SFAR No. 73 to Part 61

[Wannabe1]

The FAR/AIM book is normally pretty 'relaxing' reading. Never any complicated passages or anything... but, I am stumbling over SFAR No. 73 to part 61; Section 3. Expiration Date. It reads "This SFAR terminates on March 31, 2008, unless sooner superseded or rescinded". Does this SFAR get renewed every time the book is issued? Or is this SFAR going away?

[ADRidge]

I don't see it going away anytime soon. My bet is it'll be renewed.

[rick1128]

At HeliExpo this year it was discussed at a couple of classes. The Flight Training Committee at HAI is saying that it looks like what usually happens will happen again. The SFAR will be reissued sometime after the expiration date and made retroactive. Plus because it is easier for them to do so, the FAA will make no change in it, like dropping the R44.

[Goldy]

So, the bigger question is....will the R66 get added to the list at some point ? The renewal will probably be for another 3 years, so by keeping the 66 experimental, and not applying for a certificate until AFTER the renewal of 73, Frank gets to keep the 66 out of the books until at least 2011. Smart guy.

 

Goldy

[helonorth]

So, the bigger question is....will the R66 get added to the list at some point ? The renewal will probably be for another 3 years, so by keeping the 66 experimental, and not applying for a certificate until AFTER the renewal of 73, Frank gets to keep the 66 out of the books until at least 2011. Smart guy.

 

Goldy

I don't know anything about certifying an aircraft, but do you honestly believe that if the R-66

gets certified after the SFAR gets superceded, It will not have to comply? The only way it will

not have to comply is if the FAA feels the design doesn't warrant it. If the FAA feels the design

has the same characteristics as the R-22 and 44, the SFAR will be rewritten to include the R-66.

Edited March 10, 2008 by helonorth

[ADRidge]

I don't know anything about certifying an aircraft, but do you honestly believe that if the R-66

gets certified after the SFAR gets superceded, I will not have to comply? The only way it will

not have to comply is if the FAA feels the design doesn't warrant it. If the FAA feels the design

has the same characteristics as the R-22 and 44, the SFAR will be rewritten to include the R-66.

 

And my bet is it will. From my understanding there are very few differences between the -44 and -66, but I know little about either.

[Jeff]

I know we've all been down this SFAR 73 discussion road before, but why not just require a type rating for the R-22 and/or R-44? Once I pass a type ride in the helicopter, I can fly it, instruct in it, etc. Then it would fall under the standard recent experience requirements of FAR 61. Having a type rating required would be similar to SFAR 73, but much simpler in my view.

 

Jeff

[rick1128]

I know we've all been down this SFAR 73 discussion road before, but why not just require a type rating for the R-22 and/or R-44? Once I pass a type ride in the helicopter, I can fly it, instruct in it, etc. Then it would fall under the standard recent experience requirements of FAR 61. Having a type rating required would be similar to SFAR 73, but much simpler in my view.

 

Jeff

 

That is a bucket of worms, you really don't want to open. Once it is open, the next step will be for the FAA to require a type rating for all models of helicopter. Then we will find ourselves in the same mess that the JAA countries are in. A 300C is not the same thing as a 300CBi. And it really doesn't make flying any safer. Just more expensive.

[Wannabe1]

" I don't see it going away anytime soon. "

 

" The Flight Training Committee at HAI is saying that it looks like what usually happens will happen again. The SFAR will be reissued sometime after the expiration date and made retroactive. Plus because it is easier for them to do so, the FAA will make no change in it. "

 

" The renewal will probably be for another 3 years "

 

I dind't know this was a regular issue with the FAA. Thanks for answering up my question.

 

Best Regards,

Tom

[JDHelicopterPilot]

I agree with Goldy. I can see Robinson holding off so that the R66 won't be on the SFAR73. However, the R66 is larger and heavier than the R44. I think the R66 will also have a heavier main rotor system. With that I don't think it will need to be under the SFAR73 regulation anyway.

[helonorth]

I agree with Goldy. I can see Robinson holding off so that the R66 won't be on the SFAR73. However, the R66 is larger and heavier than the R44. I think the R66 will also have a heavier main rotor system. With that I don't think it will need to be under the SFAR73 regulation anyway.

As I said, the only way it will not be included in the SFAR is if its design doesn't warrant it. Do you

actually believe that just because the SFAR doesn't include the R-66 at the time of issuance that

it will just be exempt? Not a chance. It will be rewritten.

Robinson will not drag it's feet getting certification because of the SFAR. They are going to

sell the R-66 in big numbers if they can deliver it at the right price. Look at the 44. It's the

best selling helicopter in history. They have nothing to gain and millions to lose by holding

off. If they don't want it to be subjected to the SFAR, they will have to design it that way.

[mattfromomaha]

I wonder what Frank's take on the SFAR is - if I were him I might be inclined to support continuance of SFAR 73, and possibly inclusion of the R-66 as well. Didn't he lobby for it on the R-22 in the first place?

 

If Robinson helicopter is self-insured (from what I've heard) and wants to minimize lawsuits from accidents, as well as minimize accidents in the first place to maintain their reputation - the extra training one must go through to comply with SFAR 73 certainly helps accommplish that. I doubt he ever lost out on the sale of a helicopter only because of SFAR 73...

Edited March 11, 2008 by mattfromomaha

[K-38]

73

[Goldy]

Do you actually believe that just because the SFAR doesn't include the R-66 at the time of issuance that it will just be exempt?

 

Yes, actually I do. The 66 doesnt exist now, so they can't consider it. Lets say in May they re-write it..the new re-write will have an expiration date, and I believe they won't even look at 73 again until that due date. Heck, they've known it expires March 1.08 for the last 3 years and they couldnt have it rewritten in time for the 08 FAR ? That's a joke. That's our FAA and tax dollars at work.

 

As far as the 66 is concerned, I dont know if the rotor system is any stronger. The mast is taller and the blades are wider, and it certainly will be a bit heavier...but I think only a bit.

 

Guess we'll have to wait and see. I will try to remember to look up this thread a year from now!

 

Goldy

[helonorth]

You're trying to make a point and I can't figure out what it is. My point to you is that no aircraft

will be "off the books" just because it get's certified even one day after the SFAR get's extended.

As I keep saying, if the FAA decides it has the same characteristics as the 22 and 44, it will

be subject to some kind of special FAR. As mattfromomaha said, in addition to safety, there is

the liability. What will happen when the first one crashes because of a mast bump? All hell would

break loose with no SFAR. I just hope they design it so they don't find it necessary (a SFAR).

[Goldy]

I guess my point is the FAA doesnt work that way, or that fast. They may reissue 73 at some point, and then in their mind it is done for another 3 years. Hey, the mast is taller ( less chance of taking off the tail) and maybe a bit heavier so it may have fewer mast bumping issues..

[Wannabe1]

I'm told that the SFAR 73 has been renewed as of 2 - 3 days ago.

Edited April 5, 2008 by Wannabe1

[cruise475]

At the Factory Safety Course a few weeks ago, Frank talked about SFAR 73. He said that he DOES support it, however only for the R22. Be believes that the SFAR should only include the R22. He said that he is working on trying to get the FAA to take the requirement for the R44 out of it, but who knows if that will happen.

[Jeff]

At the Factory Safety Course a few weeks ago, Frank talked about SFAR 73. He said that he DOES support it, however only for the R22. Be believes that the SFAR should only include the R22. He said that he is working on trying to get the FAA to take the requirement for the R44 out of it, but who knows if that will happen.

 

That is true. I was reading in the NPRM (I think that's what it was) where he testified to the FAA that the R-44 should be removed from the SFAR. However, the FAA's position was pretty much that since the R-44 was already covered by the SFAR, it wouldn't hurt anything just to leave it there.

 

~Jeff

[Goldy]

That is true. I was reading in the NPRM (I think that's what it was) where he testified to the FAA that the R-44 should be removed from the SFAR. However, the FAA's position was pretty much that since the R-44 was already covered by the SFAR, it wouldn't hurt anything just to leave it there.

 

~Jeff

 

 

Frank has given up trying to get the SFAR removed completely, so yes his focus is to get the R44 off the list. Like I've said in the past, at some point in time, the R22 will no longer be made, so if the R44 is off the list the issues are over. ( for Frank at least )

 

Kinda sneaky that the FAA renewed this only for one year...previously it was 3 years. It just means another state of confusion a year from now when it expires again. I've just never understood why the FAA can't respond to these expiration dates a week BEFORE they expire instead of a week AFTER.

 

However, one good thing. The FAA letter shows the dramatic decline in mast bump incidents, since the aircraft hasnt changed it means that the pilots flying them have.

 

As far as the R44, I think they should leave it in. You think mast bumping can happen in a 22 at 90 knots? Try flying at 130 knots and see how fast it can happen...the R66 is supposed to fly even faster, so the issues are really the same in all the aircraft.

 

I wonder if I can an STC for a 4 bladed semi rigid R66..now that would be one hell of a ship !

 

Goldy

Edited April 5, 2008 by Goldy

[Superman]

I don't understand why SFAR-73 hasn't made it into the book as a permanent regulation to part 61. How long has it been now, 15 years or more?

I don't know if any have noticed but that 5 pound wonder of a book (FAR/AIM) didn't get that size by "removing" much of anything! Anyone have a copy from say the 50's, bet it was half the size it is now.

 

The R66, well my bet is it will be included somehow.....maybe it will be an SFAR to the SFAR Just substitute "R66" where it currently reads "R44" and you'll have it.

 

Clark

[mrjibbs]

Kinda sneaky that the FAA renewed this only for one year...previously it was 3 years. It just means another state of confusion a year from now when it expires again. I've just never understood why the FAA can't respond to these expiration dates a week BEFORE they expire instead of a week AFTER.

 

 

Maybe, just maybe, the reason for only a 1 year extension is to give Frank enough time to finish the certification process for the 66, and when this time next year rolls around, they can just re-write the whole thing to include all 3 helo's for the typical 3 years or even longer, rather then have to issue an ammendment or something later on. Sounds like an easy solution, but then again its the FAA were talking about and that just sounds like long lost hopes i guess.....

[Goldy]

Courtesy of AOPA's email blast:

 

FAA SEES BENEFIT IN SPECIAL TRAINING FOR ROBINSON COPTERS

The FAA wants to continue to require special flight training for Robinson R22

and R44 helicopters. In 1995 the agency put in place a special federal

aviation regulation (SFAR) to address the unique aerodynamic and design

features of the helicopters. There had been more fatal accidents due to "main

rotor/airframe contact than other piston-powered helicopters." There have

been no such accidents over the past few years. The FAA has been extending

the SFAR in five-year increments. Now it is proposing

( http://www.aopa.org/epilot/redir.cfm?adid=16649 ) to modify the expiration

date so that it says "until further notice." The last extension of the SFAR

was in March 2008.

 

http://www.aopa.org/epilot/redir.cfm?adid=16649

 

Goldy

[PhilJ]

From some of the replies to this topic there seems to be a bit of misunderstanding about the FARs. They are not issued yearly they are continually changing, just because you have bought the latest available book does not mean you are up to date. The books most people buy are not official documents and say so as much in them.

[svtcobra66]

So is it likely at all the SFAR is getting removed for the R44 this year? Anybody hear anything new? I know it expires mid-09...

 

Thanks