ED Decision 2009/009/R
When assessing
ground escape, the possibility of the aircraft coming to rest in an inverted
(turnover) position should be determined.
If it is determined
that an aircraft design is not susceptible to turnover, then no further action
is necessary. If however turnover remains a distinct possibility or is
questionable, provisions should be made in the basic aircraft design to allow
the occupants to make a rapid escape from a turnover position. This may
include the design of the emergency exit or fuselage, the use of materials
which are readily breakable or by installing weak points in the fuselage or
canopy.
As an alternative to provisions within the basic aircraft design, it is acceptable to install qualified escape equipment (e.g. crash axe) that would permit the occupant(s) to make a rapid escape from the inverted position. In such a case, it would not be necessary to consider the wearing of a parachute, as escape could be made more rapid if the occupant(s) released their parachute(s) prior to egress rather than attempt to enlarge an escape opening or risk getting entangled. In order to qualify escape equipment, it must be shown by test or by similarity with previous tests, that the equipment can perform its intended function.
[Amdt 22/2]
Loading collections...