Transport Canada has issued certification paperwork for the Gulfstream G500 and G600 and it seemed to come with strings attached. The Type Certificate Data Sheet (copied below) lists the certification basis for the two late-model bizjets that were at the center of a diplomatic tiff involving President Trump last month. But rather than just accept the FAA certifications, which were approved five years ago, Transport Canada added a list of “additional requirements” for the certifications. It’s not clear if Gulfstream has addressed these apparent deficiencies and they are simply being listed on the document or whether they are outstanding items that need attention from Gulfstream. We’ve asked Gulfstream and Transport Canada for elaboration, but the email was sent over the weekend and we don’t expect an immediate response. Smart Aviator Editor Larry Anglisano toured the avionics suite of the G600 at NBAA 2025 last October.
The document flags nine sections of its certification master list where the ultramodern aircraft apparently came up short. They include stall warning, lift and drag devices controls, lift and drag devices indicator, engines, fuel system (general), aeroplane operations after cold soak, powerplant limitations, and miscellaneous markings and placards. Whether the items listed on the data sheet were responsible for the delay in certification is also not clear. The certifications of Gulfstream’s two latest designs, the G700 and G800, have not yet been published. Last month, Trump threatened to “decertify” Canadian aircraft operating in the U.S. and said he would impose 50% tariffs on Bombardier products if the certification of all four Gulfstream products weren’t expedited.
It is worth adding that the type certificate is only applicable to three individual aircraft serial numbers, too. As NOTE 1 says:
“The addition of eligible serial numbers within this aircraft series to this Type
Certificate Data Sheet requires an additional review and acceptance of several
aspects including (but not limited to) the specific configuration of the serial
number, and the approved publications including the Aircraft Flight Manual
applicable to the serial number in question. Contact Transport Canada”
“If this ice builds up, it can block fuel lines or filters, potentially causing engine power loss or even failure.
This is a known concern with the G700 and G800, as when the FAA certified the aircraft, it did so by granting a temporary exemption for this issue, valid through 2026. This exemption allows Gulfstream to deliver planes to customers while they finish the required full-scale icing tests.” (Hartley, Simple Flying, February 3, 2026).
Bilateral agreements with Canada were signed June 12, 2000. It’s signing acknowledges reciprocity and collaborative agreement in Certification regulations and commitments to safety. FAA certification renders implied acceptance by Canada in this action.
What holds up this agreement for Gulfstream is a change made by the FAA requiring further flight modeling of fuel de-ice systems in the Certification of G700/G800 airplanes; a two-year effort holding up full Certification acceptance by the FAA. Consequently, those airplanes were provided a “conditional” Certification in 2024 with completion scheduled for late 2026. This, to allow Gulfstream the ability to build and sell the aircraft while icing tests were developed and satisfactorily concluded.
Canada pushed back against bilateral acceptance of a product for which full FAA acceptance has yet to be proven. And they have a right to do so. If that means Canada took advantage of the delay in a play to increase its own business jet interests, they can hardly be blamed. The US would do the same.
But self interests take many forms, and while we should ask the FAA why it required further flight tests for fuel system anti-icing systems it has already approved in other models, it may be that a greater political interest will eclipse any meaningful answer to the question.
It is worth being clear that neither type fully meets FAA airworthiness requirements, so it is prudent on TC’s part to make sure that all the non-conforming items are addressed or just deny certification until full airworthiness compliance is achieved.
Agreed.
Certification with IOUs is a classic example of slippery slopes, exceptions becoming rules, and other metaphors of your choice. Requests for certification with IOUs became frequent practice among OEMs of garden variety business jets of average capability and dubious quality in the early 2000s. This is what happens when finance, sales and marketing, and the C suite rather than engineering and flight ops departments determine final quality. For Gulfstream which should be setting the high bar standard in business jets, this practice today is disappointing. Pity the poor crews who have to operate these aircraft hobbled by undue limitations. Don’t ask me how I know.