Originally Posted by
Pilot DAR
It's a bit subjective. But, the design requirement:
FAR Part 25.101:
Originally Posted by FAR Part 25.101
........(1) Be able to be consistently executed in service by crews of average skill;......
Does specifically exclude above standard pilot skill and attention for in service flying. Yes, it can be a bit of a variable to have a very practiced company test pilot limit the application of their skill to "average", but, if in doubt, the test pilot confers with the authority in advance of a finding of design compliance.
You look at the positive side ;-)
I am more worried about these types of design requirements. Nowadays, in new drafts, there is no longer room for such a "non-specification" type of specification.
Bottom line, such a vague specification would imply, the specified design item is allowed to fail on 50% of the "crews". Granted, it depends a bit on the way you define "average" as well, the average level fluctuating "during the day", however it still implies a huge amount of failures is allowed, according to the specification. Add enough of these specifications and the Swiss cheese holes start lining up.
And, having these vague specifications, it widely opens the door to specification (interpretation) manipulation by management, as we have seen with the MAX.