issue inaccordance with Annex A1.6.2 Manufacturer shall maintain a record of all safety offlight related risk assessments and the resolution thereof.7. Notice Of Corrective Action7.1 When corrective action is determined to be warranted(based upon
19、the manufactures Operational Safety Risk Assess-ment Procedure as described in Section 6), the manufacturershall issue a notice to the known owner/operators of theeffected LSAs.7.2 Notices:7.2.1 Notices shall have a page header that contains thefollowing information, when available:7.2.1.1 The name,
20、 postal address, Web address, and tele-phone number of the issuing entity,7.2.1.2 The date the notice is released,7.2.1.3 The date the notice takes effect,7.2.1.4 Limitations for completion of any required correc-tive action,7.2.1.5 The make and model of the affected LSA,7.2.1.6 The serial number of
21、 the affected LSA,7.2.1.7 A number that uniquely identifies the notice,7.2.1.8 The number of the superseded notice, if applicable,and7.2.1.9 The page number and number of total pages.7.2.2 The first page shall contain, in large bold uppercaseletters, one of the following titles:7.2.2.1 “SAFETY ALERT
22、” for notifications that requireimmediate action.7.2.2.2 “SERVICE BULLETIN” for notifications that donot require immediate action but do recommend future action.7.2.2.3 “NOTIFICATION” for notifications that do notnecessarily recommend future action but are primarily forpromulgation of continued airw
23、orthiness information.8. Discontinued Airworthiness Support8.1 Should a manufacturer no longer be able to support theLSA produced, manufacturer should make a timely and dili-gent effort to contractually transfer any design data needed forcontinued airworthiness support to a viable entity, such asano
24、ther manufacturer, type club, user group, or other interestedparty.NOTE 1This section shall not be construed as a requirement for amanufacturer to forfeit for any reason, any patents, copyrights, designownership, commercial rights, proprietary information, intellectual prop-erty, monetary rights, or
25、 financial interests in the sale or transfer, or both,of any design data. Should a significant airworthiness issue arise thatcannot be satisfactorily resolved, affected LSAs may be subject toregulatory action by the presiding aviation authority.9. Keywords9.1 airworthiness; light sport aircraft; spo
26、rt pilotANNEX(Mandatory Information)A1. OPERATIONAL SAFETY RISK ASSESSMENT PROCEDUREA1.1 IntroductionA1.1.1 This process of performing a risk assessment is forLSA manufacturers to use in order to determine appropriatecorrective action on aircraft service difficulty or flight safetyreports. Note that
27、 all operational situations are unique and thatmanufacturer experience or judgment may result in a differentaction taken than that prescribed by this procedure.A1.1.2 Safety Alert notifications are required to addressunsafe conditions, but the determination of which types ofservice problems should b
28、e considered as unsafe conditions isgenerally dependent upon the type and use of aircraft, and theeffect a particular condition may have on the continued safeoperation of the aircraft.A1.2 DefinitionsA1.2.1 Safety EffectThe actual service report or potentialconsequences of the service issue. The mor
29、e adverse theconsequences, the higher the risk weighting. The weighting foreach safety effect is shown below:A1.2.2 Catastrophic Effect (4)High potential for loss ofaircraft and fatalities.A1.2.3 Hazardous Effect (3)Large reduction in functionalcapabilities or safety margins that may cause serious o
30、r fatalinjuries.A1.2.4 Major Effect (2)Significant reduction in functionalcapabilities or safety margins that may cause physical discom-fort or a significant increase in workload, possible injuries, orfatalities.A1.2.5 Minor Effect (1)Slight reduction in functionalcapabilities or safety margins that
31、 may cause an increase inworkload or require use of emergency procedures.A1.2.6 Operational UseOperational use may play a rolein determining appropriate corrective action by impacting thepriority in which the corrective action is accomplished.F2295062A1.2.7 TrainersRigorous operational use demanded.
32、Large number of takeoffs, landings, and power changes perflight hour tends to accelerate wear; accumulates hours quicklyand is usually maintained under a structured maintenanceprogram.A1.2.8 Personal UseUsually owned by individuals orsmall groups and generally operated for recreational purposes.Typi
33、cally accrue low fleet average hours per month and aresubject to annual condition inspection intervals. Low use oftencontributes to different airworthiness concerns than higher useaircraft.A1.2.9 Special UseRentals, aerial advertising, aerial pho-tography, and so forth may generate special concerns
34、from thissegment of operations.A1.2.10 Number of Occurrences of the EventAn event isdefined as a single service difficulty that requires an investiga-tion to determine if a corrective action is necessary. The eventmay result in an aircraft accident, incident, a safety recommen-dation from the presid
35、ing civil aviation authority, a servicereport, and so forth. The number of occurrences is the totalnumber of events of the same service difficulty across the fleetof specific make and model of aircraft.A1.2.11 Events versus PopulationThe number of occur-rences divided by the total number of aircraft
36、 of that make andmodel and configuration. Alternately, where a component isused in the same capacity on multiple makes or models, thenumber of occurrences divided by the total number of aircraftthat incorporate the component.A1.2.12 Time Between EventsUsing all of the occur-rences as defined above,
37、determine the average time betweenevents. For single events, use the average fleet age (in airframehours) as the time between events.A1.3 Risk Assessment MethodologyA1.3.1 Determine the safety effect and the Safety RiskFactor and plot the results of the assessment on the RiskAssessment Evaluation Ch
38、art using the methodology thatfollows. From the chart, determine the most appropriatemethod of alerting the public to the safety of flight issue orservice difficulty (that is, Safety Alert notification, ServiceBulletin, and so forth). The chart provides an objective methodto assist the evaluator in
39、determining the most appropriatecorrective action.A1.4 Risk Assessment Evaluation ChartA1.4.1 The chart depicted in Fig. A1.1 is intended to serveas a basis for determining corrective actions. In certain cases,however, experience and judgment may drive the user to adifferent conclusion.A1.4.2 The ve
40、rtical axis denotes the safety effect and itseffect on continued airworthiness. The four categories areminor, major, hazardous, and catastrophic. The categories are:intended to weigh the relative effects of an airworthinessproblem and its effect on continued flight to landing. The usercan interpolat
41、e and assess a safety effect score between thevalues stated below.A1.4.3 The higher the Safety Effect, the more negative theairworthiness effect. The airworthiness impact determination isvery important and must be carefully analyzed to ensure publicsafety while minimizing the economic burden of any
42、necessarycorrective action on the owners of an LSA.A1.4.4 The horizontal axis denotes the Safety Risk Factor.The Safety Risk Factor increases from left to right and iscalculated using the following:A1.4.5 Safety Risk Factor = Safety Effect (a) 3 OperationalUse (b) 3 Percentage Use by Population (c)
43、+ Number ofOccurrences (d) + Events versus Population (e) + Timebetween events (f):Safety Risk Factor 5 a! 3 b! 3 c! 1 d! 1 e! 1 f!(a) = Safety Effect: (d) = Number of Occurrences:Catastrophic = (4) 5+ = (3)Hazardous = (3) 3 to5=(2)Major=(2) 1to3=(1)Minor = (1) (e) = Events versus Population:(b) = O
44、perational Use: 10 %+ = (2)For hire = (2) 1 %+ = (1)Personal = (1) 0.1 % = (0)(c) = Percentage Use by Population: Less than 0.1 % = (-1)75 % For hire = (4) (f) = Time between Events:50 % For hire = (3) Over 3 years = (-1)25 % For Hire = (2) Over 2 years = (0)25 % For Hire = (1) 1 to 2 years = (1)Les
45、s than 1 year = (2)A1.5 Safety Effect DeterminationA1.5.1 The safety effect determination has a significantimpact on the response to an airworthiness concern or serviceproblem.A1.5.2 The following list of safety of flight examples isbroken down by the potential airworthiness impact. This is aguide,
46、not a hard and fast rule or an exhaustive list. Manufac-turers are encouraged to relocate, delete, or add, or a combi-nation thereof, to the service issues listed within the examplesbelow as necessary to address what constitutes a given level ofsafety effect appropriate to a specific aircraft config
47、uration.Examples of conditions with potentially CATASTROPHIC effect (4):Failure of primary aircraft structureLoss of primary controlFailure of propeller bladeFailure of propeller hubEngine fire that causes an accidentCabin fireSignificant electrical system fireStructural, engine, or propeller repair
48、s, or a combination thereof, performedincorrectly that resultin a failureExamples of conditions with potentially HAZARDOUS effect (3):Crack in primary structure (repairs required)Engine fireCarbon monoxide in cabinTotal power lossPartial propeller blade failureFailure of pilots seatExamples of condi
49、tions with potentially MAJOR effect (2):Crack in primary structure (inspections required)Failure of primary engine fuel pump that results in aircraft damageLoss of ground steeringFailure of engine coolant systemLoss of trim controlExamples of conditions with potentially MINOR effect (1):Cracks in secondary aircraft structuresLoss of primary engine fuel pump that does not cause engine failure,may cause performance degradationFailure of engine instruments including EGT/CHT, RPM, oil pressure,oil temperature, engine coolant indicatorTotal loss of brakingLoss
