AC 91-70A 8/12/10
Page 124 Par 10-3
to fly the normal system and carefully monitor its performance using any additional NAVAIDs
available. In the unlikely event that a total navigation failure occurs and other aids are
unavailable, the only action may be to fly by contingency DR using the flight plan headings and
times. Under these circumstances, flightcrews should continue to use all means available to
obtain as much navigational information as possible. Flightcrews should be alert for visual
sightings of other aircraft, since a hazard may exist due to an inadvertent deviation from the
assigned track. In some cases, it may be possible to establish and maintain visual contact with
another aircraft on the same track.
e. Recommended Action Following a Divergence Between Systems. Since a small
divergence between systems may be normal, evaluate the significance of the divergence. In
general terms, if the divergence is less than 10 NM, the best course may be to closely monitor
system performance and continue to steer the system considered most accurate. If the divergence
between systems is greater than 10 NM, it may degrade one of the systems. Therefore, make
attempts to determine which system may be faulty. If you cannot determine the faulty system
using the practices described in this section, and both systems appear normal, the action most
likely to limit gross tracking error may be to position the aircraft so that the actual track is
midway between the cross-track differences for as long as the position uncertainty exists. Advise
ATC that you are experiencing navigation difficulties so that you may adjust separation criteria
as necessary. Give consideration to abandoning this “split-the-difference” practice if the
divergence exceeds the separation criteria currently in effect on the route of flight. If a
divergence of this magnitude occurs and you cannot isolate the faulty system, the best course
may be to fly by contingency procedures using the best known wind information. However, in
some cases, the best known information may be flight plan headings and times.
10-4. PROVING TESTS AND VALIDATION FLIGHTS. Title 14 CFR parts 121 and 135
require evaluation of an operator’s ability to conduct operations safely and in accordance with
the applicable regulations before issuing an operating certificate or authorizing a certificate
holder to serve an area or route. The testing method used by the FAA to determine an operator’s
capabilities are validation flights. Sections 121.93, 121.113, and 135.145 require an operator to
demonstrate the ability to conduct operations over proposed routes or areas in compliance with
regulatory requirements before receiving FAA authority to conduct these operations. The FAA
requires validation flights for authorization to add any areas of operation beyond the continent of
North America and Mexico, and before issuing authorization for special means of navigation.
Though proving tests and validation flights satisfy different requirements, it is common practice
for operators to conduct both tests simultaneously. However, validation flights are important to
consideration of oceanic operations (14 CFR part 119, § 119.59).
a. Validation Flights. Sections 121.93, 121.113, and 135.145 require operators to show
the capability to conduct line operations safely and in compliance with regulatory requirements
before receiving authorization to conduct those operations in revenue service. The most common
method of validating an operator’s capability is to observe flight operations. The FAA normally
requires validation flights before issuing OpSpecs granting authority to conduct operations
beyond the populated areas of the North American (NAM) continent. When the FAA conducts a
validation flight, they conduct an in-depth review of the applicable portions of the operator’s
proposed procedures, including flight following, training programs, manuals, facilities, and
maintenance programs. There are four situations that require validation flights in association