Advisory .

Circular
-*:EMERGENCY EVACUATION Dac 11/l !l10
DEMONSTRATIONS Ini~ir~ed by: M

1. PURPOSE. This'advisory circular (AC) provides guidance on a means, but

not the only means, of compliance with the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR)
concerning: (1) conduct of full-scale emergency evacuation demonstrations,
and (2) use of analysis and tests for emergency evacuation demonstrations in
lieu of conducting an actual demonstration.

2. RELATED FAR SECTIONS.

@ a. Section 25.803, Emergency evacuation, as amended through Amendment

25-46.

b. Section 121.291, Demonstration and emergency evacuation procedures, as

amended through Amendment 121-149.

3. BACKGROUND.

a. The requirements for emergency evacuation demonstrations were first

established in Part 121 (5 121.291) of the FAR by Amendment 121-2, effective .
March 3, 1965. Operators were required to conduct full-scale evacuation
dgmonstrations with a time limit of two minutes using 50 percent of the exits.
The purpose of the test was to demonstrate the crewmembers' ability to execute
the established emergency evacuation procedures and to ensure realistic
assignment of functions to the crew. A full-scale demonstration was required
on initial introduction of a type and model of airplane into
passenger-carrying operation, a five percent or greater increase in passenger
seating capacity, or a major change in the cabin interior that would affect
emergency evacuation.

b. The requirement for the airplane manufacturer to conduct an evacuation

demonstration for airplanes having a seating capacity of more than 44
passengers was established in Part 25 (5 25.803) by Amendment 25-15, effective
October 24; 1967. The time limit for the manufacturer's demonstration was
established at 90 seconds, and the Part 121 time limit was reduced to 90
seconds. It was considered that the manufacturer's demonstration would show
the basic capability ofh new airplane and, as before, the Part 121
demonstration was intended to account for crew training and adequate crew
procedures. Therefore, the test conditions were somewhat different.
 AC 25.803-i ll/lSpB9 .

With the addition of the requirement for a full-scale demonstration in

Part 25, 5 25.803(d) gave conditions for analysis in lieu of demonstration.
Section 25.803(d) stated that the demonstration need not be repeated for a
change in the interior arrangement or a passenger capacity change of not more
than five percent, or both, if it could be substantiated by analysis that the
passengers could be evacuated in 90 seconds. At that time analysis was used
for decreases in passenger capacity when an airplane was reduced in size.
Generally, the analysis was based on a full-scale demonstration for the larger
e airplane. Analysis was also used for increases of less than five percent.

C. Since'Amendment,25-15, numerous full-scale demonstrations have been

conducted by the manufacturers for both type certification and operational
requirements. These tests provided data on evacuation rates, escape system
performance, and the behavior of evacuees during the demonstration.

d. By Amendments 25-46 and 121-149, effective December 1, 1978, 5 25.803

was revised to allow a means other than actual demonstration to show the
evacuation capability of the airplane and to replace the existing Part 25
demonstration conditions with conditions that would satisfy both Part 25 and
Part 121 so one demonstration would serve both requirements. Part 25 was
changed to match the conditions in Part 121.

Amendment 25-46 removed the five percent limitation on analysis from

5 25.803(d). It was proposed in Notice 75-26, that analysis or a combination
of analysis and tests be used to show evacuation capability. Amendment 25-46
dropped the provision which allowed analysis alone and required a combination
of analysis and tests to assure approvals would be based on sufficient test
data. It was considered that sufficient data may not be available in the case
of a completely new airplane model or a model which had major changes or a
considerably larger passenger capacity than a previously approved model.
Thus, the requirement that the Administrator find the data used in the
analysis acceptable was intended to preclude approvals which might be based on
insufficient test data.

Amendment 121-176, effective January 18 1982 allowed a Part 121

certPficate holder to use the results of a Part'25 deionstration or the Part
121 demonstration of another operator to show compliance with 5 121.291. This
amendment also eliminated the five percent limit from Part 121 because the
manufacturer would have already shown compliance with 5 25.803 and the partial
demonstration required by 5 121.291 would show that the carrier's procedures,
training program and maintenance program are adequate.

The preamble to Amendment 121-176 referred to the results of an FAA study

of evacuation demonstrations. The preamble stated that the study concluded
"that with rare exceptions, the rates of passenger egress are not
significantly different for the same type of exit and that changes in the
passenger cabin configuration, seat pitch, and aisle width have no significant
bearing on the egress rates if the airplane type certification requirements
for minimum aisle width and exit accessibility are met."

f. The conduct of emergency evacuation demonstrations .and the use of

an'alysis in lieu of a full-scale demonstration were discussed at the Public
Technical Conference held by the FAA in September 1985, in Seattle, Washington.

2 Par 3
 AC 25.803-l
ll/ 13/89

These items were later discussed in detail at working group meetings. As a

result of a paragraph by paragraph review of 5 25.803(c), the FAA concluded
that it was necessary to formalize policy on conduct of an evacuation
demonstration and to clarify items of concern expressed by the group members.
Most of the guidance presented in this AC is consolidated from existing FAA
policy or the consensus of the working group. In those areas where no
consensus could be reached, for example the use of analysis in lieu of
full-scale demonstration, the FAA has decided how best to implement the
regulations.

4. OBJECTIVE OF THE RULE.

A full-scale demonstration is conducted to assess the evacuation

capability of the airplane and, when compliance with 5 25.803(c)(7)(i) is
requested, to also demonstrate the effectiveness of crew training and
emergency procedures. Section 25.803(c) specifies the conditions for conduct
of the evacuation demonstration.

b. The objective of the analysis allowed by 5 25.803(d) is to show that

the airplane can be evacuated within 90 seconds under the conditions specified
in 5 25.803(c). The use of analysis will reduce the number of injuries to
passengers used in actual demonstrations and eliminate conducting
demonstrations that would not provide additional knowledge.

5. 'DETERMINATION OF WHETHERANALYSIS OR A DEMONSTRATION IS REOUIREO FOR A NEW

CONFIGURATION.

a. Each change in airplane design that may have an effect on the

emergency evacuation capability of the airplane should be evaluated for
compliance with 5 25.803, either by full-scale demonstration or by analysis if
appropriate.

b. The following are examples of design changes that should be evaluated

for their effect on evaluation capability.

(1) A change in type, number or location of exits.

(2) An increase in passenger capacity above that listed on the type

certificate data sheet.

(3) Changes in passenger distribution within the cabin area that

would increase the number of passengers expected to use an exit pair to a
number greater than the exit rating of the exit pair.

(4) Classifying an exit as an "excess" exit in accordance with the

requirements of 5 25.807(c)(6).

(5) Installation of escape slides or other assist means not

previously approved for that model airplane.

(6) Changes to the interior that adversly affect the passengers

access to any emergency exit when the full-scale demonstration was conducted
with significantly greater than minimum access. For example, partitions,
galleys, etc., that restrict the flow of passengers merging from an aisle and

?ar 3
AC 25.803-l 11/13/89

cross aisle, that restrict the crew's ability to determine which exits are
operable, or restrict the crew's ability to balance the passe,nger flow to a
Type A exit or among the operating exits.

Changes in passenger cabin configuration seat pitch aisle width and

passigeway configuration generally have no signiiicant effeci on evacuation if
the minimum type certification requirements are met.

d. A full-scale demonstration should be conductedwhen one or more of the

following conditions occur:

(1) Insufficient test data exist for an analysis, as discussed in

paragraph 6.0.

(2) The type and number of exits is not identical to a previous

approval (a new exit arrangement) and the passenger capacity requested is at
or near the limit permitted by 5 25.807(c). "Near" in this context is
considered within five percent of ihe maximum allowable, not to exceed an
increase of five percent from previously demonstrated arrangement.

NOTE: This would permit installation of additional exits if no increase in

passenger capacity was requested; or a new exit arrangement at a reduced
capacity, i.e., a passenger capacity less than that permitted by 5 25.807(c),
where the capacity is not substantially greater than that previously approved
for the model in question. In any case, each exit's evacuation performance
would have to be verified by test.

(3) The analysis indicates that the number of evacuees expected to

use an exit is higher than has been previously demonstrated for that type
exit.

(4) Crew duties are more complicated or physically demanding than

previously demonstrated, i.e., the crew complement is changed or flight
attendant seats are drastically relocated such that the crew performance as
originally demonstrated is invalidated.

(5) The proposed passenger seating configuration is an increase.of

more than five percent above that which has been previously demonstrated on an
airplane (which need not be the same model as the airplane being reviewed)
with an identical (with respect to type and number of exits) exit
configuration.

The determination that a demonstration or formal analysis is required

is m$e by the FAA. The applicant can participate in this decision process by
preparing a proposal for either running a demonstration or preparing an
analysis. If the proposal is to do an analysis, the applicant should indicate
which previous evacuation demonstrations will be used as the database for the
analysis.

6. GUIDANCE FOR DEMONSTRATING COMPLIANCE WITH 6 25.803.

a. Section 25.803tcl. The following is intended to provide uniform

standards for test conduct to make test results as directly comparable as is
practical.
Par 5
4
.

11/13/89
AC 25.803-l

(1) Upon determination that an actual demonstration will be required,

the applicant should prepare a test plan that outlines such details as time
and place for the demonstration, test vehicle configuration, and flightcrew
training program. This plan should be submitted to the FAA as soon as
possible to allow the FAA time to review the plan and to arrange for
participation of the appropriate FAA organizations.

(2) The phrase "The maximum capacity... for which certification is

requested," refers to the airplane model presented for certification.

(3) To constitute a successful test, all passengers and crewmembers

used in the demonstration must be evacuated to the ground or to an off-wing
stand or ramp, if used, within 90 seconds. Use only the number of passengers
for which approved seating is provided, not to exceed the limits of
5 25.807(c) or (d). No credit is given for the number of evacuees on the
ground at 90 seconds if all persons have not been evacuated.

(4) Federal Aviation Administration observers should be stationed

inside the airplane at expected critical locations, and outside the airplane
at each exit to be used. Small airplanes which do not have space for an
onboard observer should provide extra interior video coverage to compensate
for the absence of an official witness.

(5) The airplane should be configured with the minimum aisle and
passage clearance expected to be type certificated. This may require
combining features of more than one model. The airplane interior need not be
representative of a specific configuration for the purposes of the test. For
example, galleys and other furnishings may be simulated by mockups; seats need
not have a Technical Standard Order (TSO) authorization, etc. The interior .
configuration should be FAA-approved, as a test configuration, prior to the
test, and should be described in sufficient detail to allow a conformity
inspection.

(6) The phrase "including the number of crewmembers required by the

operating rule" refers to the minimum number of flight crewmembers listed in
the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) and the minimum number of flight attendants
required by 5 121.391 for the passenger capacity to be demonstrated. The
observer seats need not be occupied.

(7) If the demonstration fails due to mechanical problems such as

failure of a door or slide, the demonstration may be repeated after corrective
action is identified to the FAA. A different group of passengers and
crewmembers should be used in the repeat demonstration.

b. Section 25.803(c)(3).

(1) If the airplane is equipped with an off-wing assist means, it

should be used during the demonstration in lieu of any stands or ramps.

(2) Safety personnel stationed outside the airplane to prevent injury

to the participants, should not aid participants (until they have cleared the
descent means), interfere with the evacuation process, or position the assist
means following its deployment.

92, f 5
AC 25.803-l 11/13/89 ’

Section 25.803(c)(5)- The emergency descent dev ices used in the

demoiitration should be those intended to be in the airp lane type design. The
slide certification program should have progressed to the point where the
system is reliable and can be expected to perform safely during the
demonstration.

d. Section 25.803(c)(7).

(1) Evacuation demonstrations using crewmembers meeting the

requirements of 5 25.803(c)(7)(ii) are conducted to demonstrate the evacuation
capability of the airplane. Therefore, there are no specific crew training
requirements for the demonstration.

(2) Evacuation demonstrations intended to meet the requirements of

5 25.803(c) and 5 121.291(a)(l) should use crewmembers who meet the
requirements of 5 25.803(c)(7)(i). These demonstrations are conducted to
demonstrate the evacuation capability of the airplane and to demonstrate the
effectiveness of the crewmembers' emergency training program and evacuation
procedures.

(3) Flight attendants should be positioned at the most critical (with

respect to executing their evacuation duties) cabin locations consistent with
g 121.391. The flight attendants should be seated near operative and
inoperative exits.

(4) Following the test start signal, the flightcrew should simulate
the time required for normal pilot compartment procedures prior to commencing
evacuation.

(5) Crewmembers in excess of the number required for the

demonstration should be available. The FAA will select the crew that will
participate in the test from this group. Subsequent tests, if required, may
use crewmembers from the group remaining.

e. Section 25.803(c)(7)(i). In order to be considered a "regularly

scheduled line crew," the crew should meet the following requirements:

(1) The crew should be trained in specific duties related to an

emergency evacuation in accordance with an FAA-approved training program (for
evacuation demonstration purposes). This training program need not be a
complete flight attendant training program but should be an emergency
evacuation training program similar in content and duration to the emergency
evacuation portion of training programs approved under Part 121 and
FAA-approved, for evacuation demonstration purposes, prior to the
demonstration. Reference 5 25,803(c)(19).

(2) If the crew to be used for the demonstration has been previously
trained under an operator's FAA-approved program, additional training may be
given when the airplane model or layout to be demonstrated differs from the
one used by that operator. Training in exit operation and passenger
management is especially important for a demonstration of a new model
airplane; however, the crew should not be trained specifically in the conduct
of a demonstration, or receive special training or be assigned duties not

6 Par 6
 AC 25.803-l
11/13/89

normally associated with a Part 121 crew training program. This training
should be similar in content and duration to the training received by a flight
attendant when an operator adds a new model airplane to their operating
certificate.

(3) If extensive training is required (or provided) for successful

conduct of a demonstration, this additional information or training should be
added to the training program of all operators utilizing that demonstration
for compliance with 3 121.291(a)(l).

(4) If the demonstration is not successful and crew procedures are

changed in order to successfully conduct a repeat demonstration, the changes
in procedures should be fully documented.

(5) The crew to be used in the demonstration should participate as

required crewmembers on a regular basis and should not be instructors,
supervisory personnel, worker-organization safety.representatives, or anyone
else expected to have knowledge above that of an average crewmember, with
respect to evacuation demonstrations.

(6) Crewmembers from more than one operator may be used.

f. Section 25.803(c)(8). The following two age-sex distributions have

been found to be equivalent under the provisions of 5 21.21(b)(l) to that
stipulated in this section:

Percent Percent
&I2 of Total of Female

(1) 21-50 80 30

51-59 15 40

60t 5 30
------------------_--------------------
(2) 18-50 75 30

51-60 25 40

9. Section 25.803(8)(iv). The life size dolls should be of appropriate

size and weight to simulate an infant two years old or younger.

h. Section 25.803(c)(8)(v). In addition to those persons prohibited by

the regulation, persons involved in the design or type certification of escape
systems, development of emergency evacuation crew training, or those who have
previously conducted evacuation demonstrations should not be used as
passengers for the demonstration.
.
Section 25.803(c)(91. Passenger seating for the demonstration should
be &dom. It is preferred that passengers be allowed to select their own
seats except as specifically required by 5 25.803(c)(9) and (c)(12). Federal
Aviation Administration observers may subsequently reseat passengers at their
discretion.

Par 6 7
 11/13/89
AC X.803-1

j. Section 25.803(c)(ll~. Simulated carry-on luggage in the form of

small suitcases, gym bags, airplane flight bags, briefcases, etc., filled with
old clothes or newspaper, that will fit under a passenger seat should be
placed in the main aisle(s) with approximately one bag per seat row for each
aisle. Also, some bags should be placed in the cross a'sles and passageways
and pillows and blankets should be scattered in the main aisle(s).

k. Section 25.803(~1(131.
*- . .
(1) Neither the crew nor passengers should hear or otherwise receive
any. indication that the demonstration is about to begin. The first indication
to persons on board the airplane should be the test start signal.

(2) If safety pillows or other equipment unique to the active exits

are employed, passengers and crew should enter the airplane through a tunnel
or other means that prevents them from viewing the airplane exterior.

(3j Video cameras used to record activity inside the airplane should
be positioned so as not to reveal the exits used in this demonstration. This
may require the installation of cameras at inoperative exits.

(4) If exit deactivation is by an external indication (e.g., red

light outside exit), this indication should not be visible from inside the
airplane until after the demonstration has begun. Mechanical deactivation of
exits in a manner not perceptible to crew or passengers prior to attempting to
operate them is preferred.

(5) For those airplanes equipped with emergency descent means, the
means should be installed at inactive exits as well as active exits.

1. Section 25.803(~)(141. The following are guidelines for the applicant

to obtain informed consent from participants in the demonstration and still
comply with the intent of 5 25.803(~)(14). These guidelines are not intended
to be a complete list nor meet any legal requirements. The applicant is
responsible to obtain informed consent and to comply with all local, state and
federal laws and regulations concerning the use of people in tests of this
nature.

(1) The applicant should seek consent under circumstances that

provide the prospective participants sufficient opportunity to consider
whether or not to participate in the demonstration. This will minimize the
possibility of coercion or undue influence.

(2) The prospective participants should be informed of the purpose of

the demonstration and the expected duration of their participation. They
should also be given a description of any logistic procedures to be'followed '
,before and after the demonstration. Details of the test parameters should not
be disclosed.

(3) The participants should be given a description of any reasonably

foreseeable risks or discomforts such as the type or probability of injury
that could be encountered when using an emergency escape slide.

(4) A description of any benefits of the testing should be given.

8 Par 6
ll/ 13/89 AC 25.8133-l

(5) An explanation should be given as to whether any compensation

and/or medical treatments are available if injury occurs and, if so, what they
consist of or where further information may be obtained.

(6) Information on whom to contact for answers to questions should be

given.

(7) A statement should be given that participation is voluntary,

refusal to participate will involve no penalty and that the subject may
discontinue participation at any time without penalty or loss of benefits to
which the subject is otherwise entitled.

(8) The consequences of a person's decision to withdraw from the

demonstration at any given time and procedures for orderly termination of
participation should be explained. This should include the consequences of
the subject attempting to withdraw after the demonstration has started, such
as the possibility of being pushed out of the airplane if the subject stops at
the exit.

(9) The approximate number of participants involved in the

demonstration may be disclosed.

(10) The participants may be told that they are evacuating an

airplane via the escape slides and to follow the instructions of the crew, but
a description of the location or operation of the exits, the conduct of the
demonstration, or additional information not in the normal passenger briefing
should not be given. The prospective passengers may not have the benefit of
prior practice in exit or escape-slide operation or knowledge of the airplane
configuration, since only crewmembers are,required to be properly trained.
Neither crewmembers nor passengers should have participated in a demonstration .
within the preceding six months.

m. Section 25.803(~)(17). In order for the operable exits to be

representative of all of the required emergency exits on the airplane, one
exit from each pair should be used. Flightcrew exits, ventral exits,
tail-cone exits, and exits in the side of the fuselage that are not part of a
pair should not be used for the demonstration (even if additional passenger
capacity has been granted), except for ventral and tail-cone exits used in
conjunction with an exit on the side that has been determined to be equivalent
to an exit pair, such as the aft exits on the MD-81 and 82. (The MD-81 and
MD-82 have a tail-cone exit and a Type I exit which is located on the
left-hand side of the fuselage, aft of the wing. The FAA has determined that
these two exits form an exit pair.)

n. Section 25.803(c)f20).

(1) The "acceptance rate" of the stand or ramp refers to the width af
the passage to the stand or ramp.

(2) The test is complete when the last evacuee (passenger or crew)
has cleared the assist means and has both feet on the ground or ramp (if
provided at the off-wing exit).

Par 6 9
AC 25.803-l 11/13/89

0. Section 25.8031di.

(1) The preamble to Amendment 25-46 makes it clear that adequate test
data are a prerequisite for considering substantiation of airplane evacuation
capability using analysis instead of conducting a full-scale demonstration.
It is intended that the analysis be a conservative prediction of the results
that would be achieved if a full-scale demonstration were conducted. As such,
the assumptions used should be conservative.

(2) Full-scale demonstrations should be required whenever one of the

conditions specified in paragraph 5-b. cannot be substantiated by analysis.

(3) There are many factors that should be evaluated to determine the
adequacy of data used to support an evacuation analysis. The data used in an
evacuation analysis should be based on actual demonstrations used to show
compliance with 5 25.803(c) or 5 121.291 or other appropriate tests such as
demonstrations of portions of an airplane cabin conducted under the conditions
of 5 25.803(c). It should not include data from mini-evacuations conducted
under 5 121.291(b), escape-slide evacuation rate tests conducted under the
Technical Standard Order (TSO), or "Latin-square" (see FAA Order FS8110-12,
dated May 21, 1964) tests that do not meet all the requirements of
5 25.803(c).

(4) Test data to be used as a basis for analysis should be derived

from demonstrations which are consistent with the type demonstration that
would be conducted for the model in question. That is, tests which would be
currently unacceptable as showing compliance with 5 25.803(c) should not be
used as a basis for analysis.

(5) In order to preclude extending an analysis to a completely new

airplane exit arrangement and passenger capacity, a comparative analysis
should be made with a full-scale demonstration of an airplane that has
identical type and number of exits. As noted in paragraph 5.d.(2), it would
be possible to analyze a modified exit arrangement at a reduced passenger
capacity. The reduced capacity should be approved on the airplane used for
comparison as desribed above. The airplane under consideration shouid also be
compared to previous approvals of similar airplanes and should consider
passenger capacity, passenger distribution, aisles, cross aisles, crew
stations, crew duties, exit locations, and exit distribution. Any differences
should be examined for their effect on evacuation capability. It may be
necessary to conduct partial evacuation demonstrations to substantiate
particular aspects of the airplane design for which insufficient data exist.

(6) Evacuation data from previous full-scale demonstrations on the

same model airplane should be used as the primary source for an analysis.
Data from different model airplanes may be conservatively applied for the same
exit types if it can be shown that the exits on the airplane being analyzed
will produce equivalent evacuation rates considering all the elements noted
below. Different series of the same airplane are considered to be the same
model. For example, the 737-100 and 737-200 are the same model, and since the
exits are identical, demonstrations on one of these airplanes are the best
source of data for analysis on the second.

Par 6
10
 AC 25.803-l
11/13/89

(7) Each exit should be evaluated considering the time for the crew
to reach their assigned evacuation station, time to fully open the exit, slide
inflation time, evacuee hesitation, time for an evacuee to traverse the slide,
evacuation rate, passenger distribution within the cabin, and the passenger
management duties of the crew.

(8) Evacuation rate data should include average passenger flow rates
.. for each type of exit, considering the internal constraints as well as the
escape slide being analyzed. This average should include as many
demonstrations as possible, but no less than five individual exit rates for
each type (A, I, III, etc.) of exit being analyzed for data applied to a
different model. Data from the same model airplane should include three exit
rates per exit type or should otherwise be applied conservatively.
Conversely, a derivative model whose only difference from a demonstrated model
is a shortened fuselage (door/slide mechanisms identical) could be analyzed in
a simplified fashion.

(9) The passenger distribution within the airplane with respect to

the exits should be evaluated to determine the number of persons likely to use
each exit. The highest passenger seating density expected in each area of the
cabin should be considered. Critical points such as aisles, passageways, and
points where aisles and cross aisles meet should be evaluated for factors that
may limit evacuation rate versus the arrangements actually demonstrated.

(10) The analysis should also include an evaluation of the duties the
crewmembers are expected to perform to assure that those duties are no more
difficult than those performed during a successful full-scale demonstration.
This is of particular importance when considering the performance of the crew
in directing passengers to usable exits and redirection of passengers during a.
demonstration in an attempt to balance the number of passengers using each
exit.

(11) As a general guideline, evacuation analyses should be at least

informally coordinated with the certificating office for a given model to
ensure that all factors that may have been significant in the original
zzizz .

LEROY A. KEITH -
Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate
Aircraft Certification Service

Par 6 11