*7.4.2 Military certification procedure in America*

According to the US Air Force (USAF) Policy Directive No. AFPD 62-6 on 11 Jun 2010 issued by the Secretary of Defense, the USAF is responsible for assuring the airworthiness of all the aircraft which it operates. The directive establishes policies for formal airworthiness evaluations to ensure that AF-operated aircraft are airworthy over their entire life cycle and maintain high levels of safety. This policy is implemented through USAF Instruction AFI 62-601, dated 15 Jun 2010 and supplemented on 12 May 2011. According to this AFI, a Technical Airworthiness Authority (TAA) and an AF Airworthiness Board (AFAB) have been created in the AF Materiel Command (AFMC) to provide independence in airworthiness evaluations. AFAB is chaired by the TAA. AFAB defines the requirement for *design-based (DB) airworthiness certification* and also provides *non-design-based (NDB) special flight release* of aircraft when design-based certification is not possible. AFAB provides acceptance of FAA certifications, evaluations and inspections and disestablishes the Airworthiness Certification Criteria Control Board (AC3 B). Based on the technical evaluations, the Project Manager (PM) proposes one of the two possible alternatives of DB certification or NDB special flight release. The former one is the preferred approach, while the latter is chosen 'by exception' on unique aircraft or situations.

### *7.4.2.1 Design-based airworthiness assessment*

The DB certification is carried out in stages of design evaluation, issuance of military experimental flight release and finally issuance of military-type certificates (MTC). Issuance of MTC indicates that aircraft design documentation accurately defines the configuration which meets the certification basis and the aircraft design is in compliance with requirement.

### *7.4.2.2 Non-design-based airworthiness assessment*

A Non Design Based (NDB) assessment is conducted when it is found by the TAA that a DB airworthiness certification cannot reasonably be accomplished, but there is a compelling military need to operate the air system. On successful conclusion of NDB evaluation, the TAA may issue a special flight release. The NDB special flight releases process identifies and assess the inherent risks of operating these aircraft and the services formally acknowledge these risks during their flight operations.

### *7.4.2.3 Commercial derivative aircraft (CDA)*

The USAF prefers FAA-type certification for newly developed military transport and CDA for USAF operation, when it is found that the criticality of military usage is no severe than the FAA-certified flight envelope and operational environment. FAA Form 8130-2 or 8130-31 can be used for FAA-type certification. CDA require the issuance of a MTC by the TAA. For this, FAA TC is used for the basic aircraft, and a compliance analysis is carried out with the approved military certification basis for items not covered by FAA (e.g. EW suits or other military appliances). MIL-HDBK-516 is to be used to define applicable military airworthiness certification criteria. CDA used in the USAF are to be maintained as per AFI 21-107: maintaining Commercial Derivative Aircraft.

#### *7.4.3 Military airworthiness of Australia*

In 2014, the Chief of Defence, Australian Defence Forces (ADF) and Secretary of Defence decided that the procurement and maintenance of all aviation fleet of

**21**

*Military Aviation Principles*

*DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.87087*

General Technical Airworthiness (DGTA).

*7.4.4 Military airworthiness in Russia*

quality standards like ISO, AS9100 [13].

cally remained the same.

stage [3, 4, 13, 29].

diagram in **Figure 10**.

*7.4.5 Military airworthiness and certification in India*

ADF be regulated to meet the requirement of Australian Defence Safety Objectives. DoD, Australia, issued Australian Air Publication AAP 7001.048, 'Defence Aviation Safety Program (DASP) Manual' on 30 Jun 2014. As per the above publication, the Chief of Air Force will be the 'Defence Aviation Authority'. He will be responsible for creating and implementing DASP. He will be supported by Deputy Chief of Air Force (DCAF) as Operational Airworthiness Regulator (OAR) and Directorate

The military aviation design and development and certification were carried out by various aviation design bureaus and manufacturing complexes. Military forces decide the operational requirements and release design specification. The aviation design bureaus and the manufacturing units carry out necessary designs to meet the requirements. The design bureaus take support from the state research institutes on aerodynamics and other aircraft systems. In fact the design bureau creates a number of alternate designs. The designs are evaluated, and the chosen design is then assigned to one or more manufacturing complexes. During D&D and manufacture of the aircraft, state standards GOST are to be used. The production and quality system 'Oboronsertifika' followed by the defence industries are similar to international

The Indian military airworthiness certification process has been modeled after the earlier British system. The system is based on concurrent design and clearance leading to eventual certification. This approach was adopted since the certification authority, viz. the Chief Resident Engineer (CRE), and the inspection authority Chief Resident Inspector (CRI) were co-located with defence public sector Hindustan Aeronautics Limited who is responsible for design and development (D&D). D&D milestones are agreed between the design and certification authorities, and the design is reviewed for safety and airworthiness by a team of experts. At appropriate stages, test procedures are examined and approved, and tests are carried out. The test results are reviewed for acceptance, redesign or retest. The CRE and CRI organizations have been changed to CEMILAC and DGAQA; however, the inspection and design certification procedure have practi-

However, this process conceptually differs from those followed in the United States and Europe, where both D&D and manufacture are delegated to approved design/production organization. The Defence Project Managers (PM) monitor the project progress. At mutually accepted major milestones, reviews are carried out as per the agreed documentation of the contract. The government, through the certification provision, holds the authorized personnel within the firm

responsible for the airworthiness certification of the aircraft. In contrast, in India, CEMILAC and DGAQA interact with the D&D team on a day-to-day basis and carry out spot checks to identify design/production deficiencies during the D&D

MOD Document DDPMAS 2002 (Procedures for Design Development of Military Aircraft and Airborne Stores) guidelines are as follows. DDPMAS 2002 volume 2 is used as a procedure for certification of airborne software. These documents also lay down airworthiness assurance procedures during manufacture, overhaul and upgrade of military aircraft. The military airworthiness functions are shown in **Figure 9**, and aircraft certification procedure is shown in the block

#### *Military Aviation Principles DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.87087*

*Military Engineering*

*7.4.2 Military certification procedure in America*

Certification Criteria Control Board (AC3

*7.4.2.1 Design-based airworthiness assessment*

*7.4.2.2 Non-design-based airworthiness assessment*

*7.4.2.3 Commercial derivative aircraft (CDA)*

taining Commercial Derivative Aircraft.

*7.4.3 Military airworthiness of Australia*

is in compliance with requirement.

According to the US Air Force (USAF) Policy Directive No. AFPD 62-6 on 11 Jun 2010 issued by the Secretary of Defense, the USAF is responsible for assuring the airworthiness of all the aircraft which it operates. The directive establishes policies for formal airworthiness evaluations to ensure that AF-operated aircraft are airworthy over their entire life cycle and maintain high levels of safety. This policy is implemented through USAF Instruction AFI 62-601, dated 15 Jun 2010 and supplemented on 12 May 2011. According to this AFI, a Technical Airworthiness Authority (TAA) and an AF Airworthiness Board (AFAB) have been created in the AF Materiel Command (AFMC) to provide independence in airworthiness evaluations. AFAB is chaired by the TAA. AFAB defines the requirement for *design-based (DB) airworthiness certification* and also provides *non-design-based (NDB) special flight release* of aircraft when design-based certification is not possible. AFAB provides acceptance of FAA certifications, evaluations and inspections and disestablishes the Airworthiness

Project Manager (PM) proposes one of the two possible alternatives of DB certification or NDB special flight release. The former one is the preferred approach, while

The DB certification is carried out in stages of design evaluation, issuance of military experimental flight release and finally issuance of military-type certificates (MTC). Issuance of MTC indicates that aircraft design documentation accurately defines the configuration which meets the certification basis and the aircraft design

A Non Design Based (NDB) assessment is conducted when it is found by the TAA that a DB airworthiness certification cannot reasonably be accomplished, but there is a compelling military need to operate the air system. On successful conclusion of NDB evaluation, the TAA may issue a special flight release. The NDB special flight releases process identifies and assess the inherent risks of operating these aircraft and the services formally acknowledge these risks during their flight operations.

The USAF prefers FAA-type certification for newly developed military transport and CDA for USAF operation, when it is found that the criticality of military usage is no severe than the FAA-certified flight envelope and operational environment. FAA Form 8130-2 or 8130-31 can be used for FAA-type certification. CDA require the issuance of a MTC by the TAA. For this, FAA TC is used for the basic aircraft, and a compliance analysis is carried out with the approved military certification basis for items not covered by FAA (e.g. EW suits or other military appliances). MIL-HDBK-516 is to be used to define applicable military airworthiness certification criteria. CDA used in the USAF are to be maintained as per AFI 21-107: main-

In 2014, the Chief of Defence, Australian Defence Forces (ADF) and Secretary of Defence decided that the procurement and maintenance of all aviation fleet of

the latter is chosen 'by exception' on unique aircraft or situations.

B). Based on the technical evaluations, the

**20**

ADF be regulated to meet the requirement of Australian Defence Safety Objectives. DoD, Australia, issued Australian Air Publication AAP 7001.048, 'Defence Aviation Safety Program (DASP) Manual' on 30 Jun 2014. As per the above publication, the Chief of Air Force will be the 'Defence Aviation Authority'. He will be responsible for creating and implementing DASP. He will be supported by Deputy Chief of Air Force (DCAF) as Operational Airworthiness Regulator (OAR) and Directorate General Technical Airworthiness (DGTA).
