2. Helicopter Hoist Operations JAR-OPS 3
OST WP-03-07
HSST WP-05/12.10

3. Draft NPA
Proposal to amend JAR-OPS 3 in order to achieve a European wide solution to the interpretation of the requirements relating to Helicopter Hoist Operations detailed in Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.005(h), by the introduction of a new ACJ to Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.005(h) sub-paragraph (e)(1)

4. Background
Some of the requirements relating to Helicopter Hoist Operations detailed in Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.005(h) have been found to be difficult to interpret and implement
This is particularly relevant to text which relates to the helicopter hoist equipment and its standard of airworthiness approval appropriate to the intended use or function
The aim of this paper is to introduce a new ACJ to provide explanatory material to clarify and explain the requirements

5. Appendix 1 to 3.005(h) (e) Additional Requirements
(1) HHO Equipment. The installation of all helicopter hoist equipment including any subsequent modifications and where appropriate, its operation, shall have an airworthiness approval appropriate to the intended function. Ancillary equipment must be designed and tested to the appropriate standard and acceptable to the Authority.

6. Background
FAA included the airworthiness standard for Human External Cargo (HEC) application into Part Amendment 36 and Part Amendment 43
JAA endorsed these as JAR Amend 2 (with some modifications - including JAR (c)(6), the requirement for one-engine-inoperative hover performance data - not present in FAR ) and JAR Amendment 2, which were released in May 2001
EASA adopted as CS 27/ with some modifications in November 2003

7. Background
FAA advisory circular (AC), AC29-2C Change 1, remains the current guidance for compliance as indicated in the Acceptable Means of Compliance Book 2 of CS-27/29
AC has been updated to Change 2 status which amongst other subjects included merging MG 12 into AC27.865B and AC29.865B
Change 2 to AMC to CS-27/29 under review by EASA
AC likely to be incorporated in due course
outstanding issues to be dealt with

8. Background
The majority of hoist installations currently in existence were certificated in accordance with previous amendment standards where the airworthiness requirements did not distinguish between the kinds of external cargo that were intended to be carried
In interpreting the phrase “appropriate to the intended function” of para (e)(1) of the Appendix, and due to past experience following several accidents, some Authorities decided to require the higher standards necessary for HEC applications to be applied to existing installations

9. Background
It was clearly explained in AC29-2C MG12 that the described methods of compliance were intended to apply only to either new designs or major modifications to existing designs from the effective date of the specs
Such Authorities require that retrofit actions or further investigations are mandatory for the granting or maintaining of the operational approval for existing hoist systems

10. Background
The new ACJ describes alternative approaches to the minimum level of retrofit effort necessary to achieve a satisfactory standard of equipment installation.
These approaches could include a comprehensive review to confirm safe design of the existing hoist installation to demonstrate an acceptable level of compliance against the actual specifications of HEC as required by CS 27/ or JAR 27/29 Amendment 2 (27/29.865)

11. Harmonisation
There are some harmonisation issues with regards to the current standards of FARs and CSs in dealing with Human External Cargo requirements
These are outlined in the NPA but are subject to review by EASA

12. Proposal
Introduce a new ACJ to Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.005(h) sub-paragraph (e)(1).
Additionally, it is proposed to insert references to the relevant ACJs into the heading of Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.005(h) which are currently missing

13. Options Option 1. - Do nothing.
This would leave the interpretation of the subject code unclear
Option 2. – Introduce the ACJ material to provide a clear form of interpretation
This is the preferred option

14. Impacts
There are not expected to be any additional economic, safety or other effects following these amendments

15. Consultation
This proposal has received wide input from operators, National Authorities and manufacturers during its development within the HSST and has been reviewed and amended by EASA

16. Amendments Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.005(h)
Helicopter Hoist Operations (HHO)
Insert:
(See ACJ to Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.005(h), sub-paragraph (d)(2)(iv))
(See ACJ to Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.005(h), sub-paragraph (e)(1))

17. Amendments Insert new ACJ:
ACJ to Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.005(h) sub-para (e)(1)
Airworthiness Approval for Human External Cargo
(See Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.005(h))

18. Summary and Final Assessment
The introduction of this advisory material will help to alleviate different interpretations of text within Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 3.005(h) sub-paragraph (e)(1) and a more harmonious approach to its application.
Those affected would be operators of older helicopter / hoist equipment combinations which had certification completed before more stringent standards were applied for the external carriage of human cargo.