LED position light

Bell206 said:
I didn't know Transport Canada also copied the FARs. I thought they had used the BCARs.
Click to expand...

TC harmonized the Canadian regs with "Big Brother" back in 1996. Basically took FAR 23 and added a "5" to the front. There are a few little differences here and there.

Bell206 said:
No. That is what is left of Part 23 after it was rewritten several years ago. In an effort to stimulate production of small airplanes, the Feds streamlined the regulatory burden and moved a number of airworthiness standards from a regulation level down to the "acceptable data" level. The type design/type certificate approval process is still the same but now provides flexibility in meeting those requirements. In this position light example it is no longer a specific regulation requiring a "dihedral angle" but allows to the designer to submit a position light system that indicates the position and direction of the aircraft in flight.
Click to expand...

There must be some standards then. Perhaps AC 20-30B and AC 20-74? In the CARs, x2x would denote a standard that would meet the requirements in a regulation.
 
JAWS said:
There must be some standards then
Click to expand...
It's all in the terminology. Part 23 went from all enforceable minimum "standards" which are defined by U.S.C. law, to a hand-full of legal "standards" with the remaining certification requirements open to external guidance or development of new guidance/references. The ACs you mention are one option but now guidance from the SAE, AEA, etc. can be used in the type design data package and application. From a design/production/cost standpoint this change is huge. Now whether anyone decides to design/build a new Part 23 aircraft under these new guidelines is yet to be seen.
 
Gotcha. Makes sense in some ways.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top