AMC2 ORA.ATO.135 Training aircraft and FSTDs

EVALUATION PROCESS

Two cases for the evaluation process of Annex-I aircraft are distinguished:

(a)     Annex-I aircraft that hold an ICAO-level certificate of airworthiness (CoA)

(1)     To support the evaluation process performed by the competent authority and provide the competent authority with sufficient data related to the aircraft in question, an instructor who is qualified in accordance with Annex I (Part-FCL) to Regulation (EU) No 1187/2011 and nominated by the head of training (HT) of the ATO should assess that the aircraft is appropriately equipped and suitable for the training courses provided. The result of this assessment should be submitted to the competent authority and may be included already in the application for the authorisation.

(2)     During the evaluation process, the competent authority should consider aircraft that hold a CoA issued in accordance with Annex 8 to the Chicago Convention to provide a level of safety comparable to that required by Annex II to the Basic Regulation, unless the competent authority determines that the airworthiness requirements used for certification of the aircraft, or the service experience, or the safety system of the State of design, do not provide for a comparable level of safety.

(b)     Annex-I aircraft that do not hold an ICAO-level CoA

Before the inclusion of these aircraft in the fleet of an ATO and their use in training to obtain Part-FCL licences and ratings, the ATO should apply for the authorisation to the competent authority that should perform the evaluation process in the following order:

(1)     Initial assessment by the competent authority and criteria taken into consideration

The competent authority should take into account the following criteria (non-exhaustive list):

(i)      national airworthiness requirements based on which the aircraft CoA was issued;

(ii)     aircraft similarities to a certified variant;

(iii)     aircraft with a satisfactory in-service experience as training aircraft;

(iv)     simple and conventional aircraft design;

(v)      aircraft that does not have hazardous design features or details, judging by experience; and

(vi)     operable aircraft systems, equipment, and appliances that do not require exceptional skills or strength.

(2)     Additional assessment by a qualified instructor

To support the evaluation process performed by the competent authority and provide the competent authority with sufficient data related to the aircraft in question, after the positive initial assessment by the competent authority as per point (1), an instructor who is qualified in accordance with Part-FCL and nominated by the HT of the ATO should show through an evaluation report that the aircraft is appropriately equipped and suitable for the training courses provided. That evaluation report should consider all of the following criteria:

(i)      the aircraft should be safely controllable and manoeuvrable under all anticipated operating conditions, including after failure of one or more propulsion systems;

(ii)     the aircraft should allow for a smooth transition from one flight phase to another without requiring exceptional piloting skills, alertness, strength, or workload under any probable operating conditions;

(iii)     the aircraft should have sufficient stability to ensure that the demands made on the pilot are not excessive, considering the phase and duration of flight; and

(iv)     the assessment should take into account control forces, flight deck environment, pilot workload, and other human factors (HF) considerations, depending on the phase and duration of flight.

Subject to a positive evaluation report as per point (2), the competent authority should issue the authorisation.