AC 27-1A

Historical

Advisory circular · Certification of Normal Category Rotorcraft

A newer version is currentThis is a historical version. AC 27-1B CHG 1-9 is the version in force, approved June 23, 2023.
Approved
July 30, 1997
Last reviewed
January 23, 2001
Cancelled by
AC27-1B
Family
AC 27-1 · 10 versions
Revision
A
14 CFR parts
27
Cited by
1 AD

Guidance, not mandatory unless a rule or AD requires it. DRS record last changed November 22, 2025.

Show pages 68–79
Page 80OCROpen in PDF

69. § 27.79 (Amendment 27-14) LIMITING HEIGHT-SPEED ENVELOPE.

a. Explanation.

(1) The height-speed envelope is normally referred to as the height-velocity (HV) diagram. It defines an envelope of airspeed and height above the ground from which a safe power-off or OE landing cannot be made. The diagram normally consists of three portions: (a) the level flight (cruise) portion, (b) the takeoff portion, and (c) the high speed portion. See Figure 69-1. The high speed portion is omitted on occasions when it can be shown that the rotorcraft can suffer an engine failure at low altitude and high speed (up to Vu) and make a successful landing or climb out on the remaining engine(s).

(2) Power failure, engine failure, throttle chop, or other similar terms used in this discussion mean a simulated engine failure. The actual shutdown of an engine to simulate an engine failure should not be necessary if the simulated procedure ensures that the engine power is suddenly removed from driving the rotor and remains so. The normal fuel control deceleration schedule is usually satisfactory for the power removal for turbine engines but the flight/ground idle speed may have to be set lower than normal for HV testing.

(3) The avoid areas of the HV diagram are separated by the takeoff corridor.

This corridor should be wide enough to consistently permit a takeoff flight path clear of the HV diagram using normal pilot skill. The takeoff corridor should always permit a minimum of +5 knots clearance from critical portions of the diagram.

(4) The knee of the curve separates the takeoff portion from the cruise portion and is defined as the highest speed point on the low speed portion of the HV envelope.

Altitudes above this point are considered cruise, or "fly-in," points, and these test points require a minimum time delay of 1 second between throttle chop and control actuation (reference § 27.143(d)). Altitudes below the knee represent takeoff profile points. For test points in the takeoff portion, takeoff power (or a lower power selected by the applicant as an operating procedure) and normal pilot reaction time for corrective control actuation will be used.

(5) Since the HV diagram may represent the limiting capabilities of the rotorcraft, each test point should be approached with caution. The manufacturer's buildup program should be reviewed to determine the amount of conservatism in the HV diagram (if any). It should be remembered that the operational pilot will be operating at or near the HV diagram without the benefit of a buildup program. Buildup testing is necessary, and it is most important to vary only one parameter at a time to prevent surprises. Light weight testing is ordinarily conducted first. High and low hover points are approached from above and below respectively. Portions near the knee are initially evaluated at high speed with subsequent backing down of the speed. In most rotorcraft the effective flare airspeed is critical. At airspeeds slightly below this value, Par 69 95

Page 81OCROpen in PDF

AC 27-1A 7130/97 the ability to arrest and control descent rates through use of an aft cyclic flare may be greatly diminished. Extreme care should be exercised when "backing down" to lower speeds.

(6) In addition to the on-board and ground instrumentation, a motion picture camera or other position measuring equipment should cover each run.

(7) For FAA/AUTHORITY tests, the minimum required crew and the minimum instrument panel display presented for certification should be used. Ground safety equipment should be provided.

(8) This test is the least predictable of all the performance items. Therefore, the expansion and extrapolation of test data are questionable. Weight may not be extrapolated to higher values. In order to extrapolate HV data to higher altitudes, any analytical method must have FAA/AUTHORITY approval. In lieu of pure analytical methods, simulations have been used successfully, especially for multiengine rotorcraft.

In either case, the maximum allowable extrapolation should be limited to 2,000 feet density altitude (Ho). HV test weights for normal category rotorcraft are the maximum weight at sea level and some lessor weight at high density altitudes. The high density altitude HV curve needs to be defined only to 7,000 feet and may be a lower altitude if the rotorcraft does not have the performance capabilities to attain 7,000 feet. A weight less than the maximum weight may be used to define the high density altitude HV curve, but this weight should not be less than the maximum weight that will allow hovering out-of-ground effect. For a given diagram, typical weight reductions that are necessary as altitude is increased can be conservatively estimated by maintaining a constant gross weight divided by density ratio, GW/o. See Figure 69-2, Part A. If weight is not varied, an enlarged HV diagram is required for safe power-off landing as density altitude is increased. See Figure 69-2, Part B. Another method of presentation is to show varying weights at a constant density altitude. (See Figure 69-2, Part C.)

(9) Vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) testing normally does not require separate HV testing. The takeoff and landing tests take on the combined characteristics of takeoff, landing, and HV tests.

b. Procedures.

(1) Instrumentation.

Ground Station. The ground station must have equipment and instrumentation to determine wind direction and velocity, outside air temperature, and if the test rotorcraft has reciprocating engines, humidity. Since the tests must be conducted in winds of 2 knots or less, a smoke generator is highly recommended to show both flightcrew and ground crew personnel the wind direction and velocity at any given time. Additionally, the location of the ground station should be such that it is free Par 69 96

Page 82OCROpen in PDF

of rotor downwash at all times. Motion picture or phototheodolite and radio equipment will be necessary to properly conduct the test program. The use of telemetry equipment is desirable if the location of the test site and the magnitude of the test program make it practical.

Airborne Equipment (Test Rotorcraft). Necessary installed test equipment may include photopanels and/or recorders for recording engine parameters, control positions, landing gear loads, landing gear deflections, airspeed, altitude, and other variables. An external light attached to the rotorcraft (or any other means of identifying the engine failure point to the ground camera or phototheodolite) is needed to identify the exact time of engine failure and may also be used to synchronize the ground recorder with the airborne recorded data.

(2) Analytical Prediction. The HV diagram can be estimated by analytical means and this is recommended prior to test. HV, however, is the least predictable of all rotorcraft performance and because of this, the expansion and extrapolation of test data must be done with great care. Test weight may not be extrapolated. All test points should be approached conservatively with some speed or altitude margin. If the applicant has conducted a comprehensive HV flight test program to validate his analytical predictions, much preliminary testing can be eliminated. In any case, the maximum allowable extrapolation from flight test conditions is 2,000 feet density altitude, and an approved analytical and/or simulation method must be utilized for extrapolation.

(3) Power.

The appropriate power level before engine failure for the low and high hover points is simply the power required to hover at the prevailing hover conditions.

The appropriate power condition prior to failure of the engine for points below the knee is takeoff power or a lower value if approved as an operating procedure. For cruise or "fly-in" points above the knee, the appropriate condition is power required for level flight.

(ii) The applicable power failure conditions are listed in § 29.79(b).

Power should be completely cut for normal category rotorcraft. For multiengine rotorcraft with Category A engine isolation, only one engine need be failed and the desired topping power (for the remaining engine(s)) should be set prior to the test. This power value will need adjustment as ambient conditions change. The power can be takeoff power (TOP), 2 ½-minute power, or some calculated lower power for simulating hot day or higher density altitude conditions. Power is verified and recorded by the pilot by "topping" the engine(s) prior to engine failure tests. Care must be taken to ensure that this power value is no more than that which would be delivered by a minimum specification engine under the ambient conditions to be approved.

(4) Test Loadings. Weight extrapolation is not permitted for HV. Therefore, the test weight must be closely controlled. Ballast or fuel should be added frequently to Par 69 97

Page 83OCROpen in PDF

maintain the weight within -1 to +5 percent when testing final points. Ordinarily, tests are conducted at a mid center of gravity unless a particular loading is expected to be particularly critical.

(5) Landing Gear Loads.

Instrumented landing gear can be a great help in evaluating test results. This information can be telemetered to a ground station or otherwise recorded and displayed for direct reference following each landing.

(її) Any landing which results in permanent deformation of aircraft structure or landing gear beyond allowable maintenance limits is considered an unsatisfactory test point.

(6) Piloting Considerations. In verifying the HV diagram, the minimum certificated instrument panel display and minimum crew should be used in order not to mislead the operational pilot who has no test equipment available and may have no copilot to assist. Three distinctly different flight profiles are utilized in developing the diagram.

(i> High Hover. A stabilized out-of-ground-effect (OGE) hover condition prior to power failure is essential. A minimum 1-second time delay between power failure and initial control actuation is utilized. Following the time delay, the primary concern is to quickly lower collective and to gain sufficient airspeed to allow an effective flare approaching touchdown. While the immediate development of airspeed is necessary, the dive angle must be reasonable and must be representative of that expected in service. While initial aircraft attitude will vary between models and with changing conditions, 10°-20° has been previously applied as a maximum allowable nose down pitch attitude. Use of greater attitudes could result in a diagram which is difficult to achieve and unrealistic for operations in service. Initial testing should start relatively high with gradual lowering of height to the final high hover altitude. A stabilized OGE hover condition prior to power failure is essential. If a stabilized high hover condition cannot be achieved prior to the engine cut, then this point should be tested from a minimum level flight speed. This will result in an open-ended HV diagram. A smoke source or balloon on a long cord is highly desirable since the wind can vary significantly from surface observations to typical high hover altitudes. Vertical speed must be very near zero at the throttle chop. Any climb or sink rate can have a significant influence on the success of the test point. Use of a radar altimeter with a cross check to barometric altitude is essential.

Low Hover. From the low hover position there is no flare capability and little time for collective reaction. No time delay is applied other than normal pilot reaction. For typical designs the collective may not be lowered after power failure.

Lowering of the collective is not permitted because it is not a pilot action which could be expected if an engine failed without notice during a hovering condition in service. Initial Par 69 98

Page 84OCROpen in PDF

7/30/97 АС 27-1A lowering of collective immediately after power failure can result in a very high, unconservative low hover height that is unrealistic for operational conditions. If, however, a design is such that a 1-second pilot delay after power failure could be achieved without any appreciable descent, a slight lowering of collective could be allowed.

(ilI) Takeoff Corridor. Normal pilot reaction is applied when the engine is made inoperative. At low speeds, collective may be lowered quickly to retain RPM and minimize the time between power failure and ground contact. If airspeed is sufficient for an effective flare, the aircraft is flared to reduce airspeed, retain rotor RPM, and control vertical speed prior to touchdown. Considerable surface area may be needed for a sliding or rolling stop.

(iv) Additional Considerations. The "in-between" points utilize similar techniques. The cruise or "fly-in" points are similar to the high hover point although the steep initial pitch attitudes are not needed as altitude is decreased and airspeed is increased along the curve. The low speed points along the takeoff corridor are similar to the low hover point except that the collective may be quickly lowered and some flare capability may be used as the "knee" is approached. The pilot should be proficient in all normal autorotation landings before conducting HV tests in a single-engine rotorcraft.

(7) Ground Support. Motion picture or theodolite coverage and ground safety equipment are necessary. Communication capability among these elements should be provided. Use of a phototheodolite to compare height/speed with cockpit observations is very desirable.

(8) Verifying the HV Diagram.

A sufficient number of test points must be flown to verify the diagram.

The key areas are the knee, high altitude hover, low altitude hover, and low altitude high speed flight. Test points with excessive gear loads, exceptional skill requirements, winds above permissible levels, rotor droop below approved minimum transient RPM, damage to the rotorcraft, excessive power, incorrect time delay, etc., cannot be accepted.

(ii) After the HV diagram is defined, it should be ascertained that the corridor permits takeoffs within +5 knots of the recommended takeoff profile.

(9) Flight Manual. The flight manual should list any procedures which may apply to specific points (e.g., high speed points) and test conditions, such as runway surface, wave height for amphibious tests, marginal areas of controllability or landing gear response, etc. The HV curve should be presented in the RFM using actual altitude above ground level and indicated airspeed.

Par 69 99

Page 85OCROpen in PDF

(10) Night Evaluation. If a rotorcraft is to be certified for night operation, a night evaluation is required. Simulated engine failures should be conducted along the recommended takeoff path. Landings should also be qualitatively evaluated with an engine failed. Engine failures at critical HV conditions are not required. The intent is to show adequate visibility using aircraft and/or runway lights without requiring a duplication of the daytime HV test program.

(11) Water Landings. For amphibious float-equipped rotorcraft, day and night water landings should be conducted under critical loading conditions with an engine failed. Engine failures should be conducted along the recommended takeoff path.

Engine failures at critical HV conditions are not required. The intent is to show similarity to test results over land without requiring a duplication of the HV test program.

Par 69 100

Page 86OCROpen in PDF

7/30/97/ AC 27-1A HEIGHT LEVEL FLIGHT (H)

- KNEE

TAKEOFF

TAKEOFF CORRIDOR

HIGH SPEED

SPEED (V) FIGURE 69-1. HEIGHT - VELOCITY DIAGRAM Par 69 101

Page 87OCROpen in PDF

• Approx.

Constant GWo Height Velocity LA- Weight

CONSTANT HV DIAGRAM, VARIABLE WEIGHT Increasing Density Altitude Height Velocity

- B

CONSTANT WEIGHT Increasing Gross Weight Height Velocity

- C-

CONSTANT DENSITY ALTITUDE FIGURE 69-2. ALTITUDEMEIGHT ACCOUNTABILITY Par 69 102

Page 88OCROpen in PDF

69A. § 27.79 (Amendment 27-21) LIMITING HEIGHT-SPEED ENVELOPE.

a. Explanation. Amendment 27-21 to the regulation redefines the required weight for establishing the HV envelope at altitudes above sea level.

b. Procedures. All of the policy material pertaining to this section remains in effect. In addition, the following applies:

(1) The rotorcraft height-velocity envelope should be established for the maximum gross weight at sea level. At altitudes above sea level, the envelope should be established at not less than the maximum operating weight or OGE hover weight, whichever is lower. If a weight below the OGE hover weight is selected, by definition, that selected weight becomes the maximum operating weight for the rotorcraft at that altitude.

(2) If the HV envelope is established for a maximum altitude less than 7,000 feet, by definition, the maximum takeoff and landing altitude for the rotorcraft may be no higher than that maximum HV altitude. Hover performance information should not be presented for altitudes above the maximum altitude for which the HV envelope is established.

70.-79. RESERVED.

Par 69A 103(thru 113)

Page 89OCROpen in PDF

SECTION 4. FLIGHT CHARACTERISTICS

80. § 27.141 (Amendment 27-21) GENERAL.

a. Explanation.

(1) This section prescribes the general flight characteristics required for certification of a normal category rotorcraft. Specifically, it states that the rotorcraft shall comply with the flight characteristics requirements at all approved operating altitudes, gross weights, center of gravity locations, airspeeds, power, and rotor speed conditions for which certification is requested. The reference to altitude in § 27.141(a)(1) refers to density altitude. Density altitude is, of course, a function of pressure altitude and ambient temperature, hence the need to account for ambient temperature effects.

Additional flight characteristics required for instrument flight are contained in Paragraph 775 of this advisory circular.

(2) Generally, the aircraft structural (load level) survey accounts for takeoff power values at speeds up to and including Vy. At speeds above Vy, maximum continuous power is assumed. Stress to rotating components usually increases with airspeed and power. If the takeoff power rating exceeds the maximum continuous power rating, and the structural survey has been conducted under the assumption that takeoff power is not used at speeds above Vy, the Rotorcraft Flight Manual must limit takeoff power to speeds of Vy and below. If takeoff power is structurally substantiated throughout the flight envelope, and appropriate portions of the controllability, maneuverability, and trim requirements of §§ 27.141 through 27.161 are met at takeoff power levels, no flight manual entry is needed. Obviously if transmission limits for maximum continuous (MC) and takeoff power coincide, no special action is needed.

(3) During the flight characteristics testing, the controls must be rigged in accordance with the approved rigging instructions and tolerances. The control system rigging must be known prior to testing. In addition to the normal rigging procedures, any programmed control surfaces which may be operated by dynamic pressure, electronics, etc., must also be calibrated. During the flight test program, it is frequently necessary to rig a control, such as the swashplate or tail rotor blade angle, to the allowable critical extreme of the tolerance band. For example, it would be necessary to rig the tail rotor to the minimum allowable blade angle if meeting the requirements of §27.143(c) would be in question. The same consideration must be given to all rotorcraft controls and movable aerodynamic surfaces where questionable compliance with the regulations may exist. If the rotor-induced vibration characteristics of the rotorcraft are significantly affected and require time-consuming rigging for such things as acceptable ride comfort, then the rotor(s) should be rigged to the allowable extreme tolerance limits to determine compliance, for example, with § 27.251.

114 Par 80

Page 90OCROpen in PDF

7/30/97 АС 27-1A

(4) During the FAA/AUTHORITY flight test program, the crew should be especially alert for conditions requiring great attentiveness, high skill levels, or exceptional strength. If any of these features appear marginal, it is advisable to obtain another pilot's opinion and to carefully document the results of these evaluations.

Section 27.141(b) provides the regulatory basis for these strength and skill requirements. The general requirements for a smooth transition capability between appropriate flight conditions are also included in § 27.141(b). These requirements must also be met during appropriate engine failure conditions for each category of rotorcraft.

(5) For night or IFR approval, § 27.141 (c) contains the general regulatory reference which requires additional characteristics for night and IFR flight. The appropriate flight test procedures are included in other portions of this order.

81. § 27.143 (Amendment 27-21) CONTROLLABILITY AND MANEUVERABILITY.

a. Explanation.

(1) This regulation contains the basic controllability requirements for normal category rotorcraft. It also specifies a minimum maneuvering capability for required conditions of flight. The general requirements for control and for maneuverability are summarized in § 27.143(a) which is largely self-explanatory. The hover condition is not specifically addressed in § 27.143(a)(2) so that the general requirement may remain applicable to all rotorcraft types, including those without hover capability. For rotorcraft, the hover condition clearly applies under "any maneuver appropriate to the type."

(2) Paragraphs (b) through (e), § 27.143, include more specitic flight conditions and highlight the typical areas of concern during a flight test program.

(i) Section 27.143(b) specifies flight at VNE With critical weight, center of gravity (CG), rotor RPM, and power. Adequate cyclic authority must remain at VNE for nosedown pitching of the rotorcraft and for adequate roll control. Nosedown pitching capability is needed for control of gust response and to allow necessary flight path changes in a nosedown direction. Roll control is needed for gust response and for normal maneuvering of the aircraft. In the past, 10 percent control travel margin has been applied as an appropriate minimum control standard. The required amount of control power, however, has very little to do with any fixed percentage of remaining control travel. There are foreseeable designs for which 5 percent remaining is adequate and others for which 20 percent may not be enough. The key is, can the remaining longitudinal control travel at VNE generate a clearly positive nosedown pitching moment, and will the remaining lateral travel allow at least 30° banked turns at reasonable roll rates? Moderate lateral control reversals should be included in this evaluation and since available roll control can diminish with sideslip, reasonable out of trim conditions (directionally) should be investigated. This "control remaining" philosophy must also be applied for other flight conditions specified in this section.

Par 80 115

Page 91OCROpen in PDF

(it) Section 27.143(c) requires a minimum control capability for hover and takeoff in winds of 17 knots from any azimuth. Control capability in wind from zero to at least 17 knots must also be shown for any other appropriate maneuver near the ground such as rolling takeoffs for wheeled rotorcraft. These requirements must be met from standard sea level conditions to the maximum altitude capability of the rotorcraft or 7,000 feet, whichever is less. On rotorcraft incorporating a tail rotor, efficiency of the tail rotor decreases with altitude so that a given sideward flight condition requires more pedal deflection, a higher tail rotor blade angle, and more horsepower. Hence, directional capability in sideward flight (or at critical wind azimuth) is most critical during testing at a high altitude site.

Section 27.143(d) requires adequate controllability when an engine fails. This requirement specifies conditions under which engine failure testing must be conducted and includes minimum required delay times.

(A) For rotorcraft which meet the engine isolation requirements of transport Category A, demonstration of sudden complete single-engine failure is required at critical conditions throughout the flight envelope including hover, takeoff, climb at Vy, and high speed flight up to VNE. Entry conditions for the first engine failure are engine or transmission limiting maximum continuous power (or takeoff power where appropriate) including reasonable engine torque splits. For multiengine Category A installations (three or more engines) subsequent engine failures should be conducted utilizing the same criteria as that used for first-engine failure. The applicant may limit his flight envelope for subsequent failures. Initial or sequential engine failure tests are ordinarily much less severe than the "last" engine failure test required by § 27.75(b).

The conditions for last-engine failure are maximum continuous power, or 30-minute power if that rating is approved, level flight, and sudden engine failure with the same pilot delay of 1 second or normal pilot reaction time, whichever is greater.

(B) For rotorcraft without transport Category A engine isolation, demonstration of sudden complete power failure is required at critical conditions throughout the flight envelope. This includes speeds from zero to VNE (power-on) and conditions of hover, takeoff, and climb at Vy. Maximum continuous power is specified prior to the failure for the cruise condition. Power levels appropriate to the maneuver should be used for other conditions. The corrective action time delay for the cruise failure should be 1-second or normal pilot reaction time (whichever is greater). Cyclic and directional control motions which are apart of the pilot task of flight path control are normally not subject to the 1-second restriction; however, the delay is always applied to the collective control for the cruise failure. If the aircraft flying qualities and cyclic trim configuration would encourage routine release of the cyclic control to complete other cockpit tasks during cruise flight, consideration should be given to also holding cyclic fixed for the 1-second delay. Although the same philosophy could be extended to the directional controls, the likelihood of the pilot having his feet away from the pedals is much lower, unless the aircraft has a heading hold feature. Rotor speed at execution of the cruise condition power failure should be the minimum power-on value. The term 116 Par 81