e-CFR banner

Home
gpo.gov
govinfo.gov

e-CFR Navigation Aids

Browse

Simple Search

Advanced Search

 — Boolean

 — Proximity

 

Search History

Search Tips

Corrections

Latest Updates

User Info

FAQs

Agency List

Incorporation By Reference

eCFR logo

Related Resources

 

Electronic Code of Federal Regulations

e-CFR data is current as of October 21, 2019

Title 14Chapter ISubchapter D → Part 60


Title 14: Aeronautics and Space


PART 60—FLIGHT SIMULATION TRAINING DEVICE INITIAL AND CONTINUING QUALIFICATION AND USE


Contents
§60.1   Applicability.
§60.2   Applicability of sponsor rules to persons who are not sponsors and who are engaged in certain unauthorized activities.
§60.3   Definitions.
§60.4   Qualification Performance Standards.
§60.5   Quality management system.
§60.7   Sponsor qualification requirements.
§60.9   Additional responsibilities of the sponsor.
§60.11   FSTD use.
§60.13   FSTD objective data requirements.
§60.14   Special equipment and personnel requirements for qualification of the FSTD.
§60.15   Initial qualification requirements.
§60.16   Additional qualifications for a currently qualified FSTD.
§60.17   Previously qualified FSTDs.
§60.19   Inspection, continuing qualification evaluation, and maintenance requirements.
§60.20   Logging FSTD discrepancies.
§60.21   Interim qualification of FSTDs for new aircraft types or models.
§60.23   Modifications to FSTDs.
§60.25   Operation with missing, malfunctioning, or inoperative components.
§60.27   Automatic loss of qualification and procedures for restoration of qualification.
§60.29   Other losses of qualification and procedures for restoration of qualification.
§60.31   Recordkeeping and reporting.
§60.33   Applications, logbooks, reports, and records: Fraud, falsification, or incorrect statements.
§60.35   Specific full flight simulator compliance requirements.
§60.37   FSTD qualification on the basis of a Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement (BASA).
Appendix A to Part 60—Qualification Performance Standards for Airplane Full Flight Simulators
Appendix B to Part 60—Qualification Performance Standards for Airplane Flight Training Devices
Appendix C to Part 60—Qualification Performance Standards for Helicopter Full Flight Simulators
Appendix D to Part 60—Qualification Performance Standards for Helicopter Flight Training Devices
Appendix E to Part 60—Qualification Performance Standards for Quality Management Systems for Flight Simulation Training Devices
Appendix F to Part 60—Definitions and Abbreviations for Flight Simulation Training Devices

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40113, and 44701; Pub. L. 111-216, 124 Stat. 2348 (49 U.S.C. 44701 note)

Source: Docket No. FAA-2002-12461, 71 FR 63426, Oct. 30, 2006, unless otherwise noted.

§60.1   Applicability.

(a) This part prescribes the rules governing the initial and continuing qualification and use of all aircraft flight simulation training devices (FSTD) used for meeting training, evaluation, or flight experience requirements of this chapter for flight crewmember certification or qualification.

(b) The rules of this part apply to each person using or applying to use an FSTD to meet any requirement of this chapter.

(c) The requirements of §60.33 regarding falsification of applications, records, or reports also apply to each person who uses an FSTD for training, evaluation, or obtaining flight experience required for flight crewmember certification or qualification under this chapter.

§60.2   Applicability of sponsor rules to persons who are not sponsors and who are engaged in certain unauthorized activities.

(a) The rules of this part that are directed to a sponsor of an FSTD also apply to any person who uses or causes the use of an FSTD when—

(1) That person knows that the FSTD does not have an FAA-approved sponsor; and

(2) The use of the FSTD by that person is nonetheless claimed for purposes of meeting any requirement of this chapter or that person knows or should have known that the person's acts or omissions would cause another person to mistakenly credit use of the FSTD for purposes of meeting any requirement of this chapter.

(b) A situation in which paragraph (a) of this section would not apply to a person would be when each of the following conditions are met:

(1) The person sold or leased the FSTD and merely represented to the purchaser or lessee that the FSTD is in a condition in which it should be able to obtain FAA approval and qualification under this part;

(2) The person does not falsely claim to be the FAA-approved sponsor for the FSTD;

(3) The person does not falsely make representations that someone else is the FAA-approved sponsor of the FSTD at a time when that other person is not the FAA-approved sponsor of the FSTD; and

(4) The person's acts or omissions do not cause another person to detrimentally rely on such acts or omissions for the mistaken conclusion that the FSTD is FAA-approved and qualified under this part at the time the FSTD is sold or leased.

§60.3   Definitions.

In addition to the definitions in part 1 of this chapter, other terms and definitions applicable to this part are found in appendix F of this part.

§60.4   Qualification Performance Standards.

The Qualification Performance Standards (QPS) are published in appendices to this part as follows:

(a) Appendix A contains the QPS for Airplane Flight Simulators.

(b) Appendix B contains the QPS for Airplane Flight Training Devices.

(c) Appendix C contains the QPS for Helicopter Flight Simulators.

(d) Appendix D contains the QPS for Helicopter Flight Training Devices.

(e) Appendix E contains the QPS for Quality Management Systems for FSTDs.

(f) Appendix F contains the QPS for Definitions and Abbreviations for FSTDs.

§60.5   Quality management system.

(a) After May 30, 2010, no sponsor may use or allow the use of or offer the use of an FSTD for flight crewmember training or evaluation or for obtaining flight experience to meet any requirement of this chapter unless the sponsor has established and follows a quality management system (QMS), currently approved by the National Simulator Program Manager (NSPM), for the continuing surveillance and analysis of the sponsor's performance and effectiveness in providing a satisfactory FSTD for use on a regular basis as described in QPS appendix E of this part.

(b) The QMS program must provide a process for identifying deficiencies in the program and for documenting how the program will be changed to address these deficiencies.

(c) Whenever the NSPM finds that the QMS program does not adequately address the procedures necessary to meet the requirements of this part, the sponsor must, after notification by the NSPM, change the program so the procedures meet the requirements of this part. Each such change must be approved by the NSPM prior to implementation.

(d) Within 30 days after the sponsor receives a notice described in paragraph (c) of this section, the sponsor may file a petition with the Executive Director of Flight Standards Service (the Executive Director) for reconsideration of the NSPM finding. The sponsor must address its petition to the Executive Director, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591. The filing of such a petition to reconsider stays the notice pending a decision by the Executive Director. However, if the Executive Director finds that there is a situation that requires immediate action in the interest of safety in air commerce, he may, upon a statement of the reasons, require a change effective without stay.

[Doc. No. FAA-2002-12461, 71 FR 63426, Oct. 30, 2006; Amdt. 60-2, 72 FR 59599, Oct. 22, 2007, as amended by Docket FAA-2018-0119, Amdt. 60-5, 83 FR 9170, Mar. 5, 2018]

§60.7   Sponsor qualification requirements.

(a) A person is eligible to apply to be a sponsor of an FSTD if the following conditions are met:

(1) The person holds, or is an applicant for, a certificate under part 119, 141, or 142 of this chapter; or holds, or is an applicant for, an approved flight engineer course in accordance with part 63 of this chapter.

(2) The FSTD will be used, or will be offered for use, in the sponsor's FAA-approved flight training program for the aircraft being simulated as evidenced in a request for evaluation submitted to the NSPM.

(b) A person is a sponsor if the following conditions are met:

(1) The person is a certificate holder under part 119, 141, or 142 of this chapter or has an approved flight engineer course in accordance with part 63 of this chapter.

(2) The person has—

(i) Operations specifications authorizing the use of the specific aircraft or set of aircraft and has an FAA-approved training program under which at least one FSTD, simulating the aircraft or set of aircraft and for which the person is the sponsor, is used by the sponsor as described in paragraphs (b)(5) or (b)(6) of this section; or

(ii) Training specifications or an FAA-approved course of training under which at least one FSTD, simulating that aircraft or set of aircraft and for which the person is the sponsor, is used by the sponsor as described in paragraphs (b)(5) or (b)(6) of this section.

(3) The person has a quality management system currently approved by the NSPM in accordance with §60.5.

(4) The NSPM has accepted the person as the sponsor of the FSTD and that acceptance has not been withdrawn by the FAA.

(5) At least one FSTD (as referenced in paragraph (b)(2)(i) or (b)(2)(ii) of this section) that is initially qualified on or after May 30, 2008, is used within the sponsor's FAA-approved flight training program for the aircraft or set of aircraft at least once within the 12-month period following the initial/upgrade evaluation, and at least once within each subsequent 12-month period thereafter.

(6) At least one FSTD (as referenced in paragraph (b)(2)(i) or (b)(2)(ii) of this section) that was qualified before May 30, 2008, is used within the sponsor's FAA-approved flight training program for the aircraft or set of aircraft at least once within the 12-month period following the first continuing qualification evaluation conducted by the NSPM after May 30, 2008 and at least once within each subsequent 12-month period thereafter.

(c) If the use requirements of paragraphs (b)(2) and either (b)(5) or (b)(6) of this section are not met, the person will forfeit the right to sponsor that FSTD and that person will not be eligible to apply to sponsor that FSTD for at least 12 calendar months following the expiration of the qualification status.

(d) In addition to the FSTD described in paragraph (b) of this section, an FSTD sponsor may sponsor any number of other FSTDs regardless of specific aircraft or set of aircraft provided either—

(1) During the preceding 12-month period, all of the other FSTDs are used within the sponsor's or another certificate holder's FAA-approved flight training program for the aircraft or set of aircraft simulated; or

(2) The sponsor obtains a written statement at least annually from a qualified pilot who has flown the aircraft or set of aircraft (as appropriate) during the preceding 12-month period stating that the subject FSTD's performance and handling qualities, within the normal operating envelope, represent the aircraft or set of aircraft described in the FAA Type Certificate and the type data sheet, if appropriate. The sponsor must retain the two most current written statements for review by the NSPM.

[Doc. No. FAA-2002-12461, 71 FR 63426, Oct. 30, 2006; Amdt. 60-2, 72 FR 59599, Oct. 22, 2007]

§60.9   Additional responsibilities of the sponsor.

(a) The sponsor must allow the NSPM upon request to inspect the FSTD as soon as practicable. This inspection may include all records and documents relating to the FSTD, to determine its compliance with this part.

(b) The sponsor must do the following for each FSTD:

(1) Establish a mechanism to receive written comments regarding the FSTD and its operation in accordance with the QPS appendix E of this part.

(2) Post in or adjacent to the FSTD the Statement of Qualification issued by the NSPM. An electronic copy of the Statement of Qualification that may be accessed by an appropriate terminal or display in or adjacent to the FSTD is satisfactory.

(c) Each sponsor of an FSTD must identify to the NSPM by name, one individual to be the management representative (MR).

(1) One person may serve as an MR for more than one FSTD, but one FSTD must not have more than one person serving in this capacity.

(2) Each MR must be an employee of the sponsor with the responsibility and authority to—

(i) Monitor the on-going qualification of assigned FSTDs to ensure that all matters regarding FSTD qualification are being carried out as provided for in this part;

(ii) Ensure that the QMS is properly established, implemented, and maintained by overseeing the structure (and modifying where necessary) of the QMS policies, practices, and procedures; and

(iii) Regularly brief sponsor's management on the status of the on-going FSTD qualification program and the effectiveness and efficiency of the QMS.

(3) The MR serves as the primary contact point for all matters between the sponsor and the NSPM regarding the qualification of that FSTD as provided for in this part.

(4) The MR may delegate the duties described in paragraph (c)(2) and (c)(3) of this section to an individual at each of the sponsor's locations.

§60.11   FSTD use.

No person may use or allow the use of or offer the use of an FSTD for flight crewmember training or evaluation or for obtaining flight experience to meet any of the requirements under this chapter unless, in accordance with the QPS for the specific device, the FSTD meets all of the following:

(a) Has a single sponsor who is qualified under §60.7. The sponsor may arrange with another person for services of document preparation and presentation, as well as FSTD inspection, maintenance, repair, and servicing; however, the sponsor remains responsible for ensuring that these functions are conducted in a manner and with a result of continually meeting the requirements of this part.

(b) Is qualified as described in the Statement of Qualification.

(c) Remains qualified, through satisfactory inspection, continuing qualification evaluations, appropriate maintenance, and use requirements in accordance with this part and the applicable QPS.

(d) Functions during day-to-day training, evaluation, or flight experience activities with the software and hardware that was evaluated as satisfactory by the NSPM and, if modified, modified only in accordance with the provisions of this part. However, this section does not apply to routine software or hardware changes that do not fall under the requirements of §60.23.

(e) Is operated in accordance with the provisions and limitations of §60.25.

§60.13   FSTD objective data requirements.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) and (c) of this section, for the purposes of validating FSTD performance and handling qualities during evaluation for qualification, the data made available to the NSPM (the validation data package) must include the aircraft manufacturer's flight test data and all relevant data developed after the type certificate was issued (e.g., data developed in response to an airworthiness directive) if such data results from a change in performance, handling qualities, functions, or other characteristics of the aircraft that must be considered for flight crewmember training, evaluation, or for meeting experience requirements of this chapter.

(b) The validation data package may contain flight test data from a source in addition to or independent of the aircraft manufacturer's data in support of an FSTD qualification, but only if this data is gathered and developed by that source in accordance with flight test methods, including a flight test plan, as described in the applicable QPS.

(c) The validation data package may also contain predicted data, engineering simulation data, data from pilot owner or pilot operating manuals, or data from public domain sources, provided this data is acceptable to the NSPM. If found acceptable the data may then be used in particular applications for FSTD qualification.

(d) Data or other material or elements must be submitted in a form and manner acceptable to the NSPM.

(e) The NSPM may require additional objective data, which may include flight testing if necessary, if the validation data package does not support FSTD qualification requirements as described in this part and the applicable QPS appendix.

(f) When an FSTD sponsor learns, or is advised by an aircraft manufacturer or other data provider, that an addition to, an amendment to, or a revision of data that may relate to FSTD performance or handling characteristics is available, the sponsor must notify the NSPM as described in the applicable QPS.

§60.14   Special equipment and personnel requirements for qualification of the FSTD.

When notified by the NSPM, the sponsor must make available all special equipment and qualified personnel needed to accomplish or assist in the accomplishment of tests during initial qualification, continuing qualification, or special evaluations.

§60.15   Initial qualification requirements.

(a) For each FSTD, the sponsor must submit a request to the NSPM to evaluate the FSTD for initial qualification at a specific level and simultaneously request the Training Program Approval Authority (TPAA) forward a concurring letter to the NSPM. The request must be submitted in the form and manner described in the applicable QPS.

(b) The management representative described in §60.9(c) must sign a statement (electronic signature is acceptable for electronic transmissions) after confirming the following:

(1) The performance and handling qualities of the FSTD represent those of the aircraft or set of aircraft within the normal operating envelope. This determination must be made by a pilot(s) meeting the requirements of paragraph (d) of this section after having flown all of the Operations Tasks listed in the applicable QPS appendix relevant to the qualification level of the FSTD. Exceptions, if any, must be noted. The name of the person(s) making this determination must be available to the NSPM upon request.

(2) The FSTD systems and sub-systems (including the simulated aircraft systems) functionally represent those in the aircraft or set of aircraft. This determination must be made by the pilot(s) described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, or by a person(s) trained on simulator systems/sub-systems and trained on the operation of the simulated aircraft systems, after having exercised the operation of the FSTD and the pertinent functions available through the Instructor Operating Station(s). Exceptions, if any, must be noted. The name of the person(s) making this determination must be available to the NSPM upon request.

(3) The cockpit represents the configuration of the specific type; or aircraft make, model, and series aircraft being simulated, as appropriate. This determination must be made by the pilot(s) described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, or by a person(s) trained on the configuration and operation of the aircraft simulated. Exceptions, if any, must be noted. The name of the person(s) making this determination must be available to the NSPM upon request.

(c) Except for those FSTDs previously qualified and described in §60.17, each FSTD evaluated for initial qualification must meet the standard that is in effect at the time of the evaluation. However—

(1) If the FAA publishes a change to the existing standard or publishes a new standard for the evaluation for initial qualification, a sponsor may request that the NSPM apply the standard that was in effect when an FSTD was ordered for delivery if the sponsor—

(i) Within 30 days of the publication of the change to the existing standard or publication of the new standard, notifies the NSPM that an FSTD has been ordered;

(ii) Within 90 days of the NSPM notification described in paragraph (c)(1)(i) of this section, requests that the standard in effect at the time the order was placed be used for the evaluation for initial qualification; and

(iii) The evaluation is conducted within 24 months following the publication of the change to the existing standard or publication of the new standard.

(2) This notification must include a description of the FSTD; the anticipated qualification level of the FSTD; the make, model, and series of aircraft simulated; and any other pertinent information.

(3) Any tests, tolerances, or other requirements that are current at the time of the evaluation may be used during the initial evaluation, at the request of the sponsor, if the sponsor provides acceptable updates to the required qualification test guide.

(4) The standards used for the evaluation for initial qualification will be used for all subsequent evaluations of the FSTD.

(5) An FSTD sponsor or FSTD manufacturer may submit a request to the Administrator for approval of a deviation from the QPS requirements as defined in Appendix A through Appendix D of this part.

(i) Requests for deviation must be submitted in a form and manner acceptable to the Administrator and must provide sufficient justification that the deviation meets or exceeds the testing requirements and tolerances as specified in the part 60 QPS or will otherwise not adversely affect the fidelity and capability of the FSTDs evaluated and qualified under the deviation.

(ii) The Administrator may consider deviation from the minimum requirements tables, the objective testing tables, the functions and subjective testing tables, and other supporting tables and requirements in the part 60 QPS.

(iii) Deviations may be issued to an FSTD manufacturer for the initial qualification of multiple FSTDs, subject to terms and limitations as determined by Administrator. Approved deviations will become a part of the permanent qualification basis of the individual FSTD and will be noted in the FSTD's Statement of Qualification.

(iv) If the FAA publishes a change to the existing part 60 standards as described in paragraph (c)(1) of this section or issues an FSTD Directive as described in §60.23(b), which conflicts with or supersedes an approved deviation, the Administrator may terminate or revise a grant of deviation authority issued under this paragraph.

(d) The pilot(s) who contributes to the confirmation statement required by paragraph (b) of this section must—

(1) Be designated by the sponsor; and

(2) Be qualified in—

(i) The aircraft or set of aircraft being simulated; or

(ii) For aircraft not yet issued a type certificate, or aircraft not previously operated by the sponsor or not having previous FAA-approved training programs conducted by the sponsor, an aircraft similar in size and configuration.

(e) The subjective tests that form the basis for the statements described in paragraph (b) of this section and the objective tests referenced in paragraph (f) of this section must be accomplished at the sponsor's training facility or other sponsor designated location where training will take place, except as provided for in the applicable QPS.

(f) The person seeking to qualify the FSTD must provide the NSPM access to the FSTD for the length of time necessary for the NSPM to complete the required evaluation of the FSTD for initial qualification, which includes the conduct and evaluation of objective and subjective tests, including general FSTD requirements, as described in the applicable QPS, to determine that the FSTD meets the standards in that QPS.

(g) When the FSTD passes an evaluation for initial qualification, the NSPM issues a Statement of Qualification that includes all of the following:

(1) Identification of the sponsor.

(2) Identification of the make, model, and series of the aircraft or set of aircraft being simulated.

(3) Identification of the configuration of the aircraft or set of aircraft being simulated (e.g., engine model or models, flight instruments, or navigation or other systems).

(4) A statement that the FSTD is qualified as either a full flight simulator or a flight training device.

(5) Identification of the qualification level of the FSTD.

(6) A statement that (with the exception of the noted exclusions for which the FSTD has not been subjectively tested by the sponsor or the NSPM and for which qualification is not sought) the qualification of the FSTD includes the tasks set out in the applicable QPS appendix relevant to the qualification level of the FSTD.

(7) A statement referencing any deviations that have been granted and included in the permanent qualification basis of the FSTD.

(h) After the NSPM completes the evaluation for initial qualification, the sponsor must update the Qualification Test Guide (QTG), with the results of the FAA-witnessed tests together with the results of all the objective tests described in the applicable QPS.

(i) Upon issuance of the Statement of Qualification the updated QTG becomes the Master Qualification Test Guide (MQTG). The MQTG must be made available to the NSPM upon request.

[Docket No. FAA-2002-12461, 71 FR 63426, Oct. 30, 2006, as amended by Docket FAA-2014-0391, Amdt. 60-4, 81 FR 18217, Mar. 30, 2016]

§60.16   Additional qualifications for a currently qualified FSTD.

(a) A currently qualified FSTD is required to undergo an additional qualification process if a user intends to use the FSTD for meeting training, evaluation, or flight experience requirements of this chapter beyond the qualification issued for that FSTD. This process consists of the following:

(1) The sponsor:

(i) Must submit to the NSPM all modifications to the MQTG that are required to support the additional qualification.

(ii) Must describe to the NSPM all modifications to the FSTD that are required to support the additional qualification.

(iii) Must submit to the NSPM a confirmation statement as described in §60.15(c) that a pilot, designated by the sponsor in accordance with §60.15(d), has subjectively evaluated the FSTD in those areas not previously evaluated.

(2) The FSTD must successfully pass an evaluation—

(i) Consisting of all the elements of an initial evaluation for qualification in those circumstances where the NSPM has determined that all the elements of an initial evaluation for qualification is necessary; or

(ii) Consisting of those elements of an initial evaluation for qualification designated as necessary by the NSPM.

(b) In making the determinations described in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, the NSPM considers factors including the existing qualification of the FSTD, any modifications to the FSTD hardware or software that are involved, and any additions or modifications to the MQTG.

(c) The FSTD is qualified for the additional uses when the NSPM issues an amended Statement of Qualification in accordance with §60.15(h).

(d) The sponsor may not modify the FSTD except as described in §60.23.

§60.17   Previously qualified FSTDs.

(a) Unless otherwise specified by an FSTD Directive, further referenced in the applicable QPS, or as specified in paragraph (e) of this section, an FSTD qualified before May 31, 2016 will retain its qualification basis as long as it continues to meet the standards, including the objective test results recorded in the MQTG and subjective tests, under which it was originally evaluated, regardless of sponsor. The sponsor of such an FSTD must comply with the other applicable provisions of this part.

(b) For each FSTD qualified before May 30, 2008, no sponsor may use or allow the use of or offer the use of such an FSTD after May 30, 2014 for flight crewmember training, evaluation or flight experience to meet any of the requirements of this chapter, unless that FSTD has been issued a Statement of Qualification, including the Configuration List and the List of Qualified Tasks in accordance with the procedures set out in the applicable QPS.

(c) If the FSTD qualification is lost under §60.27 and—

(i) Restored under §60.27 in less than (2) years, then the qualification basis (in terms of objective tests and subjective tests) for the re-qualification will be those against which the FSTD was originally evaluated and qualified.

(ii) Not restored under §60.27 for two (2) years or more, then the qualification basis (in terms of objective tests and subjective tests) for the re-qualification will be those standards in effect and current at the time of re-qualification application.

(d) Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section, any change in FSTD qualification level initiated on or after May 30, 2008 requires an evaluation for initial qualification in accordance with this part.

(e) A sponsor may request that an FSTD be permanently downgraded. In such a case, the NSPM may downgrade a qualified FSTD without requiring and without conducting an initial evaluation for the new qualification level. Subsequent continuing qualification evaluations will use the existing MQTG, modified as necessary to reflect the new qualification level.

(f) When the sponsor has appropriate validation data available and receives approval from the NSPM, the sponsor may adopt tests and associated tolerances described in the current qualification standards as the tests and tolerances applicable for the continuing qualification of a previously qualified FSTD. The updated test(s) and tolerance(s) must be made a permanent part of the MQTG.

[Doc. No. FAA-2002-12461, 71 FR 63426, Oct. 30, 2006; Amdt. 60-2, 72 FR 59599, Oct. 22, 2007, as amended by Docket FAA-2014-0391, Amdt. 60-4, 81 FR 18218, Mar. 30, 2016]

§60.19   Inspection, continuing qualification evaluation, and maintenance requirements.

(a) Inspection. No sponsor may use or allow the use of or offer the use of an FSTD for flight crewmember training, evaluation, or flight experience to meet any of the requirements of this chapter unless the sponsor does the following:

(1) Accomplishes all appropriate objective tests each year as specified in the applicable QPS.

(2) Completes a functional preflight check within the preceding 24 hours.

(b) Continuing qualification evaluation. (1) This evaluation consists of objective tests, and subjective tests, including general FSTD requirements, as described in the applicable QPS or as may be amended by an FSTD Directive.

(2) The sponsor must contact the NSPM to schedule the FSTD for continuing qualification evaluations not later than 60 days before the evaluation is due.

(3) The sponsor must provide the NSPM access to the objective test results in the MQTG and access to the FSTD for the length of time necessary for the NSPM to complete the required continuing qualification evaluations.

(4) The frequency of NSPM-conducted continuing qualification evaluations for each FSTD will be established by the NSPM and specified in the Statement of Qualification.

(5) Continuing qualification evaluations conducted in the 3 calendar months before or after the calendar month in which these continuing qualification evaluations are required will be considered to have been conducted in the calendar month in which they were required.

(6) No sponsor may use or allow the use of or offer the use of an FSTD for flight crewmember training or evaluation or for obtaining flight experience for the flight crewmember to meet any requirement of this chapter unless the FSTD has passed an NSPM-conducted continuing qualification evaluation within the time frame specified in the Statement of Qualification or within the grace period as described in paragraph (b)(5) of this section.

(c) Maintenance. The sponsor is responsible for continuing corrective and preventive maintenance on the FSTD to ensure that it continues to meet the requirements of this part and the applicable QPS appendix. No sponsor may use or allow the use of or offer the use of an FSTD for flight crewmember training, evaluation, or flight experience to meet any of the requirements of this chapter unless the sponsor does the following:

(1) Maintains a discrepancy log.

(2) Ensures that, when a discrepancy is discovered, the following requirements are met:

(i) A description of each discrepancy is entered in the log and remains in the log until the discrepancy is corrected as specified in §60.25(b).

(ii) A description of the corrective action taken for each discrepancy, the identity of the individual taking the action, and the date that action is taken is entered in the log.

(iii) The discrepancy log is kept in a form and manner acceptable to the Administrator and is kept in or adjacent to the FSTD. An electronic log that may be accessed by an appropriate terminal or display in or adjacent to the FSTD is satisfactory.

[Docket No. FAA-2002-12461, 71 FR 63426, Oct. 30, 2006, as amended by Docket FAA-2014-0391, Amdt. 60-4, 81 FR 18218, Mar. 30, 2016]

§60.20   Logging FSTD discrepancies.

Each instructor, check airman, or representative of the Administrator conducting training, evaluation, or flight experience, and each person conducting the preflight inspection who discovers a discrepancy, including any missing, malfunctioning, or inoperative components in the FSTD, must write or cause to be written a description of that discrepancy into the discrepancy log at the end of the FSTD preflight or FSTD use session.

§60.21   Interim qualification of FSTDs for new aircraft types or models.

(a) A sponsor may apply for and the NSPM may issue an interim qualification level for an FSTD for a new type or model of aircraft, even though the aircraft manufacturer's aircraft data package is preliminary, if the sponsor provides the following to the satisfaction of the NSPM—

(1) The aircraft manufacturer's data, which consists of at least predicted data, validated by a limited set of flight test data;

(2) The aircraft manufacturer's description of the prediction methodology used to develop the predicted data; and

(3) The QTG test results.

(b) An FSTD that has been issued interim qualification is deemed to have been issued initial qualification unless the NSPM rescinds the qualification. Interim qualification terminates two years after its issuance, unless the NSPM determines that specific conditions warrant otherwise.

(c) Within twelve months of the release of the final aircraft data package by the aircraft manufacturer, but no later than two years after the issuance of the interim qualification status, the sponsor must apply for initial qualification in accordance with §60.15 based on the final aircraft data package approved by the aircraft manufacturer, unless the NSPM determines that specific conditions warrant otherwise.

(d) An FSTD with interim qualification may be modified only in accordance with §60.23.

§60.23   Modifications to FSTDs.

(a) Description of a modification. For the purposes of this part, an FSTD is said to have been modified when:

(1) Equipment or devices intended to simulate aircraft appliances are added to or removed from FSTD, which change the Statement of Qualification or the MQTG; or

(2) Changes are made to either software or hardware that are intended to impact flight or ground dynamics; changes are made that impact performance or handling characteristics of the FSTD (including motion, visual, control loading, or sound systems for those FSTD levels requiring sound tests and measurements); or changes are made to the MQTG. Changes to the MQTG which do not affect required objective testing results or validation data approved during the initial evaluation of the FSTD are not considered modifications under this section.

(b) FSTD Directive. When the FAA determines that FSTD modification is necessary for safety of flight reasons, the sponsor of each affected FSTD must ensure that the FSTD is modified according to the FSTD Directive regardless of the original qualification standards applicable to any specific FSTD.

(c) Using the modified FSTD. The sponsor may not use, or allow the use of, or offer the use of, the FSTD with the proposed modification for flight crewmember training or evaluation or for obtaining flight experience for the flight crewmember to meet any requirement of this chapter unless:

(1) The sponsor has notified the NSPM and the TPAA of their intent to incorporate the proposed modification, and one of the following has occurred;

(i) Twenty-one days have passed since the sponsor notified the NSPM and the TPAA of the proposed modification and the sponsor has not received any response from either the NSPM or the TPAA;

(ii) Twenty-one days have passed since the sponsor notified the NSPM and the TPAA of the proposed modification and one has approved the proposed modification and the other has not responded;

(iii) Fewer than twenty-one days have passed since the sponsor notified the NSPM and the TPAA of the proposed modification and the NSPM and TPAA both approve the proposed modification;

(iv) The sponsor has successfully completed any evaluation the NSPM may require in accordance with the standards for an evaluation for initial qualification or any part thereof before the modified FSTD is placed in service.

(2) The notification is submitted with the content as, and in a form and manner as, specified in the applicable QPS.

(d) User notification. When a modification is made to an FSTD that affects the Statement of Qualification, the sponsor must post an addendum to the Statement of Qualification until such time as a permanent, updated statement is posted.

(e) MQTG update. The MQTG must be updated with current objective test results in accordance with §60.15(h) and (i) and appropriate objective data in accordance with §60.13, each time an FSTD is modified and an objective test or other MQTG section is affected by the modification. If an FSTD Directive is the cause of this update, the direction to make the modification and the record of the modification completion must be filed in the MQTG.

[Docket No. FAA-2002-12461, 71 FR 63426, Oct. 30, 2006, as amended by Docket FAA-2014-0391, Amdt. 60-4, 81 FR 18218, Mar. 30, 2016]

§60.25   Operation with missing, malfunctioning, or inoperative components.

(a) No person may knowingly use or allow the use of or misrepresent the capability of an FSTD for any maneuver, procedure, or task that is to be accomplished to meet training, evaluation, or flight experience requirements of this chapter for flight crewmember certification or qualification when there is a missing, malfunctioning, or inoperative (MMI) component that is required to be present and correctly operate for the satisfactory completion of that maneuver, procedure, or task.

(b) Each MMI component as described in paragraph (a) of this section, or any MMI component installed and required to operate correctly to meet the current Statement of Qualification, must be repaired or replaced within 30 calendar days, unless otherwise required or authorized by the NSPM.

(c) A list of the current MMI components must be readily available in or adjacent to the FSTD for review by users of the device. Electronic access to this list via an appropriate terminal or display in or adjacent to the FSTD is satisfactory. The discrepancy log may be used to satisfy this requirement provided each currently MMI component is listed in the discrepancy log.

§60.27   Automatic loss of qualification and procedures for restoration of qualification.

(a) An FSTD qualification is automatically lost when any of the following occurs:

(1) The FSTD is not used in the sponsor's FAA-approved flight training program in accordance with §60.7(b)(5) or (b)(6) and the sponsor does not obtain and maintain the written statement as described in §60.7(d)(2).

(2) The FSTD is not inspected in accordance with §60.19.

(3) The FSTD is physically moved from one location and installed in a different location, regardless of distance.

(4) The MQTG is missing or otherwise not available and a replacement is not made within 30 days.

(b) If FSTD qualification is lost under paragraph (a) of this section, qualification is restored when either of the following provisions is met:

(1) The FSTD successfully passes an evaluation:

(i) For initial qualification, in accordance with §§60.15 and 60.17(c) in those circumstances where the NSPM has determined that a full evaluation for initial qualification is necessary; or

(ii) For those elements of an evaluation for initial qualification, in accordance with §§60.15 and 60.17(c), as determined to be necessary by the NSPM.

(2) The NSPM advises the sponsor that an evaluation is not necessary.

(c) In making the determinations described in paragraph (b) of this section, the NSPM considers factors including the number of continuing qualification evaluations missed, the number of sponsor-conducted quarterly inspections missed, and the care that had been taken of the device since the last evaluation.

§60.29   Other losses of qualification and procedures for restoration of qualification.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, when the NSPM determines that the FSTD no longer meets qualification standards, the following procedure applies:

(1) The NSPM notifies the sponsor in writing that the FSTD no longer meets some or all of its qualification standards.

(2) The NSPM sets a reasonable period (but not less than 7 days) within which the sponsor may submit written information, views, and arguments on the FSTD qualification.

(3) After considering all material presented, the NSPM notifies the sponsor about the determination with regard to the qualification of the FSTD.

(4) When the NSPM notifies the sponsor that some or all of the FSTD is no longer qualified, the action described in the notification becomes effective not less than 30 days after the sponsor receives that notice unless—

(i) The NSPM finds under paragraph (c) of this section that there is an emergency requiring immediate action with respect to safety in air commerce; or

(ii) The sponsor petitions the Executive Director of Flight Standards Service for reconsideration of the NSPM finding under paragraph (b) of this section.

(b) When a sponsor seeks reconsideration of a decision from the NSPM concerning the FSTD qualification, the following procedure applies:

(1) The sponsor must petition for reconsideration of that decision within 30 days of the date that the sponsor receives a notice that some or all of the FSTD is no longer qualified.

(2) The sponsor must address its petition to the Executive Director, Flight Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591.

(3) A petition for reconsideration, if filed within the 30-day period, suspends the effectiveness of the determination by the NSPM that the FSTD is no longer qualified unless the NSPM has found, under paragraph (c) of this section, that an emergency exists requiring immediate action with respect to safety in air commerce.

(c) If the NSPM find that an emergency exists requiring immediate action with respect to safety in air commerce that makes the procedures set out in this section impracticable or contrary to the public interest:

(1) The NSPM withdraws qualification of some or all of the FSTD and makes the withdrawal of qualification effective on the day the sponsor receives notice of it.

(2) In the notice to the sponsor, the NSPM articulates the reasons for its finding that an emergency exists requiring immediate action with respect to safety in air transportation or air commerce or that makes it impracticable or contrary to the public interest to stay the effectiveness of the finding.

(d) FSTD qualification lost under paragraph (a) or (c) of this section may be restored when either of the following provisions are met:

(1) The FSTD successfully passes an evaluation for initial qualification, in accordance with §§60.15 and 60.17(c) in those circumstances where the NSPM has determined that a full evaluation for initial qualification is necessary; or

(2) The FSTD successfully passes an evaluation for those elements of an initial qualification evaluation, in accordance with §§60.15 and 60.17(c), as determined to be necessary by the NSPM.

(e) In making the determinations described in paragraph (d) of this section, the NSPM considers factors including the reason for the loss of qualification, any repairs or replacements that may have to have been completed, the number of continuing qualification evaluations missed, the number of sponsor-conducted quarterly inspections missed, and the care that had been taken of the device since the loss of qualification.

[Docket No. FAA-2002-12461, 71 FR 63426, Oct. 30, 2006, as amended by Docket FAA-2018-0119, Amdt. 60-5, 83 FR 9170, Mar. 5, 2018]

§60.31   Recordkeeping and reporting.

(a) The FSTD sponsor must maintain the following records for each FSTD it sponsors:

(1) The MQTG and each amendment thereto.

(2) A record of all FSTD modifications affected under §60.23 since the issuance of the original Statement of Qualification.

(3) A copy of all of the following:

(i) Results of the qualification evaluations (initial and each upgrade) since the issuance of the original Statement of Qualification.

(ii) Results of the objective tests conducted in accordance with §60.19(a) for a period of 2 years.

(iii) Results of the previous three continuing qualification evaluations, or the continuing qualification evaluations from the previous 2 years, whichever covers a longer period.

(iv) Comments obtained in accordance with §60.9(b) for a period of at least 90 days.

(4) A record of all discrepancies entered in the discrepancy log over the previous 2 years, including the following:

(i) A list of the components or equipment that were or are missing, malfunctioning, or inoperative.

(ii) The action taken to correct the discrepancy.

(iii) The date the corrective action was taken.

(iv) The identity of the person determining that the discrepancy has been corrected.

(b) The records specified in this section must be maintained in plain language form or in coded form if the coded form provides for the preservation and retrieval of information in a manner acceptable to the NSPM.

§60.33   Applications, logbooks, reports, and records: Fraud, falsification, or incorrect statements.

(a) No person may make, or cause to be made, any of the following:

(1) A fraudulent or intentionally false statement in any application or any amendment thereto, or any other report or test result required by this part.

(2) A fraudulent or intentionally false statement in or a known omission from any record or report that is kept, made, or used to show compliance with this part, or to exercise any privileges under this chapter.

(3) Any reproduction or alteration, for fraudulent purpose, of any report, record, or test result required under this part.

(b) The commission by any person of any act prohibited under paragraph (a) of this section is a basis for any one or any combination of the following:

(1) A civil penalty.

(2) Suspension or revocation of any certificate held by that person that was issued under this chapter.

(3) The removal of FSTD qualification and approval for use in a training program.

(c) The following may serve as a basis for removal of qualification of an FSTD including the withdrawal of approval for use of an FSTD; or denying an application for a qualification:

(1) An incorrect statement, upon which the FAA relied or could have relied, made in support of an application for a qualification or a request for approval for use.

(2) An incorrect entry, upon which the FAA relied or could have relied, made in any logbook, record, or report that is kept, made, or used to show compliance with any requirement for an FSTD qualification or an approval for use.

§60.35   Specific full flight simulator compliance requirements.

(a) No device will be eligible for initial or upgrade qualification to a FFS at Level C or Level D under this part unless it includes the equipment and appliances installed and operating to the extent necessary for the issuance of an airman certificate or rating.

(b) No device will be eligible for initial or upgrade qualification to a FFS at Level A or Level B under this part unless it includes the equipment and appliances installed and operating to the extent necessary for the training, testing, and/or checking that comprise the simulation portion of the requirements for issuance of an airman certificate or rating.

§60.37   FSTD qualification on the basis of a Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement (BASA).

(a) The evaluation and qualification of an FSTD by a contracting State to the Convention on International Civil Aviation for the sponsor of an FSTD located in that contracting State may be used as the basis for issuing a U.S. statement of qualification (see applicable QPS, attachment 4, figure 4) by the NSPM to the sponsor of that FSTD in accordance with—

(1) A BASA between the United States and the Contracting State that issued the original qualification; and

(2) A Simulator Implementation Procedure (SIP) established under the BASA.

(b) The SIP must contain any conditions and limitations on validation and issuance of such qualification by the U.S.

Appendix A to Part 60—Qualification Performance Standards for Airplane Full Flight Simulators

 

Begin Information

This appendix establishes the standards for Airplane FFS evaluation and qualification. The NSPM is responsible for the development, application, and implementation of the standards contained within this appendix. The procedures and criteria specified in this appendix will be used by the NSPM, or a person assigned by the NSPM, when conducting airplane FFS evaluations.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction.

2. Applicability (§§60.1 and 60.2).

3. Definitions (§60.3).

4. Qualification Performance Standards (§60.4).

5. Quality Management System (§60.5).

6. Sponsor Qualification Requirements (§60.7).

7. Additional Responsibilities of the Sponsor (§60.9).

8. FFS Use (§60.11).

9. FFS Objective Data Requirements (§60.13).

10. Special Equipment and Personnel Requirements for Qualification of the FFS (§60.14).

11. Initial (and Upgrade) Qualification Requirements (§60.15).

12. Additional Qualifications for a Currently Qualified FFS (§60.16).

13. Previously Qualified FFSs (§60.17).

14. Inspection, Continuing Qualification Evaluation, and Maintenance Requirements (§60.19).

15. Logging FFS Discrepancies (§60.20).

16. Interim Qualification of FFSs for New Airplane Types or Models (§60.21).

17. Modifications to FFSs (§60.23).

18. Operations With Missing, Malfunctioning, or Inoperative Components (§60.25).

19. Automatic Loss of Qualification and Procedures for Restoration of Qualification (§60.27).

20. Other Losses of Qualification and Procedures for Restoration of Qualification (§60.29).

21. Record Keeping and Reporting (§60.31).

22. Applications, Logbooks, Reports, and Records: Fraud, Falsification, or Incorrect Statements (§60.33).

23. Specific FFS Compliance Requirements (§60.35).

24. [Reserved]

25. FFS Qualification on the Basis of a Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement (BASA) (§60.37).

Attachment 1 to Appendix A to Part 60—General Simulator Requirements.

Attachment 2 to Appendix A to Part 60—FFS Objective Tests.

Attachment 3 to Appendix A to Part 60—Simulator Subjective Evaluation.

Attachment 4 to Appendix A to Part 60—Sample Documents.

Attachment 5 to Appendix A to Part 60—Simulator Qualification Requirements for Windshear Training Program Use.

Attachment 6 to Appendix A to Part 60—FSTD Directives Applicable to Airplane Flight Simulators.

End Information

 

1. Introduction

 

Begin Information

a. This appendix contains background information as well as regulatory and informative material as described later in this section. To assist the reader in determining what areas are required and what areas are permissive, the text in this appendix is divided into two sections: “QPS Requirements” and “Information.” The QPS Requirements sections contain details regarding compliance with the part 60 rule language. These details are regulatory, but are found only in this appendix. The Information sections contain material that is advisory in nature, and designed to give the user general information about the regulation.

b. Questions regarding the contents of this publication should be sent to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Flight Standards Service, National Simulator Program Staff, AFS-205, P.O. Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia, 30320. Telephone contact numbers for the NSP are: phone, 404-474-5620; fax, 404-474-5656. The NSP Internet Web site address is: http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/nsp/. On this Web site you will find an NSP personnel list with telephone and email contact information for each NSP staff member, a list of qualified flight simulation devices, advisory circulars (ACs), a description of the qualification process, NSP policy, and an NSP “In-Works” section. Also linked from this site are additional information sources, handbook bulletins, frequently asked questions, a listing and text of the Federal Aviation Regulations, Flight Standards Inspector's handbooks, and other FAA links.

c. The NSPM encourages the use of electronic media for all communication, including any record, report, request, test, or statement required by this appendix. The electronic media used must have adequate security provisions and be acceptable to the NSPM. The NSPM recommends inquiries on system compatibility, and minimum system requirements are also included on the NSP Web site.

d. Related Reading References.

(1) 14 CFR part 60.

(2) 14 CFR part 61.

(3) 14 CFR part 63.

(4) 14 CFR part 119.

(5) 14 CFR part 121.

(6) 14 CFR part 125.

(7) 14 CFR part 135.

(8) 14 CFR part 141.

(9) 14 CFR part 142.

(10) AC 120-28, as amended, Criteria for Approval of Category III Landing Weather Minima.

(11) AC 120-29, as amended, Criteria for Approving Category I and Category II Landing Minima for part 121 operators.

(12) AC 120-35, as amended, Line Operational Simulations: Line-Oriented Flight Training, Special Purpose Operational Training, Line Operational Evaluation.

(13) AC 120-40, as amended, Airplane Simulator Qualification.

(14) AC 120-41, as amended, Criteria for Operational Approval of Airborne Wind Shear Alerting and Flight Guidance Systems.

(15) AC 120-57, as amended, Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (SMGCS).

(16) AC 150/5300-13, as amended, Airport Design.

(17) AC 150/5340-1, as amended, Standards for Airport Markings.

(18) AC 150/5340-4, as amended, Installation Details for Runway Centerline Touchdown Zone Lighting Systems.

(19) AC 150/5340-19, as amended, Taxiway Centerline Lighting System.

(20) AC 150/5340-24, as amended, Runway and Taxiway Edge Lighting System.

(21) AC 150/5345-28, as amended, Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) Systems.

(22) International Air Transport Association document, “Flight Simulation Training Device Design and Performance Data Requirements,” as amended.

(23) AC 25-7, as amended, Flight Test Guide for Certification of Transport Category Airplanes.

(24) AC 23-8, as amended, Flight Test Guide for Certification of Part 23 Airplanes.

(25) International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Manual of Criteria for the Qualification of Flight Simulation Training Devices, as amended.

(26) Aeroplane Flight Simulation Training Device Evaluation Handbook, Volume I, as amended and Volume II, as amended, The Royal Aeronautical Society, London, UK.

(27) FAA Airman Testing Standards for the Airline Transport Pilot Certificate, Type Ratings, Commercial Pilot Certificate, and Instrument Ratings.

(28) The FAA Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM). An electronic version of the AIM is on the Internet at http://www.faa.gov/atpubs.

(29) Aeronautical Radio, Inc. (ARINC) document number 436, titled Guidelines For Electronic Qualification Test Guide (as amended).

(30) Aeronautical Radio, Inc. (ARINC) document 610, Guidance for Design and Integration of Aircraft Avionics Equipment in Simulators (as amended).

End Information

 

2. Applicability (§§60.1 and 60.2)

 

Begin Information

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.1, Applicability, or to §60.2, Applicability of sponsor rules to persons who are not sponsors and who are engaged in certain unauthorized activities.

End Information

 

3. Definitions (§60.3)

 

Begin Information

See Appendix F of this part for a list of definitions and abbreviations from part 1 and part 60, including the appropriate appendices of part 60.

End Information

 

4. Qualification Performance Standards (§60.4)

 

Begin Information

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.4, Qualification Performance Standards.

End Information

 

5. Quality Management System (§60.5)

 

Begin Information

See Appendix E of this part for additional regulatory and informational material regarding Quality Management Systems.

End Information

 

6. Sponsor Qualification Requirements (§60.7)

 

Begin Information

a. The intent of the language in §60.7(b) is to have a specific FFS, identified by the sponsor, used at least once in an FAA-approved flight training program for the airplane simulated during the 12-month period described. The identification of the specific FFS may change from one 12-month period to the next 12-month period as long as the sponsor sponsors and uses at least one FFS at least once during the prescribed period. No minimum number of hours or minimum FFS periods are required.

b. The following examples describe acceptable operational practices:

(1) Example One.

(a) A sponsor is sponsoring a single, specific FFS for its own use, in its own facility or elsewhere—this single FFS forms the basis for the sponsorship. The sponsor uses that FFS at least once in each 12-month period in the sponsor's FAA-approved flight training program for the airplane simulated. This 12-month period is established according to the following schedule:

(i) If the FFS was qualified prior to May 30, 2008, the 12-month period begins on the date of the first continuing qualification evaluation conducted in accordance with §60.19 after May 30, 2008, and continues for each subsequent 12-month period;

(ii) A device qualified on or after May 30, 2008, will be required to undergo an initial or upgrade evaluation in accordance with §60.15. Once the initial or upgrade evaluation is complete, the first continuing qualification evaluation will be conducted within 6 months. The 12-month continuing qualification evaluation cycle begins on that date and continues for each subsequent 12-month period.

(b) There is no minimum number of hours of FFS use required.

(c) The identification of the specific FFS may change from one 12-month period to the next 12-month period as long as the sponsor sponsors and uses at least one FFS at least once during the prescribed period.

(2) Example Two.

(a) A sponsor sponsors an additional number of FFSs, in its facility or elsewhere. Each additionally sponsored FFS must be—

(i) Used by the sponsor in the sponsor's FAA-approved flight training program for the airplane simulated (as described in §60.7(d)(1));

      OR

(ii) Used by another FAA certificate holder in that other certificate holder's FAA-approved flight training program for the airplane simulated (as described in §60.7(d)(1)). This 12-month period is established in the same manner as in example one;

      OR

(iii) Provided a statement each year from a qualified pilot (after having flown the airplane, not the subject FFS or another FFS, during the preceding 12-month period), stating that the subject FFS's performance and handling qualities represent the airplane (as described in §60.7(d)(2)). This statement is provided at least once in each 12-month period established in the same manner as in example one.

(b) No minimum number of hours of FFS use is required.

(3) Example Three.

(a) A sponsor in New York (in this example, a Part 142 certificate holder) establishes “satellite” training centers in Chicago and Moscow.

(b) The satellite function means that the Chicago and Moscow centers must operate under the New York center's certificate (in accordance with all of the New York center's practices, procedures, and policies; e.g., instructor and/or technician training/checking requirements, record keeping, QMS program).

(c) All of the FFSs in the Chicago and Moscow centers could be dry-leased (i.e., the certificate holder does not have and use FAA-approved flight training programs for the FFSs in the Chicago and Moscow centers) because—

(i) Each FFS in the Chicago center and each FFS in the Moscow center is used at least once each 12-month period by another FAA certificate holder in that other certificate holder's FAA-approved flight training program for the airplane (as described in §60.7(d)(1));

      OR

(ii) A statement is obtained from a qualified pilot (having flown the airplane, not the subject FFS or another FFS, during the preceding 12-month period) stating that the performance and handling qualities of each FFS in the Chicago and Moscow centers represents the airplane (as described in §60.7(d)(2)).

End Information

 

7. Additional Responsibilities of the Sponsor (§60.9)

 

Begin Information

The phrase “as soon as practicable” in §60.9(a) means without unnecessarily disrupting or delaying beyond a reasonable time the training, evaluation, or experience being conducted in the FFS.

End Information

 

8. FFS Use (§60.11)

 

Begin Information

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.11, Simulator Use.

End Information

 

9. FFS Objective Data Requirements (§60.13)

 

Begin QPS Requirements

a. Flight test data used to validate FFS performance and handling qualities must have been gathered in accordance with a flight test program containing the following:

(1) A flight test plan consisting of:

(a) The maneuvers and procedures required for aircraft certification and simulation programming and validation.

(b) For each maneuver or procedure—

(i) The procedures and control input the flight test pilot and/or engineer used.

(ii) The atmospheric and environmental conditions.

(iii) The initial flight conditions.

(iv) The airplane configuration, including weight and center of gravity.

(v) The data to be gathered.

(vi) All other information necessary to recreate the flight test conditions in the FFS.

(2) Appropriately qualified flight test personnel.

(3) An understanding of the accuracy of the data to be gathered using appropriate alternative data sources, procedures, and instrumentation that is traceable to a recognized standard as described in Attachment 2, Table A2E of this appendix.

(4) Appropriate and sufficient data acquisition equipment or system(s), including appropriate data reduction and analysis methods and techniques, as would be acceptable to the FAA's Aircraft Certification Service.

b. The data, regardless of source, must be presented as follows:

(1) In a format that supports the FFS validation process.

(2) In a manner that is clearly readable and annotated correctly and completely.

(3) With resolution sufficient to determine compliance with the tolerances set forth in Attachment 2, Table A2A of this appendix.

(4) With any necessary instructions or other details provided, such as yaw damper or throttle position.

(5) Without alteration, adjustments, or bias. Data may be corrected to address known data calibration errors provided that an explanation of the methods used to correct the errors appears in the QTG. The corrected data may be re-scaled, digitized, or otherwise manipulated to fit the desired presentation.

c. After completion of any additional flight test, a flight test report must be submitted in support of the validation data. The report must contain sufficient data and rationale to support qualification of the FFS at the level requested.

d. As required by §60.13(f), the sponsor must notify the NSPM when it becomes aware that an addition to, an amendment to, or a revision of data that may relate to FFS performance or handling characteristics is available. The data referred to in this paragraph is data used to validate the performance, handling qualities, or other characteristics of the aircraft, including data related to any relevant changes occurring after the type certificate was issued. The sponsor must—

(1) Within 10 calendar days, notify the NSPM of the existence of this data; and

(2) Within 45 calendar days, notify the NSPM of—

(a) The schedule to incorporate this data into the FFS; or

(b) The reason for not incorporating this data into the FFS.

e. In those cases where the objective test results authorize a “snapshot test” or a “series of snapshot tests” results in lieu of a time-history result, the sponsor or other data provider must ensure that a steady state condition exists at the instant of time captured by the “snapshot.” The steady state condition must exist from 4 seconds prior to, through 1 second following, the instant of time captured by the snapshot.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

f. The FFS sponsor is encouraged to maintain a liaison with the manufacturer of the aircraft being simulated (or with the holder of the aircraft type certificate for the aircraft being simulated if the manufacturer is no longer in business), and, if appropriate, with the person having supplied the aircraft data package for the FFS in order to facilitate the notification required by §60.13(f).

g. It is the intent of the NSPM that for new aircraft entering service, at a point well in advance of preparation of the Qualification Test Guide (QTG), the sponsor should submit to the NSPM for approval, a descriptive document (see Table A2C, Sample Validation Data Roadmap for Airplanes) containing the plan for acquiring the validation data, including data sources. This document should clearly identify sources of data for all required tests, a description of the validity of these data for a specific engine type and thrust rating configuration, and the revision levels of all avionics affecting the performance or flying qualities of the aircraft. Additionally, this document should provide other information, such as the rationale or explanation for cases where data or data parameters are missing, instances where engineering simulation data are used or where flight test methods require further explanations. It should also provide a brief narrative describing the cause and effect of any deviation from data requirements. The aircraft manufacturer may provide this document.

h. There is no requirement for any flight test data supplier to submit a flight test plan or program prior to gathering flight test data. However, the NSPM notes that inexperienced data gatherers often provide data that is irrelevant, improperly marked, or lacking adequate justification for selection. Other problems include inadequate information regarding initial conditions or test maneuvers. The NSPM has been forced to refuse these data submissions as validation data for an FFS evaluation. It is for this reason that the NSPM recommends that any data supplier not previously experienced in this area review the data necessary for programming and for validating the performance of the FFS, and discuss the flight test plan anticipated for acquiring such data with the NSPM well in advance of commencing the flight tests.

i. The NSPM will consider, on a case-by-case basis, whether to approve supplemental validation data derived from flight data recording systems, such as a Quick Access Recorder or Flight Data Recorder.

End Information

 

10. Special Equipment and Personnel Requirements for Qualification of the FFSs (§60.14)

 

Begin Information

a. In the event that the NSPM determines that special equipment or specifically qualified persons will be required to conduct an evaluation, the NSPM will make every attempt to notify the sponsor at least one (1) week, but in no case less than 72 hours, in advance of the evaluation. Examples of special equipment include spot photometers, flight control measurement devices, and sound analyzers. Examples of specially qualified personnel include individuals specifically qualified to install or use any special equipment when its use is required.

b. Examples of a special evaluation include an evaluation conducted after an FFS is moved, at the request of the TPAA, or as a result of comments received from users of the FFS that raise questions about the continued qualification or use of the FFS.

End Information

 

11. Initial (and Upgrade) Qualification Requirements (§60.15)

 

Begin QPS Requirements

a. In order to be qualified at a particular qualification level, the FFS must:

(1) Meet the general requirements listed in Attachment 1 of this appendix;

(2) Meet the objective testing requirements listed in Attachment 2 of this appendix; and

(3) Satisfactorily accomplish the subjective tests listed in Attachment 3 of this appendix.

b. The request described in §60.15(a) must include all of the following:

(1) A statement that the FFS meets all of the applicable provisions of this part and all applicable provisions of the QPS.

(2) Unless otherwise authorized through prior coordination with the NSPM, a confirmation that the sponsor will forward to the NSPM the statement described in §60.15(b) in such time as to be received no later than 5 business days prior to the scheduled evaluation and may be forwarded to the NSPM via traditional or electronic means.

(3) A QTG, acceptable to the NSPM, that includes all of the following:

(a) Objective data obtained from traditional aircraft testing or another approved source.

(b) Correlating objective test results obtained from the performance of the FFS as prescribed in the appropriate QPS.

(c) The result of FFS subjective tests prescribed in the appropriate QPS.

(d) A description of the equipment necessary to perform the evaluation for initial qualification and the continuing qualification evaluations.

c. The QTG described in paragraph (a)(3) of this section, must provide the documented proof of compliance with the simulator objective tests in Attachment 2, Table A2A of this appendix.

d. The QTG is prepared and submitted by the sponsor, or the sponsor's agent on behalf of the sponsor, to the NSPM for review and approval, and must include, for each objective test:

(1) Parameters, tolerances, and flight conditions;

(2) Pertinent and complete instructions for the conduct of automatic and manual tests;

(3) A means of comparing the FFS test results to the objective data;

(4) Any other information as necessary, to assist in the evaluation of the test results;

(5) Other information appropriate to the qualification level of the FFS.

e. The QTG described in paragraphs (a)(3) and (b) of this section, must include the following:

(1) A QTG cover page with sponsor and FAA approval signature blocks (see Attachment 4, Figure A4C, of this appendix for a sample QTG cover page).

(2) [Reserved]

(3) An FFS information page that provides the information listed in this paragraph (see Attachment 4, Figure A4B, of this appendix for a sample FFS information page). For convertible FFSs, the sponsor must submit a separate page for each configuration of the FFS.

(a) The sponsor's FFS identification number or code.

(b) The airplane model and series being simulated.

(c) The aerodynamic data revision number or reference.

(d) The source of the basic aerodynamic model and the aerodynamic coefficient data used to modify the basic model.

(e) The engine model(s) and its data revision number or reference.

(f) The flight control data revision number or reference.

(g) The flight management system identification and revision level.

(h) The FFS model and manufacturer.

(i) The date of FFS manufacture.

(j) The FFS computer identification.

(k) The visual system model and manufacturer, including display type.

(l) The motion system type and manufacturer, including degrees of freedom.

(4) A Table of Contents.

(5) A log of revisions and a list of effective pages.

(6) A list of all relevant data references.

(7) A glossary of terms and symbols used (including sign conventions and units).

(8) Statements of Compliance and Capability (SOCs) with certain requirements.

(9) Recording procedures or equipment required to accomplish the objective tests.

(10) The following information for each objective test designated in Attachment 2, Table A2A, of this appendix as applicable to the qualification level sought:

(a) Name of the test.

(b) Objective of the test.

(c) Initial conditions.

(d) Manual test procedures.

(e) Automatic test procedures (if applicable).

(f) Method for evaluating FFS objective test results.

(g) List of all relevant parameters driven or constrained during the automatically conducted test(s).

(h) List of all relevant parameters driven or constrained during the manually conducted test(s).

(i) Tolerances for relevant parameters.

(j) Source of Validation Data (document and page number).

(k) Copy of the Validation Data (if located in a separate binder, a cross reference for the identification and page number for pertinent data location must be provided).

(l) Simulator Objective Test Results as obtained by the sponsor. Each test result must reflect the date completed and must be clearly labeled as a product of the device being tested.

f. A convertible FFS is addressed as a separate FFS for each model and series airplane to which it will be converted and for the FAA qualification level sought. If a sponsor seeks qualification for two or more models of an airplane type using a convertible FFS, the sponsor must submit a QTG for each airplane model, or a QTG for the first airplane model and a supplement to that QTG for each additional airplane model. The NSPM will conduct evaluations for each airplane model.

g. Form and manner of presentation of objective test results in the QTG:

(1) The sponsor's FFS test results must be recorded in a manner acceptable to the NSPM, that allows easy comparison of the FFS test results to the validation data (e.g., use of a multi-channel recorder, line printer, cross plotting, overlays, transparencies).

(2) FFS results must be labeled using terminology common to airplane parameters as opposed to computer software identifications.

(3) Validation data documents included in a QTG may be photographically reduced only if such reduction will not alter the graphic scaling or cause difficulties in scale interpretation or resolution.

(4) Scaling on graphical presentations must provide the resolution necessary to evaluate the parameters shown in Attachment 2, Table A2A of this appendix.

(5) Tests involving time histories, data sheets (or transparencies thereof) and FFS test results must be clearly marked with appropriate reference points to ensure an accurate comparison between the FFS and the airplane with respect to time. Time histories recorded via a line printer are to be clearly identified for cross plotting on the airplane data. Over-plots must not obscure the reference data.

h. The sponsor may elect to complete the QTG objective and subjective tests at the manufacturer's facility or at the sponsor's training facility (or other sponsor designated location where training will take place). If the tests are conducted at the manufacturer's facility, the sponsor must repeat at least one-third of the tests at the sponsor's training facility in order to substantiate FFS performance. The QTG must be clearly annotated to indicate when and where each test was accomplished. Tests conducted at the manufacturer's facility and at the sponsor's designated training facility must be conducted after the FFS is assembled with systems and sub-systems functional and operating in an interactive manner. The test results must be submitted to the NSPM.

i. The sponsor must maintain a copy of the MQTG at the FFS location.

j. All FFSs for which the initial qualification is conducted after May 30, 2014, must have an electronic MQTG (eMQTG) including all objective data obtained from airplane testing, or another approved source (reformatted or digitized), together with correlating objective test results obtained from the performance of the FFS (reformatted or digitized) as prescribed in this appendix. The eMQTG must also contain the general FFS performance or demonstration results (reformatted or digitized) prescribed in this appendix, and a description of the equipment necessary to perform the initial qualification evaluation and the continuing qualification evaluations. The eMQTG must include the original validation data used to validate FFS performance and handling qualities in either the original digitized format from the data supplier or an electronic scan of the original time-history plots that were provided by the data supplier. A copy of the eMQTG must be provided to the NSPM.

k. All other FFSs not covered in subparagraph “j” must have an electronic copy of the MQTG by May 30, 2014. An electronic copy of the MQTG must be provided to the NSPM. This may be provided by an electronic scan presented in a Portable Document File (PDF), or similar format acceptable to the NSPM.

l. During the initial (or upgrade) qualification evaluation conducted by the NSPM, the sponsor must also provide a person who is a user of the device (e.g., a qualified pilot or instructor pilot with flight time experience in that aircraft) and knowledgeable about the operation of the aircraft and the operation of the FFS.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

m. Only those FFSs that are sponsored by a certificate holder as defined in Appendix F of this part will be evaluated by the NSPM. However, other FFS evaluations may be conducted on a case-by-case basis as the Administrator deems appropriate, but only in accordance with applicable agreements.

n. The NSPM will conduct an evaluation for each configuration, and each FFS must be evaluated as completely as possible. To ensure a thorough and uniform evaluation, each FFS is subjected to the general simulator requirements in Attachment 1 of this appendix, the objective tests listed in Attachment 2 of this appendix, and the subjective tests listed in Attachment 3 of this appendix. The evaluations described herein will include, but not necessarily be limited to the following:

(1) Airplane responses, including longitudinal and lateral-directional control responses (see Attachment 2 of this appendix);

(2) Performance in authorized portions of the simulated airplane's operating envelope, to include tasks evaluated by the NSPM in the areas of surface operations, takeoff, climb, cruise, descent, approach, and landing as well as abnormal and emergency operations (see Attachment 2 of this appendix);

(3) Control checks (see Attachment 1 and Attachment 2 of this appendix);

(4) Flight deck configuration (see Attachment 1 of this appendix);

(5) Pilot, flight engineer, and instructor station functions checks (see Attachment 1 and Attachment 3 of this appendix);

(6) Airplane systems and sub-systems (as appropriate) as compared to the airplane simulated (see Attachment 1 and Attachment 3 of this appendix);

(7) FFS systems and sub-systems, including force cueing (motion), visual, and aural (sound) systems, as appropriate (see Attachment 1 and Attachment 2 of this appendix); and

(8) Certain additional requirements, depending upon the qualification level sought, including equipment or circumstances that may become hazardous to the occupants. The sponsor may be subject to Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements.

o. The NSPM administers the objective and subjective tests, which includes an examination of functions. The tests include a qualitative assessment of the FFS by an NSP pilot. The NSP evaluation team leader may assign other qualified personnel to assist in accomplishing the functions examination and/or the objective and subjective tests performed during an evaluation when required.

(1) Objective tests provide a basis for measuring and evaluating FFS performance and determining compliance with the requirements of this part.

(2) Subjective tests provide a basis for:

(a) Evaluating the capability of the FFS to perform over a typical utilization period;

(b) Determining that the FFS satisfactorily simulates each required task;

(c) Verifying correct operation of the FFS controls, instruments, and systems; and

(d) Demonstrating compliance with the requirements of this part.

p. The tolerances for the test parameters listed in Attachment 2 of this appendix reflect the range of tolerances acceptable to the NSPM for FFS validation and are not to be confused with design tolerances specified for FFS manufacture. In making decisions regarding tests and test results, the NSPM relies on the use of operational and engineering judgment in the application of data (including consideration of the way in which the flight test was flown and the way the data was gathered and applied), data presentations, and the applicable tolerances for each test.

q. In addition to the scheduled continuing qualification evaluation, each FFS is subject to evaluations conducted by the NSPM at any time without prior notification to the sponsor. Such evaluations would be accomplished in a normal manner (i.e., requiring exclusive use of the FFS for the conduct of objective and subjective tests and an examination of functions) if the FFS is not being used for flight crewmember training, testing, or checking. However, if the FFS were being used, the evaluation would be conducted in a non-exclusive manner. This non-exclusive evaluation will be conducted by the FFS evaluator accompanying the check airman, instructor, Aircrew Program Designee (APD), or FAA inspector aboard the FFS along with the student(s) and observing the operation of the FFS during the training, testing, or checking activities.

r. Problems with objective test results are handled as follows:

(1) If a problem with an objective test result is detected by the NSP evaluation team during an evaluation, the test may be repeated or the QTG may be amended.

(2) If it is determined that the results of an objective test do not support the level requested but do support a lower level, the NSPM may qualify the FFS at that lower level. For example, if a Level D evaluation is requested and the FFS fails to meet sound test tolerances, it could be qualified at Level C.

s. After an FFS is successfully evaluated, the NSPM issues a Statement of Qualification (SOQ) to the sponsor. The NSPM recommends the FFS to the TPAA, who will approve the FFS for use in a flight training program. The SOQ will be issued at the satisfactory conclusion of the initial or continuing qualification evaluation and will list the tasks for which the FFS is qualified, referencing the tasks described in Table A1B in Attachment 1 of this appendix. However, it is the sponsor's responsibility to obtain TPAA approval prior to using the FFS in an FAA-approved flight training program.

t. Under normal circumstances, the NSPM establishes a date for the initial or upgrade evaluation within ten (10) working days after determining that a complete QTG is acceptable. Unusual circumstances may warrant establishing an evaluation date before this determination is made. A sponsor may schedule an evaluation date as early as 6 months in advance. However, there may be a delay of 45 days or more in rescheduling and completing the evaluation if the sponsor is unable to meet the scheduled date. See Attachment 4 of this appendix, Figure A4A, Sample Request for Initial, Upgrade, or Reinstatement Evaluation.

u. The numbering system used for objective test results in the QTG should closely follow the numbering system set out in Attachment 2 of this appendix, FFS Objective Tests, Table A2A.

v. Contact the NSPM or visit the NSPM Web site for additional information regarding the preferred qualifications of pilots used to meet the requirements of §60.15(d).

w. Examples of the exclusions for which the FFS might not have been subjectively tested by the sponsor or the NSPM and for which qualification might not be sought or granted, as described in §60.15(g)(6), include windshear training and circling approaches.

End Information

 

12. Additional Qualifications for a Currently Qualified FFS (§60.16)

 

Begin Information

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.16, Additional Qualifications for a Currently Qualified FFS.

End Information

 

13. Previously Qualified FFSs (§60.17)

 

Begin QPS Requirements

a. In instances where a sponsor plans to remove an FFS from active status for a period of less than two years, the following procedures apply:

(1) The NSPM must be notified in writing and the notification must include an estimate of the period that the FFS will be inactive;

(2) Continuing Qualification evaluations will not be scheduled during the inactive period;

(3) The NSPM will remove the FFS from the list of qualified FSTDs on a mutually established date not later than the date on which the first missed continuing qualification evaluation would have been scheduled;

(4) Before the FFS is restored to qualified status, it must be evaluated by the NSPM. The evaluation content and the time required to accomplish the evaluation is based on the number of continuing qualification evaluations and sponsor-conducted quarterly inspections missed during the period of inactivity.

(5) The sponsor must notify the NSPM of any changes to the original scheduled time out of service;

b. Simulators qualified prior to May 31, 2016, are not required to meet the general simulation requirements, the objective test requirements or the subjective test requirements of attachments 1, 2, and 3 of this appendix as long as the simulator continues to meet the test requirements contained in the MQTG developed under the original qualification basis.

c. After May 30, 2009, each visual scene or airport model beyond the minimum required for the FFS qualification level that is installed in and available for use in a qualified FFS must meet the requirements described in attachment 3 of this appendix.

d. Simulators qualified prior to May 31, 2016, may be updated. If an evaluation is deemed appropriate or necessary by the NSPM after such an update, the evaluation will not require an evaluation to standards beyond those against which the simulator was originally qualified.

e. Other certificate holders or persons desiring to use an FFS may contract with FFS sponsors to use FFSs previously qualified at a particular level for an airplane type and approved for use within an FAA-approved flight training program. Such FFSs are not required to undergo an additional qualification process, except as described in §60.16.

f. Each FFS user must obtain approval from the appropriate TPAA to use any FFS in an FAA-approved flight training program.

g. The intent of the requirement listed in §60.17(b), for each FFS to have a SOQ within 6 years, is to have the availability of that statement (including the configuration list and the limitations to authorizations) to provide a complete picture of the FFS inventory regulated by the FAA. The issuance of the statement will not require any additional evaluation or require any adjustment to the evaluation basis for the FFS.

h. Downgrading of an FFS is a permanent change in qualification level and will necessitate the issuance of a revised SOQ to reflect the revised qualification level, as appropriate. If a temporary restriction is placed on an FFS because of a missing, malfunctioning, or inoperative component or on-going repairs, the restriction is not a permanent change in qualification level. Instead, the restriction is temporary and is removed when the reason for the restriction has been resolved.

i. The NSPM will determine the evaluation criteria for an FFS that has been removed from active status. The criteria will be based on the number of continuing qualification evaluations and quarterly inspections missed during the period of inactivity. For example, if the FFS were out of service for a 1 year period, it would be necessary to complete the entire QTG, since all of the quarterly evaluations would have been missed. The NSPM will also consider how the FFS was stored, whether parts were removed from the FFS and whether the FFS was disassembled.

j. The FFS will normally be requalified using the FAA-approved MQTG and the criteria that was in effect prior to its removal from qualification. However, inactive periods of 2 years or more will require requalification under the standards in effect and current at the time of requalification.

End Information

 

14. Inspection, Continuing Qualification Evaluation, and Maintenance Requirements (§60.19)

 

Begin QPS Requirements

a. The sponsor must conduct a minimum of four evenly spaced inspections throughout the year. The objective test sequence and content of each inspection must be developed by the sponsor and must be acceptable to the NSPM.

b. The description of the functional preflight check must be contained in the sponsor's QMS.

c. Record “functional preflight” in the FFS discrepancy log book or other acceptable location, including any item found to be missing, malfunctioning, or inoperative.

d. During the continuing qualification evaluation conducted by the NSPM, the sponsor must also provide a person knowledgeable about the operation of the aircraft and the operation of the FFS.

e. The NSPM will conduct continuing qualification evaluations every 12 months unless:

(1) The NSPM becomes aware of discrepancies or performance problems with the device that warrants more frequent evaluations; or

(2) The sponsor implements a QMS that justifies less frequent evaluations. However, in no case shall the frequency of a continuing qualification evaluation exceed 36 months.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

f. The sponsor's test sequence and the content of each quarterly inspection required in §60.19(a)(1) should include a balance and a mix from the objective test requirement areas listed as follows:

(1) Performance.

(2) Handling qualities.

(3) Motion system (where appropriate).

(4) Visual system (where appropriate).

(5) Sound system (where appropriate).

(6) Other FFS systems.

g. If the NSP evaluator plans to accomplish specific tests during a normal continuing qualification evaluation that requires the use of special equipment or technicians, the sponsor will be notified as far in advance of the evaluation as practical; but not less than 72 hours. Examples of such tests include latencies, control dynamics, sounds and vibrations, motion, and/or some visual system tests.

h. The continuing qualification evaluations, described in §60.19(b), will normally require 4 hours of FFS time. However, flexibility is necessary to address abnormal situations or situations involving aircraft with additional levels of complexity (e.g., computer controlled aircraft). The sponsor should anticipate that some tests may require additional time. The continuing qualification evaluations will consist of the following:

(1) Review of the results of the quarterly inspections conducted by the sponsor since the last scheduled continuing qualification evaluation.

(2) A selection of approximately 8 to 15 objective tests from the MQTG that provide an adequate opportunity to evaluate the performance of the FFS. The tests chosen will be performed either automatically or manually and should be able to be conducted within approximately one-third ( 13 ) of the allotted FFS time.

(3) A subjective evaluation of the FFS to perform a representative sampling of the tasks set out in attachment 3 of this appendix. This portion of the evaluation should take approximately two-thirds ( 23 ) of the allotted FFS time.

(4) An examination of the functions of the FFS may include the motion system, visual system, sound system, instructor operating station, and the normal functions and simulated malfunctions of the airplane systems. This examination is normally accomplished simultaneously with the subjective evaluation requirements.

End Information

 

15. Logging FFS Discrepancies (§60.20)

Begin Information

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.20. Logging FFS Discrepancies.

End Information

 

16. Interim Qualification of FFSs for New Airplane Types or Models (§60.21)

 

Begin Information

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.21, Interim Qualification of FFSs for New Airplane Types or Models.

End Information

 

17. Modifications to FFSs (§60.23)

Begin QPS Requirements

a. The notification described in §60.23(c)(2) must include a complete description of the planned modification, with a description of the operational and engineering effect the proposed modification will have on the operation of the FFS and the results that are expected with the modification incorporated.

b. Prior to using the modified FFS:

(1) All the applicable objective tests completed with the modification incorporated, including any necessary updates to the MQTG (e.g., accomplishment of FSTD Directives) must be acceptable to the NSPM; and

(2) The sponsor must provide the NSPM with a statement signed by the MR that the factors listed in §60.15(b) are addressed by the appropriate personnel as described in that section.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

FSTD Directives are considered modifications of an FFS. See Attachment 4 of this appendix for a sample index of effective FSTD Directives. See Attachment 6 of this appendix for a list of all effective FSTD Directives applicable to Airplane FFSs.

End Information

 

18. Operation with Missing, Malfunctioning, or Inoperative Components (§60.25)

Begin Information

a. The sponsor's responsibility with respect to §60.25(a) is satisfied when the sponsor fairly and accurately advises the user of the current status of an FFS, including any missing, malfunctioning, or inoperative (MMI) component(s).

b. It is the responsibility of the instructor, check airman, or representative of the administrator conducting training, testing, or checking to exercise reasonable and prudent judgment to determine if any MMI component is necessary for the satisfactory completion of a specific maneuver, procedure, or task.

c. If the 29th or 30th day of the 30-day period described in §60.25(b) is on a Saturday, a Sunday, or a holiday, the FAA will extend the deadline until the next business day.

d. In accordance with the authorization described in §60.25(b), the sponsor may develop a discrepancy prioritizing system to accomplish repairs based on the level of impact on the capability of the FFS. Repairs having a larger impact on FFS capability to provide the required training, evaluation, or flight experience will have a higher priority for repair or replacement.

End Information

 

19. Automatic Loss of Qualification and Procedures for Restoration of Qualification (§60.27)

 

Begin Information

If the sponsor provides a plan for how the FFS will be maintained during its out-of-service period (e.g., periodic exercise of mechanical, hydraulic, and electrical systems; routine replacement of hydraulic fluid; control of the environmental factors in which the FFS is to be maintained) there is a greater likelihood that the NSPM will be able to determine the amount of testing required for requalification.

End Information

 

20. Other Losses of Qualification and Procedures for Restoration of Qualification (§60.29)

 

Begin Information

If the sponsor provides a plan for how the FFS will be maintained during its out-of-service period (e.g., periodic exercise of mechanical, hydraulic, and electrical systems; routine replacement of hydraulic fluid; control of the environmental factors in which the FFS is to be maintained) there is a greater likelihood that the NSPM will be able to determine the amount of testing required for requalification.

End Information

 

21. Recordkeeping and Reporting (§60.31)

 

Begin QPS Requirements

a. FFS modifications can include hardware or software changes. For FFS modifications involving software programming changes, the record required by §60.31(a)(2) must consist of the name of the aircraft system software, aerodynamic model, or engine model change, the date of the change, a summary of the change, and the reason for the change.

b. If a coded form for record keeping is used, it must provide for the preservation and retrieval of information with appropriate security or controls to prevent the inappropriate alteration of such records after the fact.

End QPS Requirements

 

22. Applications, Logbooks, Reports, and Records: Fraud, Falsification, or Incorrect Statements (§60.33)

 

Begin Information

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.33, Applications, Logbooks, Reports, and Records: Fraud, Falsification, or Incorrect Statements.

23. Specific FFS Compliance Requirements (§60.35)

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.35, Specific FFS Compliance Requirements.

24. [Reserved]

25. FFS Qualification on the Basis of a Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement (BASA) (§60.37)

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.37, FFS Qualification on the Basis of a Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement (BASA).

End Information

 

Attachment 1 to Appendix A to Part 60—General Simulator Requirements

Begin QPS Requirements

1. Requirements

a. Certain requirements included in this appendix must be supported with an SOC as defined in Appendix F, which may include objective and subjective tests. The requirements for SOCs are indicated in the “General Simulator Requirements” column in Table A1A of this appendix.

b. Table A1A describes the requirements for the indicated level of FFS. Many devices include operational systems or functions that exceed the requirements outlined in this section. However, all systems will be tested and evaluated in accordance with this appendix to ensure proper operation.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

2. Discussion

a. This attachment describes the general simulator requirements for qualifying an airplane FFS. The sponsor should also consult the objective tests in Attachment 2 of this appendix and the examination of functions and subjective tests listed in Attachment 3 of this appendix to determine the complete requirements for a specific level simulator.

b. The material contained in this attachment is divided into the following categories:

(1) General flight deck configuration.

(2) Simulator programming.

(3) Equipment operation.

(4) Equipment and facilities for instructor/evaluator functions.

(5) Motion system.

(6) Visual system.

(7) Sound system.

c. Table A1A provides the standards for the General Simulator Requirements.

d. Table A1B provides the tasks that the sponsor will examine to determine whether the FFS satisfactorily meets the requirements for flight crew training, testing, and experience, and provides the tasks for which the simulator may be qualified.

e. Table A1C provides the functions that an instructor/check airman must be able to control in the simulator.

f. It is not required that all of the tasks that appear on the List of Qualified Tasks (part of the SOQ) be accomplished during the initial or continuing qualification evaluation.

End Information

 
eCFR graphic er30mr16.118.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.119.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.120.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.121.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.122.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.123.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.124.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.125.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.126.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.127.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.128.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.129.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.130.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.131.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.132.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.133.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.134.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.135.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.136.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.137.gif

View or download PDF

Table A1B—Table of Tasks vs. Simulator Level

QPS requirementsInformation
Entry No.Subjective requirements
In order to be qualified at the simulator qualification level indicated, the simulator must be able to perform at least the tasks associated with that level of qualification.
Simulator levelsNotes
ABCD
1. Preflight Procedures
1.a.Preflight Inspection (flight deck only)XXXX
1.b.Engine StartXXXX
1.c.TaxiingRXX
1.d.Pre-takeoff ChecksXXXX
2. Takeoff and Departure Phase
2.a.Normal and Crosswind TakeoffRXX
2.b.Instrument TakeoffXXXX
2.c.Engine Failure During TakeoffAXXX
2.d.Rejected TakeoffXXXX
2.e.Departure ProcedureXXXX
3. Inflight Maneuvers
3.a.Steep TurnsXXXX
3.b. High Angle of Attack Maneuvers
3.b.1Approaches to StallXXXX
3.b.2Full StallXXStall maneuvers at angles of attack above the activation of the stall warning system.
   Required only for FSTDs qualified to conduct full stall training tasks as indicated on the Statement of Qualification.
3.c.Engine Failure—Multiengine AirplaneXXXX
3.d.Engine Failure—Single-Engine AirplaneXXXX
3.e.Specific Flight Characteristics incorporated into the user's FAA approved flight training programAAAA
3.f.Recovery From Unusual AttitudesXXXXWithin the normal flight envelope supported by applicable simulation validation data.
3.g.Upset Prevention and Recovery Training (UPRT)XXUpset recovery or unusual attitude training maneuvers within the FSTD's validation envelope that are intended to exceed pitch attitudes greater than 25 degrees nose up; pitch attitudes greater than 10 degrees nose down, and bank angles greater than 45 degrees.
4. Instrument Procedures
4.a.Standard Terminal Arrival/Flight Management System Arrivals ProceduresXXXX
4.b.HoldingXXXX
4.c.Precision Instrument
4.c.1.All Engines OperatingXXXXe.g., Autopilot, Manual (Flt. Dir. Assisted), Manual (Raw Data).
4.c.2.One Engine InoperativeXXXXe.g., Manual (Flt. Dir. Assisted), Manual (Raw Data).
4.d.Non-Precision Instrument ApproachXXXXe.g., NDB, VOR, VOR/DME, VOR/TAC, RNAV, LOC, LOC/BC, ADF, and SDF.
4.e.Circling ApproachXXXXSpecific authorization required.
4.f.Missed Approach
4.f.1.NormalXXXX
4.f.2.One Engine InoperativeXXXX
5. Landings and Approaches to Landings
5.a.Normal and Crosswind Approaches and LandingsRXX
5.b.Landing From a Precision/Non-Precision ApproachRXX
5.c.Approach and Landing with (Simulated) Engine Failure—Multiengine AirplaneRXX
5.d.Landing From Circling ApproachRXX
5.e.Rejected LandingXXXX
5.f.Landing From a No Flap or a Nonstandard Flap Configuration ApproachRXX
6. Normal and Abnormal Procedures
6.a.Engine (including shutdown and restart)XXXX
6.b.Fuel SystemXXXX
6.c.Electrical SystemXXXX
6.d.Hydraulic SystemXXXX
6.e.Environmental and Pressurization SystemsXXXX
6.f.Fire Detection and Extinguisher SystemsXXXX
6.g.Navigation and Avionics SystemsXXXX
6.h.Automatic Flight Control System, Electronic Flight Instrument System, and Related SubsystemsXXXX
6.i.Flight Control SystemsXXXX
6.j.Anti-ice and Deice SystemsXXXX
6.k.Aircraft and Personal Emergency EquipmentXXXX
7. Emergency Procedures
7.a.Emergency Descent (Max. Rate)XXXX
7.b.Inflight Fire and Smoke RemovalXXXX
7.c.Rapid DecompressionXXXX
7.d.Emergency EvacuationXXXX
8. Postflight Procedures
8.a.After-Landing ProceduresXXXX
8.b.Parking and SecuringXXXX

“A”—indicates that the system, task, or procedure may be examined if the appropriate aircraft system or control is simulated in the FSTD and is working properly.

“R”—indicates that the simulator may be qualified for this task for continuing qualification training.

“X”—indicates that the simulator must be able to perform this task for this level of qualification.

Table A1C—Table of Simulator System Tasks

QPS requirementsInformation
Entry No.Subjective requirements
In order to be qualified at the simulator qualification level indicated, the simulator must be able to perform at least the tasks associated with that level of qualification.
Simulator levelsNotes
ABCD
1. Instructor Operating Station (IOS), as appropriate
1.a.Power switch(es)XXXX
1.b.Airplane conditionsXXXXe.g., GW, CG, Fuel loading and Systems.
1.c.Airports/RunwaysXXXXe.g., Selection, Surface, Presets, Lighting controls.
1.d.Environmental controlsXXXXe.g., Clouds, Visibility, RVR, Temp, Wind, Ice, Snow, Rain, and Windshear.
1.e.Airplane system malfunctions (Insertion/deletion)XXXX
1.f.Locks, Freezes, and RepositioningXXXX
2. Sound Controls
2.a.On/off/adjustmentXXXX
3. Motion/Control Loading System
3.a.On/off/emergency stopXXXX
4. Observer Seats/Stations
4.a.Position/Adjustment/Positive restraint systemXXXX

Attachment 2 to Appendix A to Part 60—FFS Objective Tests

Table of Contents

Paragraph No.Title
1.Introduction.
2.Test Requirements.
   Table A2A, Objective Tests.
3.General.
4.Control Dynamics.
5.Ground Effect.
6.Motion System.
7.Sound System.
8.Additional Information About Flight Simulator Qualification for New or Derivative Airplanes.
9.Engineering Simulator—Validation Data.
10.[Reserved]
11.Validation Test Tolerances.
12.Validation Data Roadmap.
13.Acceptance Guidelines for Alternative Engines Data.
14.Acceptance Guidelines for Alternative Avionics (Flight-Related Computers and Controllers).
15.Transport Delay Testing.
16.Continuing Qualification Evaluations—Validation Test Data Presentation.
17.Alternative Data Sources, Procedures, and Instrumentation: Level A and Level B Simulators Only.
 

Begin Information

1. Introduction

a. For the purposes of this attachment, the flight conditions specified in the Flight Conditions Column of Table A2A of this appendix, are defined as follows:

(1) Ground—on ground, independent of airplane configuration;

(2) Take-off—gear down with flaps/slats in any certified takeoff position;

(3) First segment climb—gear down with flaps/slats in any certified takeoff position (normally not above 50 ft AGL);

(4) Second segment climb—gear up with flaps/slats in any certified takeoff position (normally between 50 ft and 400 ft AGL);

(5) Clean—flaps/slats retracted and gear up;

(6) Cruise—clean configuration at cruise altitude and airspeed;

(7) Approach—gear up or down with flaps/slats at any normal approach position as recommended by the airplane manufacturer; and

(8) Landing—gear down with flaps/slats in any certified landing position.

b. The format for numbering the objective tests in Appendix A, Attachment 2, Table A2A, and the objective tests in Appendix B, Attachment 2, Table B2A, is identical. However, each test required for FFSs is not necessarily required for FTDs. Also, each test required for FTDs is not necessarily required for FFSs. Therefore, when a test number (or series of numbers) is not required, the term “Reserved” is used in the table at that location. Following this numbering format provides a degree of commonality between the two tables and substantially reduces the potential for confusion when referring to objective test numbers for either FFSs or FTDs.

c. The reader is encouraged to review the Airplane Flight Simulator Evaluation Handbook, Volumes I and II, published by the Royal Aeronautical Society, London, UK, and AC 25-7, as amended, Flight Test Guide for Certification of Transport Category Airplanes, and AC 23-8, as amended, Flight Test Guide for Certification of Part 23 Airplanes, for references and examples regarding flight testing requirements and techniques.

d. If relevant winds are present in the objective data, the wind vector should be clearly noted as part of the data presentation, expressed in conventional terminology, and related to the runway being used for the test.

End Information

 

Begin QPS Requirements

2. Test Requirements

a. The ground and flight tests required for qualification are listed in Table A2A, FFS Objective Tests. Computer generated simulator test results must be provided for each test except where an alternative test is specifically authorized by the NSPM. If a flight condition or operating condition is required for the test but does not apply to the airplane being simulated or to the qualification level sought, it may be disregarded (e.g., an engine out missed approach for a single-engine airplane or a maneuver using reverse thrust for an airplane without reverse thrust capability). Each test result is compared against the validation data described in §60.13 and in this appendix. Although use of a driver program designed to automatically accomplish the tests is encouraged for all simulators and required for Level C and Level D simulators, it must be possible to conduct each test manually while recording all appropriate parameters. The results must be produced on an appropriate recording device acceptable to the NSPM and must include simulator number, date, time, conditions, tolerances, and appropriate dependent variables portrayed in comparison to the validation data. Time histories are required unless otherwise indicated in Table A2A. All results must be labeled using the tolerances and units given.

b. Table A2A in this attachment sets out the test results required, including the parameters, tolerances, and flight conditions for simulator validation. Tolerances are provided for the listed tests because mathematical modeling and acquisition and development of reference data are often inexact. All tolerances listed in the following tables are applied to simulator performance. When two tolerance values are given for a parameter, the less restrictive may be used unless otherwise indicated. In those cases where a tolerance is expressed only as a percentage, the tolerance percentage applies to the maximum value of that parameter within its normal operating range as measured from the neutral or zero position unless otherwise indicated.

c. Certain tests included in this attachment must be supported with an SOC. In Table A2A, requirements for SOCs are indicated in the “Test Details” column.

d. When operational or engineering judgment is used in making assessments for flight test data applications for simulator validity, such judgment must not be limited to a single parameter. For example, data that exhibit rapid variations of the measured parameters may require interpolations or a “best fit” data selection. All relevant parameters related to a given maneuver or flight condition must be provided to allow overall interpretation. When it is difficult or impossible to match simulator to airplane data throughout a time history, differences must be justified by providing a comparison of other related variables for the condition being assessed.

e. It is not acceptable to program the FFS so that the mathematical modeling is correct only at the validation test points. Unless otherwise noted, simulator tests must represent airplane performance and handling qualities at operating weights and centers of gravity (CG) typical of normal operation. Simulator tests at extreme weight or CG conditions may be acceptable where required for concurrent aircraft certification testing. Tests of handling qualities must include validation of augmentation devices.

f. When comparing the parameters listed to those of the airplane, sufficient data must also be provided to verify the correct flight condition and airplane configuration changes. For example, to show that control force is within the parameters for a static stability test, data to show the correct airspeed, power, thrust or torque, airplane configuration, altitude, and other appropriate datum identification parameters must also be given. If comparing short period dynamics, normal acceleration may be used to establish a match to the airplane, but airspeed, altitude, control input, airplane configuration, and other appropriate data must also be given. If comparing landing gear change dynamics, pitch, airspeed, and altitude may be used to establish a match to the airplane, but landing gear position must also be provided. All airspeed values must be properly annotated (e.g., indicated versus calibrated). In addition, the same variables must be used for comparison (e.g., compare inches to inches rather than inches to centimeters).

g. The QTG provided by the sponsor must clearly describe how the simulator will be set up and operated for each test. Each simulator subsystem may be tested independently, but overall integrated testing of the simulator must be accomplished to assure that the total simulator system meets the prescribed standards. A manual test procedure with explicit and detailed steps for completing each test must also be provided.

h. For previously qualified simulators, the tests and tolerances of this attachment may be used in subsequent continuing qualification evaluations for any given test if the sponsor has submitted a proposed MQTG revision to the NSPM and has received NSPM approval.

i. Simulators are evaluated and qualified with an engine model simulating the airplane data supplier's flight test engine. For qualification of alternative engine models (either variations of the flight test engines or other manufacturer's engines) additional tests with the alternative engine models may be required. This attachment contains guidelines for alternative engines.

j. For testing Computer Controlled Aircraft (CCA) simulators, or other highly augmented airplane simulators, flight test data is required for the Normal (N) and/or Non-normal (NN) control states, as indicated in this attachment. Where test results are independent of control state, Normal or Non-normal control data may be used. All tests in Table A2A require test results in the Normal control state unless specifically noted otherwise in the Test Details section following the CCA designation. The NSPM will determine what tests are appropriate for airplane simulation data. When making this determination, the NSPM may require other levels of control state degradation for specific airplane tests. Where Non-normal control states are required, test data must be provided for one or more Non-normal control states, and must include the least augmented state. Where applicable, flight test data must record Normal and Non-normal states for:

(1) Pilot controller deflections or electronically generated inputs, including location of input; and

(2) Flight control surface positions unless test results are not affected by, or are independent of, surface positions.

k. Tests of handling qualities must include validation of augmentation devices. FFSs for highly augmented airplanes will be validated both in the unaugmented configuration (or failure state with the maximum permitted degradation in handling qualities) and the augmented configuration. Where various levels of handling qualities result from failure states, validation of the effect of the failure is necessary. Requirements for testing will be mutually agreed to between the sponsor and the NSPM on a case-by-case basis.

l. Some tests will not be required for airplanes using airplane hardware in the simulator flight deck (e.g., “side stick controller”). These exceptions are noted in Section 2 “Handling Qualities” in Table A2A of this attachment. However, in these cases, the sponsor must provide a statement that the airplane hardware meets the appropriate manufacturer's specifications and the sponsor must have supporting information to that fact available for NSPM review.

m. For objective test purposes, see Appendix F of this part for the definitions of “Near maximum,” “Light,” and “Medium” gross weight.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

n. In those cases where the objective test results authorize a “snapshot test” or a “series of snapshot tests” results in lieu of a time-history result, the sponsor or other data provider must ensure that a steady state condition exists at the instant of time captured by the “snapshot.” The steady state condition should exist from 4 seconds prior to, through 1 second following, the instant of time captured by the snap shot.

o. For references on basic operating weight, see AC 120-27, “Aircraft Weight and Balance;” and FAA-H-8083-1, “Aircraft Weight and Balance Handbook.”

End Information

 
eCFR graphic er20my16.000.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.001.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.002.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.003.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.004.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.005.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.006.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.007.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.008.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.009.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.010.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.011.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.012.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.013.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.014.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.015.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.016.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.017.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.018.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.019.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.020.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.021.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.022.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.023.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.024.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.025.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.026.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.027.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.028.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.029.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.030.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.031.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.032.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.033.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.034.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.035.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.036.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.037.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.038.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.039.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.040.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.041.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.042.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.043.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.044.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.045.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.046.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.047.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.048.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.049.gif

View or download PDF

 

Begin Information

3. General

a. If relevant winds are present in the objective data, the wind vector should be clearly noted as part of the data presentation, expressed in conventional terminology, and related to the runway being used for test near the ground.

b. The reader is encouraged to review the Airplane Flight Simulator Evaluation Handbook, Volumes I and II, published by the Royal Aeronautical Society, London, UK, and AC 25-7, as amended, Flight Test Guide for Certification of Transport Category Airplanes, and AC 23-8, as amended, Flight Test Guide for Certification of Part 23 Airplanes, for references and examples regarding flight testing requirements and techniques.

4. Control Dynamics

a. General. The characteristics of an airplane flight control system have a major effect on handling qualities. A significant consideration in pilot acceptability of an airplane is the “feel” provided through the flight controls. Considerable effort is expended on airplane feel system design so that pilots will be comfortable and will consider the airplane desirable to fly. In order for an FFS to be representative, it should “feel” like the airplane being simulated. Compliance with this requirement is determined by comparing a recording of the control feel dynamics of the FFS to actual airplane measurements in the takeoff, cruise and landing configurations.

(1) Recordings such as free response to an impulse or step function are classically used to estimate the dynamic properties of electromechanical systems. In any case, it is only possible to estimate the dynamic properties as a result of being able to estimate true inputs and responses. Therefore, it is imperative that the best possible data be collected since close matching of the FFS control loading system to the airplane system is essential. The required dynamic control tests are described in Table A2A of this attachment.

(2) For initial and upgrade evaluations, the QPS requires that control dynamics characteristics be measured and recorded directly from the flight controls (Handling Qualities—Table A2A). This procedure is usually accomplished by measuring the free response of the controls using a step or impulse input to excite the system. The procedure should be accomplished in the takeoff, cruise and landing flight conditions and configurations.

(3) For airplanes with irreversible control systems, measurements may be obtained on the ground if proper pitot-static inputs are provided to represent airspeeds typical of those encountered in flight. Likewise, it may be shown that for some airplanes, takeoff, cruise, and landing configurations have like effects. Thus, one may suffice for another. In either case, engineering validation or airplane manufacturer rationale should be submitted as justification for ground tests or for eliminating a configuration. For FFSs requiring static and dynamic tests at the controls, special test fixtures will not be required during initial and upgrade evaluations if the QTG shows both test fixture results and the results of an alternate approach (e.g., computer plots that were produced concurrently and show satisfactory agreement). Repeat of the alternate method during the initial evaluation satisfies this test requirement.

b. Control Dynamics Evaluation. The dynamic properties of control systems are often stated in terms of frequency, damping and a number of other classical measurements. In order to establish a consistent means of validating test results for FFS control loading, criteria are needed that will clearly define the measurement interpretation and the applied tolerances. Criteria are needed for underdamped, critically damped and overdamped systems. In the case of an underdamped system with very light damping, the system may be quantified in terms of frequency and damping. In critically damped or overdamped systems, the frequency and damping are not readily measured from a response time history. Therefore, the following suggested measurements may be used:

(1) For Level C and D simulators. Tests to verify that control feel dynamics represent the airplane should show that the dynamic damping cycles (free response of the controls) match those of the airplane within specified tolerances. The NSPM recognizes that several different testing methods may be used to verify the control feel dynamic response. The NSPM will consider the merits of testing methods based on reliability and consistency. One acceptable method of evaluating the response and the tolerance to be applied is described below for the underdamped and critically damped cases. A sponsor using this method to comply with the QPS requirements should perform the tests as follows:

(a) Underdamped response. Two measurements are required for the period, the time to first zero crossing (in case a rate limit is present) and the subsequent frequency of oscillation. It is necessary to measure cycles on an individual basis in case there are non-uniform periods in the response. Each period will be independently compared to the respective period of the airplane control system and, consequently, will enjoy the full tolerance specified for that period. The damping tolerance will be applied to overshoots on an individual basis. Care should be taken when applying the tolerance to small overshoots since the significance of such overshoots becomes questionable. Only those overshoots larger than 5 per cent of the total initial displacement should be considered. The residual band, labeled T(Ad) on Figure A2A is ±5 percent of the initial displacement amplitude Ad from the steady state value of the oscillation. Only oscillations outside the residual band are considered significant. When comparing FFS data to airplane data, the process should begin by overlaying or aligning the FFS and airplane steady state values and then comparing amplitudes of oscillation peaks, the time of the first zero crossing and individual periods of oscillation. The FFS should show the same number of significant overshoots to within one when compared against the airplane data. The procedure for evaluating the response is illustrated in Figure A2A.

(b) Critically damped and overdamped response. Due to the nature of critically damped and overdamped responses (no overshoots), the time to reach 90 percent of the steady state (neutral point) value should be the same as the airplane within ±10 percent. Figure A2B illustrates the procedure.

(c) Special considerations. Control systems that exhibit characteristics other than classical overdamped or underdamped responses should meet specified tolerances. In addition, special consideration should be given to ensure that significant trends are maintained.

(2) Tolerances.

(a) The following table summarizes the tolerances, T, for underdamped systems, and “n” is the sequential period of a full cycle of oscillation. See Figure A2A of this attachment for an illustration of the referenced measurements.

T(P0)±10% of P0.
T(P1)±20% of P1.
T(P2)±30% of P2.
T(Pn)±10(n + 1)% of Pn.
T(An)±10% of A1.
T(Ad)±5% of Ad = residual band.

Significant overshoots, First overshoot and ±1 subsequent overshoots.

(b) The following tolerance applies to critically damped and overdamped systems only. See Figure A2B for an illustration of the reference measurements:

T(P0)±10% of P0

End Information

 

Begin QPS Requirement

c. Alternative method for control dynamics evaluation.

(1) An alternative means for validating control dynamics for aircraft with hydraulically powered flight controls and artificial feel systems is by the measurement of control force and rate of movement. For each axis of pitch, roll, and yaw, the control must be forced to its maximum extreme position for the following distinct rates. These tests are conducted under normal flight and ground conditions.

(a) Static test—Slowly move the control so that a full sweep is achieved within 95 to 105 seconds. A full sweep is defined as movement of the controller from neutral to the stop, usually aft or right stop, then to the opposite stop, then to the neutral position.

(b) Slow dynamic test—Achieve a full sweep within 8-12 seconds.

(c) Fast dynamic test—Achieve a full sweep within 3-5 seconds.

Note: Dynamic sweeps may be limited to forces not exceeding 100 lbs. (44.5 daN).

(d) Tolerances

(i) Static test; see Table A2A, FFS Objective Tests, Entries 2.a.1., 2.a.2., and 2.a.3.

(ii) Dynamic test—±2 lbs (0.9 daN) or ±10% on dynamic increment above static test.

End QPS Requirement

 

Begin Information

d. The FAA is open to alternative means such as the one described above. The alternatives should be justified and appropriate to the application. For example, the method described here may not apply to all manufacturers' systems and certainly not to aircraft with reversible control systems. Each case is considered on its own merit on an ad hoc basis. If the FAA finds that alternative methods do not result in satisfactory performance, more conventionally accepted methods will have to be used.

eCFR graphic er09my08.000.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.001.gif

View or download PDF

5. Ground Effect

a. For an FFS to be used for take-off and landing (not applicable to Level A simulators in that the landing maneuver may not be credited in a Level A simulator) it should reproduce the aerodynamic changes that occur in ground effect. The parameters chosen for FFS validation should indicate these changes.

(1) A dedicated test should be provided that will validate the aerodynamic ground effect characteristics.

(2) The organization performing the flight tests may select appropriate test methods and procedures to validate ground effect. However, the flight tests should be performed with enough duration near the ground to sufficiently validate the ground-effect model.

b. The NSPM will consider the merits of testing methods based on reliability and consistency. Acceptable methods of validating ground effect are described below. If other methods are proposed, rationale should be provided to conclude that the tests performed validate the ground-effect model. A sponsor using the methods described below to comply with the QPS requirements should perform the tests as follows:

(1) Level fly-bys. The level fly-bys should be conducted at a minimum of three altitudes within the ground effect, including one at no more than 10% of the wingspan above the ground, one each at approximately 30% and 50% of the wingspan where height refers to main gear tire above the ground. In addition, one level-flight trim condition should be conducted out of ground effect (e.g., at 150% of wingspan).

(2) Shallow approach landing. The shallow approach landing should be performed at a glide slope of approximately one degree with negligible pilot activity until flare.

c. The lateral-directional characteristics are also altered by ground effect. For example, because of changes in lift, roll damping is affected. The change in roll damping will affect other dynamic modes usually evaluated for FFS validation. In fact, Dutch roll dynamics, spiral stability, and roll-rate for a given lateral control input are altered by ground effect. Steady heading sideslips will also be affected. These effects should be accounted for in the FFS modeling. Several tests such as crosswind landing, one engine inoperative landing, and engine failure on take-off serve to validate lateral-directional ground effect since portions of these tests are accomplished as the aircraft is descending through heights above the runway at which ground effect is an important factor.

6. Motion System

a. General.

(1) Pilots use continuous information signals to regulate the state of the airplane. In concert with the instruments and outside-world visual information, whole-body motion feedback is essential in assisting the pilot to control the airplane dynamics, particularly in the presence of external disturbances. The motion system should meet basic objective performance criteria, and should be subjectively tuned at the pilot's seat position to represent the linear and angular accelerations of the airplane during a prescribed minimum set of maneuvers and conditions. The response of the motion cueing system should also be repeatable.

(2) The Motion System tests in Section 3 of Table A2A are intended to qualify the FFS motion cueing system from a mechanical performance standpoint. Additionally, the list of motion effects provides a representative sample of dynamic conditions that should be present in the flight simulator. An additional list of representative, training-critical maneuvers, selected from Section 1 (Performance tests), and Section 2 (Handling Qualities tests), in Table A2A, that should be recorded during initial qualification (but without tolerance) to indicate the flight simulator motion cueing performance signature have been identified (reference Section 3.e). These tests are intended to help improve the overall standard of FFS motion cueing.

b. Motion System Checks. The intent of test 3a, Frequency Response, and test 3b, Turn-Around Check, as described in the Table of Objective Tests, are to demonstrate the performance of the motion system hardware, and to check the integrity of the motion set-up with regard to calibration and wear. These tests are independent of the motion cueing software and should be considered robotic tests.

c. Motion System Repeatability. The intent of this test is to ensure that the motion system software and motion system hardware have not degraded or changed over time. This diagnostic test should be completed during continuing qualification checks in lieu of the robotic tests. This will allow an improved ability to determine changes in the software or determine degradation in the hardware. The following information delineates the methodology that should be used for this test.

(1) Input: The inputs should be such that rotational accelerations, rotational rates, and linear accelerations are inserted before the transfer from airplane center of gravity to pilot reference point with a minimum amplitude of 5 deg/sec/sec, 10 deg/sec and 0.3 g, respectively, to provide adequate analysis of the output.

(2) Recommended output:

(a) Actual platform linear accelerations; the output will comprise accelerations due to both the linear and rotational motion acceleration;

(b) Motion actuators position.

d. Objective Motion Cueing Test—Frequency Domain

(1) Background. This test quantifies the response of the motion cueing system from the output of the flight model to the motion platform response. Other motion tests, such as the motion system frequency response, concentrate on the mechanical performance of the motion system hardware alone. The intent of this test is to provide quantitative frequency response records of the entire motion system for specified degree-of-freedom transfer relationships over a range of frequencies. This range should be representative of the manual control range for that particular aircraft type and the simulator as set up during qualification. The measurements of this test should include the combined influence of the motion cueing algorithm, the motion platform dynamics, and the transport delay associated with the motion cueing and control system implementation. Specified frequency responses describing the ability of the FSTD to reproduce aircraft translations and rotations, as well as the cross-coupling relations, are required as part of these measurements. When simulating forward aircraft acceleration, the simulator is accelerated momentarily in the forward direction to provide the onset cueing. This is considered the direct transfer relation. The simulator is simultaneously tilted nose-up due to the low-pass filter in order to generate a sustained specific force. The tilt associated with the generation of the sustained specific force, and the angular rates and angular accelerations associated with the initiation of the sustained specific force, are considered cross-coupling relations. The specific force is required for the perception of the aircraft sustained specific force, while the angular rates and accelerations do not occur in the aircraft and should be minimized.

(2) Frequency response test. This test requires the frequency response to be measured for the motion cueing system. Reference sinusoidal signals are inserted at the pilot reference position prior to the motion cueing computations. The response of the motion platform in the corresponding degree-of-freedom (the direct transfer relations), as well as the motions resulting from cross-coupling (the cross-coupling relations), are recorded. These are the tests that are important to pilot motion cueing and are general tests applicable to all types of airplanes.

(3) This test is only required to be run once for the initial qualification of the FSTD and will not be required for continuing qualification purposes. The FAA will accept test results provided by the FSTD manufacturer as part of a Statement of Compliance confirming that the objective motion cueing tests were used to assist in the tuning of the FSTD's motion cueing algorithms.

e. Motion Vibrations.

(1) Presentation of results. The characteristic motion vibrations may be used to verify that the flight simulator can reproduce the frequency content of the airplane when flown in specific conditions. The test results should be presented as a Power Spectral Density (PSD) plot with frequencies on the horizontal axis and amplitude on the vertical axis. The airplane data and flight simulator data should be presented in the same format with the same scaling. The algorithms used for generating the flight simulator data should be the same as those used for the airplane data. If they are not the same then the algorithms used for the flight simulator data should be proven to be sufficiently comparable. As a minimum, the results along the dominant axes should be presented and a rationale for not presenting the other axes should be provided.

(2) Interpretation of results. The overall trend of the PSD plot should be considered while focusing on the dominant frequencies. Less emphasis should be placed on the differences at the high frequency and low amplitude portions of the PSD plot. During the analysis, certain structural components of the flight simulator have resonant frequencies that are filtered and may not appear in the PSD plot. If filtering is required, the notch filter bandwidth should be limited to 1 Hz to ensure that the buffet feel is not adversely affected. In addition, a rationale should be provided to explain that the characteristic motion vibration is not being adversely affected by the filtering. The amplitude should match airplane data as described below. However, if the PSD plot was altered for subjective reasons, a rationale should be provided to justify the change. If the plot is on a logarithmic scale, it may be difficult to interpret the amplitude of the buffet in terms of acceleration. For example, a 1 × 10−3 g-rms2/Hz would describe a heavy buffet and may be seen in the deep stall regime. Alternatively, a 1 × 10−6 g-rms2/Hz buffet is almost not perceivable; but may represent a flap buffet at low speed. The previous two examples differ in magnitude by 1000. On a PSD plot this represents three decades (one decade is a change in order of magnitude of 10; and two decades is a change in order of magnitude of 100).

Note: In the example, “g-rms2 is the mathematical expression for “g's root mean squared.”

7. Sound System

a. General. The total sound environment in the airplane is very complex, and changes with atmospheric conditions, airplane configuration, airspeed, altitude, and power settings. Flight deck sounds are an important component of the flight deck operational environment and provide valuable information to the flight crew. These aural cues can either assist the crew (as an indication of an abnormal situation), or hinder the crew (as a distraction or nuisance). For effective training, the flight simulator should provide flight deck sounds that are perceptible to the pilot during normal and abnormal operations, and comparable to those of the airplane. The flight simulator operator should carefully evaluate background noises in the location where the device will be installed. To demonstrate compliance with the sound requirements, the objective or validation tests in this attachment were selected to provide a representative sample of normal static conditions typically experienced by a pilot.

b. Alternate propulsion. For FFS with multiple propulsion configurations, any condition listed in Table A2A of this attachment should be presented for evaluation as part of the QTG if identified by the airplane manufacturer or other data supplier as significantly different due to a change in propulsion system (engine or propeller).

c. Data and Data Collection System.

(1) Information provided to the flight simulator manufacturer should be presented in the format suggested by the International Air Transport Association (IATA) “Flight Simulator Design and Performance Data Requirements,” as amended. This information should contain calibration and frequency response data.

(2) The system used to perform the tests listed in Table A2A should comply with the following standards:

(a) The specifications for octave, half octave, and third octave band filter sets may be found in American National Standards Institute (ANSI) S1.11-1986;

(b) Measurement microphones should be type WS2 or better, as described in International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 1094-4-1995.

(3) Headsets. If headsets are used during normal operation of the airplane they should also be used during the flight simulator evaluation.

(4) Playback equipment. Playback equipment and recordings of the QTG conditions should be provided during initial evaluations.

(5) Background noise.

(a) Background noise is the noise in the flight simulator that is not associated with the airplane, but is caused by the flight simulator's cooling and hydraulic systems and extraneous noise from other locations in the building. Background noise can seriously impact the correct simulation of airplane sounds and should be kept below the airplane sounds. In some cases, the sound level of the simulation can be increased to compensate for the background noise. However, this approach is limited by the specified tolerances and by the subjective acceptability of the sound environment to the evaluation pilot.

(b) The acceptability of the background noise levels is dependent upon the normal sound levels in the airplane being represented. Background noise levels that fall below the lines defined by the following points, may be acceptable:

(i) 70 dB @ 50 Hz;

(ii) 55 dB @ 1000 Hz;

(iii) 30 dB @ 16 kHz

(Note: These limits are for unweighted 13 octave band sound levels. Meeting these limits for background noise does not ensure an acceptable flight simulator. Airplane sounds that fall below this limit require careful review and may require lower limits on background noise.)

(6) Validation testing. Deficiencies in airplane recordings should be considered when applying the specified tolerances to ensure that the simulation is representative of the airplane. Examples of typical deficiencies are:

(a) Variation of data between tail numbers;

(b) Frequency response of microphones;

(c) Repeatability of the measurements.

Table A2B—Example of Continuing Qualification Frequency Response Test Tolerance

Band center
frequency
Initial results
(dBSPL)
Continuing qualification results
(dBSPL)
Absolute
difference
5075.073.81.2
6375.975.60.3
8077.176.50.6
10078.078.30.3
12581.981.30.6
16079.880.10.3
20083.184.91.8
25078.678.90.3
31579.578.31.2
40080.179.50.6
50080.779.80.9
63081.980.41.5
80073.274.10.9
100079.280.10.9
125080.782.82.1
160081.678.63.0
200076.274.41.8
250079.580.71.2
315080.177.13.0
400078.978.60.3
500080.177.13.0
630080.780.40.3
800084.385.51.2
1000081.379.81.5
1250080.780.10.6
1600071.171.10.0
Average1.1

8. Additional Information About Flight Simulator Qualification for New or Derivative Airplanes

a. Typically, an airplane manufacturer's approved final data for performance, handling qualities, systems or avionics is not available until well after a new or derivative airplane has entered service. However, flight crew training and certification often begins several months prior to the entry of the first airplane into service. Consequently, it may be necessary to use preliminary data provided by the airplane manufacturer for interim qualification of flight simulators.

b. In these cases, the NSPM may accept certain partially validated preliminary airplane and systems data, and early release (“red label”) avionics data in order to permit the necessary program schedule for training, certification, and service introduction.

c. Simulator sponsors seeking qualification based on preliminary data should consult the NSPM to make special arrangements for using preliminary data for flight simulator qualification. The sponsor should also consult the airplane and flight simulator manufacturers to develop a data plan and flight simulator qualification plan.

d. The procedure to be followed to gain NSPM acceptance of preliminary data will vary from case to case and between airplane manufacturers. Each airplane manufacturer's new airplane development and test program is designed to suit the needs of the particular project and may not contain the same events or sequence of events as another manufacturer's program, or even the same manufacturer's program for a different airplane. Therefore, there cannot be a prescribed invariable procedure for acceptance of preliminary data, but instead there should be a statement describing the final sequence of events, data sources, and validation procedures agreed by the simulator sponsor, the airplane manufacturer, the flight simulator manufacturer, and the NSPM.

Note: A description of airplane manufacturer-provided data needed for flight simulator modeling and validation is to be found in the IATA Document “Flight Simulator Design and Performance Data Requirements,” as amended.

e. The preliminary data should be the manufacturer's best representation of the airplane, with assurance that the final data will not significantly deviate from the preliminary estimates. Data derived from these predictive or preliminary techniques should be validated against available sources including, at least, the following:

(1) Manufacturer's engineering report. The report should explain the predictive method used and illustrate past success of the method on similar projects. For example, the manufacturer could show the application of the method to an earlier airplane model or predict the characteristics of an earlier model and compare the results to final data for that model.

(2) Early flight test results. This data is often derived from airplane certification tests, and should be used to maximum advantage for early flight simulator validation. Certain critical tests that would normally be done early in the airplane certification program should be included to validate essential pilot training and certification maneuvers. These include cases where a pilot is expected to cope with an airplane failure mode or an engine failure. Flight test data that will be available early in the flight test program will depend on the airplane manufacturer's flight test program design and may not be the same in each case. The flight test program of the airplane manufacturer should include provisions for generation of very early flight test results for flight simulator validation.

f. The use of preliminary data is not indefinite. The airplane manufacturer's final data should be available within 12 months after the airplane's first entry into service or as agreed by the NSPM, the simulator sponsor, and the airplane manufacturer. When applying for interim qualification using preliminary data, the simulator sponsor and the NSPM should agree on the update program. This includes specifying that the final data update will be installed in the flight simulator within a period of 12 months following the final data release, unless special conditions exist and a different schedule is acceptable. The flight simulator performance and handling validation would then be based on data derived from flight tests or from other approved sources. Initial airplane systems data should be updated after engineering tests. Final airplane systems data should also be used for flight simulator programming and validation.

g. Flight simulator avionics should stay essentially in step with airplane avionics (hardware and software) updates. The permitted time lapse between airplane and flight simulator updates should be minimal. It may depend on the magnitude of the update and whether the QTG and pilot training and certification are affected. Differences in airplane and flight simulator avionics versions and the resulting effects on flight simulator qualification should be agreed between the simulator sponsor and the NSPM. Consultation with the flight simulator manufacturer is desirable throughout the qualification process.

h. The following describes an example of the design data and sources that might be used in the development of an interim qualification plan.

(1) The plan should consist of the development of a QTG based upon a mix of flight test and engineering simulation data. For data collected from specific airplane flight tests or other flights, the required design model or data changes necessary to support an acceptable Proof of Match (POM) should be generated by the airplane manufacturer.

(2) For proper validation of the two sets of data, the airplane manufacturer should compare their simulation model responses against the flight test data, when driven by the same control inputs and subjected to the same atmospheric conditions as recorded in the flight test. The model responses should result from a simulation where the following systems are run in an integrated fashion and are consistent with the design data released to the flight simulator manufacturer:

(a) Propulsion;

(b) Aerodynamics;

(c) Mass properties;

(d) Flight controls;

(e) Stability augmentation; and

(f) Brakes/landing gear.

i. A qualified test pilot should be used to assess handling qualities and performance evaluations for the qualification of flight simulators of new airplane types.

End Information

 

Begin QPS Requirement

9. Engineering Simulator—Validation Data

a. When a fully validated simulation (i.e., validated with flight test results) is modified due to changes to the simulated airplane configuration, the airplane manufacturer or other acceptable data supplier must coordinate with the NSPM if they propose to supply validation data from an “audited” engineering simulator/simulation to selectively supplement flight test data. The NSPM must be provided an opportunity to audit the engineering simulation or the engineering simulator used to generate the validation data. Validation data from an audited engineering simulation may be used for changes that are incremental in nature. Manufacturers or other data suppliers must be able to demonstrate that the predicted changes in aircraft performance are based on acceptable aeronautical principles with proven success history and valid outcomes. This must include comparisons of predicted and flight test validated data.

b. Airplane manufacturers or other acceptable data suppliers seeking to use an engineering simulator for simulation validation data as an alternative to flight-test derived validation data, must contact the NSPM and provide the following:

(1) A description of the proposed aircraft changes, a description of the proposed simulation model changes, and the use of an integral configuration management process, including a description of the actual simulation model modifications that includes a step-by-step description leading from the original model(s) to the current model(s).

(2) A schedule for review by the NSPM of the proposed plan and the subsequent validation data to establish acceptability of the proposal.

(3) Validation data from an audited engineering simulator/simulation to supplement specific segments of the flight test data.

c. To be qualified to supply engineering simulator validation data, for aerodynamic, engine, flight control, or ground handling models, an airplane manufacturer or other acceptable data supplier must:

(1) Be able to verify their ability able to:

(a) Develop and implement high fidelity simulation models; and

(b) Predict the handling and performance characteristics of an airplane with sufficient accuracy to avoid additional flight test activities for those handling and performance characteristics.

(2) Have an engineering simulator that:

(a) Is a physical entity, complete with a flight deck representative of the simulated class of airplane;

(b) Has controls sufficient for manual flight;

(c) Has models that run in an integrated manner;

(d) Has fully flight-test validated simulation models as the original or baseline simulation models;

(e) Has an out-of-the-flight deck visual system;

(f) Has actual avionics boxes interchangeable with the equivalent software simulations to support validation of released software;

(g) Uses the same models as released to the training community (which are also used to produce stand-alone proof-of-match and checkout documents);

(h) Is used to support airplane development and certification; and

(i) Has been found to be a high fidelity representation of the airplane by the manufacturer's pilots (or other acceptable data supplier), certificate holders, and the NSPM.

(3) Use the engineering simulator/simulation to produce a representative set of integrated proof-of-match cases.

(4) Use a configuration control system covering hardware and software for the operating components of the engineering simulator/simulation.

(5) Demonstrate that the predicted effects of the change(s) are within the provisions of sub-paragraph “a” of this section, and confirm that additional flight test data are not required.

d. Additional Requirements for Validation Data

(1) When used to provide validation data, an engineering simulator must meet the simulator standards currently applicable to training simulators except for the data package.

(2) The data package used must be:

(a) Comprised of the engineering predictions derived from the airplane design, development, or certification process;

(b) Based on acceptable aeronautical principles with proven success history and valid outcomes for aerodynamics, engine operations, avionics operations, flight control applications, or ground handling;

(c) Verified with existing flight-test data; and

(d) Applicable to the configuration of a production airplane, as opposed to a flight-test airplane.

(3) Where engineering simulator data are used as part of a QTG, an essential match must exist between the training simulator and the validation data.

(4) Training flight simulator(s) using these baseline and modified simulation models must be qualified to at least internationally recognized standards, such as contained in the ICAO Document 9625, the “Manual of Criteria for the Qualification of Flight Simulators.”

End QPS Requirement

 

10. [Reserved]

11. Validation Test Tolerances

 

Begin Information

a. Non-Flight-Test Tolerances

(1) If engineering simulator data or other non-flight-test data are used as an allowable form of reference validation data for the objective tests listed in Table A2A of this attachment, the data provider must supply a well-documented mathematical model and testing procedure that enables a replication of the engineering simulation results within 40% of the corresponding flight test tolerances.

b. Background

(1) The tolerances listed in Table A2A of this attachment are designed to measure the quality of the match using flight-test data as a reference.

(2) Good engineering judgment should be applied to all tolerances in any test. A test is failed when the results clearly fall outside of the prescribed tolerance(s).

(3) Engineering simulator data are acceptable because the same simulation models used to produce the reference data are also used to test the flight training simulator (i.e., the two sets of results should be “essentially” similar).

(4) The results from the two sources may differ for the following reasons:

(a) Hardware (avionics units and flight controls);

(b) Iteration rates;

(c) Execution order;

(d) Integration methods;

(e) Processor architecture;

(f) Digital drift, including:

(i) Interpolation methods;

(ii) Data handling differences; and

(iii) Auto-test trim tolerances.

(5) The tolerance limit between the reference data and the flight simulator results is generally 40 percent of the corresponding `flight-test' tolerances. However, there may be cases where the simulator models used are of higher fidelity, or the manner in which they are cascaded in the integrated testing loop have the effect of a higher fidelity, than those supplied by the data provider. Under these circumstances, it is possible that an error greater than 40 percent may be generated. An error greater than 40 percent may be acceptable if simulator sponsor can provide an adequate explanation.

(6) Guidelines are needed for the application of tolerances to engineering-simulator-generated validation data because:

(a) Flight-test data are often not available due to technical reasons;

(b) Alternative technical solutions are being advanced; and

(c) High costs.

12. Validation Data Roadmap

a. Airplane manufacturers or other data suppliers should supply a validation data roadmap (VDR) document as part of the data package. A VDR document contains guidance material from the airplane validation data supplier recommending the best possible sources of data to be used as validation data in the QTG. A VDR is of special value when requesting interim qualification, qualification of simulators for airplanes certificated prior to 1992, and qualification of alternate engine or avionics fits. A sponsor seeking to have a device qualified in accordance with the standards contained in this QPS appendix should submit a VDR to the NSPM as early as possible in the planning stages. The NSPM is the final authority to approve the data to be used as validation material for the QTG.

b. The VDR should identify (in matrix format) sources of data for all required tests. It should also provide guidance regarding the validity of these data for a specific engine type, thrust rating configuration, and the revision levels of all avionics affecting airplane handling qualities and performance. The VDR should include rationale or explanation in cases where data or parameters are missing, engineering simulation data are to be used, flight test methods require explanation, or there is any deviation from data requirements. Additionally, the document should refer to other appropriate sources of validation data (e.g., sound and vibration data documents).

c. The Sample Validation Data Roadmap (VDR) for airplanes, shown in Table A2C, depicts a generic roadmap matrix identifying sources of validation data for an abbreviated list of tests. This document is merely a sample and does not provide actual data. A complete matrix should address all test conditions and provide actual data and data sources.

d. Two examples of rationale pages are presented in Appendix F of the IATA “Flight Simulator Design and Performance Data Requirements.” These illustrate the type of airplane and avionics configuration information and descriptive engineering rationale used to describe data anomalies or provide an acceptable basis for using alternative data for QTG validation requirements.

End Information

 
eCFR graphic er09my08.002.gif

View or download PDF

Begin Information

 

13. Acceptance Guidelines for Alternative Engines Data.

a. Background

(1) For a new airplane type, the majority of flight validation data are collected on the first airplane configuration with a “baseline” engine type. These data are then used to validate all flight simulators representing that airplane type.

(2) Additional flight test validation data may be needed for flight simulators representing an airplane with engines of a different type than the baseline, or for engines with thrust rating that is different from previously validated configurations.

(3) When a flight simulator with alternate engines is to be qualified, the QTG should contain tests against flight test validation data for selected cases where engine differences are expected to be significant.

b. Approval Guidelines For Validating Alternate Engine Applications

(1) The following guidelines apply to flight simulators representing airplanes with alternate engine applications or with more than one engine type or thrust rating.

(2) Validation tests can be segmented into two groups, those that are dependent on engine type or thrust rating and those that are not.

(3) For tests that are independent of engine type or thrust rating, the QTG can be based on validation data from any engine application. Tests in this category should be designated as independent of engine type or thrust rating.

(4) For tests that are affected by engine type, the QTG should contain selected engine-specific flight test data sufficient to validate that particular airplane-engine configuration. These effects may be due to engine dynamic characteristics, thrust levels or engine-related airplane configuration changes. This category is primarily characterized by variations between different engine manufacturers' products, but also includes differences due to significant engine design changes from a previously flight-validated configuration within a single engine type. See Table A2D, Alternate Engine Validation Flight Tests in this section for a list of acceptable tests.

(5) Alternate engine validation data should be based on flight test data, except as noted in sub-paragraphs 13.c.(1) and (2), or where other data are specifically allowed (e.g., engineering simulator/simulation data). If certification of the flight characteristics of the airplane with a new thrust rating (regardless of percentage change) does require certification flight testing with a comprehensive stability and control flight instrumentation package, then the conditions described in Table A2D in this section should be obtained from flight testing and presented in the QTG. Flight test data, other than throttle calibration data, are not required if the new thrust rating is certified on the airplane without need for a comprehensive stability and control flight instrumentation package.

(6) As a supplement to the engine-specific flight tests listed in Table A2D and baseline engine-independent tests, additional engine-specific engineering validation data should be provided in the QTG, as appropriate, to facilitate running the entire QTG with the alternate engine configuration. The sponsor and the NSPM should agree in advance on the specific validation tests to be supported by engineering simulation data.

(7) A matrix or VDR should be provided with the QTG indicating the appropriate validation data source for each test.

(8) The flight test conditions in Table A2D are appropriate and should be sufficient to validate implementation of alternate engines in a flight simulator.

End Information

 

Begin QPS Requirement

c. Test Requirements

(1) The QTG must contain selected engine-specific flight test data sufficient to validate the alternative thrust level when:

(a) the engine type is the same, but the thrust rating exceeds that of a previously flight-test validated configuration by five percent (5%) or more; or

(b) the engine type is the same, but the thrust rating is less than the lowest previously flight-test validated rating by fifteen percent (15%) or more. See Table A2D for a list of acceptable tests.

(2) Flight test data is not required if the thrust increase is greater than 5%, but flight tests have confirmed that the thrust increase does not change the airplane's flight characteristics.

(3) Throttle calibration data (i.e., commanded power setting parameter versus throttle position) must be provided to validate all alternate engine types and engine thrust ratings that are higher or lower than a previously validated engine. Data from a test airplane or engineering test bench with the correct engine controller (both hardware and software) are required.

End QPS Requirement

 

Begin QPS Requirement

Table A2D—Alternative Engine Validation Flight Tests

Entry No.            Test description   Alternative
engine type
Alternative
thrust rating2
1.b.1., 1.b.4.Normal take-off/ground acceleration time and distanceXX
1.b.2.Vmcg, if performed for airplane certificationXX
1.b.5.
1.b.8.
Engine-out take-off
Dynamic engine failure after take-off.
Either test may be performed
X
1.b.7.Rejected take-off if performed for airplane certificationX
1.d.1.Cruise performanceX
1.f.1., 1.f.2.Engine acceleration and decelerationXX
2.a.7.Throttle calibration1XX
2.c.1.Power change dynamics (acceleration)XX
2.d.1.Vmca if performed for airplane certificationXX
2.d.5.Engine inoperative trimXX
2.e.1.Normal landingX   

1Must be provided for all changes in engine type or thrust rating; see paragraph 13.c.(3).

2See paragraphs 13.c.(1) through 13.c.(3), for a definition of applicable thrust ratings.

End QPS Requirement

 

Begin Information

14. Acceptance Guidelines for Alternative Avionics (Flight-Related Computers and Controllers)

a. Background

(1) For a new airplane type, the majority of flight validation data are collected on the first airplane configuration with a “baseline” flight-related avionics ship-set; (see subparagraph b.(2) of this section). These data are then used to validate all flight simulators representing that airplane type.

(2) Additional validation data may be required for flight simulators representing an airplane with avionics of a different hardware design than the baseline, or a different software revision than previously validated configurations.

(3) When a flight simulator with additional or alternate avionics configurations is to be qualified, the QTG should contain tests against validation data for selected cases where avionics differences are expected to be significant.

b. Approval Guidelines for Validating Alternate Avionics

(1) The following guidelines apply to flight simulators representing airplanes with a revised avionics configuration, or more than one avionics configuration.

(2) The baseline validation data should be based on flight test data, except where other data are specifically allowed (e.g., engineering flight simulator data).

(3) The airplane avionics can be segmented into two groups, systems or components whose functional behavior contributes to the aircraft response presented in the QTG results, and systems that do not. The following avionics are examples of contributory systems for which hardware design changes or software revisions may lead to significant differences in the aircraft response relative to the baseline avionics configuration: Flight control computers and controllers for engines, autopilot, braking system, nosewheel steering system, and high lift system. Related avionics such as stall warning and augmentation systems should also be considered.

(4) The acceptability of validation data used in the QTG for an alternative avionics fit should be determined as follows:

(a) For changes to an avionics system or component that do not affect QTG validation test response, the QTG test can be based on validation data from the previously validated avionics configuration.

(b) For an avionics change to a contributory system, where a specific test is not affected by the change (e.g., the avionics change is a Built In Test Equipment (BITE) update or a modification in a different flight phase), the QTG test can be based on validation data from the previously-validated avionics configuration. The QTG should include authoritative justification (e.g., from the airplane manufacturer or system supplier) that this avionics change does not affect the test.

(c) For an avionics change to a contributory system, the QTG may be based on validation data from the previously-validated avionics configuration if no new functionality is added and the impact of the avionics change on the airplane response is small and based on acceptable aeronautical principles with proven success history and valid outcomes. This should be supplemented with avionics-specific validation data from the airplane manufacturer's engineering simulation, generated with the revised avionics configuration. The QTG should also include an explanation of the nature of the change and its effect on the airplane response.

(d) For an avionics change to a contributory system that significantly affects some tests in the QTG or where new functionality is added, the QTG should be based on validation data from the previously validated avionics configuration and supplemental avionics-specific flight test data sufficient to validate the alternate avionics revision. Additional flight test validation data may not be needed if the avionics changes were certified without the need for testing with a comprehensive flight instrumentation package. The airplane manufacturer should coordinate flight simulator data requirements, in advance with the NSPM.

(5) A matrix or “roadmap” should be provided with the QTG indicating the appropriate validation data source for each test. The roadmap should include identification of the revision state of those contributory avionics systems that could affect specific test responses if changed.

15. Transport Delay Testing

a. This paragraph explains how to determine the introduced transport delay through the flight simulator system so that it does not exceed a specific time delay. The transport delay should be measured from control inputs through the interface, through each of the host computer modules and back through the interface to motion, flight instrument, and visual systems. The transport delay should not exceed the maximum allowable interval.

b. Four specific examples of transport delay are:

(1) Simulation of classic non-computer controlled aircraft;

(2) Simulation of computer controlled aircraft using real airplane black boxes;

(3) Simulation of computer controlled aircraft using software emulation of airplane boxes;

(4) Simulation using software avionics or re-hosted instruments.

c. Figure A2C illustrates the total transport delay for a non-computer-controlled airplane or the classic transport delay test. Since there are no airplane-induced delays for this case, the total transport delay is equivalent to the introduced delay.

d. Figure A2D illustrates the transport delay testing method using the real airplane controller system.

e. To obtain the induced transport delay for the motion, instrument and visual signal, the delay induced by the airplane controller should be subtracted from the total transport delay. This difference represents the introduced delay and should not exceed the standards prescribed in Table A1A.

f. Introduced transport delay is measured from the flight deck control input to the reaction of the instruments and motion and visual systems (See Figure A2C).

g. The control input may also be introduced after the airplane controller system and the introduced transport delay measured directly from the control input to the reaction of the instruments, and simulator motion and visual systems (See Figure A2D).

h. Figure A2E illustrates the transport delay testing method used on a flight simulator that uses a software emulated airplane controller system.

i. It is not possible to measure the introduced transport delay using the simulated airplane controller system architecture for the pitch, roll and yaw axes. Therefore, the signal should be measured directly from the pilot controller. The flight simulator manufacturer should measure the total transport delay and subtract the inherent delay of the actual airplane components because the real airplane controller system has an inherent delay provided by the airplane manufacturer. The flight simulator manufacturer should ensure that the introduced delay does not exceed the standards prescribed in Table A1A.

j. Special measurements for instrument signals for flight simulators using a real airplane instrument display system instead of a simulated or re-hosted display. For flight instrument systems, the total transport delay should be measured and the inherent delay of the actual airplane components subtracted to ensure that the introduced delay does not exceed the standards prescribed in Table A1A.

(1) Figure A2FA illustrates the transport delay procedure without airplane display simulation. The introduced delay consists of the delay between the control movement and the instrument change on the data bus.

(2) Figure A2FB illustrates the modified testing method required to measure introduced delay due to software avionics or re-hosted instruments. The total simulated instrument transport delay is measured and the airplane delay should be subtracted from this total. This difference represents the introduced delay and should not exceed the standards prescribed in Table A1A. The inherent delay of the airplane between the data bus and the displays is indicated in figure A2FA. The display manufacturer should provide this delay time.

k. Recorded signals. The signals recorded to conduct the transport delay calculations should be explained on a schematic block diagram. The flight simulator manufacturer should also provide an explanation of why each signal was selected and how they relate to the above descriptions.

l. Interpretation of results. Flight simulator results vary over time from test to test due to “sampling uncertainty.” All flight simulators run at a specific rate where all modules are executed sequentially in the host computer. The flight controls input can occur at any time in the iteration, but these data will not be processed before the start of the new iteration. For example, a flight simulator running at 60 Hz may have a difference of as much as 16.67 msec between test results. This does not mean that the test has failed. Instead, the difference is attributed to variations in input processing. In some conditions, the host simulator and the visual system do not run at the same iteration rate, so the output of the host computer to the visual system will not always be synchronized.

m. The transport delay test should account for both daylight and night modes of operation of the visual system. In both cases, the tolerances prescribed in Table A1A must be met and the motion response should occur before the end of the first video scan containing new information.

eCFR graphic er09my08.003.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.004.gif

View or download PDF

 

Begin Information

16. Continuing Qualification Evaluations—Validation Test Data Presentation

a. Background

(1) The MQTG is created during the initial evaluation of a flight simulator. This is the master document, as amended, to which flight simulator continuing qualification evaluation test results are compared.

(2) The currently accepted method of presenting continuing qualification evaluation test results is to provide flight simulator results over-plotted with reference data. Test results are carefully reviewed to determine if the test is within the specified tolerances. This can be a time consuming process, particularly when reference data exhibits rapid variations or an apparent anomaly requiring engineering judgment in the application of the tolerances. In these cases, the solution is to compare the results to the MQTG. The continuing qualification results are compared to the results in the MQTG for acceptance. The flight simulator operator and the NSPM should look for any change in the flight simulator performance since initial qualification.

b. Continuing Qualification Evaluation Test Results Presentation

(1) Flight simulator operators are encouraged to over-plot continuing qualification validation test results with MQTG flight simulator results recorded during the initial evaluation and as amended. Any change in a validation test will be readily apparent. In addition to plotting continuing qualification validation test and MQTG results, operators may elect to plot reference data as well.

(2) There are no suggested tolerances between flight simulator continuing qualification and MQTG validation test results. Investigation of any discrepancy between the MQTG and continuing qualification flight simulator performance is left to the discretion of the flight simulator operator and the NSPM.

(3) Differences between the two sets of results, other than variations attributable to repeatability issues that cannot be explained, should be investigated.

(4) The flight simulator should retain the ability to over-plot both automatic and manual validation test results with reference data.

End Information

 

Begin QPS Requirements

17. Alternative Data Sources, Procedures, and Instrumentation: Level A and Level B Simulators Only

a. Sponsors are not required to use the alternative data sources, procedures, and instrumentation. However, a sponsor may choose to use one or more of the alternative sources, procedures, and instrumentation described in Table A2E.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

b. It has become standard practice for experienced simulator manufacturers to use modeling techniques to establish data bases for new simulator configurations while awaiting the availability of actual flight test data. The data generated from the aerodynamic modeling techniques is then compared to the flight test data when it becomes available. The results of such comparisons have become increasingly consistent, indicating that these techniques, applied with the appropriate experience, are dependable and accurate for the development of aerodynamic models for use in Level A and Level B simulators.

c. Based on this history of successful comparisons, the NSPM has concluded that those who are experienced in the development of aerodynamic models may use modeling techniques to alter the method for acquiring flight test data for Level A or Level B simulators.

d. The information in Table A2E (Alternative Data Sources, Procedures, and Instrumentation) is presented to describe an acceptable alternative to data sources for simulator modeling and validation and an acceptable alternative to the procedures and instrumentation traditionally used to gather such modeling and validation data.

(1) Alternative data sources that may be used for part or all of a data requirement are the Airplane Maintenance Manual, the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM), Airplane Design Data, the Type Inspection Report (TIR), Certification Data or acceptable supplemental flight test data.

(2) The sponsor should coordinate with the NSPM prior to using alternative data sources in a flight test or data gathering effort.

e. The NSPM position regarding the use of these alternative data sources, procedures, and instrumentation is based on the following presumptions:

(1) Data gathered through the alternative means does not require angle of attack (AOA) measurements or control surface position measurements for any flight test. However, AOA can be sufficiently derived if the flight test program ensures the collection of acceptable level, unaccelerated, trimmed flight data. All of the simulator time history tests that begin in level, unaccelerated, and trimmed flight, including the three basic trim tests and “fly-by” trims, can be a successful validation of angle of attack by comparison with flight test pitch angle. (Note: Due to the criticality of angle of attack in the development of the ground effects model, particularly critical for normal landings and landings involving cross-control input applicable to Level B simulators, stable “fly-by” trim data will be the acceptable norm for normal and cross-control input landing objective data for these applications.)

(2) The use of a rigorously defined and fully mature simulation controls system model that includes accurate gearing and cable stretch characteristics (where applicable), determined from actual aircraft measurements. Such a model does not require control surface position measurements in the flight test objective data in these limited applications.

f. The sponsor is urged to contact the NSPM for clarification of any issue regarding airplanes with reversible control systems. Table A2E is not applicable to Computer Controlled Aircraft FFSs.

g. Utilization of these alternate data sources, procedures, and instrumentation (Table A2E) does not relieve the sponsor from compliance with the balance of the information contained in this document relative to Level A or Level B FFSs.

h. The term “inertial measurement system” is used in the following table to include the use of a functional global positioning system (GPS).

i. Synchronized video for the use of alternative data sources, procedures, and instrumentation should have:

(1) Sufficient resolution to allow magnification of the display to make appropriate measurement and comparisons; and

(2) Sufficient size and incremental marking to allow similar measurement and comparison. The detail provided by the video should provide sufficient clarity and accuracy to measure the necessary parameter(s) to at least 12 of the tolerance authorized for the specific test being conducted and allow an integration of the parameter(s) in question to obtain a rate of change.

End Information

 

Table A2E—Alternative Data Sources, Procedures, and Instrumentation

QPS REQUIREMENTS
The standards in this table are required if the data gathering methods described in paragraph 9 of
Appendix A are not used.
Information
Table of objective testsSim levelAlternative data sources, procedures, and
instrumentation
Notes
Test entry number and titleAB
1.a.1. Performance. Taxi. Minimum Radius turnXXTIR, AFM, or Design data may be used
1.a.2. Performance. Taxi Rate of Turn vs. Nosewheel Steering AngleXData may be acquired by using a constant tiller position, measured with a protractor or full rudder pedal application for steady state turn, and synchronized video of heading indicator. If less than full rudder pedal is used, pedal position must be recordedA single procedure may not be adequate for all airplane steering systems, therefore appropriate measurement procedures must be devised and proposed for NSPM concurrence.
1.b.1. Performance. Takeoff. Ground Acceleration Time and DistanceXXPreliminary certification data may be used. Data may be acquired by using a stop watch, calibrated airspeed, and runway markers during a takeoff with power set before brake release. Power settings may be hand recorded. If an inertial measurement system is installed, speed and distance may be derived from acceleration measurements
1.b.2. Performance. Takeoff. Minimum Control Speed—ground (Vmcg) using aerodynamic controls only (per applicable airworthiness standard) or low speed, engine inoperative ground control characteristicsXXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controlsRapid throttle reductions at speeds near Vmcg may be used while recording appropriate parameters. The nosewheel must be free to caster, or equivalently freed of sideforce generation.
1.b.3. Performance. Takeoff. Minimum Unstick Speed (Vmu) or equivalent test to demonstrate early rotation takeoff characteristicsXXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
1.b.4. Performance. Takeoff. Normal TakeoffXXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controls. AOA can be calculated from pitch attitude and flight path
1.b.5. Performance. Takeoff. Critical Engine Failure during TakeoffXXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controlsRecord airplane dynamic response to engine failure and control inputs required to correct flight path.
1.b.6. Performance. Takeoff. Crosswind TakeoffXXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controlsThe “1:7 law” to 100 feet (30 meters) is an acceptable wind profile.
1.b.7. Performance. Takeoff. Rejected TakeoffXXData may be acquired with a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments, thrust lever position, engine parameters, and distance (e.g., runway markers). A stop watch is required.
1.c. 1. Performance. Climb. Normal Climb all engines operating.XXData may be acquired with a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and engine power throughout the climb range
1.c.2. Performance. Climb. One engine Inoperative ClimbXXData may be acquired with a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and engine power throughout the climb range
1.c.4. Performance. Climb. One Engine Inoperative Approach Climb (if operations in icing conditions are authorized)XXData may be acquired with a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and engine power throughout the climb range
1.d.1. Cruise/Descent. Level flight acceleration.XXData may be acquired with a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments, thrust lever position, engine parameters, and elapsed time
1.d.2. Cruise/Descent. Level flight deceleration.XXData may be acquired with a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments, thrust lever position, engine parameters, and elapsed time
1.d.4. Cruise/Descent. Idle descentXXData may be acquired with a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments, thrust lever position, engine parameters, and elapsed time
1.d.5. Cruise/Descent. Emergency DescentXXData may be acquired with a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments, thrust lever position, engine parameters, and elapsed time
1.e.1. Performance. Stopping. Deceleration time and distance, using manual application of wheel brakes and no reverse thrust on a dry runwayXXData may be acquired during landing tests using a stop watch, runway markers, and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments, thrust lever position and the pertinent parameters of engine power
1.e.2. Performance. Ground. Deceleration Time and Distance, using reverse thrust and no wheel brakesXXData may be acquired during landing tests using a stop watch, runway markers, and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments, thrust lever position and pertinent parameters of engine power
1.f.1. Performance. Engines. AccelerationXXData may be acquired with a synchronized video recording of engine instruments and throttle position
1.f.2. Performance. Engines. DecelerationXXData may be acquired with a synchronized video recording of engine instruments and throttle position
2.a.1.a. Handling Qualities. Static Control Checks. Pitch Controller Position vs. Force and Surface Position CalibrationXXSurface position data may be acquired from flight data recorder (FDR) sensor or, if no FDR sensor, at selected, significant column positions (encompassing significant column position data points), acceptable to the NSPM, using a control surface protractor on the ground. Force data may be acquired by using a hand held force gauge at the same column position data pointsFor airplanes with reversible control systems, surface position data acquisition should be accomplished with winds less than 5 kts.
2.a.2.a. Handling Qualities. Static Control Checks. Roll Controller Position vs. Force and Surface Position CalibrationXXSurface position data may be acquired from flight data recorder (FDR) sensor or, if no FDR sensor, at selected, significant wheel positions (encompassing significant wheel position data points), acceptable to the NSPM, using a control surface protractor on the ground. Force data may be acquired by using a hand held force gauge at the same wheel position data pointsFor airplanes with reversible control systems, surface position data acquisition should be accomplished with winds less than 5 kts.
2.a.3.a. Handling Qualities. Static Control Checks. Rudder Pedal Position vs. Force and Surface Position CalibrationXXSurface position data may be acquired from flight data recorder (FDR) sensor or, if no FDR sensor, at selected, significant rudder pedal positions (encompassing significant rudder pedal position data points), acceptable to the NSPM, using a control surface protractor on the ground. Force data may be acquired by using a hand held force gauge at the same rudder pedal position data pointsFor airplanes with reversible control systems, surface position data acquisition should be accomplished with winds less than 5 kts.
2.a.4. Handling Qualities. Static Control Checks. Nosewheel Steering Controller Force and PositionXXBreakout data may be acquired with a hand held force gauge. The remainder of the force to the stops may be calculated if the force gauge and a protractor are used to measure force after breakout for at least 25% of the total displacement capability
2.a.5. Handling Qualities. Static Control Checks. Rudder Pedal Steering CalibrationXXData may be acquired through the use of force pads on the rudder pedals and a pedal position measurement device, together with design data for nosewheel position
2.a.6. Handling Qualities. Static Control Checks. Pitch Trim Indicator vs. Surface Position CalibrationXXData may be acquired through calculations
2.a.7. Handling qualities. Static control tests. Pitch trim rateXXData may be acquired by using a synchronized video of pitch trim indication and elapsed time through range of trim indication
2.a.8. Handling Qualities. Static Control tests. Alignment of Flight deck Throttle Lever Angle vs. Selected engine parameterXXData may be acquired through the use of a temporary throttle quadrant scale to document throttle position. Use a synchronized video to record steady state instrument readings or hand-record steady state engine performance readings
2.a.9. Handling qualities. Static control tests. Brake pedal position vs. force and brake system pressure calibrationXXUse of design or predicted data is acceptable. Data may be acquired by measuring deflection at “zero” and “maximum” and calculating deflections between the extremes using the airplane design data curve
2.c.1. Handling qualities. Longitudinal control tests. Power change dynamicsXXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and throttle position
2.c.2. Handling qualities. Longitudinal control tests. Flap/slat change dynamicsXXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and flap/slat position
2.c.3. Handling qualities. Longitudinal control tests. Spoiler/speedbrake change dynamicsXXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and spoiler/speedbrake position
2.c.4. Handling qualities. Longitudinal control tests. Gear change dynamicsXXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and gear position
2.c.5. Handling qualities. Longitudinal control tests. Longitudinal trimXXData may be acquired through use of an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of flight deck controls position (previously calibrated to show related surface position) and the engine instrument readings
2.c.6. Handling qualities. Longitudinal control tests. Longitudinal maneuvering stability (stick force/g)XXData may be acquired through the use of an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments; a temporary, high resolution bank angle scale affixed to the attitude indicator; and a wheel and column force measurement indication
2.c.7. Handling qualities. Longitudinal control tests. Longitudinal static stabilityXXData may be acquired through the use of a synchronized video of airplane flight instruments and a hand held force gauge
2.c.8. Handling qualities. Longitudinal control tests. Stall characteristicsXXData may be acquired through a synchronized video recording of a stop watch and calibrated airplane airspeed indicator. Hand-record the flight conditions and airplane configurationAirspeeds may be cross checked with those in the TIR and AFM.
2.c.9. Handling qualities. Longitudinal control tests. Phugoid dynamicsXXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controls
2.c.10. Handling qualities. Longitudinal control tests. Short period dynamicsXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controls
2.d.1. Handling qualities. Lateral directional tests. Minimum control speed, air (Vmca or Vmci), per applicable airworthiness standard or Low speed engine inoperative handling characteristics in the airXXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controls
2.d.2. Handling qualities. Lateral directional tests. Roll response (rate)XXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck lateral controlsMay be combined with step input of flight deck roll controller test, 2.d.3.
2.d.3. Handling qualities. Lateral directional tests. Roll response to flight deck roll controller step inputXXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck lateral controls
2.d.4. Handling qualities. Lateral directional tests. Spiral stabilityXXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments; force/position measurements of flight deck controls; and a stop watch
2.d.5. Handling qualities. Lateral directional tests. Engine inoperative trimXXData may be hand recorded in-flight using high resolution scales affixed to trim controls that have been calibrated on the ground using protractors on the control/trim surfaces with winds less than 5 kts.OR Data may be acquired during second segment climb (with proper pilot control input for an engine-out condition) by using a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controlsTrimming during second segment climb is not a certification task and should not be conducted until a safe altitude is reached.
2.d.6. Handling qualities. Lateral directional tests. Rudder responseXXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of rudder pedals
2.d.7. Handling qualities. Lateral directional tests. Dutch roll, (yaw damper OFF)XXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controls
2.d.8. Handling qualities. Lateral directional tests. Steady state sideslipXXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controls
Ground track and wind corrected heading may be used for sideslip angle.
2.e.1. Handling qualities. Landings. Normal landingXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controls
2.e.3. Handling qualities. Landings. Crosswind landingXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controls
2.e.4. Handling qualities. Landings. One engine inoperative landingXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls. Normal and lateral accelerations may be recorded in lieu of AOA and sideslip
2.e.5. Handling qualities. Landings. Autopilot landing (if applicable)XData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controls.Normal and lateral accelerations may be recorded in lieu of AOA and sideslip
2.e.6. Handling qualities. Landings. All engines operating, autopilot, go around   XData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controls. Normal and lateral accelerations may be recorded in lieu of AOA and sideslip
2.e.7. Handling qualities. Landings. One engine inoperative go aroundXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controls. Normal and lateral accelerations may be recorded in lieu of AOA and sideslip
2.e.8. Handling qualities. Landings. Directional control (rudder effectiveness with symmetric thrust)XData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controls. Normal and lateral accelerations may be recorded in lieu of AOA and sideslip
2.e.9. Handling qualities. Landings. Directional control (rudder effectiveness with asymmetric reverse thrust)XData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controls. Normal and lateral accelerations may be recorded in lieu of AOA and sideslip
2.f. Handling qualities. Ground effect. Test to demonstrate ground effectXData may be acquired by using calibrated airplane instruments, an inertial measurement system, and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck controls

End Information

 

Attachment 3 to Appendix A to Part 60—Simulator Subjective Evaluation

 

Begin QPS Requirements

1. Requirements

a. Except for special use airport models, described as Class III, all airport models required by this part must be representations of real-world, operational airports or representations of fictional airports and must meet the requirements set out in Tables A3B or A3C of this attachment, as appropriate.

b. If fictional airports are used, the sponsor must ensure that navigational aids and all appropriate maps, charts, and other navigational reference material for the fictional airports (and surrounding areas as necessary) are compatible, complete, and accurate with respect to the visual presentation of the airport model of this fictional airport. An SOC must be submitted that addresses navigation aid installation and performance and other criteria (including obstruction clearance protection) for all instrument approaches to the fictional airports that are available in the simulator. The SOC must reference and account for information in the terminal instrument procedures manual and the construction and availability of the required maps, charts, and other navigational material. This material must be clearly marked “for training purposes only.”

c. When the simulator is being used by an instructor or evaluator for purposes of training, checking, or testing under this chapter, only airport models classified as Class I, Class II, or Class III may be used by the instructor or evaluator. Detailed descriptions/definitions of these classifications are found in Appendix F of this part.

d. When a person sponsors an FFS maintained by a person other than a U.S. certificate holder, the sponsor is accountable for that FFS originally meeting, and continuing to meet, the criteria under which it was originally qualified and the appropriate Part 60 criteria, including the airport models that may be used by instructors or evaluators for purposes of training, checking, or testing under this chapter.

e. Neither Class II nor Class III airport visual models are required to appear on the SOQ, and the method used for keeping instructors and evaluators apprised of the airport models that meet Class II or Class III requirements on any given simulator is at the option of the sponsor, but the method used must be available for review by the TPAA.

f. When an airport model represents a real world airport and a permanent change is made to that real world airport (e.g., a new runway, an extended taxiway, a new lighting system, a runway closure) without a written extension grant from the NSPM (described in paragraph 1.g. of this section), an update to that airport model must be made in accordance with the following time limits:

(1) For a new airport runway, a runway extension, a new airport taxiway, a taxiway extension, or a runway/taxiway closure—within 90 days of the opening for use of the new airport runway, runway extension, new airport taxiway, or taxiway extension; or within 90 days of the closure of the runway or taxiway.

(2) For a new or modified approach light system—within 45 days of the activation of the new or modified approach light system.

(3) For other facility or structural changes on the airport (e.g., new terminal, relocation of Air Traffic Control Tower)—within 180 days of the opening of the new or changed facility or structure.

g. If a sponsor desires an extension to the time limit for an update to a visual scene or airport model or has an objection to what must be updated in the specific airport model requirement, the sponsor must provide a written extension request to the NSPM stating the reason for the update delay and a proposed completion date, or explain why the update is not necessary (i.e., why the identified airport change will not have an impact on flight training, testing, or checking). A copy of this request or objection must also be sent to the POI/TCPM. The NSPM will send the official response to the sponsor and a copy to the POI/TCPM. If there is an objection, after consultation with the appropriate POI/TCPM regarding the training, testing, or checking impact, the NSPM will send the official response to the sponsor and a copy to the POI/TCPM.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

2. Discussion

a. The subjective tests provide a basis for evaluating the capability of the simulator to perform over a typical utilization period; determining that the simulator accurately simulates each required maneuver, procedure, or task; and verifying correct operation of the simulator controls, instruments, and systems. The items listed in the following Tables are for simulator evaluation purposes only. They may not be used to limit or exceed the authorizations for use of a given level of simulator, as described on the SOQ, or as approved by the TPAA.

b. The tests in Table A3A, Operations Tasks, in this attachment, address pilot functions, including maneuvers and procedures (called flight tasks), and are divided by flight phases. The performance of these tasks by the NSPM includes an operational examination of the visual system and special effects. There are flight tasks included to address some features of advanced technology airplanes and innovative training programs. For example, “high angle-of-attack maneuvering” is included to provide a required alternative to “approach to stalls” for airplanes employing flight envelope protection functions.

c. The tests in Table A3A, Operations Tasks, and Table A3G, Instructor Operating Station of this attachment, address the overall function and control of the simulator including the various simulated environmental conditions; simulated airplane system operations (normal, abnormal, and emergency); visual system displays; and special effects necessary to meet flight crew training, evaluation, or flight experience requirements.

d. All simulated airplane systems functions will be assessed for normal and, where appropriate, alternate operations. Normal, abnormal, and emergency operations associated with a flight phase will be assessed during the evaluation of flight tasks or events within that flight phase. Simulated airplane systems are listed separately under “Any Flight Phase” to ensure appropriate attention to systems checks. Operational navigation systems (including inertial navigation systems, global positioning systems, or other long-range systems) and the associated electronic display systems will be evaluated if installed. The NSP pilot will include in his report to the TPAA, the effect of the system operation and any system limitation.

e. Simulators demonstrating a satisfactory circling approach will be qualified for the circling approach maneuver and may be approved for such use by the TPAA in the sponsor's FAA-approved flight training program. To be considered satisfactory, the circling approach will be flown at maximum gross weight for landing, with minimum visibility for the airplane approach category, and must allow proper alignment with a landing runway at least 90° different from the instrument approach course while allowing the pilot to keep an identifiable portion of the airport in sight throughout the maneuver (reference—14 CFR 91.175(e)).

f. At the request of the TPAA, the NSPM may assess a device to determine if it is capable of simulating certain training activities in a sponsor's training program, such as a portion of a Line Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) scenario. Unless directly related to a requirement for the qualification level, the results of such an evaluation would not affect the qualification level of the simulator. However, if the NSPM determines that the simulator does not accurately simulate that training activity, the simulator would not be approved for that training activity.

g. The FAA intends to allow the use of Class III airport models when the sponsor provides the TPAA (or other regulatory authority) an appropriate analysis of the skills, knowledge, and abilities (SKAs) necessary for competent performance of the tasks in which this particular media element is used. The analysis should describe the ability of the FFS/visual media to provide an adequate environment in which the required SKAs are satisfactorily performed and learned. The analysis should also include the specific media element, such as the airport model. Additional sources of information on the conduct of task and capability analysis may be found on the FAA's Advanced Qualification Program (AQP) Web site at: http://www.faa.gov/education__research/training/aqp/.

h. The TPAA may accept Class III airport models without individual observation provided the sponsor provides the TPAA with an acceptable description of the process for determining the acceptability of a specific airport model, outlines the conditions under which such an airport model may be used, and adequately describes what restrictions will be applied to each resulting airport or landing area model. Examples of situations that may warrant Class_III model designation by the TPAA include the following:

(a) Training, testing, or checking on very low visibility operations, including SMGCS operations.

(b) Instrument operations training (including instrument takeoff, departure, arrival, approach, and missed approach training, testing, or checking) using—

(i) A specific model that has been geographically “moved” to a different location and aligned with an instrument procedure for another airport.

(ii) A model that does not match changes made at the real-world airport (or landing area for helicopters) being modeled.

(iii) A model generated with an “off-board” or an “on-board” model development tool (by providing proper latitude/longitude reference; correct runway or landing area orientation, length, width, marking, and lighting information; and appropriate adjacent taxiway location) to generate a facsimile of a real world airport or landing area.

i. Previously qualified simulators with certain early generation Computer Generated Image (CGI) visual systems, are limited by the capability of the Image Generator or the display system used. These systems are:

(1) Early CGI visual systems that are excepted from the requirement of including runway numbers as a part of the specific runway marking requirements are:

(a) Link NVS and DNVS.

(b) Novoview 2500 and 6000.

(c) FlightSafety VITAL series up to, and including, VITAL III, but not beyond.

(d) Redifusion SP1, SP1T, and SP2.

(2) Early CGI visual systems are excepted from the requirement of including runway numbers unless the runways are used for LOFT training sessions. These LOFT airport models require runway numbers but only for the specific runway end (one direction) used in the LOFT session. The systems required to display runway numbers only for LOFT scenes are:

(a) FlightSafety VITAL IV.

(b) Redifusion SP3 and SP3T.

(c) Link-Miles Image II.

(3) The following list of previously qualified CGI and display systems are incapable of generating blue lights. These systems are not required to have accurate taxi-way edge lighting:

(a) Redifusion SP1.

(b) FlightSafety Vital IV.

(c) Link-Miles Image II and Image IIT

(d) XKD displays (even though the XKD image generator is capable of generating blue colored lights, the display cannot accommodate that color).

End Information

 
eCFR graphic er20my16.050.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.051.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.052.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.053.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.054.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.055.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.056.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.057.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.058.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.059.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.060.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.061.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.062.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.063.gif

View or download PDF

Table A3C—Functions and Subjective Tests

QPS requirements
Entry No.Additional airport models beyond minimum required for qualification—Class II airport modelsSimulator level
ABCD
This table specifies the minimum airport model content and functionality necessary to add airport models to a simulator's model library, beyond those necessary for qualification at the stated level, without the necessity of further involvement of the NSPM or TPAA.
Begin QPS Requirements
1.Airport model management. The following is the minimum airport model management requirements for simulators at Levels A, B, C, and D.
1.a.The direction of strobe lights, approach lights, runway edge lights, visual landing aids, runway centerline lights, threshold lights, and touchdown zone lights on the “in-use” runway must be replicatedXXXX
2.Visual feature recognition. The following are the minimum distances at which runway features must be visible for simulators at Levels A, B, C, and D. Distances are measured from runway threshold to an airplane aligned with the runway on an extended 3° glide-slope in simulated meteorological conditions that recreate the minimum distances for visibility. For circling approaches, all requirements of this section apply to the runway used for the initial approach and to the runway of intended landing.
2.a.Runway definition, strobe lights, approach lights, and runway edge white lights from 5 sm (8 km) from the runway thresholdXXXX
2.b.Visual Approach Aid lights (VASI or PAPI) from 5 sm (8 km) from the runway thresholdXX
2.c.Visual Approach Aid lights (VASI or PAPI) from 3 sm (5 km) from the runway thresholdXX
2.d.Runway centerline lights and taxiway definition from 3 sm (5 km) from the runway thresholdXXXX
2.e.Threshold lights and touchdown zone lights from 2 sm (3 km) from the runway thresholdXXXX
2.f.Runway markings within range of landing lights for night scenes and as required by the surface resolution requirements on day scenesXXXX
2.g.For circling approaches, the runway of intended landing and associated lighting must fade into view in a non-distracting mannerXXXX
3.Airport model content. The following prescribes the minimum requirements for what must be provided in an airport model and identifies other aspects of the airport environment that must correspond with that model for simulators at Levels A, B, C, and D. The detail must be developed using airport pictures, construction drawings and maps, or other similar data, or developed in accordance with published regulatory material; however, this does not require that airport models contain details that are beyond the designed capability of the currently qualified visual system. For circling approaches, all requirements of this section apply to the runway used for the initial approach and to the runway of intended landing. Only one “primary” taxi route from parking to the runway end will be required for each “in-use” runway.
3.a.The surface and markings for each “in-use” runway:
3.a.1.Threshold markingsXXXX
3.a.2.Runway numbersXXXX
3.a.3.Touchdown zone markingsXXXX
3.a.4.Fixed distance markingsXXXX
3.a.5.Edge markingsXXXX
3.a.6.Centerline stripesXXXX
3.b.The lighting for each “in-use” runway
3.b.1.Threshold lightsXXXX
3.b.2.Edge lightsXXXX
3.b.3.End lightsXXXX
3.b.4.Centerline lightsXXXX
3.b.5.Touchdown zone lights, if appropriateXXXX
3.b.6.Leadoff lights, if appropriateXXXX
3.b.7.Appropriate visual landing aid(s) for that runwayXXXX
3.b.8.Appropriate approach lighting system for that runwayXXXX
3.c.The taxiway surface and markings associated with each “in-use” runway:
3.c.1.EdgeXXXX
3.c.2.CenterlineXXXX
3.c.3.Runway hold linesXXXX
3.c.4.ILS critical area markingsXXXX
3.d.The taxiway lighting associated with each “in-use” runway:
3.d.1.EdgeXX
3.d.2.CenterlineXXXX
3.d.3.Runway hold and ILS critical area lightsXXXX
4.Required model correlation with other aspects of the airport environment simulation The following are the minimum model correlation tests that must be conducted for simulators at Levels A, B, C, and D.
4.a.The airport model must be properly aligned with the navigational aids that are associated with operations at the “in-use” runwayXXXX
4.b.Slopes in runways, taxiways, and ramp areas, if depicted in the visual scene, must not cause distracting or unrealistic effectsXXXX
5.Correlation with airplane and associated equipment. The following are the minimum correlation comparisons that must be made for simulators at Levels A, B, C, and D.
5.a.Visual system compatibility with aerodynamic programmingXXXX
5.b.Accurate portrayal of environment relating to flight simulator attitudesXXXX
5.c.Visual cues to assess sink rate and depth perception during landingsXXX
5.d.Visual effects for each visible, own-ship, airplane external light(s)XXX
6.Scene quality. The following are the minimum scene quality tests that must be conducted for simulators at Levels A, B, C, and D.
6.a.Surfaces and textural cues must be free of apparent and distracting quantization (aliasing)XX
6.b.Correct color and realistic textural cuesXX
6.c.Light points free from distracting jitter, smearing or streakingXXXX
7.Instructor controls of the following: The following are the minimum instructor controls that must be available in simulators at Levels A, B, C, and D.
7.a.Environmental effects, e.g., cloud base (if used), cloud effects, cloud density, visibility in statute miles/kilometers and RVR in feet/metersXXXX
7.b.Airport selectionXXXX
7.c.Airport lighting including variable intensityXXXX
7.d.Dynamic effects including ground and flight trafficXX
End QPS Requirements
Begin Information
8.Sponsors are not required to provide every detail of a runway, but the detail that is provided must be correct within the capabilities of the systemXXXX
End Information
eCFR graphic er20my16.064.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.065.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.066.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.067.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.068.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.069.gif

View or download PDF

Table A3E—Functions and Subjective Tests

QPS Requirements
Entry No.Sound systemSimulator level
ABCD
The following checks are performed during a normal flight profile with motion system ON.
1.PrecipitationXX
2.Rain removal equipment.XX
3.Significant airplane noises perceptible to the pilot during normal operationsXX
4.Abnormal operations for which there are associated sound cues including, engine malfunctions, landing gear/tire malfunctions, tail and engine pod strike and pressurization malfunctionXX
5.Sound of a crash when the flight simulator is landed in excess of limitationsXX
eCFR graphic er20my16.070.gif

View or download PDF

Table A3G—Functions and Subjective Tests

QPS Requirements
Entry No.Special effectsSimulator level
ABCD
Functions in this table are subject to evaluation only if appropriate for the airplane and/or the system is installed on the specific simulator.
1.Simulator Power Switch(es)XXXX
2.Airplane conditions
2.a.Gross weight, center of gravity, fuel loading and allocationXXXX
2.b.Airplane systems statusXXXX
2.c.Ground crew functions (e.g., ext. power, push back)XXXX
3.Airports
3.a.Number and selectionXXXX
3.b.Runway selectionXXXX
3.c.Runway surface condition (e.g., rough, smooth, icy, wet)XX
3.d.Preset positions (e.g., ramp, gate, #1 for takeoff, takeoff position, over FAF)XXXX
3.e.Lighting controlsXXXX
4.Environmental controls
4.aVisibility (statute miles (kilometers))XXXX
4.b.Runway visual range (in feet (meters))XXXX
4.c.TemperatureXXXX
4.d.Climate conditions (e.g., ice, snow, rain)XXXX
4.e.Wind speed and directionXXXX
4.f.WindshearXX
4.g.Clouds (base and tops)XXXX
5.Airplane system malfunctions (Inserting and deleting malfunctions into the simulator)XXXX
6.Locks, Freezes, and Repositioning
6.a.Problem (all) freeze/releaseXXXX
6.b.Position (geographic) freeze/releaseXXXX
6.c.Repositioning (locations, freezes, and releases)XXXX
6.d.Ground speed controlXXXX
7.Remote IOSXXXX
8.Sound Controls. On/off/adjustmentXXXX
9.Motion/Control Loading System
9.a.On/off/emergency stopXXXX
10.Observer Seats/Stations. Position/Adjustment/Positive restraint systemXXXX
 

Begin Information

1. Introduction

a. The following is an example test schedule for an Initial/Upgrade evaluation that covers the majority of the requirements set out in the Functions and Subjective test requirements. It is not intended that the schedule be followed line by line, rather, the example should be used as a guide for preparing a schedule that is tailored to the airplane, sponsor, and training task.

b. Functions and subjective tests should be planned. This information has been organized as a reference document with the considerations, methods, and evaluation notes for each individual aspect of the simulator task presented as an individual item. In this way the evaluator can design his or her own test plan, using the appropriate sections to provide guidance on method and evaluation criteria. Two aspects should be present in any test plan structure:

(1) An evaluation of the simulator to determine that it replicates the aircraft and performs reliably for an uninterrupted period equivalent to the length of a typical training session.

(2) The simulator should be capable of operating reliably after the use of training device functions such as repositions or malfunctions.

c. A detailed understanding of the training task will naturally lead to a list of objectives that the simulator should meet. This list will form the basis of the test plan. Additionally, once the test plan has been formulated, the initial conditions and the evaluation criteria should be established. The evaluator should consider all factors that may have an influence on the characteristics observed during particular training tasks in order to make the test plan successful.

2. Events

a. Initial Conditions

(1) Airport.

(2) QNH.

(3) Temperature.

(4) Wind/Crosswind.

(5) Zero Fuel Weight /Fuel/Gross Weight /Center of Gravity.

b. Initial Checks

(1) Documentation of Simulator.

(a) Simulator Acceptance Test Manuals.

(b) Simulator Approval Test Guide.

(c) Technical Logbook Open Item List.

(d) Daily Functional Pre-flight Check.

(2) Documentation of User/Carrier Flight Logs.

(a) Simulator Operating/Instructor Manual.

(b) Difference List (Aircraft/Simulator).

(c) Flight Crew Operating Manuals.

(d) Performance Data for Different Fields.

(e) Crew Training Manual.

(f) Normal/Abnormal/Emergency Checklists.

(3) Simulator External Checks.

(a) Appearance and Cleanliness.

(b) Stairway/Access Bridge.

(c) Emergency Rope Ladders.

(d) “Motion On”/“Flight in Progress” Lights.

(4) Simulator Internal Checks.

(a) Cleaning/Disinfecting Towels (for cleaning oxygen masks).

(b) Flight deck Layout (compare with difference list).

(5) Equipment.

(a) Quick Donning Oxygen Masks.

(b) Head Sets.

(c) Smoke Goggles.

(d) Sun Visors.

(e) Escape Rope.

(f) Chart Holders.

(g) Flashlights.

(h) Fire Extinguisher (inspection date).

(i) Crash Axe.

(j) Gear Pins.

c. Power Supply and APU Start Checks

(1) Batteries and Static Inverter.

(2) APU Start with Battery.

(3) APU Shutdown using Fire Handle.

(4) External Power Connection.

(5) APU Start with External Power.

(6) Abnormal APU Start/Operation.

d. Flight deck Checks

(1) Flight deck Preparation Checks.

(2) FMC Programming.

(3) Communications and Navigational Aids Checks.

e. Engine Start

(1) Before Start Checks.

(2) Battery start with Ground Air Supply Unit.

(3) Engine Crossbleed Start.

(4) Normal Engine Start.

(5) Abnormal Engine Starts.

(6) Engine Idle Readings.

(7) After Start Checks.

f. Taxi Checks

(1) Pushback/Powerback.

(2) Taxi Checks.

(3) Ground Handling Check:

(a) Power required to initiate ground roll.

(b) Thrust response.

(c) Nosewheel and Pedal Steering.

(d) Nosewheel Scuffing.

(e) Perform 180 degree turns.

(f) Brakes Response and Differential Braking using Normal, Alternate and Emergency.

(g) Brake Systems.

(h) Eye height and fore/aft position.

(4) Runway Roughness.

g. Visual Scene—Ground Assessment. Select 3 different airport models and perform the following checks with Day, Dusk and Night selected, as appropriate:

(1) Visual Controls.

(a) Daylight, Dusk, Night Scene Controls.

(b) Flight deck “Daylight” ambient lighting.

(c) Environment Light Controls.

(d) Runway Light Controls.

(e) Taxiway Light Controls.

(2) Airport Model Content.

(a) Ramp area for buildings, gates, airbridges, maintenance ground equipment, parked aircraft.

(b) Daylight shadows, night time light pools.

(c) Taxiways for correct markings, taxiway/runway, marker boards, CAT I and II/III hold points, taxiway shape/grass areas, taxiway light (positions and colors).

(d) Runways for correct markings, lead-off lights, boards, runway slope, runway light positions, and colors, directionality of runway lights.

(e) Airport environment for correct terrain and significant features.

(f) Visual scene quantization (aliasing), color, and occulting levels.

(3) Ground Traffic Selection.

(4) Environment Effects.

(a) Low cloud scene.

(i) Rain:

(A) Runway surface scene.

(B) Windshield wiper—operation and sound.

(ii) Hail:

(A) Runway surface scene.

(B) Windshield wiper—operation and sound.

(b) Lightning/thunder.

(c) Snow/ice runway surface scene.

(d) Fog.

h. Takeoff. Select one or several of the following test cases:

(1) T/O Configuration Warnings.

(2) Engine Takeoff Readings.

(3) Rejected Takeoff (Dry/Wet/Icy Runway) and check the following:

(a) Autobrake function.

(b) Anti-skid operation.

(c) Motion/visual effects during deceleration.

(d) Record stopping distance (use runway plot or runway lights remaining).

Continue taxiing along the runway while applying brakes and check the following:

(e) Center line lights alternating red/white for 2000 feet/600 meters.

(f) Center line lights all red for 1000 feet/300 meters.

(g) Runway end, red stop bars.

(h) Braking fade effect.

(i) Brake temperature indications.

(4) Engine Failure between VI and V2.

(5) Normal Takeoff:

(a) During ground roll check the following:

(i) Runway rumble.

(ii) Acceleration cues.

(iii) Groundspeed effects.

(iv) Engine sounds.

(v) Nosewheel and rudder pedal steering.

(b) During and after rotation, check the following:

(i) Rotation characteristics.

(ii) Column force during rotation.

(iii) Gear uplock sounds/bumps.

(iv) Effect of slat/flap retraction during climbout.

(6) Crosswind Takeoff (check the following):

(a) Tendency to turn into or out of the wind.

(b) Tendency to lift upwind wing as airspeed increases.

(7) Windshear during Takeoff (check the following):

(a) Controllable during windshear encounter.

(b) Performance adequate when using correct techniques.

(c) Windshear Indications satisfactory.

(d) Motion cues satisfactory (particularly turbulence).

(8) Normal Takeoff with Control Malfunction.

(9) Low Visibility T/O (check the following):

(a) Visual cues.

(b) Flying by reference to instruments.

(c) SID Guidance on LNAV.

i. Climb Performance. Select one or several of the following test cases:

(1) Normal Climb—Climb while maintaining recommended speed profile and note fuel, distance and time.

(2) Single Engine Climb—Trim aircraft in a zero wheel climb at V2.

Note: Up to 5° bank towards the operating engine(s) is permissible. Climb for 3 minutes and note fuel, distance, and time. Increase speed toward en route climb speed and retract flaps. Climb for 3 minutes and note fuel, distance, and time.

j. Systems Operation During Climb.

Check normal operation and malfunctions as appropriate for the following systems:

(1) Air conditioning/Pressurization/Ventilation.

(2) Autoflight.

(3) Communications.

(4) Electrical.

(5) Fuel.

(6) Icing Systems.

(7) Indicating and Recording Systems.

(8) Navigation/FMS.

(9) Pneumatics.

k. Cruise Checks. Select one or several of the following test cases:

(1) Cruise Performance.

(2) High Speed/High Altitude Handling (check the following):

(a) Overspeed warning.

(b) High Speed buffet.

(c) Aircraft control satisfactory.

(d) Envelope limiting functions on Computer Controlled Aircraft.

Reduce airspeed to below level flight buffet onset speed, start a turn, and check the following:

(e) High Speed buffet increases with G loading.

Reduce throttles to idle and start descent, deploy the speedbrake, and check the following:

(f) Speedbrake indications.

(g) Symmetrical deployment.

(h) Airframe buffet.

(i) Aircraft response hands off.

(3) Yaw Damper Operation. Switch off yaw dampers and autopilot. Initiate a Dutch roll and check the following:

(a) Aircraft dynamics.

(b) Simulator motion effects.

Switch on yaw dampers, re-initiate a Dutch roll and check the following:

(c) Damped aircraft dynamics.

(4) APU Operation.

(5) Engine Gravity Feed.

(6) Engine Shutdown and Driftdown Check: FMC operation Aircraft performance.

(7) Engine Relight.

l. Descent. Select one of the following test cases:

(1) Normal Descent. Descend while maintaining recommended speed profile and note fuel, distance and time.

(2) Cabin Depressurization/Emergency Descent.

m. Medium Altitude Checks. Select one or several of the following test cases:

(1) High Angle of Attack/Stall. Trim the aircraft at 1.4 Vs, establish 1 kt/sec2 deceleration rate, and check the following—

(a) System displays/operation satisfactory.

(b) Handling characteristics satisfactory.

(c) Stall and Stick shaker speed.

(d) Buffet characteristics and onset speed.

(e) Envelope limiting functions on Computer Controlled Aircraft.

Recover to straight and level flight and check the following:

(f) Handling characteristics satisfactory.

(2) Turning Flight. Roll aircraft to left, establish a 30° to 45° bank angle, and check the following:

(a) Stick force required, satisfactory.

(b) Wheel requirement to maintain bank angle.

(c) Slip ball response, satisfactory.

(d) Time to turn 180°.

Roll aircraft from 45° bank one way to 45° bank the opposite direction while maintaining altitude and airspeed—check the following:

(e) Controllability during maneuver.

(3) Degraded flight controls.

(4) Holding Procedure (check the following:)

(a) FMC operation.

(b) Autopilot auto thrust performance.

(5) Storm Selection (check the following:)

(a) Weather radar controls.

(b) Weather radar operation.

(c) Visual scene corresponds with WXR pattern.

(Fly through storm center, and check the following:)

(d) Aircraft enters cloud.

(e) Aircraft encounters representative turbulence.

(f) Rain/hail sound effects evident.

As aircraft leaves storm area, check the following:

(g) Storm effects disappear.

(6) TCAS (check the following:)

(a) Traffic appears on visual display.

(b) Traffic appears on TCAS display(s).

As conflicting traffic approaches, take relevant avoiding action, and check the following:

(c) Visual and TCAS system displays.

n. Approach and Landing. Select one or several of the following test cases while monitoring flight control and hydraulic systems for normal operation and with malfunctions selected:

(1) Flaps/Gear Normal Operation. Check the following:

(a) Time for extension/retraction.

(b) Buffet characteristics.

(2) Normal Visual Approach and Landing.

Fly a normal visual approach and landing—check the following:

(a) Aircraft handling.

(b) Spoiler operation.

(c) Reverse thrust operation.

(d) Directional control on the ground.

(e) Touchdown cues for main and nosewheel.

(f) Visual cues.

(g) Motion cues.

(h) Sound cues.

(i) Brake and anti-skid operation.

(3) Flaps/Gear Abnormal Operation or with hydraulic malfunctions.

(4) Abnormal Wing Flaps/Slats Landing.

(5) Manual Landing with Control Malfunction.

(a) Aircraft handling.

(b) Radio aids and instruments.

(c) Airport model content and cues.

(d) Motion cues.

(e) Sound cues.

(6) Non-precision Approach—All Engines Operating.

(a) Aircraft handling.

(b) Radio Aids and instruments.

(c) Airport model content and cues.

(d) Motion cues.

(e) Sound cues.

(7) Circling Approach.

(a) Aircraft handling.

(c) Radio Aids and instruments.

(d) Airport model content and cues.

(e) Motion cues.

(f) Sound cues.

(8) Non-precision Approach—One Engine Inoperative.

(a) Aircraft handling.

(b) Radio Aids and instruments.

(c) Airport model content and cues.

(d) Motion cues.

(e) Sound cues.

(9) One Engine Inoperative Go-around.

(a) Aircraft handling.

(b) Radio Aids and instruments.

(c) Airport model content and cues.

(d) Motion cues.

(e) Sound cues.

(10) CAT I Approach and Landing with raw-data ILS.

(a) Aircraft handling.

(b) Radio Aids and instruments.

(c) Airport model content and cues.

(d) Motion cues.

(e) Sound cues.

(11) CAT I Approach and Landing with Limiting Crosswind.

(a) Aircraft handling.

(b) Radio Aids and instruments.

(c) Airport model content and cues.

(d) Motion cues.

(e) Sound cues.

(12) CAT I Approach with Windshear. Check the following:

(a) Controllable during windshear encounter.

(b) Performance adequate when using correct techniques.

(c) Windshear indications/warnings.

(d) Motion cues (particularly turbulence).

(13) CAT II Approach and Automatic Go-Around.

(14) CAT III Approach and Landing—System Malfunctions.

(15) CAT III Approach and Landing—1 Engine Inoperative.

(16) GPWS evaluation.

o. Visual Scene—In-Flight Assessment.

Select three (3) different visual models and perform the following checks with “day,” “dusk,” and “night” (as appropriate) selected. Reposition the aircraft at or below 2000 feet within 10 nm of the airfield. Fly the aircraft around the airport environment and assess control of the visual system and evaluate the Airport model content as described below:

(1) Visual Controls.

(a) Daylight, Dusk, Night Scene Controls.

(b) Environment Light Controls.

(c) Runway Light Controls.

(d) Taxiway Light Controls.

(e) Approach Light Controls.

(2) Airport model Content.

(a) Airport environment for correct terrain and significant features.

(b) Runways for correct markings, runway slope, directionality of runway lights.

(c) Visual scene for quantization (aliasing), color, and occulting.

Reposition the aircraft to a long, final approach for an “ILS runway.” Select flight freeze when the aircraft is 5-statute miles (sm)/8-kilometers (km) out and on the glide slope. Check the following:

(3) Airport model content.

(a) Airfield features.

(b) Approach lights.

(c) Runway definition.

(d) Runway definition.

(e) Runway edge lights and VASI lights.

(f) Strobe lights.

Release flight freeze. Continue flying the approach with NP engaged. Select flight freeze when aircraft is 3 sm/5 km out and on the glide slope. Check the following:

(4) Airport model Content.

(a) Runway centerline light.

(b) Taxiway definition and lights.

Release flight freeze and continue flying the approach with A/P engaged. Select flight freeze when aircraft is 2 sm/3 km out and on the glide slope. Check the following:

(5) Airport model content.

(a) Runway threshold lights.

(b) Touchdown zone lights.

At 200 ft radio altitude and still on glide slope, select Flight Freeze. Check the following:

(6) Airport model content.

(a) Runway markings.

Set the weather to Category I conditions and check the following:

(7) Airport model content.

(a) Visual ground segment.

Set the weather to Category II conditions, release Flight Freeze, re-select Flight Freeze at 100 feet radio altitude, and check the following:

(8) Airport model content.

(a) Visual ground segment.

Select night/dusk (twilight) conditions and check the following:

(9) Airport model content.

(a) Runway markings visible within landing light lobes.

Set the weather to Category III conditions, release Flight Freeze, re-select Flight Freeze at 50 feet radio altitude and check the following:

(10) Airport model content.

(a) Visual ground segment.

Set WX to a typical “missed approach? weather condition, release Flight Freeze, re-select Flight Freeze at 15 feet radio altitude, and check the following:

(11) Airport model content.

(a) Visual ground segment.

When on the ground, stop the aircraft. Set 0 feet RVR, ensure strobe/beacon tights are switched on and check the following:

(12) Airport model content.

(a) Visual effect of strobe and beacon.

Reposition to final approach, set weather to “Clear,” continue approach for an automatic landing, and check the following:

(13) Airport model content.

(a) Visual cues during flare to assess sink rate.

(b) Visual cues during flare to assess Depth perception.

(c) Flight deck height above ground.

After Landing Operations.

(1) After Landing Checks.

(2) Taxi back to gate. Check the following:

(a) Visual model satisfactory.

(b) Parking brake operation satisfactory.

(3) Shutdown Checks.

q. Crash Function.

(1) Gear-up Crash.

(2) Excessive rate of descent Crash.

(3) Excessive bank angle Crash.

eCFR graphic er09my08.005.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.006.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.008.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.009.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.010.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.011.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.012.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.013.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.014.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.015.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.016.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.017.gif

View or download PDF

Attachment 4 to Appendix A to Part 60—Figure A4H [Reserved]

   

eCFR graphic er09my08.019.gif

View or download PDF

Attachment 5 to Appendix A to Part 60—Simulator Qualification Requirements for Windshear Training Program Use

 

Begin QPS Requirements

1. Applicability

This attachment applies to all simulators, regardless of qualification level, that are used to satisfy the training requirements of an FAA-approved low-altitude windshear flight training program, or any FAA-approved training program that addresses windshear encounters.

2. Statement of Compliance and Capability (SOC)

a. The sponsor must submit an SOC confirming that the aerodynamic model is based on flight test data supplied by the airplane manufacturer or other approved data provider. The SOC must also confirm that any change to environmental wind parameters, including variances in those parameters for windshear conditions, once inserted for computation, result in the correct simulated performance. This statement must also include examples of environmental wind parameters currently evaluated in the simulator (such as crosswind takeoffs, crosswind approaches, and crosswind landings).

b. For simulators without windshear warning, caution, or guidance hardware in the original equipment, the SOC must also state that the simulation of the added hardware and/or software, including associated flight deck displays and annunciations, replicates the system(s) installed in the airplane. The statement must be accompanied by a block diagram depicting the input and output signal flow, and comparing the signal flow to the equipment installed in the airplane.

3. Models

The windshear models installed in the simulator software used for the qualification evaluation must do the following:

a. Provide cues necessary for recognizing windshear onset and potential performance degradation requiring a pilot to initiate recovery procedures. The cues must include all of the following, as appropriate for the portion of the flight envelope:

(1) Rapid airspeed change of at least ±15 knots (kts).

(2) Stagnation of airspeed during the takeoff roll.

(3) Rapid vertical speed change of at least ±500 feet per minute (fpm).

(4) Rapid pitch change of at least ±5°.

b. Be adjustable in intensity (or other parameter to achieve an intensity effect) to at least two (2) levels so that upon encountering the windshear the pilot may identify its presence and apply the recommended procedures for escape from such a windshear.

(1) If the intensity is lesser, the performance capability of the simulated airplane in the windshear permits the pilot to maintain a satisfactory flightpath; and

(2) If the intensity is greater, the performance capability of the simulated airplane in the windshear does not permit the pilot to maintain a satisfactory flightpath (crash). Note: The means used to accomplish the “nonsurvivable” scenario of paragraph 3.b.(2) of this attachment, that involve operational elements of the simulated airplane, must reflect the dispatch limitations of the airplane.

c. Be available for use in the FAA-approved windshear flight training program.

4. Demonstrations

a. The sponsor must identify one survivable takeoff windshear training model and one survivable approach windshear training model. The wind components of the survivable models must be presented in graphical format so that all components of the windshear are shown, including initiation point, variance in magnitude, and time or distance correlations. The simulator must be operated at the same gross weight, airplane configuration, and initial airspeed during the takeoff demonstration (through calm air and through the first selected survivable windshear), and at the same gross weight, airplane configuration, and initial airspeed during the approach demonstration (through calm air and through the second selected survivable windshear).

b. In each of these four situations, at an “initiation point” (i.e., where windshear onset is or should be recognized), the recommended procedures for windshear recovery are applied and the results are recorded as specified in paragraph 5 of this attachment.

c. These recordings are made without inserting programmed random turbulence. Turbulence that results from the windshear model is to be expected, and no attempt may be made to neutralize turbulence from this source.

d. The definition of the models and the results of the demonstrations of all four?(4) cases described in paragraph 4.a of this attachment, must be made a part of the MQTG.

5. Recording Parameters

a. In each of the four MQTG cases, an electronic recording (time history) must be made of the following parameters:

(1) Indicated or calibrated airspeed.

(2) Indicated vertical speed.

(3) Pitch attitude.

(4) Indicated or radio altitude.

(5) Angle of attack.

(6) Elevator position.

(7) Engine data (thrust, N1, or throttle position).

(8) Wind magnitudes (simple windshear model assumed).

b. These recordings must be initiated at least 10 seconds prior to the initiation point, and continued until recovery is complete or ground contact is made.

6. Equipment Installation and Operation

All windshear warning, caution, or guidance hardware installed in the simulator must operate as it operates in the airplane. For example, if a rapidly changing wind speed and/or direction would have caused a windshear warning in the airplane, the simulator must respond equivalently without instructor/evaluator intervention.

7. Qualification Test Guide

a. All QTG material must be forwarded to the NSPM.

b. A simulator windshear evaluation will be scheduled in accordance with normal procedures. Continuing qualification evaluation schedules will be used to the maximum extent possible.

c. During the on-site evaluation, the evaluator will ask the operator to run the performance tests and record the results. The results of these on-site tests will be compared to those results previously approved and placed in the QTG or MQTG, as appropriate.

d. QTGs for new (or MQTGs for upgraded) simulators must contain or reference the information described in paragraphs 2, 3, 4, and 5 of this attachment.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

8. Subjective Evaluation

The NSPM will fly the simulator in at least two of the available windshear scenarios to subjectively evaluate simulator performance as it encounters the programmed windshear conditions.

a. One scenario will include parameters that enable the pilot to maintain a satisfactory flightpath.

b. One scenario will include parameters that will not enable the pilot to maintain a satisfactory flightpath (crash).

c. Other scenarios may be examined at the NSPM's discretion.

9. Qualification Basis

The addition of windshear programming to a simulator in order to comply with the qualification for required windshear training does not change the original qualification basis of the simulator.

10. Demonstration Repeatability

For the purposes of demonstration repeatability, it is recommended that the simulator be flown by means of the simulator's autodrive function (for those simulators that have autodrive capability) during the demonstrations.

End Information

 

Attachment 6 to Appendix A to Part 60—FSTD Directives Applicable to Airplane Flight Simulators

Flight Simulation Training Device (FSTD) Directive

FSTD Directive 1. Applicable to all Full Flight Simulators (FFS), regardless of the original qualification basis and qualification date (original or upgrade), having Class II or Class III airport models available.

Agency: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

Action: This is a retroactive requirement to have all Class II or Class III airport models meet current requirements.

 

Summary: Notwithstanding the authorization listed in paragraph 13b in Appendices A and C of this part, this FSTD Directive requires each certificate holder to ensure that by May 30, 2009, except for the airport model(s) used to qualify the simulator at the designated level, each airport model used by the certificate holder's instructors or evaluators for training, checking, or testing under this chapter in an FFS, meets the definition of a Class II or Class III airport model as defined in 14CFR part 60. The completion of this requirement will not require a report, and the method used for keeping instructors and evaluators apprised of the airport models that meet Class II or Class III requirements on any given simulator is at the option of the certificate holder whose employees are using the FFS, but the method used must be available for review by the TPAA for that certificate holder.

Dates: FSTD Directive 1 becomes effective on May 30, 2008.

Specific Requirements:

1. Part 60 requires that each FSTD be:

a. Sponsored by a person holding or applying for an FAA operating certificate under Part 119, Part 141, or Part 142, or holding or applying for an FAA-approved training program under Part 63, Appendix C, for flight engineers, and

b. Evaluated and issued an SOQ for a specific FSTD level.

2. FFSs also require the installation of a visual system that is capable of providing an out-of-the-flight-deck view of airport models. However, historically these airport models were not routinely evaluated or required to meet any standardized criteria. This has led to qualified simulators containing airport models being used to meet FAA-approved training, testing, or checking requirements with potentially incorrect or inappropriate visual references.

3. To prevent this from occurring in the future, by May 30, 2009, except for the airport model(s) used to qualify the simulator at the designated level, each certificate holder must assure that each airport model used for training, testing, or checking under this chapter in a qualified FFS meets the definition of a Class II or Class III airport model as defined in Appendix F of this part.

4. These references describe the requirements for visual scene management and the minimum distances from which runway or landing area features must be visible for all levels of simulator. The airport model must provide, for each “in-use runway” or “in-use landing area,” runway or landing area surface and markings, runway or landing area lighting, taxiway surface and markings, and taxiway lighting. Additional requirements include correlation of the v airport models with other aspects of the airport environment, correlation of the aircraft and associated equipment, scene quality assessment features, and the control of these models the instructor must be able to exercise.

5. For circling approaches, all requirements of this section apply to the runway used for the initial approach and to the runway of intended landing.

6. The details in these models must be developed using airport pictures, construction drawings and maps, or other similar data, or developed in accordance with published regulatory material. However, this FSTD DIRECTIVE 1 does not require that airport models contain details that are beyond the initially designed capability of the visual system, as currently qualified. The recognized limitations to visual systems are as follows:

a. Visual systems not required to have runway numbers as a part of the specific runway marking requirements are:

(1) Link NVS and DNVS.

(2) Novoview 2500 and 6000.

(3) FlightSafety VITAL series up to, and including, VITAL III, but not beyond.

(4) Redifusion SP1, SP1T, and SP2.

b. Visual systems required to display runway numbers only for LOFT scenes are:

(1) FlightSafety VITAL IV.

(2) Redifusion SP3 and SP3T.

(3) Link-Miles Image II.

c. Visual systems not required to have accurate taxiway edge lighting are:

(1) Redifusion SP1.

(2) FlightSafety Vital IV.

(3) Link-Miles Image II and Image IIT

(4) XKD displays (even though the XKD image generator is capable of generating blue colored lights, the display cannot accommodate that color).

7. A copy of this Directive must be filed in the MQTG in the designated FSTD Directive Section, and its inclusion must be annotated on the Index of Effective FSTD Directives chart. See Attachment 4, Appendices A through D for a sample MQTG Index of Effective FSTD Directives chart.

Flight Simulation Training Device (FSTD) Directive

FSTD Directive 2. Applicable to all airplane Full Flight Simulators (FFS), regardless of the original qualification basis and qualification date (original or upgrade), used to conduct full stall training, upset recovery training, airborne icing training, and other flight training tasks as described in this Directive.

Agency: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

Action: This is a retroactive requirement for any FSTD being used to obtain training, testing, or checking credit in an FAA approved flight training program for the specific training maneuvers as defined in this Directive.

Summary: Notwithstanding the authorization listed in paragraph 13b in Appendix A of this Part, this FSTD Directive requires that each FSTD sponsor conduct additional subjective and objective testing, conduct required modifications, and apply for additional FSTD qualification under §60.16 to support continued qualification of the following flight training tasks where training, testing, or checking credit is being sought in a selected FSTD being used in an FAA approved flight training program:

a. Recognition of and Recovery from a Full Stall

b. Upset Prevention and Recovery

c. Engine and Airframe Icing

d. Takeoff and Landing with Gusting Crosswinds

e. Recovery from a Bounced Landing

The FSTD sponsor may elect to apply for additional qualification for any, all, or none of the above defined training tasks for a particular FSTD. After March 12, 2019, any FSTD used to conduct the above training tasks must be evaluated and issued additional qualification by the National Simulator Program Manager (NSPM) as defined in this Directive.

Dates: FSTD Directive No. 2 becomes effective on May 31, 2016.

For Further Information Contact: Larry McDonald, Air Transportation Division/National Simulator Program Branch, AFS-205, Federal Aviation Administration, P.O. Box 20636, Atlanta, GA 30320; telephone (404) 474-5620; email larry.e.mcdonald@faa.gov.

Specific Requirements

1. Part 60 requires that each FSTD be:

a. Sponsored by a person holding or applying for an FAA operating certificate under Part 119, Part 141, or Part 142, or holding or applying for an FAA-approved training program under Part 63, Appendix C, for flight engineers, and

b. Evaluated and issued a Statement of Qualification (SOQ) for a specific FSTD level.

2. The evaluation criteria contained in this Directive is intended to address specific training tasks that require additional evaluation to ensure adequate FSTD fidelity.

3. The requirements described in this Directive define additional qualification criteria for specific training tasks that are applicable only to those FSTDs that will be utilized to obtain training, testing, or checking credit in an FAA approved flight training program. In order to obtain additional qualification for the tasks described in this Directive, FSTD sponsors must request additional qualification in accordance with §60.16 and the requirements of this Directive. FSTDs that are found to meet the requirements of this Directive will have their Statement of Qualification (SOQ) amended to reflect the additional training tasks that the FSTD has been qualified to conduct. The additional qualification requirements as defined in this Directive are divided into the following training tasks:

a. Section I—Additional Qualification Requirements for Full Stall Training Tasks

b. Section II—Additional Qualification Requirements for Upset Prevention and Recovery Training Tasks

c. Section III—Additional Qualification Requirements for Engine and Airframe Icing Training Tasks

d. Section IV—Additional Qualification Requirements for Takeoff and Landing in Gusting Crosswinds

e. Section V—Additional Qualification Requirements for Bounced Landing Recovery Training Tasks

4. A copy of this Directive (along with all required Statements of Compliance and objective test results) must be filed in the MQTG in the designated FSTD Directive Section, and its inclusion must be annotated on the Index of Effective FSTD Directives chart. See Attachment 4, Appendix A for a sample MQTG Index of Effective FSTD Directives chart.

Section I—Evaluation Requirements for Full Stall Training Tasks

1. This section applies to previously qualified Level C and Level D FSTDs being used to obtain credit for stall training maneuvers beyond the first indication of a stall (such as stall warning system activation, stick shaker, etc.) in an FAA approved training program.

2. The evaluation requirements in this Directive are intended to validate FSTD fidelity at angles of attack sufficient to identify the stall, to demonstrate aircraft performance degradation in the stall, and to demonstrate recovery techniques from a fully stalled flight condition.

3. After March 12, 2019, any FSTD being used to obtain credit for full stall training maneuvers in an FAA approved training program must be evaluated and issued additional qualification in accordance with this Directive and the following sections of Appendix A of this Part:

a. Table A1A, General Requirements, Section 2.m. (High Angle of Attack Modeling)

b. Table A1A, General Requirements, Section 3.f. (Stick Pusher System) [where applicable]

c. Table A2A, Objective Testing Requirements, Test 2.a.10 (Stick Pusher Force Calibration) [where applicable]

d. Table A2A, Objective Testing Requirements, Test 2.c.8.a (Stall Characteristics)

e. Table A2A, Objective Testing Requirements, Test 3.f.5 (Characteristic Motion Vibrations—Stall Buffet) [See paragraph 4 of this section for applicability on previously qualified FSTDs]

f. Table A3A, Functions and Subjective Testing Requirements, Test 5.b.1.b. (High Angle of Attack Maneuvers)

g. Attachment 7, Additional Simulator Qualification Requirements for Stall, Upset Prevention and Recovery, and Engine and Airframe Icing Training Tasks (High Angle of Attack Model Evaluation)

4. For FSTDs initially qualified before May 31, 2016, including FSTDs that are initially qualified under the grace period conditions as defined in §60.15(c):

a. Objective testing for stall characteristics (Table A2A, test 2.c.8.a.) will only be required for the (wings level) second segment climb and approach or landing flight conditions. In lieu of objective testing for the high altitude cruise and turning flight stall conditions, these maneuvers may be subjectively evaluated by a qualified subject matter expert (SME) pilot and addressed in the required statement of compliance.

b. Where existing flight test validation data in the FSTD's Master Qualification Test Guide (MQTG) is missing required parameters or is otherwise unsuitable to fully meet the objective testing requirements of this Directive, the FAA may accept alternate sources of validation, including subjective validation by an SME pilot with direct experience in the stall characteristics of the aircraft.

c. Objective testing for characteristic motion vibrations (Stall buffet—Table A2A, test 3.f.5) is not required where the FSTD's stall buffets have been subjectively evaluated by an SME pilot. For previously qualified Level D FSTDs that currently have objective stall buffet tests in their approved MQTG, the results of these existing tests must be provided to the FAA with the updated stall and stall buffet models in place.

d. As described in Attachment 7 of this Appendix, the FAA may accept a statement of compliance from the data provider which confirms the stall characteristics have been subjectively evaluated by an SME pilot on an engineering simulator or development simulator that is acceptable to the FAA. Where this evaluation takes place on an engineering or development simulator, additional objective “proof-of-match” testing for all flight conditions as described in tests 2.c.8.a. and 3.f.5.will be required to verify the implementation of the stall model and stall buffets on the training FSTD.

5. Where qualification is being sought to conduct full stall training tasks in accordance with this Directive, the FSTD Sponsor must conduct the required evaluations and modifications as prescribed in this Directive and report compliance to the NSPM in accordance with §60.23 using the NSP's standardized FSTD Sponsor Notification Form. At a minimum, this form must be accompanied with the following information:

a. A description of any modifications to the FSTD (in accordance with §60.23) necessary to meet the requirements of this Directive.

b. Statements of Compliance (High Angle of Attack Modeling/Stick Pusher System)—See Table A1A, Section 2.m., 3.f., and Attachment 7

c. Statement of Compliance (SME Pilot Evaluation)—See Table A1A, Section 2.m. and Attachment 7

d. Copies of the required objective test results as described above in sections 3.c., 3.d., and 3.e.

6. The NSPM will review each submission to determine if the requirements of this Directive have been met and respond to the FSTD Sponsor as described in §60.23(c). Additional NSPM conducted FSTD evaluations may be required before the modified FSTD is placed into service. This response, along with any noted restrictions, will serve as interim qualification for full stall training tasks until such time that a permanent change is made to the Statement of Qualification (SOQ) at the FSTD's next scheduled evaluation.

Section II—Evaluation Requirements for Upset Prevention and Recovery Training Tasks

1. This section applies to previously qualified FSTDs being used to obtain training, testing, or checking credits for upset prevention and recovery training tasks (UPRT) as defined in Appendix A, Table A1A, Section 2.n. of this part. Additionally, FSTDs being used for unusual attitude training maneuvers that are intended to exceed the parameters of an aircraft upset must also be evaluated and qualified for UPRT under this section. These parameters include pitch attitudes greater than 25 degrees nose up; pitch attitudes greater than 10 degrees nose down, and bank angles greater than 45 degrees.

2. The requirements contained in this section are intended to define minimum standards for evaluating an FSTD for use in upset prevention and recovery training maneuvers that may exceed an aircraft's normal flight envelope. These standards include the evaluation of qualified training maneuvers against the FSTD's validation envelope and providing the instructor with minimum feedback tools for the purpose of determining if a training maneuver is conducted within FSTD validation limits and the aircraft's operating limits.

3. This Directive contains additional subjective testing that exceeds the evaluation requirements of previously qualified FSTDs. Where aerodynamic modeling data or validation data is not available or insufficient to meet the requirements of this Directive, the NSPM may limit additional qualification to certain upset prevention and recovery maneuvers where adequate data exists.

4. After March 12, 2019, any FSTD being used to obtain training, testing, or checking credit for upset prevention and recovery training tasks in an FAA approved flight training program must be evaluated and issued additional qualification in accordance with this Directive and the following sections of Appendix A of this part:

a. Table A1A, General Requirements, Section 2.n. (Upset Prevention and Recovery)

b. Table A3A, Functions and Subjective Testing, Test 5.b.3. (Upset Prevention and Recovery Maneuvers)

c. Attachment 7, Additional Simulator Qualification Requirements for Stall, Upset Prevention and Recovery, and Engine and Airframe Icing Training Tasks (Upset Prevention and Recovery Training Maneuver Evaluation)

5. Where qualification is being sought to conduct upset prevention and recovery training tasks in accordance with this Directive, the FSTD Sponsor must conduct the required evaluations and modifications as prescribed in this Directive and report compliance to the NSPM in accordance with §60.23 using the NSP's standardized FSTD Sponsor Notification Form. At a minimum, this form must be accompanied with the following information:

a. A description of any modifications to the FSTD (in accordance with §60.23) necessary to meet the requirements of this Directive.

b. Statement of Compliance (FSTD Validation Envelope)—See Table A1A, Section 2.n. and Attachment 7

c. A confirmation statement that the modified FSTD has been subjectively evaluated by a qualified pilot as described in §60.16(a)(1)(iii).

6. The NSPM will review each submission to determine if the requirements of this Directive have been met and respond to the FSTD Sponsor as described in §60.23(c). Additional NSPM conducted FSTD evaluations may be required before the modified FSTD is placed into service. This response, along with any noted restrictions, will serve as an interim qualification for upset prevention and recovery training tasks until such time that a permanent change is made to the Statement of Qualification (SOQ) at the FSTD's next scheduled evaluation.

Section III—Evaluation Requirements for Engine and Airframe Icing Training Tasks

1. This section applies to previously qualified Level C and Level D FSTDs being used to obtain training, testing, or checking credits in maneuvers that demonstrate the effects of engine and airframe ice accretion.

2. The requirements in this section are intended to supersede and improve upon existing Level C and Level D FSTD evaluation requirements on the effects of engine and airframe icing. The requirements define a minimum level of fidelity required to adequately simulate the aircraft specific aerodynamic characteristics of an in-flight encounter with engine and airframe ice accretion as necessary to accomplish training objectives.

3. This Directive contains additional subjective testing that exceeds the evaluation requirements of previously qualified FSTDs. Where aerodynamic modeling data is not available or insufficient to meet the requirements of this Directive, the NSPM may limit qualified engine and airframe icing maneuvers where sufficient aerodynamic modeling data exists.

4. After March 12, 2019, any FSTD being used to conduct training tasks that demonstrate the effects of engine and airframe icing must be evaluated and issued additional qualification in accordance with this Directive and the following sections of Appendix A of this part:

a. Table A1A, General Requirements, Section 2.j. (Engine and Airframe Icing)

b. Attachment 7, Additional Simulator Qualification Requirements for Stall, Upset Prevention and Recovery, and Engine and Airframe Icing Training Tasks (Engine and Airframe Icing Evaluation; Paragraphs 1, 2, and 3). Objective demonstration tests of engine and airframe icing effects (Attachment 2, Table A2A, test 2.i. of this Appendix) are not required for previously qualified FSTDs.

5. Where continued qualification is being sought to conduct engine and airframe icing training tasks in accordance with this Directive, the FSTD Sponsor must conduct the required evaluations and modifications as prescribed in this Directive and report compliance to the NSPM in accordance with §60.23 using the NSP's standardized FSTD Sponsor Notification Form. At a minimum, this form must be accompanied with the following information:

a. A description of any modifications to the FSTD (in accordance with §60.23) necessary to meet the requirements of this Directive;

b. Statement of Compliance (Ice Accretion Model)—See Table A1A, Section 2.j., and Attachment 7; and

c. A confirmation statement that the modified FSTD has been subjectively evaluated by a qualified pilot as described in §60.16(a)(1)(iii).

6. The NSPM will review each submission to determine if the requirements of this Directive have been met and respond to the FSTD Sponsor as described in §60.23(c). Additional NSPM conducted FSTD evaluations may be required before the modified FSTD is placed into service. This response, along with any noted restrictions, will serve as an interim update to the FSTD's Statement of Qualification (SOQ) until such time that a permanent change is made to the SOQ at the FSTD's next scheduled evaluation.

Section IV—Evaluation Requirements for Takeoff and Landing in Gusting Crosswind

1. This section applies to previously qualified FSTDs that will be used to obtain training, testing, or checking credits in takeoff and landing tasks in gusting crosswinds as part of an FAA approved training program. The requirements of this Directive are applicable only to those Level B and higher FSTDs that are qualified to conduct takeoff and landing training tasks.

2. The requirements in this section introduce new minimum simulator requirements for gusting crosswinds during takeoff and landing training tasks as well as additional subjective testing that exceeds the evaluation requirements of previously qualified FSTDs.

3. After March 12, 2019, any FSTD that is used to conduct gusting crosswind takeoff and landing training tasks must be evaluated and issued additional qualification in accordance with this Directive and the following sections of Appendix A of this part:

a. Table A1A, General Requirements, Section 2.d.3. (Ground Handling Characteristics);

b. Table A3A, Functions and Subjective Testing Requirements, test 3.a.3 (Takeoff, Crosswind—Maximum Demonstrated and Gusting Crosswind); and

c. Table A3A, Functions and Subjective Testing Requirements, test 8.d. (Approach and landing with crosswind—Maximum Demonstrated and Gusting Crosswind).

4. Where qualification is being sought to conduct gusting crosswind training tasks in accordance with this Directive, the FSTD Sponsor must conduct the required evaluations and modifications as prescribed in this Directive and report compliance to the NSPM in accordance with §60.23 using the NSP's standardized FSTD Sponsor Notification Form. At a minimum, this form must be accompanied with the following information:

a. A description of any modifications to the FSTD (in accordance with §60.23) necessary to meet the requirements of this Directive.

b. Statement of Compliance (Gusting Crosswind Profiles)—See Table A1A, Section 2.d.3.

c. A confirmation statement that the modified FSTD has been subjectively evaluated by a qualified pilot as described in §60.16(a)(1)(iii).

5. The NSPM will review each submission to determine if the requirements of this Directive have been met and respond to the FSTD Sponsor as described in §60.23(c). Additional NSPM conducted FSTD evaluations may be required before the modified FSTD is placed into service. This response, along with any noted restrictions, will serve as an interim qualification for gusting crosswind training tasks until such time that a permanent change is made to the Statement of Qualification (SOQ) at the FSTD's next scheduled evaluation.

Section V—Evaluation Requirements for Bounced Landing Recovery Training Tasks

1. This section applies to previously qualified FSTDs that will be used to obtain training, testing, or checking credits in bounced landing recovery as part of an FAA approved training program. The requirements of this Directive are applicable only to those Level B and higher FSTDs that are qualified to conduct takeoff and landing training tasks.

2. The evaluation requirements in this section are intended to introduce new evaluation requirements for bounced landing recovery training tasks and contains additional subjective testing that exceeds the evaluation requirements of previously qualified FSTDs.

3. After March 12, 2019, any FSTD that is used to conduct bounced landing training tasks must be evaluated and issued additional qualification in accordance with this Directive and the following sections of Appendix A of this Part:

a. Table A1A, General Requirements, Section 2.d.2. (Ground Reaction Characteristics)

b. Table A3A, Functions and Subjective Testing Requirements, test 9.e. (Missed Approach—Bounced Landing)

4. Where qualification is being sought to conduct bounced landing training tasks in accordance with this Directive, the FSTD Sponsor must conduct the required evaluations and modifications as prescribed in this Directive and report compliance to the NSPM in accordance with §60.23 using the NSP's standardized FSTD Sponsor Notification Form. At a minimum, this form must be accompanied with the following information:

a. A description of any modifications to the FSTD (in accordance with §60.23) necessary to meet the requirements of this Directive; and

b. A confirmation statement that the modified FSTD has been subjectively evaluated by a qualified pilot as described in §60.16(a)(1)(iii).

5. The NSPM will review each submission to determine if the requirements of this Directive have been met and respond to the FSTD Sponsor as described in §60.23(c). Additional NSPM conducted FSTD evaluations may be required before the modified FSTD is placed into service. This response, along with any noted restrictions, will serve as an interim qualification for bounced landing recovery training tasks until such time that a permanent change is made to the Statement of Qualification (SOQ) at the FSTD's next scheduled evaluation.

Attachment 7 to Appendix A to Part 60—Additional Simulator Qualification Requirements for Stall, Upset Prevention and Recovery, and Engine and Airframe Icing Training Tasks

Begin QPS Requirements

A. High Angle of Attack Model Evaluation (Table A1A, Section 2.m.)

1. Applicability: This attachment applies to all simulators that are used to satisfy training requirements for stall maneuvers that are conducted at angles of attack beyond the activation of the stall warning system. This attachment is not applicable for those FSTDs that are only qualified for approach to stall maneuvers where recovery is initiated at the first indication of the stall. The material in this section is intended to supplement the general requirements, objective testing requirements, and subjective testing requirements contained within Tables A1A, A2A, and A3A, respectively.

2. General Requirements: The requirements for high angle of attack modeling are intended to evaluate the recognition cues and performance and handling qualities of a developing stall through the stall identification angle-of-attack and recovery. Strict time-history-based evaluations against flight test data may not adequately validate the aerodynamic model in an unsteady and potentially unstable flight regime, such as stalled flight. As a result, the objective testing requirements defined in Table A2A do not prescribe strict tolerances on any parameter at angles of attack beyond the stall identification angle of attack. In lieu of mandating such objective tolerances, a Statement of Compliance (SOC) will be required to define the source data and methods used to develop the stall aerodynamic model.

3. Fidelity Requirements: The requirements defined for the evaluation of full stall training maneuvers are intended to provide the following levels of fidelity:

a. Airplane type specific recognition cues of the first indication of the stall (such as the stall warning system or aerodynamic stall buffet);

b. Airplane type specific recognition cues of an impending aerodynamic stall; and

c. Recognition cues and handling qualities from the stall break through recovery that are sufficiently exemplar of the airplane being simulated to allow successful completion of the stall recovery training tasks.

For the purposes of stall maneuver evaluation, the term “exemplar” is defined as a level of fidelity that is type specific of the simulated airplane to the extent that the training objectives can be satisfactorily accomplished.

4. Statement of Compliance (Aerodynamic Model): At a minimum, the following must be addressed in the SOC:

a. Source Data and Modeling Methods: The SOC must identify the sources of data used to develop the aerodynamic model. These data sources may be from the airplane original equipment manufacturer (OEM), the original FSTD manufacturer/data provider, or other data provider acceptable to the FAA. Of particular interest is a mapping of test points in the form of alpha/beta envelope plot for a minimum of flaps up and flaps down aircraft configurations. For the flight test data, a list of the types of maneuvers used to define the aerodynamic model for angle of attack ranges greater than the first indication of stall must be provided per flap setting. In cases where it is impractical to develop and validate a stall model with flight-test data (e.g., due to safety concerns involving the collection of flight test data past a certain angle of attack), the data provider is expected to make a reasonable attempt to develop a stall model through the required angle of attack range using analytical methods and empirical data (e.g., wind-tunnel data);

b. Validity Range: The FSTD sponsor must declare the range of angle of attack and sideslip where the aerodynamic model remains valid for training. For stall recovery training tasks, satisfactory aerodynamic model fidelity must be shown through at least 10 degrees beyond the stall identification angle of attack. For the purposes of determining this validity range, the stall identification angle of attack is defined as the angle of attack where the pilot is given a clear and distinctive indication to cease any further increase in angle of attack where one or more of the following characteristics occur:

i. No further increase in pitch occurs when the pitch control is held at the full aft stop for 2 seconds, leading to an inability to arrest descent rate;

ii. An uncommanded nose down pitch that cannot be readily arrested, which may be accompanied by an uncommanded rolling motion;

iii. Buffeting of a magnitude and severity that is a strong and effective deterrent to further increase in angle of attack; and

iv. Activation of a stick pusher.

The model validity range must also be capable of simulating the airplane dynamics as a result of a pilot initially resisting the stick pusher in training. For aircraft equipped with a stall envelope protection system, the model validity range must extend to 10 degrees of angle of attack beyond the stall identification angle of attack with the protection systems disabled or otherwise degraded (such as a degraded flight control mode as a result of a pitot/static system failure).

c. Model Characteristics: Within the declared range of model validity, the SOC must address, and the aerodynamic model must incorporate, the following stall characteristics where applicable by aircraft type:

i. Degradation in static/dynamic lateral-directional stability;

ii. Degradation in control response (pitch, roll, yaw);

iii. Uncommanded roll acceleration or roll-off requiring significant control deflection to counter;

iv. Apparent randomness or non-repeatability;

v. Changes in pitch stability;

vi. Stall hysteresis;

vii. Mach effects;

viii. Stall buffet; and

ix. Angle of attack rate effects.

An overview of the methodology used to address these features must be provided.

5. Statement of Compliance (Subject Matter Expert Pilot Evaluation): The sponsor must provide an SOC that confirms the FSTD has been subjectively evaluated by a subject matter expert (SME) pilot who is knowledgeable of the aircraft's stall characteristics. In order to qualify as an acceptable SME to evaluate the FSTD's stall characteristics, the SME must meet the following requirements:

a. Has held a type rating/qualification in the aircraft being simulated;

b. Has direct experience in conducting stall maneuvers in an aircraft that shares the same type rating as the make, model, and series of the simulated aircraft. This stall experience must include hands on manipulation of the controls at angles of attack sufficient to identify the stall (e.g., deterrent buffet, stick pusher activation, etc.) through recovery to stable flight;

c. Where the SME's stall experience is on an airplane of a different make, model, and series within the same type rating, differences in aircraft specific stall recognition cues and handling characteristics must be addressed using available documentation. This documentation may include aircraft operating manuals, aircraft manufacturer flight test reports, or other documentation that describes the stall characteristics of the aircraft; and

d. Must be familiar with the intended stall training maneuvers to be conducted in the FSTD (e.g., general aircraft configurations, stall entry methods, etc.) and the cues necessary to accomplish the required training objectives. The purpose of this requirement is to ensure that the stall model has been sufficiently evaluated in those general aircraft configurations and stall entry methods that will likely be conducted in training.

This SOC will only be required once at the time the FSTD is initially qualified for stall training tasks as long as the FSTD's stall model remains unmodified from what was originally evaluated and qualified. Where an FSTD shares common aerodynamic and flight control models with that of an engineering simulator or development simulator that is acceptable to the FAA, the FAA will accept an SOC from the data provider that confirms the stall characteristics have been subjectively assessed by an SME pilot on the engineering or development simulator.

An FSTD sponsor may submit a request to the Administrator for approval of a deviation from the SME pilot experience requirements in this paragraph. This request for deviation must include the following information:

a. An assessment of pilot availability that demonstrates that a suitably qualified pilot meeting the experience requirements of this section cannot be practically located; and

b. Alternative methods to subjectively evaluate the FSTD's capability to provide the stall recognition cues and handling characteristics needed to accomplish the training objectives.

B. Upset Prevention and Recovery Training (UPRT) Maneuver Evaluation (Table A1A, Section 2.n.)

1. Applicability: This attachment applies to all simulators that are used to satisfy training requirements for upset prevention and recovery training (UPRT) maneuvers. For the purposes of this attachment (as defined in the Airplane Upset Recovery Training Aid), an aircraft upset is generally defined as an airplane unintentionally exceeding the following parameters normally experienced in line operations or training:

a. Pitch attitude greater than 25 degrees nose up;

b. Pitch attitude greater than 10 degrees nose down;

c. Bank angles greater than 45 degrees; and

d. Within the above parameters, but flying at airspeeds inappropriate for the conditions.

FSTDs that will be used to conduct training maneuvers where the FSTD is either repositioned into an aircraft upset condition or an artificial stimulus (such as weather phenomena or system failures) is applied that is intended to result in a flightcrew entering an aircraft upset condition must be evaluated and qualified in accordance with this section.

2. General Requirements: The general requirement for UPRT qualification in Table A1A defines three basic elements required for qualifying an FSTD for UPRT maneuvers:

a. FSTD Training Envelope: Valid UPRT should be conducted within the high and moderate confidence regions of the FSTD validation envelope as defined in paragraph 3 below.

b. Instructor Feedback: Provides the instructor/evaluator with a minimum set of feedback tools to properly evaluate the trainee's performance in accomplishing an upset recovery training task.

c. Upset Scenarios: Where dynamic upset scenarios or aircraft system malfunctions are used to stimulate the FSTD into an aircraft upset condition, specific guidance must be available to the instructor on the IOS that describes how the upset scenario is driven along with any malfunction or degradation in FSTD functionality that is required to stimulate the upset.

3. FSTD Validation Envelope: For the purposes of this attachment, the term “flight envelope” refers to the entire domain in which the FSTD is capable of being flown with a degree of confidence that the FSTD responds similarly to the airplane. This envelope can be further divided into three subdivisions (see Appendix 3-D of the Airplane Upset Recovery Training Aid):

a. Flight test validated region: This is the region of the flight envelope which has been validated with flight test data, typically by comparing the performance of the FSTD against the flight test data through tests incorporated in the QTG and other flight test data utilized to further extend the model beyond the minimum requirements. Within this region, there is high confidence that the simulator responds similarly to the aircraft. Note that this region is not strictly limited to what has been tested in the QTG; as long as the aerodynamics mathematical model has been conformed to the flight test results, that portion of the mathematical model can be considered to be within the flight test validated region.

b. Wind tunnel and/or analytical region: This is the region of the flight envelope for which the FSTD has not been compared to flight test data, but for which there has been wind tunnel testing or the use of other reliable predictive methods (typically by the aircraft manufacturer) to define the aerodynamic model. Any extensions to the aerodynamic model that have been evaluated in accordance with the definition of an exemplar stall model (as described in the stall maneuver evaluation section) must be clearly indicated. Within this region, there is moderate confidence that the simulator will respond similarly to the aircraft.

c. Extrapolated: This is the region extrapolated beyond the flight test validated and wind tunnel/analytical regions. The extrapolation may be a linear extrapolation, a holding of the last value before the extrapolation began, or some other set of values. Whether this extrapolated data is provided by the aircraft or simulator manufacturer, it is a “best guess” only. Within this region, there is low confidence that the simulator will respond similarly to the aircraft. Brief excursions into this region may still retain a moderate confidence level in FSTD fidelity; however, the instructor should be aware that the FSTD's response may deviate from the actual aircraft.

4. Instructor Feedback Mechanism: For the instructor/evaluator to provide feedback to the student during UPRT maneuver training, additional information must be accessible that indicates the fidelity of the simulation, the magnitude of trainee's flight control inputs, and aircraft operational limits that could potentially affect the successful completion of the maneuver(s). At a minimum, the following must be available to the instructor/evaluator:

a. FSTD Validation Envelope: The FSTD must employ a method to display the FSTD's expected fidelity with respect to the FSTD validation envelope. This may be displayed as an angle of attack vs sideslip (alpha/beta) envelope cross-plot on the Instructor Operating System (IOS) or other alternate method to clearly convey the FSTD's fidelity level during the maneuver. The cross-plot or other alternative method must display the relevant validity regions for flaps up and flaps down at a minimum. This validation envelope must be derived by the aerodynamic data provider or derived using information and data sources provided by the original aerodynamic data provider.

b. Flight Control Inputs: The FSTD must employ a method for the instructor/evaluator to assess the trainee's flight control inputs during the upset recovery maneuver. Additional parameters, such as cockpit control forces (forces applied by the pilot to the controls) and the flight control law mode for fly-by-wire aircraft, must be portrayed in this feedback mechanism as well. For passive sidesticks, whose displacement is the flight control input, the force applied by the pilot to the controls does not need to be displayed. This tool must include a time history or other equivalent method of recording flight control positions.

c. Aircraft Operational Limits: The FSTD must employ a method to provide the instructor/evaluator with real-time information concerning the aircraft operating limits. The simulated aircraft's parameters must be displayed dynamically in real-time and also provided in a time history or equivalent format. At a minimum, the following parameters must be available to the instructor:

i. Airspeed and airspeed limits, including the stall speed and maximum operating limit airspeed (Vmo/Mmo);

ii. Load factor and operational load factor limits; and

iii. Angle of attack and the stall identification angle of attack. See section A, paragraph 4.b. of this attachment for additional information concerning the definition of the stall identification angle of attack. This parameter may be displayed in conjunction with the FSTD validation envelope.

End QPS Requirements

Begin Information

An example FSTD “alpha/beta” envelope display and IOS feedback mechanism are shown below in Figure 1 and Figure 2. The following examples are provided as guidance material on one possible method to display the required UPRT feedback parameters on an IOS display. FSTD sponsors may develop other methods and feedback mechanisms that provide the required parameters and support the training program objectives.

eCFR graphic er30mr16.116.gif

View or download PDF

End Information

Begin QPS Requirements

C. Engine and Airframe Icing Evaluation (Table A1A, Section 2.j.)

1. Applicability: This section applies to all FSTDs that are used to satisfy training requirements for engine and airframe icing. New general requirements and objective requirements for simulator qualification have been developed to define aircraft specific icing models that support training objectives for the recognition and recovery from an in-flight ice accretion event.

2. General Requirements: The qualification of engine and airframe icing consists of the following elements that must be considered when developing ice accretion models for use in training:

a. Ice accretion models must be developed to account for training the specific skills required for recognition of ice accumulation and execution of the required response.

b. Ice accretion models must be developed in a manner to contain aircraft specific recognition cues as determined with aircraft OEM supplied data or other suitable analytical methods.

c. At least one qualified ice accretion model must be objectively tested to demonstrate that the model has been implemented correctly and generates the correct cues as necessary for training.

3. Statement of Compliance: The SOC as described in Table A1A, Section 2.j. must contain the following information to support FSTD qualification of aircraft specific ice accretion models:

a. A description of expected aircraft specific recognition cues and degradation effects due to a typical in-flight icing encounter. Typical cues may include loss of lift, decrease in stall angle of attack, changes in pitching moment, decrease in control effectiveness, and changes in control forces in addition to any overall increase in drag. This description must be based upon relevant source data, such as aircraft OEM supplied data, accident/incident data, or other acceptable data sources. Where a particular airframe has demonstrated vulnerabilities to a specific type of ice accretion (due to accident/incident history) which requires specific training (such as supercooled large-droplet icing or tailplane icing), ice accretion models must be developed that address the training requirements.

b. A description of the data sources utilized to develop the qualified ice accretion models. Acceptable data sources may be, but are not limited to, flight test data, aircraft certification data, aircraft OEM engineering simulation data, or other analytical methods based upon established engineering principles.

4. Objective Demonstration Testing: The purpose of the objective demonstration test is to demonstrate that the ice accretion models as described in the Statement of Compliance have been implemented correctly and demonstrate the proper cues and effects as defined in the approved data sources. At least one ice accretion model must be selected for testing and included in the Master Qualification Test Guide (MQTG). Two tests are required to demonstrate engine and airframe icing effects. One test will demonstrate the FSTDs baseline performance without icing, and the second test will demonstrate the aerodynamic effects of ice accretion relative to the baseline test.

a. Recorded Parameters: In each of the two required MQTG cases, a time history recording must be made of the following parameters:

i. Altitude;

ii. Airspeed;

iii. Normal Acceleration;

iv. Engine Power/settings;

v. Angle of Attack/Pitch attitude;

vi. Bank Angle;

vii. Flight control inputs;

viii. Stall warning and stall buffet onset; and

ix. Other parameters as necessary to demonstrate the effects of ice accretions.

b. Demonstration maneuver: The FSTD sponsor must select an ice accretion model as identified in the SOC for testing. The selected maneuver must demonstrate the effects of ice accretion at high angles of attack from a trimmed condition through approach to stall and “full” stall as compared to a baseline (no ice buildup) test. The ice accretion models must demonstrate the cues necessary to recognize the onset of ice accretion on the airframe, lifting surfaces, and engines and provide representative degradation in performance and handling qualities to the extent that a recovery can be executed. Typical recognition cues that may be present depending upon the simulated aircraft include:

i. Decrease in stall angle of attack;

ii. Increase in stall speed;

iii. Increase in stall buffet threshold of perception speed;

iv. Changes in pitching moment;

v. Changes in stall buffet characteristics;

vi. Changes in control effectiveness or control forces; and

vii. Engine effects (power variation, vibration, etc.);

The demonstration test may be conducted by initializing and maintaining a fixed amount of ice accretion throughout the maneuver in order to consistently evaluate the aerodynamic effects.

End QPS Requirements

[Doc. No. FAA-2002-12461, 73 FR 26490, May 9, 2008, as amended by Docket FAA-2014-0391, Amdt. 60-4, 81 FR 18218, 18219, 18240, 18283, 18300, and 18303, Mar. 30, 2016; 81 FR 32016 and 32066, May 20, 2016; Docket FAA-2018-0119, Amdt. 60-5, 83 FR 9170, Mar. 5, 2018; Amdt. 60-6, 83 FR 30275, June 27, 2018]

Appendix B to Part 60—Qualification Performance Standards for Airplane Flight Training Devices

 

Begin Information

This appendix establishes the standards for Airplane FTD evaluation and qualification at Level 4, Level 5, or Level 6. The Flight Standards Service, NSPM, is responsible for the development, application, and implementation of the standards contained within this appendix. The procedures and criteria specified in this appendix will be used by the NSPM, or a person or persons assigned by the NSPM when conducting airplane FTD evaluations.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

2. Applicability (§§60.1 and 60.2).

3. Definitions (§60.3).

4. Qualification Performance Standards (§60.4).

5. Quality Management System (§60.5).

6. Sponsor Qualification Requirements (§60.7).

7. Additional Responsibilities of the Sponsor (§60.9).

8. FTD Use (§60.11).

9. FTD Objective Data Requirements (§60.13).

10. Special Equipment and Personnel Requirements for Qualification of the FTD (§60.14).

11. Initial (and Upgrade) Qualification Requirements (§60.15).

12. Additional Qualifications for Currently Qualified FTDs (§60.16).

13. Previously Qualified FTDs (§60.17).

14. Inspection, Continuing Qualification Evaluation, and Maintenance Requirements (§60.19).

15. Logging FTD Discrepancies (§60.20).

16. Interim Qualification of FTDs for New Airplane Types or Models (§60.21).

17. Modifications to FTDs (§60.23).

18. Operations with Missing, Malfunctioning, or Inoperative Components (§60.25).

19. Automatic Loss of Qualification and Procedures for Restoration of Qualification (§60.27).

20. Other Losses of Qualification and Procedures for Restoration of Qualification (§60.29).

21. Record Keeping and Reporting (§60.31).

22. Applications, Logbooks, Reports, and Records: Fraud, Falsification, or Incorrect Statements (§60.33).

23. [Reserved]

24. Levels of FTD.

25. FTD Qualification on the Basis of a Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement (BASA) (§60.37).

Attachment 1 to Appendix B to Part 60—General FTD Requirements.

Attachment 2 to Appendix B to Part 60—Flight Training Device (FTD) Objective Tests.

Attachment 3 to Appendix B to Part 60—Flight Training Device (FTD) Subjective Evaluation.

Attachment 4 to Appendix B to Part 60—Sample Documents.

End Information

 

1. Introduction

 

Begin Information

a. This appendix contains background information as well as regulatory and informative material as described later in this section. To assist the reader in determining what areas are required and what areas are permissive, the text in this appendix is divided into two sections: “QPS Requirements” and “Information.” The QPS Requirements sections contain details regarding compliance with the part 60 rule language. These details are regulatory, but are found only in this appendix. The Information sections contain material that is advisory in nature, and designed to give the user general information about the regulation.

b. Questions regarding the contents of this publication should be sent to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Flight Standards Service, National Simulator Program Staff, AFS-205, P.O. Box 20636, Atlanta, Georgia 30320. Telephone contact numbers for the NSP are: Phone, 404-474-5620; fax, 404-474-5656. The NSP Internet Web site address is: http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/nsp/. On this Web site you will find an NSP personnel list with telephone and email contact information for each NSP staff member, a list of qualified flight simulation devices, advisory circulars (ACs), a description of the qualification process, NSP policy, and an NSP “In-Works” section. Also linked from this site are additional information sources, handbook bulletins, frequently asked questions, a listing and text of the Federal Aviation Regulations, Flight Standards Inspector's handbooks, and other FAA links.

c. The NSPM encourages the use of electronic media for all communication, including any record, report, request, test, or statement required by this appendix. The electronic media used must have adequate security provisions and be acceptable to the NSPM. The NSPM recommends inquiries on system compatibility, and minimum system requirements are also included on the NSP Web site.

d. Related Reading References.

(1) 14 CFR part 60.

(2) 14 CFR part 61.

(3) 14 CFR part 63.

(4) 14 CFR part 119.

(5) 14 CFR part 121.

(6) 14 CFR part 125.

(7) 14 CFR part 135.

(8) 14 CFR part 141.

(9) 14 CFR part 142.

(10) AC 120-28, as amended, Criteria for Approval of Category III Landing Weather Minima.

(11) AC 120-29, as amended, Criteria for Approving Category I and Category II Landing Minima for part 121 operators.

(12) AC 120-35, as amended, Line Operational Simulations: Line-Oriented Flight Training, Special Purpose Operational Training, Line Operational Evaluation.

(13) AC 120-41, as amended, Criteria for Operational Approval of Airborne Wind Shear Alerting and Flight Guidance Systems.

(14) AC 120-45, as amended, Airplane Flight Training Device Qualification.

(14) AC 120-57, as amended, Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (SMGCS).

(15) AC 150/5300-13, as amended, Airport Design.

(16) AC 150/5340-1, as amended, Standards for Airport Markings.

(17) AC 150/5340-4, as amended, Installation Details for Runway Centerline Touchdown Zone Lighting Systems.

(18) AC 150/5340-19, as amended, Taxiway Centerline Lighting System.

(19) AC 150/5340-24, as amended, Runway and Taxiway Edge Lighting System.

(20) AC 150/5345-28, as amended, Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) Systems.

(21) International Air Transport Association document, “Flight Simulation Training Device Design and Performance Data Requirements,” as amended.

(22) AC 25-7, as amended, Flight Test Guide for Certification of Transport Category Airplanes.

(23) AC 23-8A, as amended, Flight Test Guide for Certification of Part 23 Airplanes.

(24) International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Manual of Criteria for the Qualification of Flight Simulation Training Devices, as amended.

(25) Aeroplane Flight Simulation Training Device Evaluation Handbook, Volume I, as amended and Volume II, as amended, The Royal Aeronautical Society, London, UK.

(26) FAA Airman Testing Standards for the Airline Transport Pilot Certificate, Type Ratings, Commercial Pilot Certificate, and Instrument Ratings.

(27) The FAA Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM). An electronic version of the AIM is on the Internet at http://www.faa.gov/atpubs.

(28) Aeronautical Radio, Inc. (ARINC) document number 436, titled Guidelines For Electronic Qualification Test Guide (as amended).

(29) Aeronautical Radio, Inc. (ARINC) document 610, Guidance for Design and Integration of Aircraft Avionics Equipment in Simulators (as amended).

 

End Information

2. Applicability (§§60.1 and 60.2)

 

Begin Information

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.1, Applicability, or to §60.2, Applicability of sponsor rules to person who are not sponsors and who are engaged in certain unauthorized activities.

3. Definitions (§60.3)

See appendix F of this part for a list of definitions and abbreviations from part 1, part 60, and the QPS appendices of part 60.

4. Qualification Performance Standards (§60.4)

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.4, Qualification Performance Standards.

5. Quality Management System (§60.5)

Additional regulatory material and informational material regarding Quality Management Systems for FTDs may be found in appendix E of this part.

End Information

 

6. Sponsor Qualification Requirements. (§60.7).

 

Begin Information

a. The intent of the language in §60.7(b) is to have a specific FTD, identified by the sponsor, used at least once in an FAA-approved flight training program for the airplane simulated during the 12-month period described. The identification of the specific FTD may change from one 12-month period to the next 12-month period as long as that sponsor sponsors and uses at least one FTD at least once during the prescribed period. There is no minimum number of hours or minimum FTD periods required.

b. The following examples describe acceptable operational practices:

(1) Example One.

(a) A sponsor is sponsoring a single, specific FTD for its own use, in its own facility or elsewhere— this single FTD forms the basis for the sponsorship. The sponsor uses that FTD at least once in each 12-month period in that sponsor's FAA-approved flight training program for the airplane simulated. This 12-month period is established according to the following schedule:

(i) If the FTD was qualified prior to May 30, 2008, the 12-month period begins on the date of the first continuing qualification evaluation conducted in accordance with §60.19 after May 30, 2008, and continues for each subsequent 12-month period;

(ii) A device qualified on or after May 30, 2008, will be required to undergo an initial or upgrade evaluation in accordance with §60.15. Once the initial or upgrade evaluation is complete, the first continuing qualification evaluation will be conducted within 6 months. The 12 month continuing qualification evaluation cycle begins on that date and continues for each subsequent 12-month period.

(b) There is no minimum number of hours of FTD use required.

(c) The identification of the specific FTD may change from one 12-month period to the next 12-month period as long as that sponsor sponsors and uses at least one FTD at least once during the prescribed period.

(2) Example Two.

(a) A sponsor sponsors an additional number of FTDs, in its facility or elsewhere. Each additionally sponsored FTD must be—

(i) Used by the sponsor in the sponsor's FAA-approved flight training program for the airplane simulated (as described in §60.7(d)(1)); or

(ii) Used by another FAA certificate holder in that other certificate holder's FAA-approved flight training program for the airplane simulated (as described in §60.7(d)(1)). This 12-month period is established in the same manner as in example one; or

(iii) Provided a statement each year from a qualified pilot, (after having flown the airplane, not the subject FTD or another FTD, during the preceding 12-month period) stating that the subject FTD's performance and handling qualities represent the airplane (as described in §60.7(d)(2)). This statement is provided at least once in each 12-month period established in the same manner as in example one.

(b) There is no minimum number of hours of FTD use required.

(3) Example Three.

(a) A sponsor in New York (in this example, a Part 142 certificate holder) establishes “satellite” training centers in Chicago and Moscow.

(b) The satellite function means that the Chicago and Moscow centers must operate under the New York center's certificate (in accordance with all of the New York center's practices, procedures, and policies; e.g., instructor and/or technician training/checking requirements, record keeping, QMS program).

(c) All of the FTDs in the Chicago and Moscow centers could be dry-leased (i.e., the certificate holder does not have and use FAA-approved flight training programs for the FTDs in the Chicago and Moscow centers) because—

(i) Each FTD in the Chicago center and each FTD in the Moscow center is used at least once each 12-month period by another FAA certificate holder in that other certificate holder's FAA-approved flight training program for the airplane (as described in §60.7(d)(1)); or

(ii) A statement is obtained from a qualified pilot (having flown the airplane, not the subject FTD or another FTD during the preceding 12-month period) stating that the performance and handling qualities of each FTD in the Chicago and Moscow centers represents the airplane (as described in §60.7(d)(2)).

End Information

 

7. Additional Responsibilities of the Sponsor (§60.9)

 

Begin Information

The phrase “as soon as practicable” in §60.9(a) means without unnecessarily disrupting or delaying beyond a reasonable time the training, evaluation, or experience being conducted in the FTD.

8. FTD Use (§60.11)

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.11, FTD use.

End Information

 

9. FTD Objective Data Requirements (§60.13)

 

Begin QPS Requirements

a. Flight test data used to validate FTD performance and handling qualities must have been gathered in accordance with a flight test program containing the following:

(1) A flight test plan consisting of:

(a) The maneuvers and procedures required for aircraft certification and simulation programming and validation.

(b) For each maneuver or procedure—

(i) The procedures and control input the flight test pilot and/or engineer used.

(ii) The atmospheric and environmental conditions.

(iii) The initial flight conditions.

(iv) The airplane configuration, including weight and center of gravity.

(v) The data to be gathered.

(vi) All other information necessary to recreate the flight test conditions in the FTD.

(2) Appropriately qualified flight test personnel.

(3) An understanding of the accuracy of the data to be gathered using appropriate alternative data sources, procedures, and instrumentation that is traceable to a recognized standard as described in Attachment 2, Table B2F of this appendix.

(4) Appropriate and sufficient data acquisition equipment or system(s), including appropriate data reduction and analysis methods and techniques, acceptable to the FAA's Aircraft Certification Service.

b. The data, regardless of source, must be presented:

(1) In a format that supports the FTD validation process;

(2) In a manner that is clearly readable and annotated correctly and completely;

(3) With resolution sufficient to determine compliance with the tolerances set forth in Attachment 2, Table B2A, Appendix B;

(4) With any necessary guidance information provided; and

(5) Without alteration, adjustments, or bias. Data may be corrected to address known data calibration errors provided that an explanation of the methods used to correct the errors appears in the QTG. The corrected data may be re-scaled, digitized, or otherwise manipulated to fit the desired presentation.

c. After completion of any additional flight test, a flight test report must be submitted in support of the validation data. The report must contain sufficient data and rationale to support qualification of the FTD at the level requested.

d. As required by §60.13(f), the sponsor must notify the NSPM when it becomes aware that an addition to or a revision of the flight related data or airplane systems related data is available if this data is used to program and operate a qualified FTD. The data referred to in this sub-section are those data that are used to validate the performance, handling qualities, or other characteristics of the aircraft, including data related to any relevant changes occurring after the type certification is issued. The sponsor must—

(1) Within 10 calendar days, notify the NSPM of the existence of this data; and

(2) Within 45 calendar days, notify the NSPM of—

(i) The schedule to incorporate this data into the FTD; or

(ii) The reason for not incorporating this data into the FTD.

e. In those cases where the objective test results authorize a “snapshot test” or a “series of snapshot test results” in lieu of a time-history result, the sponsor or other data provider must ensure that a steady state condition exists at the instant of time captured by the “snapshot.” The steady state condition must exist from 4 seconds prior to, through 1 second following, the instant of time captured by the snap shot.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

f. The FTD sponsor is encouraged to maintain a liaison with the manufacturer of the aircraft being simulated (or with the holder of the aircraft type certificate for the aircraft being simulated if the manufacturer is no longer in business), and if appropriate, with the person having supplied the aircraft data package for the FTD in order to facilitate the notification described in this paragraph.

g. It is the intent of the NSPM that for new aircraft entering service, at a point well in advance of preparation of the QTG, the sponsor should submit to the NSPM for approval, a descriptive document (see Appendix A, Table A2C, Sample Validation Data Roadmap for Airplanes) containing the plan for acquiring the validation data, including data sources. This document should clearly identify sources of data for all required tests, a description of the validity of these data for a specific engine type and thrust rating configuration, and the revision levels of all avionics affecting the performance or flying qualities of the aircraft. Additionally, this document should provide other information such as the rationale or explanation for cases where data or data parameters are missing, instances where engineering simulation data are used, or where flight test methods require further explanations. It should also provide a brief narrative describing the cause and effect of any deviation from data requirements. The aircraft manufacturer may provide this document.

h. There is no requirement for any flight test data supplier to submit a flight test plan or program prior to gathering flight test data. However, the NSPM notes that inexperienced data gatherers often provide data that is irrelevant, improperly marked, or lacking adequate justification for selection. Other problems include inadequate information regarding initial conditions or test maneuvers. The NSPM has been forced to refuse these data submissions as validation data for an FTD evaluation. It is for this reason that the NSPM recommends that any data supplier not previously experienced in this area review the data necessary for programming and for validating the performance of the FTD and discuss the flight test plan anticipated for acquiring such data with the NSPM well in advance of commencing the flight tests.

i. The NSPM will consider, on a case-by-case basis, whether to approve supplemental validation data derived from flight data recording systems such as a Quick Access Recorder or Flight Data Recorder.

End Information

 

10. Special Equipment and Personnel Requirements for Qualification of the FTD (§60.14).

 

Begin Information

a. In the event that the NSPM determines that special equipment or specifically qualified persons will be required to conduct an evaluation, the NSPM will make every attempt to notify the sponsor at least one (1) week, but in no case less than 72 hours, in advance of the evaluation. Examples of special equipment include flight control measurement devices, accelerometers, or oscilloscopes. Examples of specially qualified personnel include individuals specifically qualified to install or use any special equipment when its use is required.

b. Examples of a special evaluation include an evaluation conducted after: An FTD is moved; at the request of the TPAA; or as a result of comments received from users of the FTD that raise questions about the continued qualification or use of the FTD.

End Information

 

11. Initial (and Upgrade) Qualification Requirements (§60.15).

 

Begin QPS Requirement

a. In order to be qualified at a particular qualification level, the FTD must:

(1) Meet the general requirements listed in Attachment 1 of this appendix;

(2) Meet the objective testing requirements listed in Attachment 2 of this appendix (Level 4 FTDs do not require objective tests); and

(3) Satisfactorily accomplish the subjective tests listed in Attachment 3 of this appendix.

b. The request described in §60.15(a) must include all of the following:

(1) A statement that the FTD meets all of the applicable provisions of this part and all applicable provisions of the QPS.

(2) Unless otherwise authorized through prior coordination with the NSPM, a confirmation that the sponsor will forward to the NSPM the statement described in §60.15(b) in such time as to be received no later than 5 business days prior to the scheduled evaluation and may be forwarded to the NSPM via traditional or electronic means.

(3) Except for a Level 4 FTD, a QTG, acceptable to the NSPM, that includes all of the following:

(a) Objective data obtained from aircraft testing or another approved source.

(b) Correlating objective test results obtained from the performance of the FTD as prescribed in the appropriate QPS.

(c) The result of FTD subjective tests prescribed in the appropriate QPS.

(d) A description of the equipment necessary to perform the evaluation for initial qualification and the continuing qualification evaluations.

c. The QTG described in paragraph a(3) of this section, must provide the documented proof of compliance with the FTD objective tests in Attachment 2, Table B2A of this appendix.

d. The QTG is prepared and submitted by the sponsor, or the sponsor?s agent on behalf of the sponsor, to the NSPM for review and approval, and must include, for each objective test:

(1) Parameters, tolerances, and flight conditions;

(2) Pertinent and complete instructions for conducting automatic and manual tests;

(3) A means of comparing the FTD test results to the objective data;

(4) Any other information as necessary to assist in the evaluation of the test results;

(5) Other information appropriate to the qualification level of the FTD.

e. The QTG described in paragraphs (a)(3) and (b) of this section, must include the following:

(1) A QTG cover page with sponsor and FAA approval signature blocks (see Attachment 4, Figure B4C, of this appendix, for a sample QTG cover page).

(2) [Reserved]

(3) An FTD information page that provides the information listed in this paragraph, if applicable (see Attachment 4, Figure B4B, of this appendix, for a sample FTD information page). For convertible FTDs, the sponsor must submit a separate page for each configuration of the FTD.

(a) The sponsor's FTD identification number or code.

(b) The airplane model and series being simulated.

(c) The aerodynamic data revision number or reference.

(d) The source of the basic aerodynamic model and the aerodynamic coefficient data used to modify the basic model.

(e) The engine model(s) and its data revision number or reference.

(f) The flight control data revision number or reference.

(g) The flight management system identification and revision level.

(h) The FTD model and manufacturer.

(i) The date of FTD manufacture.

(j) The FTD computer identification.

(k) The visual system model and manufacturer, including display type.

(l) The motion system type and manufacturer, including degrees of freedom.

(4) A Table of Contents.

(5) A log of revisions and a list of effective pages.

(6) List of all relevant data references.

(7) A glossary of terms and symbols used (including sign conventions and units).

(8) Statements of compliance and capability (SOCs) with certain requirements.

(9) Recording procedures or equipment required to accomplish the objective tests.

(10) The following information for each objective test designated in Attachment 2 of this appendix, as applicable to the qualification level sought:

(a) Name of the test.

(b) Objective of the test.

(c) Initial conditions.

(d) Manual test procedures.

(e) Automatic test procedures (if applicable).

(f) Method for evaluating FTD objective test results.

(g) List of all relevant parameters driven or constrained during the automatic test(s).

(h) List of all relevant parameters driven or constrained during the manual test(s).

(i) Tolerances for relevant parameters.

(j) Source of Validation Data (document and page number).

(k) Copy of the Validation Data (if located in a separate binder, a cross reference for the identification and page number for pertinent data location must be provided).

(l) FTD Objective Test Results as obtained by the sponsor. Each test result must reflect the date completed and must be clearly labeled as a product of the device being tested.

f. A convertible FTD is addressed as a separate FTD for each model and series airplane to which it will be converted and for the FAA qualification level sought. The NSPM will conduct an evaluation for each configuration. If a sponsor seeks qualification for two or more models of an airplane type using a convertible FTD, the sponsor must provide a QTG for each airplane model, or a QTG for the first airplane model and a supplement to that QTG for each additional airplane model. The NSPM will conduct evaluations for each airplane model.

g. The form and manner of presentation of objective test results in the QTG must include the following:

(1) The sponsor's FTD test results must be recorded in a manner acceptable to the NSPM, that allows easy comparison of the FTD test results to the validation data (e.g., use of a multi-channel recorder, line printer, cross plotting, overlays, transparencies).

(2) FTD results must be labeled using terminology common to airplane parameters as opposed to computer software identifications.

(3) Validation data documents included in a QTG may be photographically reduced only if such reduction will not alter the graphic scaling or cause difficulties in scale interpretation or resolution.

(4) Scaling on graphical presentations must provide the resolution necessary to evaluate the parameters shown in Attachment 2, Table B2A of this appendix.

(5) Tests involving time histories, data sheets (or transparencies thereof) and FTD test results must be clearly marked with appropriate reference points to ensure an accurate comparison between FTD and airplane with respect to time. Time histories recorded via a line printer are to be clearly identified for cross-plotting on the airplane data. Over-plots may not obscure the reference data.

h. The sponsor may elect to complete the QTG objective and subjective tests at the manufacturer's facility or at the sponsor's training facility (or other sponsor designated location where training will take place). If the tests are conducted at the manufacturer's facility, the sponsor must repeat at least one-third of the tests at the sponsor's training facility in order to substantiate FTD performance. The QTG must be clearly annotated to indicate when and where each test was accomplished. Tests conducted at the manufacturer's facility and at the sponsor's designated training facility must be conducted after the FTD is assembled with systems and sub-systems functional and operating in an interactive manner. The test results must be submitted to the NSPM.

i. The sponsor must maintain a copy of the MQTG at the FTD location.

j. All FTDs for which the initial qualification is conducted after May 30, 2014, must have an electronic MQTG (eMQTG) including all objective data obtained from airplane testing, or another approved source (reformatted or digitized), together with correlating objective test results obtained from the performance of the FTD (reformatted or digitized) as prescribed in this appendix. The eMQTG must also contain the general FTD performance or demonstration results (reformatted or digitized) prescribed in this appendix, and a description of the equipment necessary to perform the initial qualification evaluation and the continuing qualification evaluations. The eMQTG must include the original validation data used to validate FTD performance and handling qualities in either the original digitized format from the data supplier or an electronic scan of the original time-history plots that were provided by the data supplier. A copy of the eMQTG must be provided to the NSPM.

k. All other FTDs (not covered in subparagraph “j”) must have an electronic copy of the MQTG by and after May 30, 2014. An electronic copy of the copy of the MQTG must be provided to the NSPM. This may be provided by an electronic scan presented in a Portable Document File (PDF), or similar format acceptable to the NSPM.

l. During the initial (or upgrade) qualification evaluation conducted by the NSPM, the sponsor must also provide a person knowledgeable about the operation of the aircraft and the operation of the FTD.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

m. Only those FTDs that are sponsored by a certificate holder as defined in Appendix F will be evaluated by the NSPM. However, other FTD evaluations may be conducted on a case-by-case basis as the Administrator deems appropriate, but only in accordance with applicable agreements.

n. The NSPM will conduct an evaluation for each configuration, and each FTD must be evaluated as completely as possible. To ensure a thorough and uniform evaluation, each FTD is subjected to the general FTD requirements in Attachment 1 of this appendix, the objective tests listed in Attachment 2 of this appendix, and the subjective tests listed in Attachment 3 of this appendix. The evaluations described herein will include, but not necessarily be limited to the following:

(1) Airplane responses, including longitudinal and lateral-directional control responses (see Attachment 2 of this appendix);

(2) Performance in authorized portions of the simulated airplane's operating envelope, to include tasks evaluated by the NSPM in the areas of surface operations, takeoff, climb, cruise, descent, approach and landing, as well as abnormal and emergency operations (see Attachment 2 of this appendix);

(3) Control checks (see Attachment 1 and Attachment 2 of this appendix);

(4) Flight deck configuration (see Attachment 1 of this appendix);

(5) Pilot, flight engineer, and instructor station functions checks (see Attachment 1 and Attachment 3 of this appendix);

(6) Airplane systems and sub-systems (as appropriate) as compared to the airplane simulated (see Attachment 1 and Attachment 3 of this appendix);

(7) FTD systems and sub-systems, including force cueing (motion), visual, and aural (sound) systems, as appropriate (see Attachment 1 and Attachment 2 of this appendix); and

(8) Certain additional requirements, depending upon the qualification level sought, including equipment or circumstances that may become hazardous to the occupants. The sponsor may be subject to Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements.

o. The NSPM administers the objective and subjective tests, which includes an examination of functions. The tests include a qualitative assessment of the FTD by an NSP pilot. The NSP evaluation team leader may assign other qualified personnel to assist in accomplishing the functions examination and/or the objective and subjective tests performed during an evaluation when required.

(1) Objective tests provide a basis for measuring and evaluating FTD performance and determining compliance with the requirements of this part.

(2) Subjective tests provide a basis for:

(a) Evaluating the capability of the FTD to perform over a typical utilization period;

(b) Determining that the FTD satisfactorily simulates each required task;

(c) Verifying correct operation of the FTD controls, instruments, and systems; and

(d) Demonstrating compliance with the requirements of this part.

p. The tolerances for the test parameters listed in Attachment 2 of this appendix reflect the range of tolerances acceptable to the NSPM for FTD validation and are not to be confused with design tolerances specified for FTD manufacture. In making decisions regarding tests and test results, the NSPM relies on the use of operational and engineering judgment in the application of data (including consideration of the way in which the flight test was flown and way the data was gathered and applied), data presentations, and the applicable tolerances for each test.

q. In addition to the scheduled continuing qualification evaluation, each FTD is subject to evaluations conducted by the NSPM at any time without prior notification to the sponsor. Such evaluations would be accomplished in a normal manner (i.e., requiring exclusive use of the FTD for the conduct of objective and subjective tests and an examination of functions) if the FTD is not being used for flight crewmember training, testing, or checking. However, if the FTD were being used, the evaluation would be conducted in a non-exclusive manner. This non-exclusive evaluation will be conducted by the FTD evaluator accompanying the check airman, instructor, Aircrew Program Designee (APD), or FAA inspector aboard the FTD along with the student(s) and observing the operation of the FTD during the training, testing, or checking activities.

r. Problems with objective test results are handled as follows:

(1) If a problem with an objective test result is detected by the NSP evaluation team during an evaluation, the test may be repeated or the QTG may be amended.

(2) If it is determined that the results of an objective test do not support the qualification level requested but do support a lower level, the NSPM may qualify the FTD at a lower level. For example, if a Level 6 evaluation is requested, but the FTD fails to meet the spiral stability test tolerances, it could be qualified at Level 5.

s. After an FTD is successfully evaluated, the NSPM issues an SOQ to the sponsor, the NSPM recommends the FTD to the TPAA, who will approve the FTD for use in a flight training program. The SOQ will be issued at the satisfactory conclusion of the initial or continuing qualification evaluation and will list the tasks for which the FTD is qualified, referencing the tasks described in Table B1B in Attachment 1 of this appendix. However, it is the sponsor's responsibility to obtain TPAA approval prior to using the FTD in an FAA-approved flight training program.

t. Under normal circumstances, the NSPM establishes a date for the initial or upgrade evaluation within ten (10) working days after determining that a complete QTG is acceptable. Unusual circumstances may warrant establishing an evaluation date before this determination is made. A sponsor may schedule an evaluation date as early as 6 months in advance. However, there may be a delay of 45 days or more in rescheduling and completing the evaluation if the sponsor is unable to meet the scheduled date. See Attachment 4, Figure B4A, Sample Request for Initial, Upgrade, or Reinstatement Evaluation, of this appendix.

u. The numbering system used for objective test results in the QTG should closely follow the numbering system set out in Attachment 2, FTD Objective Tests, Table B2A, of this appendix.

v. Contact the NSPM or visit the NSPM Web site for additional information regarding the preferred qualifications of pilots used to meet the requirements of §60.15(d).

w. Examples of the exclusions for which the FTD might not have been subjectively tested by the sponsor or the NSPM and for which qualification might not be sought or granted, as described in §60.15(g)(6), include engine out maneuvers or circling approaches.

12. Additional Qualifications for Currently Qualified FTDs (§60.16).

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.16, Additional Qualifications for a Currently Qualified FTD.

End Information

 

13. Previously Qualified FTDs (§60.17).

 

Begin QPS Requirements

a. In instances where a sponsor plans to remove an FTD from active status for a period of less than two years, the following procedures apply:

(1) The NSPM must be notified in writing and the notification must include an estimate of the period that the FTD will be inactive;

(2) Continuing Qualification evaluations will not be scheduled during the inactive period;

(3) The NSPM will remove the FTD from the list of qualified FTDs on a mutually established date not later than the date on which the first missed continuing qualification evaluation would have been scheduled;

(4) Before the FTD is restored to qualified status, it must be evaluated by the NSPM. The evaluation content and the time required to accomplish the evaluation is based on the number of continuing qualification evaluations and sponsor-conducted quarterly inspections missed during the period of inactivity.

(5) The sponsor must notify the NSPM of any changes to the original scheduled time out of service;

b. FTDs qualified prior to May 31, 2016, and replacement FTD systems, are not required to meet the general FTD requirements, the objective test requirements, and the subjective test requirements of Attachments 1, 2, and 3 of this appendix as long as the FTD continues to meet the test requirements contained in the MQTG developed under the original qualification basis.

c. [Reserved]

d. FTDs qualified prior to May 31, 2016, may be updated. If an evaluation is deemed appropriate or necessary by the NSPM after such an update, the evaluation will not require an evaluation to standards beyond those against which the FTD was originally qualified.

e. Other certificate holders or persons desiring to use an FTD may contract with FTD sponsors to use FTDs previously qualified at a particular level for an airplane type and approved for use within an FAA-approved flight training program. Such FTDs are not required to undergo an additional qualification process, except as described in §60.16.

f. Each FTD user must obtain approval from the appropriate TPAA to use any FTD in an FAA-approved flight training program.

g. The intent of the requirement listed in §60.17(b), for each FTD to have an SOQ within 6 years, is to have the availability of that statement (including the configuration list and the limitations to authorizations) to provide a complete picture of the FTD inventory regulated by the FAA. The issuance of the statement will not require any additional evaluation or require any adjustment to the evaluation basis for the FTD.

h. Downgrading of an FTD is a permanent change in qualification level and will necessitate the issuance of a revised SOQ to reflect the revised qualification level, as appropriate. If a temporary restriction is placed on an FTD because of a missing, malfunctioning, or inoperative component or on-going repairs, the restriction is not a permanent change in qualification level. Instead, the restriction is temporary and is removed when the reason for the restriction has been resolved.

i. The NSPM will determine the evaluation criteria for an FTD that has been removed from active status for a prolonged period. The criteria will be based on the number of continuing qualification evaluations and quarterly inspections missed during the period of inactivity. For example, if the FTD were out of service for a 1 year period, it would be necessary to complete the entire QTG, since all of the quarterly evaluations would have been missed. The NSPM will also consider how the FTD was stored, whether parts were removed from the FTD and whether the FTD was disassembled.

j. The FTD will normally be requalified using the FAA-approved MQTG and the criteria that was in effect prior to its removal from qualification. However, inactive periods of 2 years or more will require re-qualification under the standards in effect and current at the time of requalification.

End Information

 

14. Inspection, Continuing Qualification, Evaluation, and Maintenance Requirements (§60.19).

 

Begin QPS Requirement

a. The sponsor must conduct a minimum of four evenly spaced inspections throughout the year. The objective test sequence and content of each inspection in this sequence must be developed by the sponsor and must be acceptable to the NSPM.

b. The description of the functional preflight check must be contained in the sponsor's QMS.

c. Record “functional preflight” in the FTD discrepancy log book or other acceptable location, including any item found to be missing, malfunctioning, or inoperative.

d. During the continuing qualification evaluation conducted by the NSPM, the sponsor must also provide a person knowledgeable about the operation of the aircraft and the operation of the FTD.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

e. The sponsor's test sequence and the content of each quarterly inspection required in §60.19(a)(1) should include a balance and a mix from the objective test requirement areas listed as follows:

(1) Performance.

(2) Handling qualities.

(3) Motion system (where appropriate).

(4) Visual system (where appropriate).

(5) Sound system (where appropriate).

(6) Other FTD systems.

f. If the NSP evaluator plans to accomplish specific tests during a normal continuing qualification evaluation that requires the use of special equipment or technicians, the sponsor will be notified as far in advance of the evaluation as practical; but not less than 72 hours. Examples of such tests include latencies, control sweeps, or motion or visual system tests.

g. The continuing qualification evaluations described in §60.19(b) will normally require 4 hours of FTD time. However, flexibility is necessary to address abnormal situations or situations involving aircraft with additional levels of complexity (e.g., computer controlled aircraft). The sponsor should anticipate that some tests may require additional time. The continuing qualification evaluations will consist of the following:

(1) Review of the results of the quarterly inspections conducted by the sponsor since the last scheduled continuing qualification evaluation.

(2) A selection of approximately 8 to 15 objective tests from the MQTG that provide an adequate opportunity to evaluate the performance of the FTD. The tests chosen will be performed either automatically or manually and should be able to be conducted within approximately one-third (1/3) of the allotted FTD time.

(3) A subjective evaluation of the FTD to perform a representative sampling of the tasks set out in attachment 3 of this appendix. This portion of the evaluation should take approximately two-thirds (2/3) of the allotted FTD time.

(4) An examination of the functions of the FTD may include the motion system, visual system, sound system as applicable, instructor operating station, and the normal functions and simulated malfunctions of the airplane systems. This examination is normally accomplished simultaneously with the subjective evaluation requirements.

h. The requirement established in §60.19(b)(4) regarding the frequency of NSPM-conducted continuing qualification evaluations for each FTD is typically 12 months. However, the establishment and satisfactory implementation of an approved QMS for a sponsor will provide a basis for adjusting the frequency of evaluations to exceed 12-month intervals.

15. Logging FTD Discrepancies (§60.20)

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.20. Logging FTD Discrepancies.

16. Interim Qualification of FTDs for New Airplane Types or Models (§60.21)

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.21, Interim Qualification of FTDs for New Airplane Types or Models.

End Information

 

17. Modifications to FTDs (§60.23)

 

Begin QPS Requirements

a. The notification described in §60.23(c)(2) must include a complete description of the planned modification, with a description of the operational and engineering effect the proposed modification will have on the operation of the FTD and the results that are expected with the modification incorporated.

b. Prior to using the modified FTD:

(1) All the applicable objective tests completed with the modification incorporated, including any necessary updates to the MQTG (e.g., accomplishment of FSTD Directives) must be acceptable to the NSPM; and

(2) The sponsor must provide the NSPM with a statement signed by the MR that the factors listed in §60.15(b) are addressed by the appropriate personnel as described in that section.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

c. FSTD Directives are considered modification of an FTD. See Attachment 4 of this appendix for a sample index of effective FSTD Directives.

End Information

 

18. Operation with Missing, Malfunctioning, or Inoperative Components (§60.25)

 

Begin Information

a. The sponsor's responsibility with respect to §60.25(a) is satisfied when the sponsor fairly and accurately advises the user of the current status of an FTD, including any missing, malfunctioning, or inoperative (MMI) component(s).

b. It is the responsibility of the instructor, check airman, or representative of the administrator conducting training, testing, or checking to exercise reasonable and prudent judgment to determine if any MMI component is necessary for the satisfactory completion of a specific maneuver, procedure, or task.

c. If the 29th or 30th day of the 30-day period described in 60.25(b) is on a Saturday, a Sunday, or a holiday, the FAA will extend the deadline until the next business day.

d. In accordance with the authorization described in §60.25(b), the sponsor may develop a discrepancy prioritizing system to accomplish repairs based on the level of impact on the capability of the FTD. Repairs having a larger impact on the FTD's ability to provide the required training, evaluation, or flight experience will have a higher priority for repair or replacement.

End Information

 

19. Automatic Loss of Qualification and Procedures for Restoration of Qualification (§60.27)

 

Begin Information

If the sponsor provides a plan for how the FTD will be maintained during its out-of-service period (e.g., periodic exercise of mechanical, hydraulic, and electrical systems; routine replacement of hydraulic fluid; control of the environmental factors in which the FTD is to be maintained) there is a greater likelihood that the NSPM will be able to determine the amount of testing that required for requalification.

End Information

 

20. Other Losses of Qualification and Procedures for Restoration of Qualification (§60.29)

 

Begin Information

If the sponsor provides a plan for how the FTD will be maintained during its out-of-service period (e.g., periodic exercise of mechanical, hydraulic, and electrical systems; routine replacement of hydraulic fluid; control of the environmental factors in which the FTD is to be maintained) there is a greater likelihood that the NSPM will be able to determine the amount of testing that required for requalification.

End Information

 

21. Recordkeeping and Reporting (§60.31)

 

Begin QPS Requirements

a. FTD modifications can include hardware or software changes. For FTD modifications involving software programming changes, the record required by §60.31(a)(2) must consist of the name of the aircraft system software, aerodynamic model, or engine model change, the date of the change, a summary of the change, and the reason for the change.

b. If a coded form for record keeping is used, it must provide for the preservation and retrieval of information with appropriate security or controls to prevent the inappropriate alteration of such records after the fact.

End QPS Requirements

 

22. Applications, Logbooks, Reports, and Records: Fraud, Falsification, or Incorrect Statements (§60.33)

 

Begin Information

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.33, Applications, Logbooks, Reports, and Records: Fraud, Falsification, or Incorrect Statements.

End Information

 

23. [Reserved]

24. Levels of FTD.

 

Begin Information

a. The following is a general description of each level of FTD. Detailed standards and tests for the various levels of FTDs are fully defined in Attachments 1 through 3 of this appendix.

(1) Level 4. A device that may have an open airplane-specific flight deck area, or an enclosed airplane-specific flight deck and at least one operating system. Air/ground logic is required (no aerodynamic programming required). All displays may be flat/LCD panel representations or actual representations of displays in the aircraft. All controls, switches, and knobs may be touch sensitive activation (not capable of manual manipulation of the flight controls) or may physically replicate the aircraft in control operation.

(2) Level 5. A device that may have an open airplane-specific flight deck area, or an enclosed airplane-specific flight deck; generic aerodynamic programming; at least one operating system; and control loading that is representative of the simulated airplane only at an approach speed and configuration. All displays may be flat/LCD panel representations or actual representations of displays in the aircraft. Primary and secondary flight controls (e.g., rudder, aileron, elevator, flaps, spoilers/speed brakes, engine controls, landing gear, nosewheel steering, trim, brakes) must be physical controls. All other controls, switches, and knobs may be touch sensitive activation.

(3) Level 6. A device that has an enclosed airplane-specific flight deck; airplane-specific aerodynamic programming; all applicable airplane systems operating; control loading that is representative of the simulated airplane throughout its ground and flight envelope; and significant sound representation. All displays may be flat/LCD panel representations or actual representations of displays in the aircraft, but all controls, switches, and knobs must physically replicate the aircraft in control operation.

End Information

 

(4) Level 7. A Level 7 device is one that has an enclosed airplane-specific flight deck and aerodynamic program with all applicable airplane systems operating and control loading that is representative of the simulated airplane throughout its ground and flight envelope and significant sound representation. All displays may be flat/LCD panel representations or actual representations of displays in the aircraft, but all controls, switches, and knobs must physically replicate the aircraft in control operation. It also has a visual system that provides an out-of-the-flight deck view, providing cross-flight deck viewing (for both pilots simultaneously) of a field-of-view of at least 180° horizontally and 40° vertically.

25. FTD Qualification on the Basis of a Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement (BASA) (§60.37)

 

Begin Information

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.37, FTD Qualification on the Basis of a Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement (BASA).

End Information

 

Attachment 1 to Appendix B to Part 60—General FTD REQUIREMENTS

 

Begin QPS Requirements

1. Requirements

a. Certain requirements included in this appendix must be supported with an SOC as defined in Appendix F, which may include objective and subjective tests. The requirements for SOCs are indicated in the “General FTD Requirements” column in Table B1A of this appendix.

b. Table B1A describes the requirements for the indicated level of FTD. Many devices include operational systems or functions that exceed the requirements outlined in this section. In any event, all systems will be tested and evaluated in accordance with this appendix to ensure proper operation.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

2. Discussion

a. This attachment describes the general requirements for qualifying Level 4 through Level 6 FTDs. The sponsor should also consult the objectives tests in Attachment 2 of this appendix and the examination of functions and subjective tests listed in Attachment 3 of this appendix to determine the complete requirements for a specific level FTD.

b. The material contained in this attachment is divided into the following categories:

(1) General Flight deck Configuration.

(2) Programming.

(3) Equipment Operation.

(4) Equipment and facilities for instructor/evaluator functions.

(5) Motion System.

(6) Visual System.

(7) Sound System.

c. Table B1A provides the standards for the General FTD Requirements.

d. Table B1B provides the tasks that the sponsor will examine to determine whether the FTD satisfactorily meets the requirements for flight crew training, testing, and experience, and provides the tasks for which the simulator may be qualified.

e. Table B1C provides the functions that an instructor/check airman must be able to control in the simulator.

f. It is not required that all of the tasks that appear on the List of Qualified Tasks (part of the SOQ) be accomplished during the initial or continuing qualification evaluation.

End Information

 
eCFR graphic er20my16.071.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.072.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.073.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.074.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.075.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.076.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.077.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.078.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.079.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.080.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.081.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.082.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.083.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.084.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.085.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.086.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.087.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.088.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.089.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.090.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.091.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.092.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.093.gif

View or download PDF

Table B1C—Table of FTD System Tasks QPS requirements

QPS RequirementsInformation
Entry No.Subjective Requirements
In order to be qualified at the FTD qualification level indicated, the FTD must be able to perform at least the tasks associated with that level of qualification.
FTD level Notes
4 5 6
1. Instructor Operating Station (IOS).
1.a.Power switch(es)XXX
1.b.Airplane conditionsAXXe.g., GW, CG, Fuel loading, Systems, Ground Crew.
1.c.Airports/RunwaysXXXe.g., Selection and Presets; Surface and Lighting controls if equipped with a visual system.
1.d.Environmental controlsXXXe.g., Temp, Wind.
1.e.Airplane system malfunctions (Insertion/deletion)AXX
1.f.Locks, Freezes, and RepositioningXXX
1.g.Sound Controls. (On/off/adjustment)XXX
1.h.Motion/Control Loading System, as appropriate. On/off/emergency stopAAA
2. Observer Seats/Stations.
2.a.Position/Adjustment/Positive restraint systemXXX

Note 1: An “A” in the table indicates that the system, task, or procedure, although not required to be present, may be examined if the appropriate system is in the FTD and is working properly.

Attachment 2 to Appendix B to Part 60—Flight Training Device (FTD) Objective Tests

 

Begin Information

1. Discussion

a. For the purposes of this attachment, the flight conditions specified in the Flight Conditions Column of Table B2A, are defined as follows:

(1) Ground—on ground, independent of airplane configuration;

(2) Take-off—gear down with flaps/slats in any certified takeoff position;

(3) First segment climb—gear down with flaps/slats in any certified takeoff position (normally not above 50 ft AGL);

(4) Second segment climb—gear up with flaps/slats in any certified takeoff position (normally between 50 ft and 400 ft AGL);

(5) Clean—flaps/slats retracted and gear up;

(6) Cruise—clean configuration at cruise altitude and airspeed;

(7) Approach—gear up or down with flaps/slats at any normal approach position as recommended by the airplane manufacturer; and

(8) Landing—gear down with flaps/slats in any certified landing position.

b. The format for numbering the objective tests in Appendix A, Attachment 2, Table A2A, and the objective tests in Appendix B, Attachment 2, Table B2A, is identical. However, each test required for FFSs is not necessarily required for FTDs. Also, each test required for FTDs is not necessarily required for FFSs. Therefore, when a test number (or series of numbers) is not required, the term “Reserved” is used in the table at that location. Following this numbering format provides a degree of commonality between the two tables and substantially reduces the potential for confusion when referring to objective test numbers for either FFSs or FTDs.

c. The reader is encouraged to review the Airplane Flight Simulator Evaluation Handbook, Volumes I and II, published by the Royal Aeronautical Society, London, UK, and FAA AC 25-7, as amended, Flight Test Guide for Certification of Transport Category Airplanes, and AC 23-8, as amended, Flight Test Guide for Certification of Part 23 Airplanes, for references and examples regarding flight testing requirements and techniques.

d. If relevant winds are present in the objective data, the wind vector should be clearly noted as part of the data presentation, expressed in conventional terminology, and related to the runway being used for the test.

e. A Level 4 FTD does not require objective tests and therefore, Level 4 is not addressed in the following table.

End Information

 

Begin QPS Requirements

2. Test Requirements

a. The ground and flight tests required for qualification are listed in Table B2A Objective Tests. Computer generated FTD test results must be provided for each test except where an alternate test is specifically authorized by the NSPM. If a flight condition or operating condition is required for the test but does not apply to the airplane being simulated or to the qualification level sought, it may be disregarded (e.g., an engine out missed approach for a single-engine airplane; a maneuver using reverse thrust for an airplane without reverse thrust capability). Each test result is compared against the validation data described in §60.13, and in Appendix B. The results must be produced on an appropriate recording device acceptable to the NSPM and must include FTD number, date, time, conditions, tolerances, and appropriate dependent variables portrayed in comparison to the validation data. Time histories are required unless otherwise indicated in Table B2A. All results must be labeled using the tolerances and units given.

b. Table B2A in this attachment sets out the test results required, including the parameters, tolerances, and flight conditions for FTD validation. Tolerances are provided for the listed tests because mathematical modeling and acquisition and development of reference data are often inexact. All tolerances listed in the following tables are applied to FTD performance. When two tolerance values are given for a parameter, the less restrictive may be used unless otherwise indicated. In those cases where a tolerance is expressed only as a percentage, the tolerance percentage applies to the maximum value of that parameter within its normal operating range as measured from the neutral or zero position unless otherwise indicated.

c. Certain tests included in this attachment must be supported with a SOC. In Table B2A, requirements for SOCs are indicated in the “Test Details” column.

d. When operational or engineering judgment is used in making assessments for flight test data applications for FTD validity, such judgment may not be limited to a single parameter. For example, data that exhibit rapid variations of the measured parameters may require interpolations or a “best fit” data section. All relevant parameters related to a given maneuver or flight condition must be provided to allow overall interpretation. When it is difficult or impossible to match FTD to airplane data throughout a time history, differences must be justified by providing a comparison of other related variables for the condition being assessed.

e. It is not acceptable to program the FTD so that the mathematical modeling is correct only at the validation test points. Unless otherwise noted, FTD tests must represent airplane performance and handling qualities at operating weights and centers of gravity (CG) typical of normal operation. FTD tests at extreme weight or CG conditions may be acceptable where required for concurrent aircraft certification testing. Tests of handling qualities must include validation of augmentation devices.

f. When comparing the parameters listed to those of the airplane, sufficient data must also be provided to verify the correct flight condition and airplane configuration changes. For example, to show that control force is within the parameters for a static stability test, data to show the correct airspeed, power, thrust or torque, airplane configuration, altitude, and other appropriate datum identification parameters must also be given. If comparing short period dynamics, normal acceleration may be used to establish a match to the airplane, but airspeed, altitude, control input, airplane configuration, and other appropriate data must also be given. If comparing landing gear change dynamics, pitch, airspeed, and altitude may be used to establish a match to the airplane, but landing gear position must also be provided. All airspeed values must be properly annotated (e.g., indicated versus calibrated). In addition, the same variables must be used for comparison (e.g., compare inches to inches rather than inches to centimeters).

g. The QTG provided by the sponsor must clearly describe how the FTD will be set up and operated for each test. Each FTD subsystem may be tested independently, but overall integrated testing of the FTD must be accomplished to assure that the total FTD system meets the prescribed standards. A manual test procedure with explicit and detailed steps for completing each test must also be provided.

h. For previously qualified FTDs, the tests and tolerances of this attachment may be used in subsequent continuing qualification evaluations for any given test if the sponsor has submitted a proposed MQTG revision to the NSPM and has received NSPM approval.

i. FTDs are evaluated and qualified with an engine model simulating the airplane data supplier's flight test engine. For qualification of alternative engine models (either variations of the flight test engines or other manufacturer's engines) additional tests with the alternative engine models may be required. This attachment contains guidelines for alternative engines.

j. Testing Computer Controlled Aircraft (CCA) simulators, or other highly augmented airplane simulators, flight test data is required for the Normal (N) and/or Non-normal (NN) control states, as indicated in this attachment. Where test results are independent of control state, Normal or Non-normal control data may be used. All tests in Table B2A require test results in the Normal control state unless specifically noted otherwise in the Test Details section following the CCA designation. The NSPM will determine what tests are appropriate for airplane simulation data. When making this determination, the NSPM may require other levels of control state degradation for specific airplane tests. Where Non-normal control states are required, test data must be provided for one or more Non-normal control states, and must include the least augmented state. Where applicable, flight test data must record Normal and Non-normal states for:

(1) Pilot controller deflections or electronically generated inputs, including location of input; and

(2) Flight control surface positions unless test results are not affected by, or are independent of, surface positions.

k. Tests of handling qualities must include validation of augmentation devices. FTDs for highly augmented airplanes will be validated both in the unaugmented configuration (or failure state with the maximum permitted degradation in handling qualities) and the augmented configuration. Where various levels of handling qualities result from failure states, validation of the effect of the failure is necessary. Requirements for testing will be mutually agreed to between the sponsor and the NSPM on a case-by-case basis.

l. Some tests will not be required for airplanes using airplane hardware in the FTD flight deck (e.g., “side stick controller”). These exceptions are noted in Section 2 “Handling Qualities” in Table B2A of this attachment. However, in these cases, the sponsor must provide a statement that the airplane hardware meets the appropriate manufacturer's specifications and the sponsor must have supporting information to that fact available for NSPM review.

m. For objective test purposes, see Appendix F of this part for the definitions of “Near maximum,” “Light,” and “Medium” gross weight.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

n. In those cases where the objective test results authorize a “snapshot test” or a “series of snapshot test results” in lieu of a time-history result, the sponsor or other data provider must ensure that a steady state condition exists at the instant of time captured by the “snapshot.” The steady state condition must exist from 4 seconds prior to, through 1 second following, the instant of time captured by the snap shot.

o. Refer to AC 120-27, “Aircraft Weight and Balance” and FAA-H-8083-1, “Aircraft Weight and Balance Handbook” for more information.

End Information

 
eCFR graphic er20my16.094.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.095.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.096.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.097.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.098.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.099.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.100.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.101.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.102.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.103.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.104.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.105.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.106.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.107.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.108.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.109.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.110.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.111.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.112.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.113.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.114.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.115.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.116.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.117.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.118.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.119.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.120.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.121.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.122.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.123.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.124.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.125.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.126.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.127.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.128.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.129.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.130.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.131.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.132.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.133.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.134.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.135.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.170.gif

View or download PDF

 

Begin Information

3. For additional information on the following topics, please refer to Appendix A, Attachment 2, and the indicated paragraph within that attachment

  Control Dynamics, paragraph 4.

  Motion System, paragraph 6.

  Sound System, paragraph 7.

  Engineering Simulator Validation Data, paragraph 9.

  Validation Test Tolerances, paragraph 11.

  Validation Data Road Map, paragraph 12.

  Acceptance Guidelines for Alternative Engines Data, paragraph 13.

  Acceptance Guidelines for Alternative Avionics, paragraph 14.

  Transport Delay Testing, paragraph 15.

  Continuing Qualification Evaluation Validation Data Presentation, paragraph 16.

End Information

 

4. Alternative Objective Data for FTD Level 5

 

Begin QPS Requirements

a. This paragraph (including the following tables) is relevant only to FTD Level 5. It is provided because this level is required to simulate the performance and handling characteristics of a set of airplanes with similar characteristics, such as normal airspeed/altitude operating envelope and the same number and type of propulsion systems (engines).

b. Tables B2B through B2E reflect FTD performance standards that are acceptable to the FAA. A sponsor must demonstrate that a device performs within these parameters, as applicable. If a device does not meet the established performance parameters for some or for all of the applicable tests listed in Tables B2B through B2E, the sponsor may use NSP accepted flight test data for comparison purposes for those tests.

c. Sponsors using the data from Tables B2B through B2E must comply with the following:

(1) Submit a complete QTG, including results from all of the objective tests appropriate for the level of qualification sought as set out in Table B2A. The QTG must highlight those results that demonstrate the performance of the FTD is within the allowable performance ranges indicated in Tables B2B through B2E, as appropriate.

(2) The QTG test results must include all relevant information concerning the conditions under which the test was conducted; e.g., gross weight, center of gravity, airspeed, power setting, altitude (climbing, descending, or level), temperature, configuration, and any other parameter that impacts the conduct of the test.

(3) The test results become the validation data against which the initial and all subsequent continuing qualification evaluations are compared. These subsequent evaluations will use the tolerances listed in Table B2A.

(4) Subjective testing of the device must be performed to determine that the device performs and handles like an airplane within the appropriate set of airplanes.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

d. The reader is encouraged to consult the Airplane Flight Simulator Evaluation Handbook, Volumes I and II, published by the Royal Aeronautical Society, London, UK, and AC 25-7, Flight Test Guide for Certification of Transport Category Airplanes, and AC 23-8A, Flight Test Guide for Certification of Part 23 Airplanes, as amended, for references and examples regarding flight testing requirements and techniques.

End Information

 
eCFR graphic er20my16.171.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.137.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.138.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.139.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.140.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.141.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.142.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.143.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.144.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.145.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.146.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.147.gif

View or download PDF

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin QPS Requirements

5. Alternative Data Sources, Procedures, and Instrumentation: Level 6 FTD Only

a. Sponsors are not required to use the alternative data sources, procedures, and instrumentation. However, a sponsor may choose to use one or more of the alternative sources, procedures, and instrumentation described in Table B2F.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

b. It has become standard practice for experienced FTD manufacturers to use such techniques as a means of establishing data bases for new FTD configurations while awaiting the availability of actual flight test data; and then comparing this new data with the newly available flight test data. The results of such comparisons have, as reported by some recognized and experienced simulation experts, become increasingly consistent and indicate that these techniques, applied with appropriate experience, are becoming dependably accurate for the development of aerodynamic models for use in Level 6 FTDs.

c. In reviewing this history, the NSPM has concluded that, with proper care, those who are experienced in the development of aerodynamic models for FTD application can successfully use these modeling techniques to acceptably alter the method by which flight test data may be acquired and, when applied to Level 6 FTDs, does not compromise the quality of that simulation.

d. The information in the table that follows (Table of Alternative Data Sources, Procedures, and Information: Level 6 FTD Only) is presented to describe an acceptable alternative to data sources for Level 6 FTD modeling and validation, and an acceptable alternative to the procedures and instrumentation found in the flight test methods traditionally accepted for gathering modeling and validation data.

(1) Alternative data sources that may be used for part or all of a data requirement are the Airplane Maintenance Manual, the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM), Airplane Design Data, the Type Inspection Report (TIR), Certification Data or acceptable supplemental flight test data.

(2) The NSPM recommends that use of the alternative instrumentation noted in Table B2F be coordinated with the NSPM prior to employment in a flight test or data gathering effort.

e. The NSPM position regarding the use of these alternative data sources, procedures, and instrumentation is based on three primary preconditions and presumptions regarding the objective data and FTD aerodynamic program modeling.

(1) Data gathered through the alternative means does not require angle of attack (AOA) measurements or control surface position measurements for any flight test. AOA can be sufficiently derived if the flight test program insures the collection of acceptable level, unaccelerated, trimmed flight data. Angle of attack may be validated by conducting the three basic “fly-by” trim tests. The FTD time history tests should begin in level, unaccelerated, and trimmed flight, and the results should be compared with the flight test pitch angle.

(2) A simulation controls system model should be rigorously defined and fully mature. It should also include accurate gearing and cable stretch characteristics (where applicable) that are determined from actual aircraft measurements. Such a model does not require control surface position measurements in the flight test objective data for Level 6 FTD applications.

f. Table B2F is not applicable to Computer Controlled Aircraft FTDs.

g. Utilization of these alternate data sources, procedures, and instrumentation does not relieve the sponsor from compliance with the balance of the information contained in this document relative to Level 6 FTDs.

h. The term “inertial measurement system” allows the use of a functional global positioning system (GPS).

End Information

 

Table B2F—Alternative Data Sources, Procedures, and Instrumentation Level 6 FTD

QPS Requirements
The standards in this table are required if the data gathering methods described in paragraph 9 of Appendix B are not used.
Information
   
Objective test reference number and titleAlternative data sources, procedures, and instrumentationNotes
1.b.1.
Performance.
Takeoff.
Ground acceleration time.
Data may be acquired through a synchronized video recording of a stop watch and the calibrated airplane airspeed indicator. Hand-record the flight conditions and airplane configurationThis test is required only if RTO is sought.
1.b.7.
Performance.
Takeoff.
Rejected takeoff.
Data may be acquired through a synchronized video recording of a stop watch and the calibrated airplane airspeed indicator. Hand-record the flight conditions and airplane configurationThis test is required only if RTO is sought.
1.c.1.
Performance.
Climb.
Normal climb all engines operating.
Data may be acquired with a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments and engine power throughout the climb range
1.f.1.
Performance.
Engines.
Acceleration
Data may be acquired with a synchronized video recording of engine instruments and throttle position
1.f.2.
Performance.
Engines.
Deceleration
Data may be acquired with a synchronized video recording of engine instruments and throttle position
2.a.1.a.
Handling qualities.
Static control tests.
Pitch controller position vs. force and surface position calibration.
Surface position data may be acquired from flight data recorder (FDR) sensor or, if no FDR sensor, at selected, significant column positions (encompassing significant column position data points), acceptable to the NSPM, using a control surface protractor on the ground. Force data may be acquired by using a hand held force gauge at the same column position data pointsFor airplanes with reversible control systems, surface position data acquisition should be accomplished with winds less than 5 kts.
2.a.2.a.
Handling qualities.
Static control tests.
Wheel position vs. force and surface position calibration.
Surface position data may be acquired from flight data recorder (FDR) sensor or, if no FDR sensor, at selected, significant wheel positions (encompassing significant wheel position data points), acceptable to the NSPM, using a control surface protractor on the ground. Force data may be acquired by using a hand held force gauge at the same wheel position data pointsFor airplanes with reversible control systems, surface position data acquisition should be accomplished with winds less than 5 kts.
2.a.3.a.
Handling qualities.
Static control tests.
Rudder pedal position vs. force and surface position calibration.
Surface position data may be acquired from flight data recorder (FDR) sensor or, if no FDR sensor, at selected, significant rudder pedal positions (encompassing significant rudder pedal position data points), acceptable to the NSPM, using a control surface protractor on the ground. Force data may be acquired by using a hand held force gauge at the same rudder pedal position data pointsFor airplanes with reversible control systems, surface position data acquisition should be accomplished with winds less than 5 kts.
2.a.4.
Handling qualities.
Static control tests.
Nosewheel steering force.
Breakout data may be acquired with a hand held force gauge. The remainder of the force to the stops may be calculated if the force gauge and a protractor are used to measure force after breakout for at least 25% of the total displacement capability
2.a.5.
Handling qualities.
Static control tests.
Rudder pedal steering calibration.
Data may be acquired through the use of force pads on the rudder pedals and a pedal position measurement device, together with design data for nosewheel position
2.a.6.
Handling qualities.
Static control tests.
Pitch trim indicator vs. surface position calibration.
Data may be acquired through calculations
2.a.8.
Handling qualities.
Static control tests.
Alignment of power lever angle vs. selected engine parameter (e.g., EPR, N1, Torque, Manifold pressure).
Data may be acquired through the use of a temporary throttle quadrant scale to document throttle position. Use a synchronized video to record steady state instrument readings or hand-record steady state engine performance readings
2.a.9.
Handling qualities.
Static control tests.
Brake pedal position vs. force.
Use of design or predicted data is acceptable. Data may be acquired by measuring deflection at “zero” and at “maximum.”
2.c.1.
Handling qualities.
Longitudinal control tests.
Power change force.
Data may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of the calibrated airplane instruments, throttle position, and the force/position measurements of flight deck controlsPower change dynamics test is acceptable using the same data acquisition methodology.
2.c.2.
Handling qualities.
Longitudinal control tests.
Flap/slat change force.
Data may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated airplane instruments, flap/slat position, and the force/position measurements of flight deck controlsFlap/slat change dynamics test is acceptable using the same data acquisition methodology.
2.c.4.
Handling qualities.
Longitudinal control tests.
Gear change force.
Data may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of the calibrated airplane instruments, gear position, and the force/position measurements of flight deck controlsGear change dynamics test is acceptable using the same data acquisition methodology.
2.c.5.
Handling qualities.
Longitudinal control tests.
Longitudinal trim.
Data may be acquired through use of an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of flight deck controls position (previously calibrated to show related surface position) and engine instrument readings
2.c.6.
Handling qualities.
Longitudinal control tests.
Longitudinal maneuvering stability (stick force/g).
Data may be acquired through the use of an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of the calibrated airplane instruments; a temporary, high resolution bank angle scale affixed to the attitude indicator; and a wheel and column force measurement indication
2.c.7.
Handling qualities.
Longitudinal control tests.
Longitudinal static stability
Data may be acquired through the use of a synchronized video of the airplane flight instruments and a hand held force gauge
2.c.8.
Handling qualities.
Longitudinal control tests.
Stall Warning (activation of stall warning device).
Data may be acquired through a synchronized video recording of a stop watch and the calibrated airplane airspeed indicator. Hand-record the flight conditions and airplane configurationAirspeeds may be cross checked with those in the TIR and AFM.
2.c.9.a.
Handling qualities.
Longitudinal control tests.
Phugoid dynamics.
Data may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of the calibrated airplane instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
2.c.10.
Handling qualities.
Longitudinal control tests.
Short period dynamics.
Data may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of the calibrated airplane instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
2.c.11.
Handling qualities.
Longitudinal control tests.
Gear and flap/slat operating times.
May use design data, production flight test schedule, or maintenance specification, together with an SOC
2.d.2.
Handling qualities.
Lateral directional tests.
Roll response (rate).
Data may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of the calibrated airplane instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck lateral controls
2.d.3.
Handling qualities.
Lateral directional tests.
(a) Roll overshoot.
OR
(b) Roll response to flight deck roll controller step input.
Data may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of the calibrated airplane instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck lateral controls
2.d.4.
Handling qualities.
Lateral directional tests.
Spiral stability.
Data may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of the calibrated airplane instruments; the force/position measurements of flight deck controls; and a stop watch
2.d.6.a.
Handling qualities.
Lateral directional tests.
Rudder response.
Data may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of the calibrated airplane instruments; the force/position measurements of rudder pedals
2.d.7.
Handling qualities.
Lateral directional tests.
Dutch roll, (yaw damper OFF).
Data may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of the calibrated airplane instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
2.d.8.
Handling qualities.
Lateral directional tests.
Steady state sideslip.
Data may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of the calibrated airplane instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls

Attachment 3 to Appendix B to Part 60—Flight Training Device (FTD) Subjective Evaluation

 

Begin Information

1. Discussion

a. The subjective tests provide a basis for evaluating the capability of the FTD to perform over a typical utilization period. The items listed in the Table of Functions and Subjective Tests are used to determine whether the FTD competently simulates each required maneuver, procedure, or task; and verifying correct operation of the FTD controls, instruments, and systems. The tasks do not limit or exceed the authorizations for use of a given level of FTD as described on the SOQ or as approved by the TPAA. All items in the following paragraphs are subject to examination.

b. All simulated airplane systems functions will be assessed for normal and, where appropriate, alternate operations. Simulated airplane systems are listed separately under “Any Flight Phase” to ensure appropriate attention to systems checks. Operational navigation systems (including inertial navigation systems, global positioning systems, or other long-range systems) and the associated electronic display systems will be evaluated if installed. The NSP pilot will include in his report to the TPAA, the effect of the system operation and any system limitation.

c. At the request of the TPAA, the NSP Pilot may assess the FTD for a special aspect of a sponsor's training program during the functions and subjective portion of an evaluation. Such an assessment may include a portion of a specific operation (e.g., a Line Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) scenario) or special emphasis items in the sponsor's training program. Unless directly related to a requirement for the qualification level, the results of such an evaluation would not affect the qualification of the FTD.

End Information

 

Table B3A—Table of Functions and Subjective Tests Level 6 FTD

QPS requirements
Entry No.Operations tasks
Tasks in this table are subject to evaluation if appropriate for the airplane system or systems simulated as indicated in the SOQ Configuration List as defined in Appendix B, Attachment 2 of this part.
1. Preflight
   Accomplish a functions check of all installed switches, indicators, systems, and equipment at all crewmembers' and instructors' stations, and determine that the flight deck (or flight deck area) design and functions replicate the appropriate airplane.
2. Surface Operations (pre-takeoff)
2.a.Engine start:
2.a.1.Normal start.
2.a.2.Alternative procedures start.
2.a.3.Abnormal procedures start/shut down.
2.b.Pushback/Powerback (powerback requires visual system).
3. Takeoff (requires appropriate visual system as set out in Table B1A, item 6; Appendix B, Attachment 1.)
3.a.Instrument takeoff:
3.a.1.Engine checks (e.g., engine parameter relationships, propeller/mixture controls).
3.a.2.Acceleration characteristics.
3.a.3.Nosewheel/rudder steering.
3.a.4.Landing gear, wing flap, leading edge device operation.
3.b.Rejected takeoff:
3.b.1.Deceleration characteristics.
3.b.2.Brakes/engine reverser/ground spoiler operation.
3.b.3.Nosewheel/rudder steering.
4. In-Flight Operations
4.a.Normal climb.
4.b.Cruise:
4.b.1.Demonstration of performance characteristics (speed vs. power).
4.b.2.Normal turns.
4.b.3.Demonstration of high altitude handling.
4.b.4.Demonstration of high airspeed handling/overspeed warning.
4.b.5.Demonstration of Mach effects on control and trim.
4.b.6.Steep turns.
4.b.7.In-Flight engine shutdown (procedures only).
4.b.8.In-Flight engine restart (procedures only).
4.b.9.Specific flight characteristics.
4.b.10.Response to loss of flight control power.
4.b.11.Response to other flight control system failure modes.
4.b.12.Operations during icing conditions.
4.b.13.Effects of airframe/engine icing.
4.c.Other flight phase:
4.c.1.Approach to stalls in the following configurations:
4.c.1.a.Cruise.
4.c.1.b.Takeoff or approach.
4.c.1.c.Landing.
4.c.2.High angle of attack maneuvers in the following configurations:
4.c.2.a.Cruise.
4.c.2.b.Takeoff or approach.
4.c.2.c.Landing.
4.c.3.Slow flight.
4.c.4.Holding.
5. Approaches
5.a.Non-precision Instrument Approaches:
5.a.1.With use of autopilot and autothrottle, as applicable.
5.a.2.Without use of autopilot and autothrottle, as applicable.
5.a.3.With 10 knot tail wind.
5.a.4.With 10 knot crosswind.
5.b.Precision Instrument Approaches:
5.b.1.With use of autopilot, autothrottle, and autoland, as applicable.
5.b.2.Without use of autopilot, autothrottle, and autoland, as applicable.
5.b.3.With 10 knot tail wind.
5.b.4.With 10 knot crosswind.
6. Missed Approach
6.a.Manually controlled.
6.b.Automatically controlled (if applicable).
7. Any Flight Phase, as appropriate
7.a.Normal system operation (installed systems).
7.b.Abnormal/Emergency system operation (installed systems).
7.c.Flap operation.
7.d.Landing gear operation.
7.e.Engine Shutdown and Parking.
7.e.1.Systems operation.
7.e.2.Parking brake operation.
8. Instructor Operating Station (IOS), as appropriate. Functions in this section are subject to evaluation only if appropriate for the airplane and/or installed on the specific FTD involved
8.a.Power Switch(es).
8.b.Airplane conditions.
8.b.1.Gross weight, center of gravity, and fuel loading and allocation.
8.b.2.Airplane systems status.
8.b.3.Ground crew functions (e.g., external power, push back).
8.c.Airports.
8.c.1.Selection.
8.c.2.Runway selection.
8.c.3.Preset positions (e.g., ramp, over FAF).
8.d.Environmental controls.
8.d.1.Temperature.
8.d.2.Climate conditions (e.g., ice, rain).
8.d.3.Wind speed and direction.
8.e.Airplane system malfunctions.
8.e.1.Insertion/deletion.
8.e.2.Problem clear.
8.f.Locks, Freezes, and Repositioning.
8.f.1.Problem (all) freeze/release.
8.f.2.Position (geographic) freeze/release.
8.f.3.Repositioning (locations, freezes, and releases).
8.f.4.Ground speed control.
8.f.5.Remote IOS, if installed.
9. Sound Controls. On/off/adjustment
10. Control Loading System (as applicable) On/off/emergency stop.
11. Observer Stations.
11.a.Position.
11.b.Adjustments.
End QPS Requirements

Table B3B—Table of Functions and Subjective Tests Level 5 FTD

QPS requirements
Entry No.Operations tasks
Tasks in this table are subject to evaluation if appropriate for the airplane system or systems simulated as indicated in the SOQ Configuration List as defined in Appendix B, Attachment 2 of this part.
1. Preflight
   Accomplish a functions check of all installed switches, indicators, systems, and equipment at all crewmembers' and instructors' stations, and determine that the flight deck (or flight deck area) design and functions replicate the appropriate airplane.
2. Surface Operations (pre-takeoff)
2.a.Engine start (if installed):
2.a.1.Normal start.
2.a.2.Alternative procedures start.
2.a.3.Abnormal/Emergency procedures start/shut down.
3. In-Flight Operations
3.a.Normal climb.
3.b.Cruise:
3.b.1.Performance characteristics (speed vs. power).
3.b.2.Normal turns.
3.c.Normal descent.
4. Approaches
4.a.Coupled instrument approach maneuvers (as applicable for the systems installed).
5. Any Flight Phase
5.a.Normal system operation (Installed systems).
5.b.Abnormal/Emergency system operation (Installed systems).
5.c.Flap operation.
5.d.Landing gear operation
5.e.Engine Shutdown and Parking (if installed).
5.e.1.Systems operation.
5.e.2.Parking brake operation.
6. Instructor Operating Station (IOS)
6.a.Power Switch(es).
6.b.Preset positions—ground, air.
6.c.Airplane system malfunctions (Installed systems).
6.c.1.Insertion/deletion.
6.c.2.Problem clear.

Table B3C—Table of Functions and Subjective Tests Level 4 FTD

QPS requirements
Entry No.Operations tasks
Tasks in this table are subject to evaluation if appropriate for the airplane system or systems simulated as indicated in the SOQ Configuration List as defined in Appendix B, Attachment 2 of this part.
1.Level 4 FTDs are required to have at least one operational system. The NSPM will accomplish a functions check of all installed systems, switches, indicators, and equipment at all crewmembers' and instructors' stations, and determine that the flight deck (or flight deck area) design and functions replicate the appropriate airplane.
eCFR graphic er20my16.148.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.149.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.150.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.151.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.152.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.153.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.154.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.155.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.156.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.157.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.158.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er20my16.159.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er30mr16.117.gif

View or download PDF

Attachment 4 to Appendix B to Part 60—Sample Documents

 

Begin Information

Table of Contents

Title of Sample

Figure B4A   Sample Letter, Request for Initial, Upgrade, or Reinstatement Evaluation

Figure B4B   Attachment: FTD Information Form

Figure B4C   Sample Letter of Compliance

Figure B4D   Sample Qualification Test Guide Cover Page

Figure B4E   Sample Statement of Qualification—Certificate

Figure B4F   Sample Statement of Qualification—Configuration List

Figure B4G   Sample Statement of Qualification—List of Qualified Tasks

Figure B4H   Sample Continuing Qualification Evaluation Requirements Page

Figure B4I   Sample MQTG Index of Effective FTD Directives

eCFR graphic er09my08.020.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.021.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.022.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.023.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.024.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.025.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.026.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.028.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.029.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.030.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.031.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.032.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.033.gif

View or download PDF

[Doc. No. FAA-2002-12461, 73 FR 26490, May 9, 2008, as amended by Docket FAA-2014-0391, Amdt. 60-4, 81 FR 18306, 18307, 18327, and 18376, Mar. 30, 2016; 81 FR 32087, 32110, 32111, and 32165, May 20, 2016; Amdt. 60-6, 83 FR 30275, June 27, 2018]

   

   

Appendix C to Part 60—Qualification Performance Standards for Helicopter Full Flight Simulators

 

Begin Information

This appendix establishes the standards for Helicopter FFS evaluation and qualification. The NSPM is responsible for the development, application, and implementation of the standards contained within this appendix. The procedures and criteria specified in this appendix will be used by the NSPM, or a person assigned by the NSPM, when conducting helicopter FFS evaluations.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction.

2. Applicability (§60.1) and (§60.2).

3. Definitions (§60.3).

4. Qualification Performance Standards (§60.4).

5. Quality Management System (§60.5).

6. Sponsor Qualification Requirements (§60.7).

7. Additional Responsibilities of the Sponsor (§60.9).

8. FFS Use (§60.11).

9. FFS Objective Data Requirements (§60.13).

10. Special Equipment and Personnel Requirements for Qualification of the FFS (§60.14).

11. Initial (and Upgrade) Qualification Requirements (§60.15).

12. Additional Qualifications for a Currently Qualified FFS (§60.16).

13. Previously Qualified FFSs (§60.17).

14. Inspection, Continuing Qualification Evaluation, and Maintenance Requirements (§60.19).

15. Logging FFS Discrepancies (§60.20).

16. Interim Qualification of FFSs for New Helicopter Types or Models (§60.21).

17. Modifications to FFSs (§60.23).

18. Operations with Missing, Malfunctioning, or Inoperative Components (§60.25).

19. Automatic Loss of Qualification and Procedures for Restoration of Qualification (§60.27).

20. Other Losses of Qualification and Procedures for Restoration of Qualification (§60.29).

21. Record Keeping and Reporting (§60.31).

22. Applications, Logbooks, Reports, and Records: Fraud, Falsification, or Incorrect Statements (§60.33).

23. [Reserved]

24. [Reserved]

25. FFS Qualification on the Basis of a Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement (BASA) (§60.37).

Attachment 1 to Appendix C to Part 60—General Simulator Requirements.

Attachment 2 to Appendix C to Part 60—FFS Objective Tests.

Attachment 3 to Appendix C to Part 60—Simulator Subjective Evaluation.

Attachment 4 to Appendix C to Part 60—Sample Documents.

Attachment 5 to Appendix C to Part 60—FSTD Directives Applicable to Helicopter FFSs

End Information

 

1. Introduction

 

Begin Information

a. This appendix contains background information as well as regulatory and informative material as described later in this section. To assist the reader in determining what areas are required and what areas are permissive, the text in this appendix is divided into two sections: “QPS Requirements” and “Information.” The QPS Requirements sections contain details regarding compliance with the part 60 rule language. These details are regulatory, but are found only in this appendix. The Information sections contain material that is advisory in nature, and designed to give the user general information about the regulation.

b. Questions regarding the contents of this publication should be sent to the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Flight Standards Service, National Simulator Program Staff, AFS-205, 100 Hartsfield Centre Parkway, Suite 400, Atlanta, Georgia, 30354. Telephone contact numbers for the NSP are: phone, 404-832-4700; fax, 404-761-8906. The general e-mail address for the NSP office is: 9-aso-avr-sim-team@faa.gov. The NSP Internet Web site address is: http://www.faa.gov/safety/programs__initiatives/aircraft__aviation/nsp/. On this Web Site you will find an NSP personnel list with telephone and e-mail contact information for each NSP staff member, a list of qualified flight simulation devices, ACs, a description of the qualification process, NSP policy, and an NSP “In-Works” section. Also linked from this site are additional information sources, handbook bulletins, frequently asked questions, a listing and text of the Federal Aviation Regulations, Flight Standards Inspector's handbooks, and other FAA links.

c. The NSPM encourages the use of electronic media for all communication, including any record, report, request, test, or statement required by this appendix. The electronic media used must have adequate security provisions and be acceptable to the NSPM. The NSPM recommends inquiries on system compatibility, and minimum system requirements are also included on the NSP Web site.

d. Related Reading References.

(1) 14 CFR part 60.

(2) 14 CFR part 61.

(3) 14 CFR part 63.

(4) 14 CFR part 119.

(5) 14 CFR part 121.

(6) 14 CFR part 125.

(7) 14 CFR part 135.

(8) 14 CFR part 141.

(9) 14 CFR part 142.

(10) AC 120-35, as amended, Line Operational Simulations: Line-Oriented Flight Training, Special Purpose Operational Training, Line Operational Evaluation.

(11) AC 120-57, as amended, Surface Movement Guidance and Control System (SMGCS).

(12) AC 120-63, as amended, Helicopter Simulator Qualification.

(13) AC 150/5300-13, as amended, Airport Design.

(14) AC 150/5340-1, as amended, Standards for Airport Markings.

(15) AC 150/5340-4, as amended, Installation Details for Runway Centerline Touchdown Zone Lighting Systems.

(16) AC 150/5340-19, as amended, Taxiway Centerline Lighting System.

(17) AC 150/5340-24, as amended, Runway and Taxiway Edge Lighting System.

(18) AC 150/5345-28, as amended, Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI) Systems

(19) AC 150/5390-2, as amended, Heliport Design

(20) International Air Transport Association document, “Flight Simulator Design and Performance Data Requirements,” as amended.

(21) AC 29-2, as amended, Flight Test Guide for Certification of Transport Category Rotorcraft.

(22) AC 27-1, as amended, Flight Test Guide for Certification of Normal Category Rotorcraft.

(23) International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Manual of Criteria for the Qualification of Flight Simulators, as amended.

(24) Airplane Flight Simulator Evaluation Handbook, Volume I, as amended and Volume II, as amended, The Royal Aeronautical Society, London, UK.

(25) FAA Airman Testing Standards for the Airline Transport Pilot Certificate, Type Ratings, Commercial Pilot Certificate, and Instrument Ratings.

(26) The FAA Aeronautical Information Manual (AIM). An electronic version of the AIM is on the Internet at http://www.faa.gov/atpubs.

(27) Aeronautical Radio, Inc. (ARINC) document number 436, titled Guidelines For Electronic Qualification Test Guide (as amended).

(28) Aeronautical Radio, Inc. (ARINC) document 610, Guidance for Design and Integration of Aircraft Avionics Equipment in Simulators (as amended).

End Information

 

2. Applicability (§§60.1 and 60.2)

 

Begin Information

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.1, Applicability, or to §60.2, Applicability of sponsor rules to person who are not sponsors and who are engaged in certain unauthorized activities.

End Information

 

3. Definitions (§60.3)

 

Begin Information

See Appendix F of this part for a list of definitions and abbreviations from part 1 and part 60, including the appropriate appendices of part 60.

End Information

 

4. Qualification Performance Standards (§60.4)

 

Begin Information

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.4, Qualification Performance Standards.

End Information

 

5. Quality Management System (§60.5)

 

Begin Information

See Appendix E of this part for additional regulatory and informational material regarding Quality Management Systems.

End Information

 

6. Sponsor Qualification Requirements (§60.7)

 

Begin Information

a. The intent of the language in §60.7(b) is to have a specific FFS, identified by the sponsor, used at least once in an FAA-approved flight training program for the helicopter simulated during the 12-month period described. The identification of the specific FFS may change from one 12-month period to the next 12-month period as long as that sponsor sponsors and uses at least one FFS at least once during the prescribed period. There is no minimum number of hours or minimum FFS periods required.

b. The following examples describe acceptable operational practices:

(1) Example One.

(a) A sponsor is sponsoring a single, specific FFS for its own use, in its own facility or elsewhere—this single FFS forms the basis for the sponsorship. The sponsor uses that FFS at least once in each 12-month period in that sponsor's FAA-approved flight training program for the helicopter simulated. This 12-month period is established according to the following schedule:

(i) If the FFS was qualified prior to May 30, 2008, the 12-month period begins on the date of the first continuing qualification evaluation conducted in accordance with §60.19 after May 30, 2008, and continues for each subsequent 12-month period;

(ii) A device qualified on or after May 30, 2008, will be required to undergo an initial or upgrade evaluation in accordance with §60.15. Once the initial or upgrade evaluation is complete, the first continuing qualification evaluation will be conducted within 6 months. The 12 month continuing qualification evaluation cycle begins on that date and continues for each subsequent 12-month period.

(b) There is no minimum number of hours of FFS use required.

(c) The identification of the specific FFS may change from one 12-month period to the next 12-month period as long as that sponsor sponsors and uses at least one FFS at least once during the prescribed period.

(2) Example Two.

(a) A sponsor sponsors an additional number of FFSs, in its facility or elsewhere. Each additionally sponsored FFS must be—

(i) Used by the sponsor in the sponsor's FAA-approved flight training program for the helicopter simulated (as described in §60.7(d)(1)); or

(ii) Used by another FAA certificate holder in that other certificate holder's FAA-approved flight training program for the helicopter simulated (as described in §60.7(d)(1)). This 12-month period is established in the same manner as in example one; or

(iii) Provided a statement each year from a qualified pilot, (after having flown the helicopter, not the subject FFS or another FFS, during the preceding 12-month period) stating that the subject FFS's performance and handling qualities represent the helicopter (as described in §60.7(d)(2)). This statement is provided at least once in each 12-month period established in the same manner as in example one.

(b) There is no minimum number of hours of FFS use required.

(3) Example Three.

(a) A sponsor in New York (in this example, a Part 142 certificate holder) establishes “satellite” training centers in Chicago and Moscow.

(b) The satellite function means that the Chicago and Moscow centers must operate under the New York center's certificate (in accordance with all of the New York center's practices, procedures, and policies; e.g., instructor and/or technician training/checking requirements, record keeping, QMS program).

(c) All of the FFSs in the Chicago and Moscow centers could be dry-leased (i.e., the certificate holder does not have and use FAA-approved flight training programs for the FFSs in the Chicago and Moscow centers) because—

(i) Each FFS in the Chicago center and each FFS in the Moscow center is used at least once each 12-month period by another FAA certificate holder in that other certificate holder's FAA-approved flight training program for the helicopter (as described in §60.7(d)(1)); OR

(ii) A statement is obtained from a qualified pilot (having flown the helicopter, not the subject FFS or another FFS during the preceding 12-month period) stating that the performance and handling qualities of each FFS in the Chicago and Moscow centers represents the helicopter (as described in §60.7(d)(2)).

End Information

 

7. Additional Responsibilities of the Sponsor (§60.9).

Begin Information

The phrase “as soon as practicable” in §60.9(a) means without unnecessarily disrupting or delaying beyond a reasonable time the training, evaluation, or experience being conducted in the FFS.

End Information

 

8. FFS Use (§60.11)

 

Begin Information

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.11, FFS Use.

End Information

 

9. FFS Objective Data Requirements (§60.13)

 

Begin QPS Requirements

a. Flight test data used to validate FFS performance and handling qualities must have been gathered in accordance with a flight test program containing the following:

(1) A flight test plan consisting of:

(a) The maneuvers and procedures required for aircraft certification and simulation programming and validation

(b) For each maneuver or procedure—

(i) The procedures and control input the flight test pilot and/or engineer used.

(ii) The atmospheric and environmental conditions.

(iii) The initial flight conditions.

(iv) The helicopter configuration, including weight and center of gravity.

(v) The data to be gathered.

(vi) All other information necessary to recreate the flight test conditions in the FFS.

(2) Appropriately qualified flight test personnel.

(3) An understanding of the accuracy of the data to be gathered using appropriate alternative data sources, procedures, and instrumentation that is traceable to a recognized standard as described in Attachment 2, Table C2D of this appendix.

(4) Appropriate and sufficient data acquisition equipment or system(s), including appropriate data reduction and analysis methods and techniques, acceptable to the FAA's Aircraft Certification Service.

b. The data, regardless of source, must be presented:

(1) In a format that supports the FFS validation process;

(2) In a manner that is clearly readable and annotated correctly and completely;

(3) With resolution sufficient to determine compliance with the tolerances set forth in Attachment 2, Table C2A of this appendix.

(4) With any necessary instructions or other details provided, such as Stability Augmentation System (SAS) or throttle position; and

(5) Without alteration, adjustments, or bias. Data may be corrected to address known data calibration errors provided that an explanation of the methods used to correct the errors appears in the QTG. The corrected data may be re-scaled, digitized, or otherwise manipulated to fit the desired presentation.

c. After completion of any additional flight test, a flight test report must be submitted in support of the validation data. The report must contain sufficient data and rationale to support qualification of the FFS at the level requested.

d. As required by §60.13(f), the sponsor must notify the NSPM when it becomes aware that an addition to, an amendment to, or a revision of data that may relate to FFS performance or handling characteristics is available. The data referred to in this paragraph is data used to validate the performance, handling qualities, or other characteristics of the aircraft, including data related to any relevant changes occurring after the type certificate was issued. The sponsor must—

(1) Within 10 calendar days, notify the NSPM of the existence of this data; and

(2) Within 45 calendar days, notify the NSPM of—

(a) The schedule to incorporate this data into the FFS; or

(b) The reason for not incorporating this data into the FFS.

e. In those cases where the objective test results authorize a “snapshot test” or a “series of snapshot test results” in lieu of a time-history result, the sponsor or other data provider must ensure that a steady state condition exists at the instant of time captured by the “snapshot.” The steady state condition must exist from 4 seconds prior to, through 1 second following, the instant of time captured by the snap shot.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

f. The FFS sponsor is encouraged to maintain a liaison with the manufacturer of the aircraft being simulated (or with the holder of the aircraft type certificate for the aircraft being simulated if the manufacturer is no longer in business), and, if appropriate, with the person who supplied the aircraft data package for the FFS in order to facilitate the notification required by §60.13(f).

g. It is the intent of the NSPM that for new aircraft entering service, at a point well in advance of preparation of the QTG, the sponsor should submit to the NSPM for approval, a descriptive document (see Table C2D, Sample Validation Data Roadmap for Helicopters) containing the plan for acquiring the validation data, including data sources. This document should clearly identify sources of data for all required tests, a description of the validity of these data for a specific engine type and thrust rating configuration, and the revision levels of all avionics affecting the performance or flying qualities of the aircraft. Additionally, this document should provide other information, such as the rationale or explanation for cases where data or data parameters are missing, instances where engineering simulation data are used or where flight test methods require further explanations. It should also provide a brief narrative describing the cause and effect of any deviation from data requirements. The aircraft manufacturer may provide this document.

h. There is no requirement for any flight test data supplier to submit a flight test plan or program prior to gathering flight test data. However, the NSPM notes that inexperienced data gatherers often provide data that is irrelevant, improperly marked, or lacking adequate justification for selection. Other problems include inadequate information regarding initial conditions or test maneuvers. The NSPM has been forced to refuse these data submissions as validation data for an FFS evaluation. It is for this reason that the NSPM recommends that any data supplier not previously experienced in this area review the data necessary for programming and for validating the performance of the FFS, and discuss the flight test plan anticipated for acquiring such data with the NSPM well in advance of commencing the flight tests.

i. The NSPM will consider, on a case-by-case basis, whether to approve supplemental validation data derived from flight data recording systems such as a Quick Access Recorder or Flight Data Recorder.

End Information

10. Special Equipment and Personnel Requirements for Qualification of the FFS (§60.14)

 

Begin Information

a. In the event that the NSPM determines that special equipment or specifically qualified persons will be required to conduct an evaluation, the NSPM will make every attempt to notify the sponsor at least one (1) week, but in no case less than 72 hours, in advance of the evaluation. Examples of special equipment include spot photometers, flight control measurement devices, and sound analyzers. Examples of specially qualified personnel include individuals specifically qualified to install or use any special equipment when its use is required.

b. Examples of a special evaluation include an evaluation conducted after an FFS is moved, at the request of the TPAA, or as a result of comments received from users of the FFS that raise questions about the continued qualification or use of the FFS.

End Information  

 

11. Initial (and Upgrade) Qualification Requirements (§60.15)

 

Begin QPS Requirements

a. In order to be qualified at a particular qualification level, the FFS must:

(1) Meet the general requirements listed in Attachment 1 of this appendix;

(2) Meet the objective testing requirements listed in Attachment 2 of this appendix; and

(3) Satisfactorily accomplish the subjective tests listed in Attachment 3 of this appendix.

b. The request described in §60.15(a) must include all of the following:

(1) A statement that the FFS meets all of the applicable provisions of this part and all applicable provisions of the QPS.

(2) A confirmation that the sponsor will forward to the NSPM the statement described in §60.15(b) in such time as to be received no later than 5 business days prior to the scheduled evaluation and may be forwarded to the NSPM via traditional or electronic means.

(3) A QTG, acceptable to the NSPM, that includes all of the following:

(a) Objective data obtained from aircraft testing or another approved source.

(b) Correlating objective test results obtained from the performance of the FFS as prescribed in the appropriate QPS.

(c) The result of FFS subjective tests prescribed in the appropriate QPS.

(d) A description of the equipment necessary to perform the evaluation for initial qualification and the continuing qualification evaluations.

c. The QTG described in paragraph (a)(3) of this section, must provide the documented proof of compliance with the simulator objective tests in Attachment 2, Table C2A of this appendix.

d. The QTG is prepared and submitted by the sponsor, or the sponsor's agent on behalf of the sponsor, to the NSPM for review and approval, and must include, for each objective test:

(1) Parameters, tolerances, and flight conditions.

(2) Pertinent and complete instructions for the conduct of automatic and manual tests.

(3) A means of comparing the FFS test results to the objective data.

(4) Any other information as necessary, to assist in the evaluation of the test results.

(5) Other information appropriate to the qualification level of the FFS.

e. The QTG described in paragraphs (a)(3) and (b) of this section, must include the following:

(1) A QTG cover page with sponsor and FAA approval signature blocks (see Attachment 4, Figure C4C, of this appendix, for a sample QTG cover page).

(2) A continuing qualification evaluation schedule requirements page. This page will be used by the NSPM to establish and record the frequency with which continuing qualification evaluations must be conducted and any subsequent changes that may be determined by the NSPM in accordance with §60.19. See Attachment 4 of this appendix, Figure C4G, for a sample Continuing Qualification Evaluation Requirements page.

(3) An FFS information page that provides the information listed in this paragraph (see Attachment 4, Figure C4B, of this appendix for a sample FFS information page). For convertible FFSs, the sponsor must submit a separate page for each configuration of the FFS.

(a) The sponsor's FFS identification number or code.

(b) The helicopter model and series being simulated.

(c) The aerodynamic data revision number or reference.

(d) The source of the basic aerodynamic model and the aerodynamic coefficient data used to modify the basic model.

(e) The engine model(s) and its data revision number or reference.

(f) The flight control data revision number or reference.

(g) The flight management system identification and revision level.

(h) The FFS model and manufacturer.

(i) The date of FFS manufacture.

(j) The FFS computer identification.

(k) The visual system model and manufacturer, including display type.

(l) The motion system type and manufacturer, including degrees of freedom.

(4) A Table of Contents.

(5) A log of revisions and a list of effective pages.

(6) List of all relevant data references.

(7) A glossary of terms and symbols used (including sign conventions and units).

(8) Statements of compliance and capability (SOCs) with certain requirements.

(9) Recording procedures or equipment required to accomplish the objective tests.

(10) The following information for each objective test designated in Attachment 2 of this appendix, Table C2A, as applicable to the qualification level sought:

(a) Name of the test.

(b) Objective of the test.

(c) Initial conditions.

(d) Manual test procedures.

(e) Automatic test procedures (if applicable).

(f) Method for evaluating FFS objective test results.

(g) List of all relevant parameters driven or constrained during the automatically conducted test(s).

(h) List of all relevant parameters driven or constrained during the manually conducted test(s).

(i) Tolerances for relevant parameters.

(j) Source of Validation Data (document and page number).

(k) Copy of the Validation Data (if located in a separate binder, a cross reference for the identification and page number for pertinent data location must be provided).

(l) Simulator Objective Test Results as obtained by the sponsor. Each test result must reflect the date completed and must be clearly labeled as a product of the device being tested.

f. A convertible FFS is addressed as a separate FFS for each model and series helicopter to which it will be converted and for the FAA qualification level sought. If a sponsor seeks qualification for two or more models of a helicopter type using a convertible FFS, the sponsor must submit a QTG for each helicopter model, or a QTG for the first helicopter model and a supplement to that QTG for each additional helicopter model. The NSPM will conduct evaluations for each helicopter model.

g. Form and manner of presentation of objective test results in the QTG:

(1) The sponsor's FFS test results must be recorded in a manner acceptable to the NSPM, that allows easy comparison of the FFS test results to the validation data (e.g., use of a multi-channel recorder, line printer, cross plotting, overlays, transparencies).

(2) FFS results must be labeled using terminology common to helicopter parameters as opposed to computer software identifications.

(3) Validation data documents included in a QTG may be photographically reduced only if such reduction will not alter the graphic scaling or cause difficulties in scale interpretation or resolution.

(4) Scaling on graphical presentations must provide the resolution necessary to evaluate the parameters shown in Attachment 2, Table C2A of this appendix.

(5) Tests involving time histories, data sheets (or transparencies thereof) and FFS test results must be clearly marked with appropriate reference points to ensure an accurate comparison between the FFS and the helicopter with respect to time. Time histories recorded via a line printer are to be clearly identified for cross plotting on the helicopter data. Over-plots must not obscure the reference data.

h. The sponsor may elect to complete the QTG objective and subjective tests at the manufacturer's facility or at the sponsor's training facility. If the tests are conducted at the manufacturer's facility, the sponsor must repeat at least one-third of the tests at the sponsor's training facility in order to substantiate FFS performance. The QTG must be clearly annotated to indicate when and where each test was accomplished. Tests conducted at the manufacturer's facility and at the sponsor's training facility must be conducted after the FFS is assembled with systems and sub-systems functional and operating in an interactive manner. The test results must be submitted to the NSPM.

i. The sponsor must maintain a copy of the MQTG at the FFS location.

j. All FFSs for which the initial qualification is conducted after May 30, 2014, must have an electronic MQTG (eMQTG) including all objective data obtained from helicopter testing, or another approved source (reformatted or digitized), together with correlating objective test results obtained from the performance of the FFS (reformatted or digitized) as prescribed in this appendix. The eMQTG must also contain the general FFS performance or demonstration results (reformatted or digitized) prescribed in this appendix, and a description of the equipment necessary to perform the initial qualification evaluation and the continuing qualification evaluations. The eMQTG must include the original validation data used to validate FFS performance and handling qualities in either the original digitized format from the data supplier or an electronic scan of the original time-history plots that were provided by the data supplier. A copy of the eMQTG must be provided to the NSPM.

k. All other FFSs not covered in subparagraph “j” must have an electronic copy of the MQTG by May 30, 2014. An electronic copy of the MQTG must be provided to the NSPM. This may be provided by an electronic scan presented in a Portable Document File (PDF), or similar format acceptable to the NSPM.

l. During the initial (or upgrade) qualification evaluation conducted by the NSPM, the sponsor must also provide a person who is a user of the device (e.g., a qualified pilot or instructor pilot with flight time experience in that aircraft) and knowledgeable about the operation of the aircraft and the operation of the FFS.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

m. Only those FFSs that are sponsored by a certificate holder as defined in Appendix F of this part will be evaluated by the NSPM. However, other FFS evaluations may be conducted on a case-by-case basis as the Administrator deems appropriate, but only in accordance with applicable agreements.

n. The NSPM will conduct an evaluation for each configuration, and each FFS must be evaluated as completely as possible. To ensure a thorough and uniform evaluation, each FFS is subjected to the general simulator requirements in Attachment 1 of this appendix, the objective tests listed in Attachment 2 of this appendix, and the subjective tests listed in Attachment 3 of this appendix. The evaluations described herein will include, but not necessarily be limited to the following:

(1) Helicopter responses, including longitudinal and lateral-directional control responses (see Attachment 2 of this appendix).

(2) Performance in authorized portions of the simulated helicopter's operating envelope, to include tasks evaluated by the NSPM in the areas of surface operations, takeoff, climb, cruise, descent, approach, and landing as well as abnormal and emergency operations (see Attachment 2 of this appendix).

(3) Control checks (see Attachment 1 and Attachment 2 of this appendix).

(4) Flight deck configuration (see Attachment 1 of this appendix).

(5) Pilot, flight engineer, and instructor station functions checks (see Attachment 1 and Attachment 3 of this appendix).

(6) Helicopter systems and sub-systems (as appropriate) as compared to the helicopter simulated (see Attachment 1 and Attachment 3 of this appendix).

(7) FFS systems and sub-systems, including force cueing (motion), visual, and aural (sound) systems, as appropriate (see Attachment 1 and Attachment 2 of this appendix).

(8) Certain additional requirements, depending upon the qualification level sought, including equipment or circumstances that may become hazardous to the occupants. The sponsor may be subject to Occupational Safety and Health Administration requirements.

o. The NSPM administers the objective and subjective tests, which includes an examination of functions. The tests include a qualitative assessment of the FFS by an NSP pilot. The NSP evaluation team leader may assign other qualified personnel to assist in accomplishing the functions examination and/or the objective and subjective tests performed during an evaluation when required.

(1) Objective tests provide a basis for measuring and evaluating FFS performance and determining compliance with the requirements of this part.

(2) Subjective tests provide a basis for:

(a) Evaluating the capability of the FFS to perform over a typical utilization period;

(b) Determining that the FFS satisfactorily simulates each required task;

(c) Verifying correct operation of the FFS controls, instruments, and systems; and

(d) Demonstrating compliance with the requirements of this part.

p. The tolerances for the test parameters listed in Attachment 2 of this appendix reflect the range of tolerances acceptable to the NSPM for FFS validation and are not to be confused with design tolerances specified for FFS manufacture. In making decisions regarding tests and test results, the NSPM relies on the use of operational and engineering judgment in the application of data (including consideration of the way in which the flight test was flown and way the data was gathered and applied), data presentations, and the applicable tolerances for each test.

q. In addition to the scheduled continuing qualification evaluation, each FFS is subject to evaluations conducted by the NSPM at any time without prior notification to the sponsor. Such evaluations would be accomplished in a normal manner (i.e., requiring exclusive use of the FFS for the conduct of objective and subjective tests and an examination of functions) if the FFS is not being used for flight crewmember training, testing, or checking. However, if the FFS were being used, the evaluation would be conducted in a non-exclusive manner. This non-exclusive evaluation will be conducted by the FFS evaluator accompanying the check airman, instructor, Aircrew Program Designee (APD), or FAA inspector aboard the FFS along with the student(s) and observing the operation of the FFS during the training, testing, or checking activities.

r. Problems with objective test results are handled as follows:

(1) If a problem with an objective test result is detected by the NSP evaluation team during an evaluation, the test may be repeated or the QTG may be amended.

(2) If it is determined that the results of an objective test do not support the level requested but do support a lower level, the NSPM may qualify the FFS at that lower level. For example, if a Level D evaluation is requested and the FFS fails to meet sound test tolerances, it could be qualified at Level C.

s. After an FFS is successfully evaluated, the NSPM issues a certificate of qualification (COQ) to the sponsor. The NSPM recommends the FFS to the TPAA, who will approve the FFS for use in a flight training program. The COQ will be issued at the satisfactory conclusion of the initial or continuing qualification evaluation and will list the tasks for which the FFS is qualified, referencing the tasks described in Table C1B in Attachment 1 of this appendix. However, it is the sponsor's responsibility to obtain TPAA approval prior to using the FFS in an FAA-approved flight training program.

t. Under normal circumstances, the NSPM establishes a date for the initial or upgrade evaluation within ten (10) working days after determining that a complete QTG is acceptable. Unusual circumstances may warrant establishing an evaluation date before this determination is made. A sponsor may schedule an evaluation date as early as 6 months in advance. However, there may be a delay of 45 days or more in rescheduling and completing the evaluation if the sponsor is unable to meet the scheduled date. See Attachment 4, of this appendix, Figure C4A, Sample Request for Initial, Upgrade, or Reinstatement Evaluation.

u. The numbering system used for objective test results in the QTG should closely follow the numbering system set out in Attachment 2, FFS Objective Tests, Table C2A of this appendix.

v. Contact the NSPM or visit the NSPM Web site for additional information regarding the preferred qualifications of pilots used to meet the requirements of §60.15(d).

w. Examples of the exclusions for which the FFS might not have been subjectively tested by the sponsor or the NSPM and for which qualification might not be sought or granted, as described in §60.15(g)(6), include takeoffs and landing from slopes and pinnacles.

End Information

 

12. Additional Qualifications for a Currently Qualified FFS (§60.16)

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.16, Additional Qualifications for a Currently Qualified FFS.

13. Previously Qualified FFSs (§60.17)

 

Begin QPS Requirements

a. In instances where a sponsor plans to remove an FFS from active status for a period of less than two years, the following procedures apply:

(1) The NSPM must be notified in writing and the notification must include an estimate of the period that the FFS will be inactive.

(2) Continuing Qualification evaluations will not be scheduled during the inactive period.

(3) The NSPM will remove the FFS from the list of qualified FSTDs on a mutually established date not later than the date on which the first missed continuing qualification evaluation would have been scheduled.

(4) Before the FFS is restored to qualified status, it must be evaluated by the NSPM. The evaluation content and the time required to accomplish the evaluation is based on the number of continuing qualification evaluations and sponsor-conducted quarterly inspections missed during the period of inactivity.

(5) The sponsor must notify the NSPM of any changes to the original scheduled time out of service.

b. Simulators qualified prior to May 30, 2008, are not required to meet the general simulation requirements, the objective test requirements, and the subjective test requirements of attachments 1, 2, and 3, of this appendix as long as the simulator continues to meet the test requirements contained in the MQTG developed under the original qualification basis.

c. After May 30, 2009, each visual scene or airport model beyond the minimum required for the FFS qualification level that is installed in and available for use in a qualified FFS must meet the requirements described in Attachment 3 of this appendix.

d. Simulators qualified prior to May 30, 2008, may be updated. If an evaluation is deemed appropriate or necessary by the NSPM after such an update, the evaluation will not require an evaluation to standards beyond those against which the simulator was originally qualified.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

e. Other certificate holders or persons desiring to use an FFS may contract with FFS sponsors to use FFSs previously qualified at a particular level for a helicopter type and approved for use within an FAA-approved flight training program. Such FFSs are not required to undergo an additional qualification process, except as described in §60.16.

f. Each FFS user must obtain approval from the appropriate TPAA to use any FFS in an FAA-approved flight training program.

g. The intent of the requirement listed in §60.17(b), for each FFS to have an SOQ within 6 years, is to have the availability of that statement (including the configuration list and the limitations to authorizations) to provide a complete picture of the FFS inventory regulated by the FAA. The issuance of the statement will not require any additional evaluation or require any adjustment to the evaluation basis for the FFS.

h. Downgrading of an FFS is a permanent change in qualification level and will necessitate the issuance of a revised SOQ to reflect the revised qualification level, as appropriate. If a temporary restriction is placed on an FFS because of a missing, malfunctioning, or inoperative component or on-going repairs, the restriction is not a permanent change in qualification level. Instead, the restriction is temporary and is removed when the reason for the restriction has been resolved.

i. The NSPM will determine the evaluation criteria for an FFS that has been removed from active status. The criteria will be based on the number of continuing qualification evaluations and quarterly inspections missed during the period of inactivity. For example, if the FFS were out of service for a 1 year period, it would be necessary to complete the entire QTG, since all of the quarterly evaluations would have been missed. The NSPM will also consider how the FFS was stored, whether parts were removed from the FFS and whether the FFS was disassembled.

j. The FFS will normally be requalified using the FAA-approved MQTG and the criteria that was in effect prior to its removal from qualification. However, inactive periods of 2 years or more will require requalification under the standards in effect and current at the time of requalification.

End Information

 

14. Inspection, Continuing Qualification Evaluation, and Maintenance Requirements (§60.19)

 

Begin QPS Requirements

a. The sponsor must conduct a minimum of four evenly spaced inspections throughout the year. The objective test sequence and content of each inspection must be developed by the sponsor and must be acceptable to the NSPM.

b. The description of the functional preflight check must be contained in the sponsor's QMS.

c. Record “functional preflight” in the FFS discrepancy log book or other acceptable location, including any item found to be missing, malfunctioning, or inoperative.

d. During the continuing qualification evaluation conducted by the NSPM, the sponsor must also provide a person knowledgeable about the operation of the aircraft and the operation of the FFS.

e. The NSPM will conduct continuing qualification evaluations every 12 months unless:

(1) The NSPM becomes aware of discrepancies or performance problems with the device that warrants more frequent evaluations; or

(2) The sponsor implements a QMS that justifies less frequent evaluations. However, in no case shall the frequency of a continuing qualification evaluation exceed 36 months.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

f. The sponsor's test sequence and the content of each quarterly inspection required in §60.19(a)(1) should include a balance and a mix from the objective test requirement areas listed as follows:

(1) Performance.

(2) Handling qualities.

(3) Motion system (where appropriate).

(4) Visual system (where appropriate).

(5) Sound system (where appropriate).

(6) Other FFS systems.

g. If the NSP evaluator plans to accomplish specific tests during a normal continuing qualification evaluation that requires the use of special equipment or technicians, the sponsor will be notified as far in advance of the evaluation as practical; but not less than 72 hours. Examples of such tests include latencies, control dynamics, sounds and vibrations, motion, and/or some visual system tests.

h. The continuing qualification evaluations, described in §60.19(b), will normally require 4 hours of FFS time. However, flexibility is necessary to address abnormal situations or situations involving aircraft with additional levels of complexity (e.g., computer controlled aircraft). The sponsor should anticipate that some tests may require additional time. The continuing qualification evaluations will consist of the following:

(1) Review of the results of the quarterly inspections conducted by the sponsor since the last scheduled continuing qualification evaluation.

(2) A selection of approximately 8 to 15 objective tests from the MQTG that provide an adequate opportunity to evaluate the performance of the FFS. The tests chosen will be performed either automatically or manually and should be able to be conducted within approximately one-third (1/3) of the allotted FFS time.

(3) A subjective evaluation of the FFS to perform a representative sampling of the tasks set out in attachment 3 of this appendix. This portion of the evaluation should take approximately two-thirds (2/3) of the allotted FFS time.

(4) An examination of the functions of the FFS may include the motion system, visual system, sound system, instructor operating station, and the normal functions and simulated malfunctions of the simulated helicopter systems. This examination is normally accomplished simultaneously with the subjective evaluation requirements.

End Information

 

15. Logging FFS Discrepancies (§60.20)

 

Begin Information

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.20. Logging FFS Discrepancies.

End Information

 

16. Interim Qualification of FFSs for New Helicopter Types or Models (§60.21)

 

Begin Information

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.21, Interim Qualification of FFSs for New Helicopter Types or Models.

End Information

 

17. Modifications to FFSs (§60.23)

 

Begin QPS Requirements

a. The notification described in §60.23(c)(2) must include a complete description of the planned modification, with a description of the operational and engineering effect the proposed modification will have on the operation of the FFS and the results that are expected with the modification incorporated.

b. Prior to using the modified FFS:

(1) All the applicable objective tests completed with the modification incorporated, including any necessary updates to the MQTG (e.g., accomplishment of FSTD Directives) must be acceptable to the NSPM; and

(2) The sponsor must provide the NSPM with a statement signed by the MR that the factors listed in §60.15(b) are addressed by the appropriate personnel as described in that section.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

(3) FSTD Directives are considered modifications of an FFS. See Attachment 4 of this appendix for a sample index of effective FSTD Directives. See Attachment 6 of this appendix for a list of all effective FSTD Directives applicable to Helicopter FFSs.

End Information

 

18. Operation with Missing, Malfunctioning, or Inoperative Components (§60.25)

 

Begin Information

a. The sponsor's responsibility with respect to §60.25(a) is satisfied when the sponsor fairly and accurately advises the user of the current status of an FFS, including any missing, malfunctioning, or inoperative (MMI) component(s).

b. It is the responsibility of the instructor, check airman, or representative of the administrator conducting training, testing, or checking to exercise reasonable and prudent judgment to determine if any MMI component is necessary for the satisfactory completion of a specific maneuver, procedure, or task.

c. If the 29th or 30th day of the 30-day period described in §60.25(b) is on a Saturday, a Sunday, or a holiday, the FAA will extend the deadline until the next business day.

d. In accordance with the authorization described in §60.25(b), the sponsor may develop a discrepancy prioritizing system to accomplish repairs based on the level of impact on the capability of the FFS. Repairs having a larger impact on FFS capability to provide the required training, evaluation, or flight experience will have a higher priority for repair or replacement.

End Information

 

19. Automatic Loss of Qualification and Procedures for Restoration of Qualification (§60.27)

 

Begin Information

If the sponsor provides a plan for how the FFS will be maintained during its out-of-service period (e.g., periodic exercise of mechanical, hydraulic, and electrical systems; routine replacement of hydraulic fluid; control of the environmental factors in which the FFS is to be maintained) there is a greater likelihood that the NSPM will be able to determine the amount of testing required for requalification.

End Information

 

20. Other Losses of Qualification and Procedures for Restoration of Qualification (§60.29)

 

Begin Information

If the sponsor provides a plan for how the FFS will be maintained during its out-of-service period (e.g., periodic exercise of mechanical, hydraulic, and electrical systems; routine replacement of hydraulic fluid; control of the environmental factors in which the FFS is to be maintained) there is a greater likelihood that the NSPM will be able to determine the amount of testing required for requalification.

End Information

 

21. Record Keeping and Reporting (§60.31)

 

Begin QPS Requirements

a. FFS modifications can include hardware or software changes. For FFS modifications involving software programming changes, the record required by §60.31(a)(2) must consist of the name of the aircraft system software, aerodynamic model, or engine model change, the date of the change, a summary of the change, and the reason for the change.

b. If a coded form for record keeping is used, it must provide for the preservation and retrieval of information with appropriate security or controls to prevent the inappropriate alteration of such records after the fact.

End QPS Requirements

 

22. Applications, Logbooks, Reports, and Records: Fraud, Falsification, or Incorrect Statements (§60.33)

 

Begin Information

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.33, Applications, Logbooks, Reports, and Records: Fraud, Falsification, or Incorrect Statements.

23. [Reserved]

24. [Reserved]

25. FFS Qualification on the Basis of a Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement (BASA) (§60.37)

No additional regulatory or informational material applies to §60.37, FFS Qualification on the Basis of a Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement (BASA).

End Information

 

Attachment 1 to Appendix C to Part 60—GENERAL SIMULATOR REQUIREMENTS

 

Begin QPS Requirements

1. Requirements

a. Certain requirements included in this appendix must be supported with an SOC as defined in Appendix F of this part, which may include objective and subjective tests. The requirements for SOCs are indicated in the “General Simulator Requirements” column in Table C1A of this appendix.

b. Table C1A describes the requirements for the indicated level of FFS. Many devices include operational systems or functions that exceed the requirements outlined in this section. However, all systems will be tested and evaluated in accordance with this appendix to ensure proper operation.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

2. Discussion

a. This attachment describes the general simulator requirements for qualifying a helicopter FFS. The sponsor should also consult the objective tests in Attachment 2 of this appendix and the examination of functions and subjective tests listed in Attachment 3 of this appendix to determine the complete requirements for a specific level simulator.

b. The material contained in this attachment is divided into the following categories:

(1) General flight deck configuration.

(2) Simulator programming.

(3) Equipment operation.

(4) Equipment and facilities for instructor/evaluator functions.

(5) Motion system.

(6) Visual system.

(7) Sound system.

c. Table C1A provides the standards for the General Simulator Requirements.

d. Table C1B provides the tasks that the sponsor will examine to determine whether the FFS satisfactorily meets the requirements for flight crew training, testing, and experience, and provides the tasks for which the simulator may be qualified.

e. Table C1C provides the functions that an instructor/check airman must be able to control in the simulator.

f. It is not required that all of the tasks that appear on the List of Qualified Tasks (part of the SOQ) be accomplished during the initial or continuing qualification evaluation.

g. Table C1A addresses only Levels B, C, and D helicopter simulators because there are no Level A Helicopter simulators.

End Information

 

Table C1A—Minimum Simulator Requirements

Entry No.QPS requirementsSimulator levelsInformation
General simulator requirementsBCDNotes
1.General Flight Deck Configuration
1.a.The simulator must have a flight deck that is a replica of the helicopter being simulated
The simulator must have controls, equipment, observable flight deck indicators, circuit breakers, and bulkheads properly located, functionally accurate and replicating the helicopter. The direction of movement of controls and switches must be identical to that in the helicopter. Pilot seats must afford the capability for the occupant to be able to achieve the design “eye position” established for the helicopter being simulated. Equipment for the operation of the flight deck windows must be included, but the actual windows need not be operable. Fire axes, extinguishers, and spare light bulbs must be available in the FFS but may be relocated to a suitable location as near as practical to the original position. Fire axes, landing gear pins, and any similar purpose instruments need only be represented in silhouette
XXXFor simulator purposes, the flight deck consists of all that space forward of a cross section of the fuselage at the most extreme aft setting of the pilots' seats including additional, required flight crewmember duty stations and those required bulkheads aft of the pilot seats. For clarification, bulkheads containing only items such as landing gear pin storage compartments, fire axes and extinguishers, spare light bulbs, and aircraft documents pouches are not considered essential and may be omitted.
1.b.Those circuit breakers that affect procedures or result in observable flight deck indications must be properly located and functionally accurateXXX
2.Programming
2.a.A flight dynamics model that accounts for various combinations of air speed and power normally encountered in flight must correspond to actual flight conditions, including the effect of change in helicopter attitude, aerodynamic and propulsive forces and moments, altitude, temperature, mass, center of gravity location, and configuration
An SOC is required
XXX
2.b.The simulator must have the computer capacity, accuracy, resolution, and dynamic response needed to meet the qualification level sought
An SOC is required
XXX
2.c.Ground handling (where appropriate) and aerodynamic programming must include the following:
2.c.1.Ground effect
Level B does not require hover programming
An SOC is required
XXXApplicable areas include flare and touch down from a running landing as well as for in-ground-effect (IGE) hover. A reasonable simulation of ground effect includes modeling of lift, drag, pitching moment, trim, and power while in ground effect.
2.c.2.Ground reaction
Level B does not require hover programming
An SOC is required
XXXReaction of the helicopter upon contact with the landing surface during landing (e.g., strut deflection, tire or skid friction, side forces) may differ with changes in gross weight, airspeed, rate of descent on touchdown, and slide slip.
2.d.The simulator must provide for manual and automatic testing of simulator hardware and software programming to determine compliance with simulator objective tests as prescribed in Attachment 2 of this appendix
An SOC is required
XXThis may include an automated system, which could be used for conducting at least a portion of the QTG tests. Automatic “flagging” of out-of-tolerance situations is encouraged.
2.e.The relative responses of the motion system, visual system, and flight deck instruments must be measured by latency tests or transport delay tests. Motion onset must occur before the end of the scan of that video field. Instrument response may not occur prior to motion onset. Test results must be within the following limits:The intent is to verify that the simulator provides instrument, motion, and visual cues that are like the helicopter responses within the stated time delays. It is preferable motion onset occur before the start of the visual scene change (the start of the scan of the first video field containing different information). For helicopter response, acceleration in the appropriate corresponding rotational axis is preferred.
2.e.1.Response must be within 150 milliseconds of the helicopter responseX
2.e.2.Response must be within 100 milliseconds of the helicopter responseXX
2.f.The simulator must simulate brake and tire failure dynamics (including antiskid failure, if appropriate)
An SOC is required.
XXThe simulator should represent the motion (in the appropriate axes) and the directional control characteristics of the helicopter when experiencing simulated brake or tire failures.
2.g.The aerodynamic modeling in the simulator must include:
(1) Ground effect,
(2) Effects of airframe and rotor icing (if applicable),
(3) Aerodynamic interference effects between the rotor wake and fuselage,
(4) Influence of the rotor on control and stabilization systems,
(5) Representations of settling with power, and
(6) Retreating blade stall.
An SOC is required.
XXSee Attachment 2 of this appendix for further information on ground effect.
2.h.The simulator must provide for realistic mass properties, including gross weight, center of gravity, and moments of inertia as a function of payload and fuel loading
An SOC is required.
XXX
3.Equipment Operation
3.a.All relevant instrument indications involved in the simulation of the helicopter must automatically respond to control movement or external disturbances to the simulated helicopter; e.g., turbulence or windshear. Numerical values must be presented in the appropriate unitsXXX
3.b.Communications, navigation, caution, and warning equipment must be installed and operate within the tolerances applicable for the helicopter being simulatedXXXSee Attachment 3 of this appendix for further information regarding long-range navigation equipment.
3.c.Simulated helicopter systems must operate as the helicopter systems operate under normal, abnormal, and emergency operating conditions on the ground and in flightXXX
3.d.The simulator must provide pilot controls with control forces and control travel that correspond to the simulated helicopter. The simulator must also react in the same manner as the helicopter under the same flight conditionsXXX
3.e.Simulator control feel dynamics must replicate the helicopter simulated. This must be determined by comparing a recording of the control feel dynamics of the simulator to helicopter measurements. For initial and upgrade evaluations, the control dynamic characteristics must be measured and recorded directly from the flight deck controls, and must be accomplished in takeoff, cruise, and landing conditions and configurationsXX
4.Instructor/Evaluator Facilities
4.a.In addition to the flight crewmember stations, the simulator must have at least two suitable seats for the instructor/check airman and FAA inspector. These seats must provide adequate vision to the pilot's panel and forward windows. All seats other than flight crew seats need not represent those found in the helicopter but must be adequately secured to the floor and equipped with similar positive restraint devicesXXXThe NSPM will consider alternatives to this standard for additional seats based on unique flight deck configurations.
4.b.The simulator must have controls that enable the instructor/evaluator to control all required system variables and insert all abnormal or emergency conditions into the simulated helicopter systems as described in the sponsor's FAA-approved training program, or as described in the relevant operating manual as appropriateXXX
4.c.The simulator must have instructor controls for all environmental effects expected to be available at the IOS; e.g., clouds, visibility, icing, precipitation, temperature, storm cells, and wind speed and directionXXX
4.d.The simulator must provide the instructor or evaluator the ability to present ground and air hazardsXXFor example, another aircraft crossing the active runway and converging airborne traffic.
4.e.The simulator must provide the instructor or evaluator the ability to present the effect of re-circulating dust, water vapor, or snow conditions that develop as a result of rotor downwashXXThis is a selectable condition that is not required for all operations on or near the surface.
5.Motion System
5.a.The simulator must have motion (force) cues perceptible to the pilot that are representative of the motion in a helicopterXXXFor example, touchdown cues should be a function of the rate of descent (RoD) of the simulated helicopter.
5.b.The simulator must have a motion (force cueing) system with a minimum of three degrees of freedom (at least pitch, roll, and heave)
An SOC is required.
X
5.c.The simulator must have a motion (force cueing) system that produces cues at least equivalent to those of a six-degrees-of-freedom, synergistic platform motion system (i.e., pitch, roll, yaw, heave, sway, and surge)
An SOC is required.
XX
5.d.The simulator must provide for the recording of the motion system response time
An SOC is required.
XXX
5.e.The simulator must provide motion effects programming to include the following:
   (1) Runway rumble, oleo deflections, effects of ground speed, uneven runway, characteristics.XXX
   (2) Buffets due to transverse flow effects.
   (3) Buffet during extension and retraction of landing gear.
   (4) Buffet due to retreating blade stall.
   (5) Buffet due to vortex ring (settling with power).
   (6) Representative cues resulting from touchdown.
   (7) High speed rotor vibrations.
   (8) Tire failure dynamicsXX
   (9) Engine malfunction and engine damage
   (10) Airframe ground strike
   (11) Motion vibrations that result from atmospheric disturbancesXFor air turbulence, general purpose disturbance models are acceptable if, when used, they produce test results that approximate demonstrable flight test data.
5.f.The simulator must provide characteristic motion vibrations that result from operation of the helicopter (for example, retreating blade stall, extended landing gear, settling with power) in so far as vibration marks an event or helicopter state, which can be sensed in the flight deckXThe simulator should be programmed and instrumented in such a manner that the characteristic buffet modes can be measured and compared to helicopter data.
6.Visual SystemAdditional horizontal field-of-view capability may be added at the sponsor's discretion provided the minimum field-of-view is retained.
6.a.The simulator must have a visual system providing an out-of-the-flight deck viewXXX
6.b.The simulator must provide a continuous field-of-view of at least 75° horizontally and 30° vertically per pilot seat. Both pilot seat visual systems must be operable simultaneously. The minimum horizontal field-of-view coverage must be plus and minus one-half ( 12 ) of the minimum continuous field-of-view requirement, centered on the zero degree azimuth line relative to the aircraft fuselage. An SOC must explain the geometry of the installation
An SOC is required.
X
6.c.The simulator must provide a continuous visual field-of-view of at least 146° horizontally and 36° vertically per pilot seat. Both pilot seat visual systems must be operable simultaneously. Horizontal field-of-view is centered on the zero degree azimuth line relative to the aircraft fuselage. The minimum horizontal field-of-view coverage must be plus and minus one-half ( 12 ) of the minimum continuous field-of-view requirement, centered on the zero degree azimuth line relative to the aircraft fuselage
An SOC must explain the geometry of the installation. Capability for a field-of-view in excess of the minimum is not required for qualification at Level C. However, where specific tasks require extended fields of view beyond the 146° by 36° (e.g., to accommodate the use of “chin windows” where the accommodation is either integral with or separate from the primary visual system display), then the extended fields of view must be provided. When considering the installation and use of augmented fields of view, the sponsor must meet with the NSPM to determine the training, testing, checking, and experience tasks for which the augmented field-of-view capability may be required
An SOC is required.
XOptimization of the vertical field-of-view may be considered with respect to the specific helicopter flight deck cut-off angle. The sponsor may request the NSPM to evaluate the FFS for specific authorization(s) for the following:
(1) Specific areas within the database needing higher resolution to support landings, take-offs and ground cushion exercises and training away from a heliport, including elevated heliport, helidecks and confined areas.
(2) For cross-country flights, sufficient scene details to allow for ground to map navigation over a sector length equal to 30 minutes at an average cruise speed.
(3) For offshore airborne radar approaches (ARA), harmonized visual/radar representations of installations.
6.d.The simulator must provide a continuous visual field-of-view of at least 176° horizontally and 56° vertically per pilot seat. Both pilot seat visual systems must be operable simultaneously. Horizontal field-of-view is centered on the zero degree azimuth line relative to the aircraft fuselage. The minimum horizontal field-of-view coverage must be plus and minus one-half ( 12 ) of the minimum continuous field-of-view requirement, centered on the zero degree azimuth line relative to the aircraft fuselage. An SOC must explain the geometry of the installation. Capability for a field-of-view in excess of the minimum is not required for qualification at Level D. However, where specific tasks require extended fields of view beyond the 176° by 56° (e.g., to accommodate the use of “chin windows” where the accommodation is either integral with or separate from the primary visual system display), then the extended fields of view must be provided. When considering the installation and use of augmented fields of view, the sponsor must meet with the NSPM to determine the training, testing, checking, and experience tasks for which the augmented field-of-view capability may be required
An SOC is required.
XOptimization of the vertical field-of-view may be considered with respect to the specific helicopter flight deck cut-off angle.The sponsor may request the NSPM to evaluate the FFS for specific authorization(s) for the following:
(1) Specific areas within the database needing higher resolution to support landings, take-offs and ground cushion exercises and training away from a heliport, including elevated heliport, helidecks and confined areas.
(2) For cross-country flights, sufficient scene details to allow for ground to map navigation over a sector length equal to 30 minutes at an average cruise speed.
(3) For offshore airborne radar approaches (ARA), harmonized visual/radar representations of installations.
6.e.The visual system must be free from optical discontinuities and artifacts that create non-realistic cuesXXXNonrealistic cues might include image “swimming” and image “roll-off,” that may lead a pilot to make incorrect assessments of speed, acceleration and/or situational awareness.
6.f.The simulator must have operational landing lights for night scenes.Where used, dusk (or twilight) scenes require operational landing lights.XXX
6.g.The simulator must have instructor controls for the following:
(1) Visibility in statute miles (kilometers) and runway visual range (RVR) in ft. (meters).
(2) Airport or landing area selection
(3) Airport or landing area lighting
XXX
6.h.Each airport scene displayed must include the following:
(1) Airport runways and taxiways
(2) Runway definition
(a) Runway surface and markings
(b) Lighting for the runway in use, including runway threshold, edge, centerline, touchdown zone, VASI (or PAPI), and approach lighting of appropriate colors, as appropriate
(c) Taxiway lights
XXX
6.i.The simulator must provide visual system compatibility with dynamic response programmingXXX
6.j.The simulator must show that the segment of the ground visible from the simulator flight deck is the same as from the helicopter flight deck (within established tolerances) when at the correct airspeed and altitude above the touchdown zoneXXXThis will show the modeling accuracy of the scene with respect to a predetermined position from the end of the runway “in use.”
6.k.The simulator must provide visual cues necessary to assess rate of change of height, height AGL, and translational displacement and rates during takeoffs and landingsX
6.l.The simulator must provide visual cues necessary to assess rate of change of height, height AGL, as well as translational displacement and rates during takeoff, low altitude/low airspeed maneuvering, hover, and landingXX
6.m.The simulator must provide for accurate portrayal of the visual environment relating to the simulator attitudeXXXVisual attitude vs. simulator attitude is a comparison of pitch and roll of the horizon as displayed in the visual scene compared to the display on the attitude indicator.
6.nThe simulator must provide for quick confirmation of visual system color, RVR, focus, and intensity
An SOC is required.
XX
6.o.The simulator must be capable of producing at least 10 levels of occultingXX
6.p.Night Visual Scenes. The simulator must provide night visual scenes with sufficient scene content to recognize the airport, the terrain, and major landmarks around the airport. The scene content must allow a pilot to successfully accomplish a visual landing. Night scenes, as a minimum, must provide presentations of sufficient surfaces with appropriate textural cues that include self-illuminated objects such as road networks, ramp lighting, and airport signage, to conduct a visual approach, a landing, and airport movement (taxi). Scenes must include a definable horizon and typical terrain characteristics such as fields, roads and bodies of water and surfaces illuminated by helicopter landing lightsXXX
6.q.Dusk (Twilight) Visual Scenes. The simulator must provide dusk (or twilight) visual scenes with sufficient scene content to recognize the airport, the terrain, and major landmarks around the airport. The scene content must allow a pilot to successfully accomplish a visual landing. Dusk (or twilight) scenes, as a minimum, must provide full color presentations of reduced ambient intensity, sufficient surfaces with appropriate textural cues that include self-illuminated objects such as road networks, ramp lighting and airport signage, to conduct a visual approach, landing and airport movement (taxi). Scenes must include a definable horizon and typical terrain characteristics such as fields, roads and bodies of water and surfaces illuminated by representative aircraft lighting (e.g., landing lights). If provided, directional horizon lighting must have correct orientation and be consistent with surface shading effects. Total scene content must be comparable in detail to that produced by 10,000 visible textured surfaces and 15,000 visible lights with sufficient system capacity to display 16 simultaneously moving objects
An SOC is required.
XX
6.r.Daylight Visual Scenes. The simulator must have daylight visual scenes with sufficient scene content to recognize the airport, the terrain, and major landmarks around the airport. The scene content must allow a pilot to successfully accomplish a visual landing. No ambient lighting may “washout” the displayed visual scene. Total scene content must be comparable in detail to that produced by 10,000 visible textured surfaces and 6,000 visible lights with sufficient system capacity to display 16 simultaneously moving objects. The visual display must be free of apparent and distracting quantization and other distracting visual effects while the simulator is in motion
An SOC is required.
XX
6.sThe simulator must provide operational visual scenes that portray physical relationships known to cause landing illusions to pilotsXXFor example: short runways, landing approaches over water, uphill or downhill runways, rising terrain on the approach path, unique topographic features.
6.t.The simulator must provide special weather representations of light, medium, and heavy precipitation near a thunderstorm on takeoff and during approach and landing. Representations need only be presented at and below an altitude of 2,000 ft. (610 m) above the airport surface and within 10 miles (16 km) of the airportXX
6.u.The simulator must present visual scenes of wet and snow-covered runways, including runway lighting reflections for wet conditions, and partially obscured lights for snow conditionsXXThe NSPM will consider suitable alternative effects.
6.v.The simulator must present realistic color and directionality of all airport lightingXX
7.Sound System
7.a.The simulator must provide flight deck sounds that result from pilot actions that correspond to those that occur in the helicopterXXX
7.b.Volume control, if installed, must have an indication of the sound level settingXXX
7.c.The simulator must accurately simulate the sound of precipitation, windshield wipers, and other significant helicopter noises perceptible to the pilot during normal and abnormal operations, and include the sound of a crash (when the simulator is landed in an unusual attitude or in excess of the structural gear limitations); normal engine sounds; and the sounds of gear extension and retraction
An SOC is required.
XX
7.d.The simulator must provide realistic amplitude and frequency of flight deck noises and sounds. Simulator performance must be recorded, compared to amplitude and frequency of the same sounds recorded in the helicopter, and made a part of the QTGX

Table C1B—Table of Tasks vs. Simulator Level

QPS requirementsInformation
Entry No.Subjective requirements
The simulator must be able to perform the tasks associated with that level of qualification.
Simulator levelsNotes
BCD
1. Preflight Procedures
1.a.Preflight Inspection (Flight deck Only) switches, indicators, systems, and equipmentXXX
1.b.APU/Engine start and run-up
1.b.1.Normal start proceduresXXX
1.b.2.Alternate start proceduresXXX
1.b.3.Abnormal starts and shutdowns (hot start, hung start)XXX
1.c.Taxiing—GroundXXX
1.d.Taxiing—HoverXXX
1.e.Pre-takeoff ChecksXXX
2. Takeoff and Departure Phase
2.a.Normal takeoff
2.a.1.From groundXXX
2.a.2.From hoverXX
2.a.3.RunningXXX
2.b.InstrumentXXX
2.c.Powerplant Failure During TakeoffXXX
2.d.Rejected TakeoffXXX
2.e.Instrument DepartureXXX
3. Climb
3.a.NormalXXX
3.b.Obstacle clearanceXXX
3.c.VerticalXXX
3.d.One engine inoperativeXXX
4. In-flight Maneuvers
4.a.Turns (timed, normal, steep)XXX
4.b.Powerplant Failure—Multiengine HelicoptersXXX
4.c.Powerplant Failure—Single-Engine HelicoptersXXX
4.d.Recovery From Unusual AttitudesXXX
4.e.Settling with PowerXXX
4.f.Specific Flight Characteristics incorporated into the user's FAA approved flight training programAAA
5. Instrument Procedures
5.a.Instrument ArrivalXXX
5.b.HoldingXXX
5.c.Precision Instrument Approach
5.c.1.Normal—All engines operatingXXX
5.c.2.Manually controlled—One or more engines inoperativeXXX
5.d.Non-precision Instrument ApproachXXX
5.e.Missed Approach
5.e.1.All engines operatingXXX
5.e.2.One or more engines inoperativeXXX
5.e.3.Stability augmentation system failureXXX
6. Landings and Approaches to Landings
6.a.Visual Approaches (normal, steep, shallow)XXX
6.b.Landings
6.b.1.Normal/crosswind
6.b.1.a.RunningXXX
6.b.1.b.From HoverXX
6.b.2.One or more engines inoperativeXXX
6.b.3.Rejected LandingXXX
7. Normal and Abnormal Procedures
7.a.PowerplantXXX
7.b.Fuel SystemXXX
7.c.Electrical SystemXXX
7.d.Hydraulic SystemXXX
7.e.Environmental System(s)XXX
7.f.Fire Detection and Extinguisher SystemsXXX
7.g.Navigation and Aviation SystemsXXX
7.h.Automatic Flight Control System, Electronic Flight Instrument System, and Related SubsystemsXXX
7.i.Flight Control SystemsXXX
7.j.Anti-ice and Deice SystemsXXX
7.k.Aircraft and Personal Emergency EquipmentXXX
7.l.Special Missions tasks (e.g., Night Vision goggles, Forward Looking Infrared System, External Loads and as listed on the SOQ)AAX
8. Emergency procedures (as applicable)
8.a.Emergency DescentXXX
8.b.Inflight Fire and Smoke RemovalXXX
8.c.Emergency EvacuationXXX
8.d.DitchingXXX
8.e.Autorotative LandingXXX
8.f.Retreating blade stall recoveryXXX
8.g.Mast bumpingXXX
8.h.Loss of tail rotor effectivenessXXX
8.i.Vortex recoveryXXX
9. Postflight Procedures
9.aAfter-Landing ProceduresXXX
9.b.Parking and Securing
9.b.1.Rotor brake operationXXX
9.b.2.Abnormal/emergency proceduresXXX

Note: An “A” in the table indicates that the system, task, or procedure may be examined if the appropriate aircraft system or control is simulated in the FFS and is working properly

Table C1C—Table of Tasks vs. Simulator Level

QPS requirementsInformation
Entry No.Subjective requirements
The simulator must be able to perform the tasks associated with that level of qualification.
Simulator levelsNotes
BCD
1.Instructor Operating Station (IOS), as appropriate
1.a.Power switch(es)XXX
1.b.Helicopter conditionsXXXe.g., GW, CG, Fuel loading, Systems, Ground Crew.
1.c.Airports/Heliports/Helicopter Landing AreasXXXe.g., Selection, Surface, Presets, Lighting controls
1.d.Environmental controls.XXXe.g., Clouds, Visibility, RVR, Temp, Wind, Ice, Snow, Rain, and Windshear.
1.e.Helicopter system malfunctions (Insertion/deletion)XXX
1.f.Locks, Freezes, and RepositioningXXX
2.Sound Controls.
2.a.On/off/adjustmentXXX
3.Motion/Control Loading System
3.a.On/off/emergency stopXXX
4.Observer Seats/Stations
4.a.Position/Adjustment/Positive restraint systemXXX

Attachment 2 to Appendix C to Part 60—FFS Objective Tests

 

Begin Information

Table of Contents

Paragraph No.Title
1.Introduction.
2.Test Requirements.
   Table C2A, Objective Tests.
3.General.
4.Control Dynamics.
5.[Reserved]
6.Motion System.
7.Sound System.
8.Additional Information About Flight Simulator Qualification for New or Derivative Helicopters.
9.Engineering Simulator—Validation Data.
10.[Reserved]
11.Validation Test Tolerances.
12.Validation Data Roadmap.
13.Acceptance Guidelines for Alternative Engines Data.
14.Acceptance Guidelines for Alternative Avionics (Flight-Related Computers and Controllers).
15.Transport Delay Testing.
16.Continuing Qualification Evaluations—Validation Test Data Presentation.
17.Alternative Data Sources, Procedures, and Instrumentation: Level A and Level B Simulators Only.

1. Introduction

a. If relevant winds are present in the objective data, the wind vector (magnitude and direction) should be clearly noted as part of the data presentation, expressed in conventional terminology, and related to the runway being used for the test.

b. The NSPM will not evaluate any simulator unless the required SOC indicates that the motion system is designed and manufactured to safely operate within the simulator's maximum excursion, acceleration, and velocity capabilities (see Motion System in the following table).

c. Table C2A addresses helicopter simulators at Levels B, C, and D because there are no Level A Helicopter simulators.

End Information

 

Begin QPS Requirements

2. Test Requirements

a. The ground and flight tests required for qualification are listed in Table of C2A, FFS Objective Tests. Computer-generated simulator test results must be provided for each test except where an alternative test is specifically authorized by the NSPM. If a flight condition or operating condition is required for the test but does not apply to the helicopter being simulated or to the qualification level sought, it may be disregarded (e.g., an engine out missed approach for a single-engine helicopter, or a hover test for a Level B simulator). Each test result is compared against the validation data described in §60.13 and in this appendix. Although use of a driver program designed to automatically accomplish the tests is encouraged for all simulators and required for Level C and Level D simulators, each test must be able to be accomplished manually while recording all appropriate parameters. The results must be produced on an appropriate recording device acceptable to the NSPM and must include simulator number, date, time, conditions, tolerances, and appropriate dependent variables portrayed in comparison to the validation data. Time histories are required unless otherwise indicated in Table C2A. All results must be labeled using the tolerances and units given.

b. Table C2A sets out the test results required, including the parameters, tolerances, and flight conditions for simulator validation. Tolerances are provided for the listed tests because mathematical modeling and acquisition/development of reference data are often inexact. All tolerances listed in the following tables are applied to simulator performance. When two tolerance values are given for a parameter, the less restrictive value may be used unless otherwise indicated. In those cases where a tolerance is expressed only as a percentage, the tolerance percentage applies to the maximum value of that parameter within its normal operating range as measured from the neutral or zero position unless otherwise indicated.

c. Certain tests included in this attachment must be supported with an SOC. In Table C2A, requirements for SOCs are indicated in the “Test Details” column.

d. When operational or engineering judgment is used in making assessments for flight test data applications for simulator validity, such judgment may not be limited to a single parameter. For example, data that exhibit rapid variations of the measured parameters may require interpolations or a “best fit” data selection. All relevant parameters related to a given maneuver or flight condition must be provided to allow overall interpretation. When it is difficult or impossible to match simulator to helicopter data throughout a time history, differences must be justified by providing a comparison of other related variables for the condition being assessed.

e. The FFS may not be programmed so that the mathematical modeling is correct only at the validation test points. Unless noted otherwise, simulator tests must represent helicopter performance and handling qualities at operating weights and centers of gravity (CG) typical of normal operation. If a test is supported by helicopter data at one extreme weight or CG, another test supported by helicopter data at mid-conditions or as close as possible to the other extreme must be included. Certain tests that are relevant only at one extreme CG or weight condition need not be repeated at the other extreme. Tests of handling qualities must include validation of augmentation devices.

f. When comparing the parameters listed to those of the helicopter, sufficient data must also be provided to verify the correct flight condition and helicopter configuration changes. For example, to show that control force is within ±0.5 pound (0.22 daN) in a static stability test, data to show the correct airspeed, power, thrust or torque, helicopter configuration, altitude, and other appropriate datum identification parameters must also be given. If comparing short period dynamics, normal acceleration may be used to establish a match to the helicopter, but airspeed, altitude, control input, helicopter configuration, and other appropriate data must also be given. All airspeed values must be properly annotated (e.g., indicated versus calibrated). In addition, the same variables must be used for comparison (e.g., compare inches to inches rather than inches to centimeters).

g. The QTG provided by the sponsor must clearly describe how the simulator will be set up and operated for each test. Each simulator subsystem may be tested independently, but overall integrated testing of the simulator must be accomplished to assure that the total simulator system meets the prescribed standards. A manual test procedure with explicit and detailed steps for completing each test must also be provided.

h. For previously qualified simulators, the tests and tolerances of this attachment may be used in subsequent continuing qualification evaluations for any given test if the sponsor has submitted a proposed MQTG revision to the NSPM and has received NSPM approval.

i. Motion System Tests:

(a) The minimum excursions, accelerations, and velocities for pitch, roll, and yaw must be measurable about a single, common reference point and must be achieved by driving one degree of freedom at a time.

(b) The minimum excursions, accelerations, and velocities for heave, sway, and surge may be measured about different, identifiable reference points and must be achieved by driving one degree of freedom at a time.

j. Tests of handling qualities must include validation of augmentation devices. FFSs for highly augmented helicopters will be validated both in the unaugmented configuration (or failure state with the maximum permitted degradation in handling qualities) and the augmented configuration. Where various levels of handling qualities result from failure states, validation of the effect of the failure is necessary. For those performance and static handling qualities tests where the primary concern is control position in the unaugmented configuration, unaugmented data are not required if the design of the system precludes any affect on control position. In those instances where the unaugmented helicopter response is divergent and non-repeatable, it may not be feasible to meet the specified tolerances. Alternative requirements for testing will be mutually agreed upon by the sponsor and the NSPM on a case-by-case basis.

k. Some tests will not be required for helicopters using helicopter hardware in the simulator flight deck (e.g., “helicopter modular controller”). These exceptions are noted in Table C2A of this attachment. However, in these cases, the sponsor must provide a statement that the helicopter hardware meets the appropriate manufacturer's specifications and the sponsor must have supporting information to that fact available for NSPM review.

l. In cases where light-class helicopters are being simulated, prior coordination with the NSPM on acceptable weight ranges is required. The terms “light”, “medium”, and “near maximum”, as defined in Appendix F of this part, may not be appropriate for the simulation of light-class helicopters.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

m. In those cases where the objective test results authorize a “snapshot test” or a “series of snapshot test results” in lieu of a time-history result, the sponsor or other data provider must ensure that a steady state condition exists at the instant of time captured by the “snapshot”. The steady state condition must exist from 4 seconds prior to, through 1 second following, the instant of time captured by the snap shot.

n. For references on basic operating weight, see AC 120-27, Aircraft Weight and Balance; and FAA-H-8083-1, Aircraft Weight and Balance Handbook.

End Information

 

Table C2A—Full Flight Simulator (FFS) Objective Tests

QPS requirementsInformation
TestTolerance(s)Flight conditionTest detailsSimulator levelNotes
Entry No.TitleBCD
1. Performance
1.a.Engine Assessment
1.a.1.Start Operations
1.a.1.aEngine start and acceleration (transient)Light Off Time—±10% or ±1 sec., Torque—±5%, Rotor Speed—±3%, Fuel Flow—±10%, Gas Generator Speed—±5%, Power Turbine Speed—±5%, Gas Turbine Temp.—±30 °CGround with the Rotor Brake Used and Not Used, if applicable.Record each engine start from the initiation of the start sequence to steady state idle and from steady state idle to operating RPM.XXX
1.a.1.b.Steady State Idle and Operating RPM conditionsTorque—±3%, Rotor Speed—±1.5%, Fuel Flow—±5%, Gas Generator Speed—±2%, Power Turbine Speed—±2%, Turbine Gas Temp.—±20 °CGroundRecord both steady state idle and operating RPM conditions. May be a series of snapshot tests.XXX
1.a.2.Power Turbine Speed Trim±10% of total change of power turbine speed, or ±0.5% change of rotor speed.GroundRecord engine response to trim system actuation in both directions.XXX
1.a.3.Engine and Rotor Speed GoverningTorque—±5%, Rotor Speed—1.5%Climb and descentRecord results using a step input to the collective. May be conducted concurrently with climb and descent performance tests.XXX
1.b.Surface Operations
1.b.1.Minimum Radius Turn±3 ft. (0.9m) or 20% of helicopter turn radius.GroundIf brakes are used, brake pedal position and brake system pressure must be matched to the helicopter flight test value.XXX
1.b.2.Rate of Turn vs. Pedal Deflection, Brake Application, or Nosewheel Angle, as applicable±10% or ±2°/sec. Turn Rate.Ground TakeoffIf brakes are used, brake pedal position and brake system pressure must be matched to the helicopter flight test value.XXX
1.b.3.TaxiPitch Angle—±1.5°, Torque—±3%, Longitudinal Control Position—±5%, Lateral Control Position—±5%, Directional Control Position—±5%, Collective Control Position—±5%GroundRecord results for control position and pitch attitude during ground taxi for a specific ground speed, wind speed and direction, and density altitude.XXX
1.b.4.Brake Effectiveness±10% of time and distance.GroundXXX
1.c.Takeoff
When the speed range for the following tests is less than 40 knots, the applicable airspeed tolerance may be applied to either airspeed or ground speed, as appropriate.
1.c.1.All EnginesAirspeed—±3 kt, Altitude—±20 ft (6.1m), Torque—±3%, Rotor Speed—±1.5%, Vertical Velocity—±100 fpm (0.50m/sec) or 10%, Pitch Attitude—±1.5°, Bank Attitude—±2°, Heading—±2°, Longitudinal Control Position—±10%, Lateral Control Position—±10%, Directional Control Position—±10%, Collective Control Position—±10%Ground/Takeoff and Initial Segment of Climb.Record results of takeoff flight path as appropriate to helicopter model simulated (running takeoff for Level B, takeoff from a hover for Level C and D). For Level B, the criteria apply only to those segments at airspeeds above effective translational lift. Results must be recorded from the initiation of the takeoff to at least 200 ft (61m) AGL.XXX
1.c.2.One Engine Inoperative continued takeoff.Airspeed—±3 kt, Altitude—±20 ft (6.1m), Torque—±3%, Rotor Speed—±1.5%, Vertical Velocity—±100 fpm (0.50m/sec) or 10%, Pitch Attitude—±1.5°, Bank Attitude—±2°, Heading—±2°, Longitudinal Control Position—±10% Lateral Control Position—±10%, Directional Control Position—±10%, Collective Control Position—±10%Ground/Takeoff; and Initial Segment of Climb.Record takeoff flight path as appropriate to helicopter model simulated. Results must be recorded from the initiation of the takeoff to at least 200 ft (61m) AGL.XXXBecause several kinds of takeoff procedures can be performed, the specific type of takeoff profile should be recorded to ensure the proper takeoff profile comparison test is used.
1.c.3.One Engine inoperative, rejected take off.Airspeed—±3 kt, Altitude—±20 ft (6.1m), Torque—±3%, Rotor Speed—±1.5%, Pitch Attitude—±1.5°, Roll angle—±1.5°, Heading—±2°, Longitudinal Control Position—±10%, Lateral Control Position—±10%, Directional Control Position—±10%, Collective Control Position—±10%, Distance—±7.5% or ±30m (100ft).Ground, TakeoffTime history from the take off point to touch down. Test conditions near limiting performance.XX
1.d.Hover
   PerformanceTorque—±3%, Pitch Attitude—±1.5°, Bank Attitude—±1.5°, Longitudinal Control Position—±5%, Lateral Control Position—±5%, Directional Control Position—±5%, Collective Control Position—±5%.In Ground Effect (IGE); and Out of Ground Effect (OGE).Record results for light and heavy gross weights. May be a series of snapshot tests.XX
1.e.Vertical Climb
   PerformanceVertical Velocity—±100 fpm (0.50 m/sec) or ±10%, Directional Control Position—±5%, Collective Control Position—±5%.From OGE HoverRecord results for light and heavy gross weights. May be a series of snapshot tests.XX
1.f.Level Flight
   Performance and Trimmed Flight Control Positions.Torque—±3%, Pitch Attitude—±1.5°, Sideslip Angle—±2°, Longitudinal Control Position—±5%, Lateral Control Position—±5%, Directional Control Position—±5%, Collective Control Position—±5%.Cruise (Augmentation On and Off).Record results for two gross weight and CG combinations with varying trim speeds throughout the airspeed envelope. May be a series of snapshot tests.XXXThis test validates performance at speeds above maximum endurance airspeed.
1.g.Climb
   Performance and Trimmed Flight Control Positions.Vertical Velocity—±100 fpm (6.1m/sec) or ±10%, Pitch Attitude—±1.5°, Sideslip Angle—±2°, Longitudinal Control Position—±5%, Lateral Control Position—±5%, Directional Control Position—±5%, Collective Control Position—±5%.All engines operating; One engine inoperative; Augmentation System(s) On and Off.Record results for two gross weight and CG combinations. The data presented must be for normal climb power conditions. May be a series of snapshot tests.XXX
1.h.Descent
1.h.1.Descent Performance and Trimmed Flight Control Positions.Torque—±3%, Pitch Attitude—±1.5°, Sideslip Angle—±2°, Longitudinal Control Position—±5%, Lateral Control Position—±5%, Directional Control Position—±5%, Collective Control Position—±5%.At or near 1,000 fpm (5 m/sec) rate of descent (RoD) at normal approach speed. Augmentation System(s) On and Off.Results must be recorded for two gross weight and CG combinations. May be a series of snapshot tests.XXX
1.h.2.Autorotation Performance and Trimmed Flight Control Positions.Pitch Attitude—±1.5°, Sideslip Angle—±2°, Longitudinal Control Position—±5%, Lateral Control Position—±5%, Directional Control Position—±5%, Collective Control Position—±5%, Vertical Velocity—±100 fpm or 10%, Rotor Speed—±1.5%.Steady descents. Augmentation System(s) On and Off.Record results for two gross weight conditions. Data must be recorded for normal operating RPM. (Rotor speed tolerance applies only if collective control position is full down.) Data must be recorded for speeds from 50 kts, ±5 kts, through at least maximum glide distance airspeed, or maximum allowable autorotation airspeed, whichever is slower. May be a series of snapshot tests.XXX
1.i.Autorotation
   EntryRotor Speed—±3%, Pitch Attitude—±2°, Roll Attitude—±3°, Yaw Attitude—±5°, Airspeed—±5 kts., Vertical Velocity—±200 fpm (1.00 m/sec) or 10%.Cruise or ClimbRecord results of a rapid throttle reduction to idle. If the cruise condition is selected, comparison must be made for the maximum range airspeed. If the climb condition is selected, comparison must be made for the maximum rate of climb airspeed at or near maximum continuous power.XX
1.j.Landing
When the speed range for tests 1.j.1., 1.j.2., or 1.j.3. is less than 40 knots, the applicable airspeed tolerance may be applied to either airspeed or ground speed, as appropriate.
1.j.1.All EnginesAirspeed—±3 kts., Altitude—±20 ft. (6.1m), Torque—±3%, Rotor Speed—±1.5%, Pitch Attitude—±1.5°, Bank Attitude—±1.5°, Heading—±2°, Longitudinal Control Position—±10%, Lateral Control Position—±10%, Directional Control Position—±10%, Collective Control Position—±10%.ApproachRecord results of the approach and landing profile as appropriate to the helicopter model simulated (running landing for Level B, or approach to a hover for Level C and D). For Level B, the criteria apply only to those segments at airspeeds above effective translational lift.XXX
1.j.2.One Engine Inoperative.Airspeed—±3 kts., Altitude—±20 ft. (6.1m), Torque—±3%, Rotor Speed—±1.5%, Pitch Attitude—±1.5°, Bank Attitude—±1.5°, Heading—±2°, Longitudinal Control Position—±10%, Lateral Control Position—±10%, Directional Control Position—±10%, Collective Control Position—±10%.ApproachRecord results for both Category A and Category B approaches and landing as appropriate to helicopter model simulated. For Level B, the criteria apply only to those segments at airspeeds above effective translational lift.XXX
1.j.3.Balked LandingAirspeed—±3 kts, Altitude—±20 ft. (6.1m), Torque—±3%, Rotor Speed—±1.5%, Pitch Attitude—±1.5°, Bank Attitude—±1.5°, Heading—±2°, Longitudinal Control Position—±10%, Lateral Control Position—±10%, Directional Control Position—±10%, Collective Control Position—±10%.ApproachRecord the results for the maneuver initiated from a stabilized approach at the landing decision point (LDP).XXX
1.j.4.Autorotational Landing.Torque—±3%, Rotor Speed—±3%, Vertical Velocity—±100 fpm (0.50m/sec) or 10%, Pitch Attitude—±2°, Bank Attitude—±2°, Heading—±5°, Longitudinal Control Position—±10%, Lateral Control Position—±10%, Directional Control Position—±10%, Collective Control Position—±10%.LandingRecord the results of an autorotational deceleration and landing from a stabilized autorotational descent, to touch down. If flight test data containing all required parameters for a complete power-off landing is not available from the aircraft manufacturer for this test and other qualified flight test personnel are not available to acquire this data, the sponsor may coordinate with the NSPM to determine if it is appropriate to accept alternative testing means.XXAlternative approaches for acquiring this data may be acceptable, depending on the aircraft as well as the personnel and the data recording, reduction, and interpretation facilities to be used, are: (1) a simulated autorotational flare and reduction of rate of descent (ROD) at altitude; or (2) a power-on termination following an autorotational approach and flare.
2. Handling Qualities
2.a.Control System Mechanical Characteristics
   For simulators requiring Static or Dynamic tests at the controls (i.e., cyclic, collective, and pedal), special test fixtures will not be required during initial or upgrade evaluations if the sponsor's QTG/MQTG shows both test fixture results and the results of an alternative approach, such as computer plots produced concurrently showing satisfactory agreement. Repeat of the alternative method during the initial or upgrade evaluation satisfies this test requirement. For initial and upgrade evaluations, the control dynamic characteristics must be measured at and recorded directly from the flight deck controls, and must be accomplished in hover, climb, cruise, and autorotation.Contact the NSPM for clarification of any issue regarding helicopters with reversible controls or where the required validation data is not attainable.
2.a.1.CyclicBreakout—±0.25 lbs. (0.112 daN) or 25%; Force—±1.0 lb. (0.224 daN) or 10%.Ground; Static conditions with the hydraulic system (if applicable) pressurized; supplemental hydraulic pressurization system may be used. Trim On and Off. Friction Off Augmentation (if applicable) On and Off.Record results for an uninterrupted control sweep to the stops. (This test does not apply if aircraft hardware modular controllers are used.)XXXFlight Test Data for this test does not require the rotor to be engaged/turning. The phrase “if applicable” regarding stability augmentation systems means if an augmentation system is available and if this system may be operational on the ground under static conditions as described here.
2.a.2.Collective/PedalsBreakout—±0.5 lb. (0.224 daN) or 25%; Force—±1.0 lb. (0.224 daN) or 10%.Ground; Static conditions with the hydraulic system (if applicable) pressurized; supplemental hydraulic pressurization system may be used. Trim On and Off. Friction Off. Augmentation (if applicable) On and Off.Record results for an uninterrupted control sweep to the stops.XXXFlight Test Data for this test does not require the rotor to be engaged/turning. The phrase “if applicable” regarding stability augmentation system means if a stability augmentation system is available and if this system may be operational on the ground under static conditions as described here.
2.a.3.Brake Pedal Force vs. Position.±5 lbs. (2.224 daN) or 10%.Ground; Static conditions.XXX
2.a.4.Trim System Rate (all applicable systems)Rate—±10%.Ground; Static conditions. Trim On, Friction Off.The tolerance applies to the recorded value of the trim rate.XXX
2.a.5.Control Dynamics (all axes)±10% of time for first zero crossing and ±10 (N + 1)% of period thereafter, ±10% of amplitude of first overshoot, 20% of amplitude of 2nd and subsequent overshoots greater than 5% of initial displacement, ±1 overshoot.Hover/Cruise, Trim On, Friction Off.Results must be recorded for a normal control displacement in both directions in each axis.XXTypically, control displacement of 25% to 50% is necessary for proper excitation. Control Dynamics for irreversible control systems may be evaluated in a ground/static condition. Additional information on control dynamics is found later in this attachment. “N” is the sequential period of a full cycle of oscillation.
2.a.6.Control System Freeplay±0.10 inches (±2.5 mm).Ground; Static conditions; with the hydraulic system (if applicable) pressurized; supplemental hydraulic pressurization system may be used.Record and compare results for all controls.XXXFlight Test Data for this test does not require the rotor to be engaged/turning.
2.b.Low Airspeed Handling Qualities
2.b.1.Trimmed Flight Control Positions.Torque—±3%, Pitch Attitude—±1.5°, Bank Attitude—±2°, Longitudinal Control Position—±5%. Lateral Control Position—±5%, Directional Control Position—±5%, Collective Control Position—±5%.Translational Flight IGE—Sideward, rearward, and forward flight. Augmentation On and Off.Record results for several airspeed increments to the translational airspeed limits and for 45 kts. forward airspeed. May be a series of snapshot tests.XX
2.b.2.Critical AzimuthTorque—±3%, Pitch Attitude—±1.5°, Bank Attitude—±2°, Longitudinal Control Position—±5%, Lateral Control Position—±5%, Directional Control Position—±5%, Collective Control Position—±5%.Stationary Hover. Augmentation On and Off.Record results for three relative wind directions (including the most critical case) in the critical quadrant. May be a series of snapshot tests.XX
2.b.3.Control Response
2.b.3.a.LongitudinalPitch Rate—±10% or ±2°/sec., Pitch Attitude Change—±10% or 1.5°.Hover Augmentation On and Off.Record results for a step control input. The Off-axis response must show correct trend for unaugmented cases.XXThis is a “short time” test conducted in a hover, in ground effect, without entering translational flight, to provide better visual reference.
2.b.3.b.LateralRoll Rate—±10% or ±3°/sec., Roll Attitude Change—±10% or ±3°.Hover Augmentation On and Off.Record results for a step control input. The Off-axis response must show correct trend for unaugmented cases.XXThis is a “short time” test conducted in a hover, in ground effect, without entering translational flight, to provide better visual reference.
2.b.3.c.DirectionalYaw Rate—±10% or ±2°/sec., Heading Change—±10% or ±2°.Hover Augmentation On and Off.Record results for a step control input. The Off-axis response must show correct trend for unaugmented cases.XXThis is a “short time” test conducted in a hover, in ground effect, without entering translational flight, to provide better visual reference.
2.b.3.d.VerticalNormal Acceleration—±0.1 g.Hover Augmentation On and Off.Record results for a step control input. The Off-axis response must show correct trend for unaugmented cases.XX
2.c.Longitudinal Handling Qualities
2.c.1.Control ResponsePitch Rate—±10% or ±2°/sec., Pitch Attitude Change—±10% or ±1.5°.Cruise Augmentation On and Off.Results must be recorded for two cruise airspeeds to include minimum power required speed. Record data for a step control input. The Off-axis response must show correct trend for unaugmented cases.XXX
2.c.2.Static StabilityLongitudinal Control Position: ±10% of change from trim or ±0.25 in. (6.3 mm) or Longitudinal Control Force : ±0.5 lb. (0.223 daN) or ±10%.Cruise or Climb. Autorotation. Augmentation On and Off.Record results for a minimum of two speeds on each side of the trim speed. May be a series of snapshot tests.XXX
2.c.3.Dynamic Stability
2.c.3.a.Long-Term Response.±10% of calculated period, ±10% of time to 12 or double amplitude, or ±0.02 of damping ratio.For non-periodic responses, the time history must be matched within ±3° pitch; and ±5 kts airspeed over a 20 sec period following release of the controls.Cruise Augmentation On and Off.For periodic responses, record results for three full cycles (6 overshoots after input completed) or that sufficient to determine time to 12 or double amplitude, whichever is less.
The test may be terminated prior to 20 sec. if the test pilot determines that the results are becoming uncontrollably divergent.
XXXThe response may be unrepeatable throughout the stated time for certain helicopters. In these cases, the test should show at least that a divergence is identifiable. For example: Displacing the cyclic for a given time normally excites this test or until a given pitch attitude is achieved and then return the cyclic to the original position. For non-periodic responses, results should show the same convergent or divergent character as the flight test data.
2.c.3.b.Short-Term Response.±1.5° Pitch or ±2°/sec. Pitch Rate. ±0.1 g Normal Acceleration.Cruise or Climb. Augmentation On and Off.Record results for at least two airspeeds.XXXA control doublet inserted at the natural frequency of the aircraft normally excites this test. However, while input doublets are preferred over pulse inputs for Augmentation-Off tests, for Augmentation-On tests, when the short-term response exhibits 1st-order or deadbeat characteristics, longitudinal pulse inputs may produce a more coherent response.
2.c.4.Maneuvering Stability.Longitudinal Control Position—±10% of change from trim or ±0.25 in. (6.3 mm) or Longitudinal Control Forces—±0.5 lb. (0.223 daN) or ±10%.Cruise or Climb. Augmentation On and Off.Record results for at least two airspeeds at 30°-45° roll angle. The force may be shown as a cross plot for irreversible systems. May be a series of snapshot tests.XXX
2.d.Lateral and Directional Handling Qualities
2.d.1.Control Response
2.d.1.aLateralRoll Rate—±10% or ±3°/sec., Roll Attitude Change—±10% or ±3°.Cruise Augmentation On and Off.Record results for at least two airspeeds, including the speed at or near the minimum power required airspeed.
Record results for a step control input. The Off-axis response must show correct trend for unaugmented cases
XXX
2.d.1.b.DirectionalYaw Rate—±10% or ±2°/sec., Yaw Attitude Change—±10% or ±2°.Cruise Augmentation On and Off.Record data for at least two airspeeds, including the speed at or near the minimum power required airspeed.
Record results for a step control input. The Off-axis response must show correct trend for unaugmented cases.
XXX
2.d.2.Directional Static Stability.Lateral Control Position—±10% of change from trim or ±0.25 in. (6.3 mm) or Lateral Control Force—±0.5 lb. (0.223 daN) or 10%, Roll Attitude—±1.5, Directional Control Position—±10% of change from trim or ±0.25 in. (6.3 mm) or Directional Control Force—±1 lb. (0.448 daN) or 10%, Longitudinal Control Position—±10% of change from trim or ±0.25 in. (6.3 mm), Vertical Velocity—±100 fpm (0.50m/sec) or 10%.Cruise; or Climb (may use Descent instead of Climb if desired), Augmentation On and Off.Record results for at least two sideslip angles on either side of the trim point. The force may be shown as a cross plot for irreversible systems. May be a series of snapshot tests.XXXThis is a steady heading sideslip test at a fixed collective position.
2.d.3.Dynamic Lateral and Directional Stability
2.d.3.a.Lateral-Directional Oscillations.±0.5 sec. or ±10% of period, ±10% of time to 12 or double amplitude or ±0.02 of damping ratio, ±20% or ±1 sec of time difference between peaks of bank and sideslip. For non-periodic responses, the time history must be matched within ±10 knots Airspeed; ±5°/s Roll Rate or ±5° Roll Attitude; ±4°/s Yaw Rate or ±4° Yaw Angle over a 20 sec period roll angle following release of the controls.Cruise or Climb. Augmentation On and Off.Record results for at least two airspeeds. The test must be initiated with a cyclic or a pedal doublet input. Record results for six full cycles (12 overshoots after input completed) or that sufficient to determine time to 12 or double amplitude, whichever is less. The test may be terminated prior to 20 sec if the test pilot determines that the results are becoming uncontrollably divergent.XXX
2.d.3.b.Spiral Stability.±2° or ±10% roll angle.Cruise or Climb. Augmentation On and Off.Record the results of a release from pedal only or cyclic only turns for 20 sec. Results must be recorded from turns in both directions. Terminate check at zero roll angle or when the test pilot determines that the attitude is becoming uncontrollably divergent.XXX
2.d.3.c.Adverse/Proverse Yaw.Correct Trend, ±2° transient sideslip angle.Cruise or Climb. Augmentation On and Off.Record the time history of initial entry into cyclic only turns, using only a moderate rate for cyclic input. Results must be recorded for turns in both directions.XXX
3. Motion System
3.a.Frequency response
   Based on Simulator Capability.N/ARequired as part of the MQTG. The test must demonstrate frequency response of the motion system as specified by the applicant for flight simulator qualification.XXX
3.b.Leg Balance
   Leg BalanceBased on Simulator Capability.N/ARequired as part of the MQTG. The test must demonstrate motion system leg balance as specified by the applicant for flight simulator qualification.XXX
3.c.Turn Around
   Turn AroundBased on Simulator Capability.N/ARequired as part of the MQTG. The test must demonstrate a smooth turn-around (shift to opposite direction of movement) of the motion system as specified by the applicant for flight simulator qualification.XXX
3.d.Motion system repeatability
   With the same input signal, the test results must be repeatable to within ±0.05g actual platform linear acceleration in each axis.Accomplished in both the “ground” mode and in the “flight” mode of the motion system operation.Required as part of the MQTG. The test is accomplished by injecting a motion signal to generate movement of the platform. The input must be such that the rotational accelerations, rotational rates, and linear accelerations are inserted before the transfer from helicopter center of gravity to the pilot reference point with a minimum amplitude of 5°/sec/sec, 10°/sec and 0.3g, respectively.XXXSee Paragraph 6.c. in this attachment for additional information. Note: if there is no difference in the model for “ground” and “flight” operation of the motion system, this should be described in an SOC and will not require tests in both modes.
3.e.Motion cueing performance signature
   Required as part of MQTG. These tests must be run with the motion buffet mode disabled.See paragraph 6.d., of this attachment, Motion cueing performance signature.
3.e.1.Takeoff (all engines).As specified by the sponsor for flight simulator qualification.GroundPitch attitude due to initial climb must dominate over cab tilt due to longitudinal acceleration.XXXAssociated to test number 1.c.1.
3.e.2.Hover performance (IGE and OGE).As specified by the sponsor for flight simulator qualification.GroundXXAssociated to test number 1.d.
3.e.3.Autorotation (entry).As specified by the sponsor for flight simulator qualification.FlightXXAssociated to test number 1.i.
3.e.4.Landing (all engines).As specified by the sponsor for flight simulator qualification.FlightXXXAssociated to test number 1.j.1.
3.e.5.Autorotation (landing).As specified by the sponsor for flight simulator qualification.FlightXXAssociated to test number 1.j.4.
3.e.6.Control Response
3.e.6.a.LongitudinalAs specified by the sponsor for flight simulator qualification.FlightXXXAssociated to test number 2.c.1.
3.e.6.b.Lateral.As specified by the sponsor for flight simulator qualification.GroundXXXAssociated to test number 2.d.1.a.
3.e.6.c.DirectionalAs specified by the sponsor for flight simulator qualification.XXXAssociated to test number 2.d.1.c.
3.f.Characteristic Motion (Vibration) Cues—For all of the following tests, the simulator test results must exhibit the overall appearance and trends of the helicopter data, with at least three (3) of the predominant frequency “spikes” being present within ±2 Hz.Characteristic motion cues may be separate from the “main” motion system.
3.f.1.Vibrations—to include 1/Rev and n/Rev vibrations (where “n” is the number of main rotor blades). + 3db to −6db or ±10% of nominal vibration level in flight cruise and correct trend (see comment).(a) On ground (idle);
(b) In flight
Characteristic vibrations include those that result from operation of the helicopter (for example, high airspeed, retreating blade stall, extended landing gear, vortex ring or settling with power) in so far as vibration marks an event or helicopter state, which can be sensed in the flight deck.
[See Table C1A, table entries 5.e. and 5.f.]
XCorrect trend refers to a comparison of vibration amplitudes between different maneuvers; e.g., if the 1/rev vibration amplitude in the helicopter is higher during steady state turns than in level flight this increasing trend should be demonstrated in the simulator. Additional examples of vibrations may include:
(a) Low & High speed transition to and from hover;
(b) Level flight;
(c) Climb and descent (including vertical climb;
(d) Auto-rotation;
(e) Steady Turns.
3.f.2.Buffet—Test against recorded results for characteristic buffet motion that can be sensed in the flight deck. + 3db to −6db or ±10% of nominal vibration level in flight cruise and correct trend (see comment).On ground and in flight.Characteristic buffets include those that result from operation of the helicopter (for example, high airspeed, retreating blade stall, extended landing gear, vortex ring or settling with power) in so far as a buffet marks an event or helicopter state, which can be sensed in the flight deck.
[See Table C1A, table entries 5.e. and 5.f.]
XThe recorded test results for characteristic buffets should allow the checking of relative amplitude for different frequencies.
For atmospheric disturbance, general purpose models are acceptable which approximate demonstrable flight test data.
4. Visual System
4.a.Visual System Response Time: (Choose either test 4.a.1. or 4.a.2. to satisfy test 4.a., Visual System Response Time Test. This test is also sufficient for motion system response timing and flight deck instrument response timing.)
4.a.1.Latency
   150 ms (or less) after helicopter response.Takeoff, climb, and descent.One test is required in each axis (pitch, roll and yaw) for each of the three conditions (take-off, cruise, and approach or landing).X
   100 ms (or less) after helicopter response.Climb, cruise, descent, and hover.One test is required in each axis (pitch, roll and yaw) for each of the three conditions (take-off, cruise, and approach or landing).XX
4.a.2.Transport Delay
   If Transport Delay is the chosen method to demonstrate relative responses, the sponsor and the NSPM will use the latency values to ensure proper simulator response when reviewing those existing tests where latency can be identified (e.g., short period, roll response, rudder response).
   150 ms (or less) after controller movement.N/AA separate test is required in each axis (pitch, roll, and yaw).X
   100 ms (or less) after controller movement.N/AA separate test is required in each axis (pitch, roll, and yaw).XX
4.b.Field-of-view
4.b.1.Continuous field-of-view.The simulator must provide a continuous field-of-view of at least 75° horizontally and 30° vertically per pilot seat or the number of degrees necessary to meet the visual ground segment requirement, whichever is greater. Both pilot seat visual systems must be operable simultaneously. Wide-angle systems providing cross-flight deck viewing (for both pilots simultaneously) must provide a minimum field-of-view of at least 146° horizontally and 36° vertically. Any geometric error between the Image Generator eye point and the pilot eye point must be 8° or less.N/AAn SOC is required and must explain the geometry of the installation.
Additional horizontal field-of-view capability may be added at the sponsor's discretion provided the minimum field-of-view is retained.
XHorizontal field-of-view is centered on the zero degree azimuth line relative to the aircraft fuselage. Field-of-view may be measured using a visual test pattern filling the entire visual scene (all channels) with a matrix of black and white 5° squares.
4.b.2.Continuous field-of-view.The simulator must provide a continuous field-of-view of at least 146° horizontally and 36° vertically or the number of degrees necessary to meet the visual ground segment requirement, whichever is greater. The minimum horizontal field-of-view coverage must be plus and minus one-half ( 12 ) of the minimum continuous field-of-view requirement, centered on the zero degree azimuth line relative to the aircraft fuselage. Any geometric error between the Image Generator eye point and the pilot eye point must be 8° or less.N/AAn SOC is required and must explain the geometry of the installation.
Horizontal field-of-view of at least 146° (including not less than 73° measured either side of the center of the design eye point). Additional horizontal field-of-view capability may be added at the sponsor's discretion provided the minimum field-of-view is retained.
Vertical field-of-view of at least 36° measured from the pilot's and co-pilot's eye point.
XHorizontal field-of-view is centered on the zero degree azimuth line relative to the aircraft fuselage. Field-of-view may be measured using a visual test pattern filling the entire visual scene (all channels) with a matrix of black and white 5° squares.
4.b.3.Continuous field-of-view.Continuous field-of-view of at least 176° horizontal and 56° vertical field-of-view for each pilot simultaneously. Any geometric error between the Image Generator eye point and the pilot eye point must be 8° or less.N/AAn SOC is required and must explain the geometry of the installation.
Horizontal field-of-view is centered on the zero degree azimuth line relative to the aircraft fuselage. Horizontal field-of-view must be at least 176° (including not less than 88° either side of the center of the design eye point). Additional horizontal field-of-view capability may be added at the sponsor's discretion provided the minimum field-of-view is retained.
Vertical field-of-view must not be less than a total of 56° measured from the pilot's and co-pilot's eye point
XThe horizontal field-of-view is traditionally described as a 180° field-of-view. However, the field-of-view is technically no less than 176°. Field-of-view may be measured using a visual test pattern filling the entire visual scene (all channels) with a matrix of black and white 5° squares.
4.c.Surface contrast ratio.Not less than 5:1.N/AThe ratio is calculated by dividing the brightness level of the center, bright square (providing at least 2 foot-lamberts or 7 cd/m2) by the brightness level of any adjacent dark square.XMeasurements may be made using a 1° spot photometer and a raster drawn test pattern filling the entire visual scene (all channels) with a test pattern of black and white squares, 5 per square, with a white square in the center of each channel. During contrast ratio testing, simulator aft-cab and flight deck ambient light levels should be zero.
4.d.Highlight brightness.Not less than six (6) foot-lamberts (20 cd/m2).N/AMeasure the brightness of the center, white square while superimposing a highlight on that white square. The use of calligraphic capabilities to enhance the raster brightness is acceptable; however, measuring light points is not acceptable.XMeasurements may be made using a 1° spot photometer and a raster drawn test pattern filling the entire visual scene (all channels) with a test pattern of black and white squares, 5 per square, with a white square in the center of each channel.
4.e.Surface resolution.Not greater than two (2) arc minutes.N/AAn SOC is required and must include the appropriate calculations and an explanation of those calculations. Level B requires surface resolution not greater than three (3) arc minutes.XXWhen the eye is positioned on a 3° glide slope at the slant range distances indicated with white runway markings on a black runway surface, the eye will subtend two (2) arc minutes: (1) A slant range of 6,876 ft with stripes 150 ft long and 16 ft wide, spaced 4 ft apart. (2) For Configuration A, a slant range of 5,157 feet with stripes 150 ft long and 12 ft wide, spaced 3 ft apart. (3) For Configuration B, a slant range of 9,884 feet, with stripes 150 ft long and 5.75 ft wide, spaced 5.75 ft apart.
4.f.Light point sizeNot greater than five (5) arc minutes.N/AAn SOC is required and must include the relevant calculations and an explanation of those calculations.XXLight point size may be measured using a test pattern consisting of a centrally located single row of light points reduced in length until modulation is just discernible in each visual channel. A row of 48 lights will form a 4° angle or less.
4.g.Light point contrast ratio.A 1° spot photometer may be used to measure a square of at least 1° filled with light points (where light point modulation is just discernible) and compare the results to the measured adjacent background. During contrast ratio testing, simulator aft-cab and flight deck ambient light levels should be zero.
4.g.1.Not less than 10:1N/AAn SOC is required and must include the relevant calculations.X
4.g.2.Not less than 25:1N/AAn SOC is required and must include the relevant calculations.XX
4.h.Visual ground segment
   The visible segment in the simulator must be ±20% of the segment computed to be visible from the helicopter flight deck. This tolerance may be applied at the far end of the displayed segment. However, lights and ground objects computed to be visible from the helicopter flight deck at the near end of the visible segment must be visible in the simulator.Landing configuration, with the aircraft trimmed for the appropriate airspeed, where the MLG are at 100 ft (30 m) above the plane of the touchdown zone, on the electronic glide slope with an RVR value set at 1,200 ft (350 m).The QTG must contain appropriate calculations and a drawing showing the data used to establish the helicopter location and the segment of the ground that is visible considering design eye point, the helicopter attitude, flight deck cut-off angle, and a visibility of 1200 ft (350 m) RVR. Simulator performance must be measured against the QTG calculations. The data submitted must include at least the following:XXXPre-positioning for this test is encouraged, and may be achieved via manual or autopilot control to the desired position.
   (1) Static helicopter dimensions as follows:
(i) Horizontal and vertical distance from main landing gear (MLG) to glideslope reception antenna.
(ii) Horizontal and vertical distance from MLG to pilot's eyepoint.
(iii) Static flight deck cutoff angle.
(2) Approach data as follows:
(i) Identification of runway.
(ii) Horizontal distance from runway threshold to glideslope intercept with runway.
(iii) Glideslope angle.
(iv) Helicopter pitch angle on approach.
(3) Helicopter data for manual testing:
(i) Gross weight.
(ii) Helicopter configuration.
(iii) Approach airspeed.
If non-homogenous fog is used to obscure visibility, the vertical variation in horizontal visibility must be described and be included in the slant range visibility calculation used in the computations.
5.Sound system
   The sponsor will not be required to repeat the helicopter tests (i.e., tests 5.a.1. through 5.a.8. (or 5.b.1. through 5.b.9.) and 5.c., as appropriate) during continuing qualification evaluations if frequency response and background noise test results are within tolerance when compared to the initial qualification evaluation results, and the sponsor shows that no software changes have occurred that will affect the helicopter test results. If the frequency response test method is chosen and fails, the sponsor may elect to fix the frequency response problem and repeat the test or the sponsor may elect to repeat the helicopter tests. If the helicopter tests are repeated during continuing qualification evaluations, the results may be compared against initial qualification evaluation results or helicopter master data. All tests in this section must be presented using an unweighted 13 -octave band format from band 17 to 42 (50 Hz to 16 kHz). A minimum 20 second average must be taken at the location corresponding to the helicopter data set. The helicopter and flight simulator results must be produced using comparable data analysis techniques.
5.a.Basic requirements
5.a.1.Ready for engine start.±5 dB per 13 octave band.GroundNormal condition prior to engine start. The APU must be on if appropriate.X
5.a.2.All engines at idle; rotor not turning (if applicable) and rotor turning.±5 dB per 13 octave band.GroundNormal condition prior to lift-off.X
5.a.3.Hover±5 dB per 13 octave band.HoverX
5.a.4.Climb±5 dB per 13 octave band.En-route climbMedium altitudeX
5.a.5.Cruise±5 dB per 13 octave band.CruiseNormal cruise configuration.X
5.a.6.Final approach±5 dB per 13 octave band.LandingConstant airspeed, gear down.X
5.b.Special cases
   ±5 dB per 13 octave band.As appropriateXThese special cases are identified as particularly significant during critical phases of flight and ground operations for a specific helicopter type or model.
5.c.Background noise
±3 dB per 13 octave band.As appropriateResults of the background noise at initial qualification must be included in the MQTG. Measurements must be made with the simulation running, the sound muted, and a “dead” flight deck.XThe simulated sound will be evaluated to ensure that the background noise does not interfere with training, testing, or checking.
5.d.Frequency response
   ±5 dB on three (3) consecutive bands when compared to initial evaluation; and ±2 dB when comparing the average of the absolute differences between initial and continuing qualification evaluation.Applicable only to Continuing Qualification Evaluations. If frequency response plots are provided for each channel at the initial evaluation, these plots may be repeated at the continuing qualification evaluation with the following tolerances applied:
(a) The continuing qualification 13 octave band amplitudes must not exceed ±5 dB for three consecutive bands when compared to initial results.
(b) The average of the sum of the absolute differences between initial and continuing qualification results must not exceed 2 dB (refer to table C2C in Appendix C).
XMeasurements are compared to those taken during initial qualification evaluation.
 

Begin Information

3. General

a. If relevant winds are present in the objective data, the wind vector should be clearly noted as part of the data presentation, expressed in conventional terminology, and related to the runway being used for test near the ground.

b. The reader is encouraged to review the Airplane Flight Simulator Evaluation Handbook, Volumes I and II, published by the Royal Aeronautical Society, London, UK, and FAA AC 25-7, as amended, Flight Test Guide for Certification of Transport Category Airplanes, and AC 23-8, as amended, Flight Test Guide for Certification of Part 23 Airplanes, for references and examples regarding flight testing requirements and techniques.

4. Control Dynamics

a. General. The characteristics of a helicopter flight control system have a major effect on the handling qualities. A significant consideration in pilot acceptability of a helicopter is the “feel” provided through the flight controls. Considerable effort is expended on helicopter feel system design so that pilots will be comfortable and will consider the helicopter desirable to fly. In order for an FFS to be representative, it should “feel” like the helicopter being simulated. Compliance with this requirement is determined by comparing a recording of the control feel dynamics of the FFS to actual helicopter measurements in the hover and cruise configurations.

(1) Recordings such as free response to an impulse or step function are classically used to estimate the dynamic properties of electromechanical systems. In any case, it is only possible to estimate the dynamic properties as a result of only being able to estimate true inputs and responses. Therefore, it is imperative that the best possible data be collected since close matching of the FFS control loading system to the helicopter system is essential. The required dynamic control tests are described in Table C2A of this attachment.

(2) For initial and upgrade evaluations, the QPS requires that control dynamics characteristics be measured and recorded directly from the flight controls (Handling Qualities—Table C2A). This procedure is usually accomplished by measuring the free response of the controls using a step or impulse input to excite the system. The procedure should be accomplished in the hover and cruise flight conditions and configurations.

(3) For helicopters with irreversible control systems, measurements may be obtained on the ground if proper pitot-static inputs are provided to represent airspeeds typical of those encountered in flight. Likewise, it may be shown that for some helicopters, hover, climb, cruise, and autorotation have like effects. Thus, one may suffice for another. If either or both considerations apply, engineering validation or helicopter manufacturer rationale should be submitted as justification for ground tests or for eliminating a configuration. For FFSs requiring static and dynamic tests at the controls, special test fixtures will not be required during initial and upgrade evaluations if the QTG shows both test fixture results and the results of an alternate approach (e.g., computer plots that were produced concurrently and show satisfactory agreement). Repeat of the alternate method during the initial evaluation satisfies this test requirement.

b. Control Dynamics Evaluations. The dynamic properties of control systems are often stated in terms of frequency, damping, and a number of other classical measurements. In order to establish a consistent means of validating test results for FFS control loading, criteria are needed that will clearly define the measurement interpretation and the applied tolerances. Criteria are needed for underdamped, critically damped and overdamped systems. In the case of an underdamped system with very light damping, the system may be quantified in terms of frequency and damping. In critically damped or overdamped systems, the frequency and damping are not readily measured from a response time history. Therefore, the following suggested measurements may be used:

(1) For Levels C and D simulators. Tests to verify that control feel dynamics represent the helicopter should show that the dynamic damping cycles (free response of the controls) match those of the helicopter within specified tolerances. The NSPM recognizes that several different testing methods may be used to verify the control feel dynamic response. The NSPM will consider the merits of testing methods based on reliability and consistency. One acceptable method of evaluating the response and the tolerance to be applied is described below for the underdamped and critically damped cases. A sponsor using this method to comply with the QPS requirements should perform the tests as follows:

(a) Underdamped Response. Two measurements are required for the period, the time to first zero crossing (in case a rate limit is present) and the subsequent frequency of oscillation. It is necessary to measure cycles on an individual basis in case there are non-uniform periods in the response. Each period will be independently compared to the respective period of the helicopter control system and, consequently, will enjoy the full tolerance specified for that period. The damping tolerance will be applied to overshoots on an individual basis. Care should be taken when applying the tolerance to small overshoots since the significance of such overshoots becomes questionable. Only those overshoots larger than 5 percent of the total initial displacement should be considered significant. The residual band, labeled T(Ad) on Figure C2A is ±5 percent of the initial displacement amplitude Ad from the steady state value of the oscillation. Only oscillations outside the residual band are considered significant. When comparing FFS data to helicopter data, the process should begin by overlaying or aligning the FFS and helicopter steady state values and then comparing amplitudes of oscillation peaks, the time of the first zero crossing, and individual periods of oscillation. The FFS should show the same number of significant overshoots to within one when compared against the helicopter data. The procedure for evaluating the response is illustrated in Figure C2A.

(b) Critically damped and Overdamped Response. Due to the nature of critically damped and overdamped responses (no overshoots), the time to reach 90 percent of the steady state (neutral point) value should be the same as the helicopter within ±10 percent. The simulator response must be critically damped also. Figure C2B illustrates the procedure.

(c) Special considerations. Control systems that exhibit characteristics other than classical overdamped or underdamped responses should meet specified tolerances. In addition, special consideration should be given to ensure that significant trends are maintained.

(2) Tolerances.

(a) The following summarizes the tolerances, “T” for underdamped systems, and “n” is the sequential period of a full cycle of oscillation. See Figure C2A of this attachment for an illustration of the referenced measurements.

T(P0)±10% of P0
T(P1)±20% of P1
T(P2)±30% of P2
T(Pn)±10(n + 1)% of Pn
T(An)±10% of A1, ±20% of Subsequent Peaks
T(Ad)±5% of Ad = residual band

Significant overshoots. First overshoot and ±1 subsequent overshoots

(b) The following tolerance applies to critically damped and overdamped systems only. See Figure C2B for an illustration of the reference measurements:

T(P0)±10% of P0

End Information

 

Begin QPS Requirement

c. Alternative method for control dynamics evaluation.

(1) An alternative means for validating control dynamics for aircraft with hydraulically powered flight controls and artificial feel systems is by the measurement of control force and rate of movement. For each axis of pitch, roll, and yaw, the control must be forced to its maximum extreme position for the following distinct rates. These tests are conducted under normal flight and ground conditions.

(a) Static test—Slowly move the control so that a full sweep is achieved within 95-105 seconds. A full sweep is defined as movement of the controller from neutral to the stop, usually aft or right stop, then to the opposite stop, then to the neutral position.

(b) Slow dynamic test—Achieve a full sweep within 8-12 seconds.

(c) Fast dynamic test—Achieve a full sweep in within 3-5 seconds.

Note: Dynamic sweeps may be limited to forces not exceeding 100 lbs. (44.5 daN).

(d) Tolerances

(i) Static test—see Table C2A, FFS Objective Tests, Entries 2.a.1., 2.a.2., and 2.a.3.

(ii) Dynamic test—±2 lbs (0.9 daN) or ±10% on dynamic increment above static test.

End QPS Requirement

 

Begin Information

d. The FAA is open to alternative means that are justified and appropriate to the application. For example, the method described here may not apply to all manufacturers systems and certainly not to aircraft with reversible control systems. Each case is considered on its own merit on an ad hoc basis. If the FAA finds that alternative methods do not result in satisfactory performance, more conventionally accepted methods will have to be used.

eCFR graphic er09my08.034.gif

View or download PDF

End Information

 

5. [Reserved]

 

Begin Information

6. Motion System.

a. General.

(1) Pilots use continuous information signals to regulate the state of the helicopter. In concert with the instruments and outside-world visual information, whole-body motion feedback is essential in assisting the pilot to control the helicopter dynamics, particularly in the presence of external disturbances. The motion system should meet basic objective performance criteria, and be subjectively tuned at the pilot's seat position to represent the linear and angular accelerations of the helicopter during a prescribed minimum set of maneuvers and conditions. The response of the motion cueing system should be repeatable.

(2) The Motion System tests in Section 3 of Table C2A are intended to qualify the FFS motion cueing system from a mechanical performance standpoint. Additionally, the list of motion effects provides a representative sample of dynamic conditions that should be present in the flight simulator. An additional list of representative, training-critical maneuvers, selected from Section 1, (Performance tests) and Section 2, (Handling Qualities tests) in Table C2A, that should be recorded during initial qualification (but without tolerance) to indicate the flight simulator motion cueing performance signature have been identified (reference Section 3.e). These tests are intended to help improve the overall standard of FFS motion cueing.

b. Motion System Checks. The intent of test 3a, Frequency Response, test 3b, Leg Balance, and test 3c, Turn-Around Check, as described in the Table of Objective Tests, is to demonstrate the performance of the motion system hardware, and to check the integrity of the motion set-up with regard to calibration and wear. These tests are independent of the motion cueing software and should be considered robotic tests.

c. Motion System Repeatability. The intent of this test is to ensure that the motion system software and motion system hardware have not degraded or changed over time. This diagnostic test should be completed during continuing qualification checks in lieu of the robotic tests. This will allow an improved ability to determine changes in the software or determine degradation in the hardware. The following information delineates the methodology that should be used for this test.

(1) Input: The inputs should be such that rotational accelerations, rotational rates, and linear accelerations are inserted before the transfer from helicopter center of gravity to pilot reference point with a minimum amplitude of 5 deg/sec/sec, 10 deg/sec and 0.3 g, respectively, to provide adequate analysis of the output.

(2) Recommended output:

(a) Actual platform linear accelerations; the output will comprise accelerations due to both the linear and rotational motion acceleration;

(b) Motion actuators position.

d. Motion Cueing Performance Signature.

(1) Background. The intent of this test is to provide quantitative time history records of motion system response to a selected set of automated QTG maneuvers during initial qualification. It is not intended to be a comparison of the motion platform accelerations against the flight test recorded accelerations (i.e., not to be compared against helicopter cueing). If there is a modification to the initially qualified motion software or motion hardware (e.g., motion washout filter, simulator payload change greater than 10%) then a new baseline may need to be established.

(2) Test Selection. The conditions identified in Section 3.e. in Table C2A are those maneuvers where motion cueing is the most discernible. They are general tests applicable to all types of helicopters and should be completed for motion cueing performance signature at any time acceptable to the NSPM prior to or during the initial qualification evaluation, and the results included in the MQTG.

(3) Priority. Motion system should be designed with the intent of placing greater importance on those maneuvers that directly influence pilot perception and control of the helicopter motions. For the maneuvers identified in section 3.e. in Table C2A, the flight simulator motion cueing system should have a high tilt co-ordination gain, high rotational gain, and high correlation with respect to the helicopter simulation model.

(4) Data Recording. The minimum list of parameters provided should allow for the determination of the flight simulator's motion cueing performance signature for the initial qualification evaluation. The following parameters are recommended as being acceptable to perform such a function:

(a) Flight model acceleration and rotational rate commands at the pilot reference point;

(b) Motion actuators position;

(c) Actual platform position;

(d) Actual platform acceleration at pilot reference point.

e. Motion Vibrations.

(1) Presentation of results. The characteristic motion vibrations may be used to verify that the flight simulator can reproduce the frequency content of the helicopter when flown in specific conditions. The test results should be presented as a Power Spectral Density (PSD) plot with frequencies on the horizontal axis and amplitude on the vertical axis. The helicopter data and flight simulator data should be presented in the same format with the same scaling. The algorithms used for generating the flight simulator data should be the same as those used for the helicopter data. If they are not the same then the algorithms used for the flight simulator data should be proven to be sufficiently comparable. As a minimum the results along the dominant axes should be presented and a rationale for not presenting the other axes should be provided.

(2) Interpretation of results. The overall trend of the PSD plot should be considered while focusing on the dominant frequencies. Less emphasis should be placed on the differences at the high frequency and low amplitude portions of the PSD plot. During the analysis, certain structural components of the flight simulator have resonant frequencies that are filtered and may not appear in the PSD plot. If filtering is required, the notch filter bandwidth should be limited to 1 Hz to ensure that the buffet feel is not adversely affected. In addition, a rationale should be provided to explain that the characteristic motion vibration is not being adversely affected by the filtering. The amplitude should match helicopter data as described below. However, if the PSD plot was altered for subjective reasons, a rationale should be provided to justify the change. If the plot is on a logarithmic scale it may be difficult to interpret the amplitude of the buffet in terms of acceleration. For example, a 1 × 10−3 g-rms2/Hz would describe a heavy buffet and may be seen in the deep stall regime. Alternatively, a 1 × 10−6 g-rms2/Hz buffet is almost imperceptable, but may represent a flap buffet at low speed. The previous two examples differ in magnitude by 1000. On a PSD plot this represents three decades (one decade is a change in order of magnitude of 10, and two decades is a change in order of magnitude of 100).

Note: In the example, “g-rms2” is the mathematical expression for “g's root mean squared.”

f. Table C2B, Motion System Recommendations for Level C and Level D Helicopter Simulators, contains a description of the parameters that should be present in simulator motion systems to provide adequate onset motion cues to helicopter pilots. The information provided covers the six axes of motion (pitch, roll, yaw, vertical, lateral, and longitudinal) and addresses displacement, velocity, and acceleration. Also included is information about the parameters for initial rotational and linear acceleration. The parameters listed in this table apply only to Level C and Level D simulators, and are presented here as recommended targets for motion system capability. They are not requirements.

Table C2B—Motion System Recommendations for Level C and Level D Helicopter Simulators

a.Motion System Envelope
a.1.Pitch
a.1.a.Displacement±25°
a.1.b.Velocity±20°/sec
a.1.c.Acceleration±100°/sec2
a.2.Roll
a.2.a.Displacement±25°
a.2.b.Velocity±20°/sec
a.2.c.Acceleration±100°/sec2
a.3.Yaw
a.3.a.Displacement±25°
a.3.b.Velocity—±20°/sec
a.3.c.Acceleration±100°/sec2
a.4.Vertical
a.4.a.Displacement±34 in.
a.4.b.Velocity±24 in.
a.4.c.Acceleration±0.8 g.
a.5.Lateral
a.5.a.Displacement±45 in.
a.5.b.Velocity±28 in/sec.
a.5.c.Acceleration±0.6 g.
a.6.Longitudinal
a.6.a.Displacement±34 in.
a.6.b.Velocity±28 in/sec.
a.6.c.Acceleration±0.6 g.
a.7.Initial Rotational Acceleration Ratio.
   All axes 300°/ sec2/sec
a.8.Initial Linear Acceleration Ratio.
a.8.a.Vertical±6g/sec
a.8.b.Lateral±3g/sec
a.8.c.Longitudinal±3g/sec
eCFR graphic er09my08.035.gif

View or download PDF

7. Sound System

a. General. The total sound environment in the helicopter is very complex, and changes with atmospheric conditions, helicopter configuration, airspeed, altitude, and power settings. Flight deck sounds are an important component of the flight deck operational environment and provide valuable information to the flight crew. These aural cues can either assist the crew (as an indication of an abnormal situation), or hinder the crew (as a distraction or nuisance). For effective training, the flight simulator should provide flight deck sounds that are perceptible to the pilot during normal and abnormal operations, and that are comparable to those of the helicopter. The flight simulator operator should carefully evaluate background noises in the location where the device will be installed. To demonstrate compliance with the sound requirements, the objective or validation tests in this attachment were selected to provide a representative sample of normal static conditions typically experienced by a pilot.

b. Alternate propulsion. For FFS with multiple propulsion configurations, any condition listed in Table C2A in this attachment should be presented for evaluation as part of the QTG if identified by the helicopter manufacturer or other data supplier as significantly different due to a change in propulsion system (engine or propeller).

c. Data and Data Collection System.

(1) Information provided to the flight simulator manufacturer should comply be presented in the format suggested by the “International Air Transport Association (IATA) Flight Simulator Design and Performance Data Requirements,” as amended. This information should contain calibration and frequency response data.

(2) The system used to perform the tests listed in Table C2A should comply with the following standards:

(a) The specifications for octave, half octave, and third octave band filter sets may be found in American National Standards Institute (ANSI) S1.11-1986.

(b) Measurement microphones should be type WS2 or better, as described in International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) 1094-4-1995.

(3) Headsets. If headsets are used during normal operation of the helicopter they should also be used during the flight simulator evaluation.

(4) Playback equipment. Playback equipment and recordings of the QTG conditions should be provided during initial evaluations.

(5) Background noise.

(a) Background noise is the noise in the flight simulator that is not associated with the helicopter, but is caused by the flight simulator's cooling and hydraulic systems and extraneous noise from other locations in the building. Background noise can seriously impact the correct simulation of helicopter sounds, and should be kept below the helicopter sounds. In some cases, the sound level of the simulation can be increased to compensate for the background noise. However, this approach is limited by the specified tolerances and by the subjective acceptability of the sound environment to the evaluation pilot.

(b) The acceptability of the background noise levels is dependent upon the normal sound levels in the helicopter being represented. Background noise levels that fall below the lines defined by the following points, may be acceptable:

(i) 70 dB @ 50 Hz;

(ii) 55 dB @ 1000 Hz;

(iii) 30 dB @ 16 kHz.

(Note: These limits are for unweighted 13 octave band sound levels. Meeting these limits for background noise does not ensure an acceptable flight simulator. Helicopter sounds that fall below this limit require careful review and may require lower limits on background noise.)

(6) Validation testing. Deficiencies in helicopter recordings should be considered when applying the specified tolerances to ensure that the simulation is representative of the helicopter. Examples of typical deficiencies are:

(a) Variation of data between tail numbers.

(b) Frequency response of microphones.

(c) Repeatability of the measurements.

Table C2C—Example of Continuing Qualification Frequency Response Test Tolerance

Band center
frequency
Initial results
(dBSPL)
Continuing qualification results
(dBSPL)
Absolute
difference
5075.073.81.2
6375.975.60.3
8077.176.50.6
10078.078.30.3
12581.981.30.6
16079.880.10.3
20083.184.91.8
25078.678.90.3
31579.578.31.2
40080.179.50.9
50080.779.80.9
63081.980.41.5
80073.274.10.9
100079.280.10.9
125080.782.82.1
160081.678.63.0
200076.274.41.8
250079.580.71.2
315080.177.13.0
400078.978.60.3
500080.177.13.0
630080.780.40.3
800084.385.51.2
1000081.379.81.5
1250080.780.10.6
1600071.171.10.0
   Average1.1

8. Additional Information About Flight Simulator Qualification for New or Derivative Helicopters

a. Typically, a helicopter manufacturer's approved final data for performance, handling qualities, systems or avionics is not available until well after a new or derivative helicopter has entered service. However, flight crew training and certification often begins several months prior to the entry of the first helicopter into service. Consequently, it may be necessary to use preliminary data provided by the helicopter manufacturer for interim qualification of flight simulators.

b. In these cases, the NSPM may accept certain partially validated preliminary helicopter and systems data, and early release (“red label”) avionics data in order to permit the necessary program schedule for training, certification, and service introduction.

c. Simulator sponsors seeking qualification based on preliminary data should consult the NSPM to make special arrangements for using preliminary data for flight simulator qualification. The sponsor should also consult the helicopter and flight simulator manufacturers to develop a data plan and flight simulator qualification plan.

d. The procedure to be followed to gain NSPM acceptance of preliminary data will vary from case to case and between helicopter manufacturers. Each helicopter manufacturer's new helicopter development and test program is designed to suit the needs of the particular project and may not contain the same events or sequence of events as another manufacturer's program or even the same manufacturer's program for a different helicopter. Therefore, there cannot be a prescribed invariable procedure for acceptance of preliminary data; instead there should be a statement describing the final sequence of events, data sources, and validation procedures agreed by the simulator sponsor, the helicopter manufacturer, the flight simulator manufacturer, and the NSPM.

Note: A description of helicopter manufacturer-provided data needed for flight simulator modeling and validation is to be found in the “Royal Aeronautical Society Data Package Requirements for Design and Performance Evaluation of Rotary Wing Synthetic Training Devices.”

e. The preliminary data should be the manufacturer's best representation of the helicopter, with assurance that the final data will not deviate significantly from the preliminary estimates. Data derived from these predictive or preliminary techniques should be validated by available sources including, at least, the following:

(1) Manufacturer's engineering report. The report should explain the predictive method used and illustrate past success of the method on similar projects. For example, the manufacturer could show the application of the method to an earlier helicopter model or predict the characteristics of an earlier model and compare the results to final data for that model.

(2) Early flight test results. This data is often derived from helicopter certification tests and should be used to maximum advantage for early flight simulator validation. Certain critical tests that would normally be done early in the helicopter certification program should be included to validate essential pilot training and certification maneuvers. These tests include cases where a pilot is expected to cope with a helicopter failure mode or an engine failure. The early data available will depend on the helicopter manufacturer's flight test program design and may not be the same in each case. The flight test program of the helicopter manufacturer should include provisions for generation of very early flight tests results for flight simulator validation.

f. The use of preliminary data is not indefinite. The helicopter manufacturer's final data should be available within 12 months after the helicopter first entry into service or as agreed by the NSPM, the simulator sponsor, and the helicopter manufacturer. When applying for interim qualification using preliminary data, the simulator sponsor and the NSPM should agree on the update program. This includes specifying that the final data update will be installed in the flight simulator within a period of 12 months following the final data release, unless special conditions exist and a different schedule is acceptable. The flight simulator performance and handling validation would then be based on data derived from flight tests. Initial helicopter systems data should be updated after engineering tests. Final helicopter systems data should also be used for flight simulator programming and validation.

g. Flight simulator avionics should stay essentially in step with helicopter avionics (hardware and software) updates. The permitted time lapse between helicopter and flight simulator updates should be minimal. It may depend on the magnitude of the update and whether the QTG and pilot training and certification are affected. Differences in helicopter and flight simulator avionics versions and the resulting effects on flight simulator qualification should be agreed between the simulator sponsor and the NSPM. Consultation with the flight simulator manufacturer is desirable throughout the qualification process.

h. The following describes an example of the design data and sources that might be used in the development of an interim qualification plan.

(1) The plan should consist of the development of a QTG based upon a mix of flight test and engineering simulation data. For data collected from specific helicopter flight tests or other flights the required design model or data changes necessary to support an acceptable Proof of Match (POM) should be generated by the helicopter manufacturer.

(2) For proper validation of the two sets of data, the helicopter manufacturer should compare their simulation model responses against the flight test data, when driven by the same control inputs and subjected to the same atmospheric conditions as recorded in the flight test. The model responses should result from a simulation where the following systems are run in an integrated fashion and are consistent with the design data released to the flight simulator manufacturer:

(a) Propulsion.

(b) Aerodynamics.

(c) Mass properties.

(d) Flight controls.

(e) Stability augmentation.

(f) Brakes/landing gear.

i. A qualified test pilot should be used to assess handling qualities and performance evaluations for the qualification of flight simulators of new helicopter types.

End Information

 

Begin QPS Requirement

9. Engineering Simulator—Validation Data

a. When a fully validated simulation (i.e., validated with flight test results) is modified due to changes to the simulated helicopter configuration, the helicopter manufacturer or other acceptable data supplier must coordinate with the NSPM to supply validation data from an “audited” engineering simulator/simulation to selectively supplement flight test data. The NSPM must be provided an opportunity to audit the use of the engineering simulation or the engineering simulator during the acquisition of the data that will be used as validation data. Audited data may be used for changes that are incremental in nature. Manufacturers or other data suppliers must be able to demonstrate that the predicted changes in helicopter performance are based on acceptable aeronautical principles with proven success history and valid outcomes. This must include comparisons of predicted and flight test validated data.

b. Helicopter manufacturers or other acceptable data suppliers seeking to use an engineering simulator for simulation validation data as an alternative to flight-test derived validation data, must contact the NSPM and provide the following:

(1) A description of the proposed aircraft changes, a description of the proposed simulation model changes, and the use of an integral configuration management process, including an audit of the actual simulation model modifications that includes a step-by-step description leading from the original model(s) to the current model(s).

(2) A schedule for review by the NSPM of the proposed plan and the subsequent validation data to establish acceptability of the proposal.

(3) Validation data from an audited engineering simulator/simulation to supplement specific segments of the flight test data.

c. To be qualified to supply engineering simulator validation data, for aerodynamic, engine, flight control, or ground handling models, a helicopter manufacturer or other acceptable data supplier must:

(1) Be able to verify their ability to:

(a) Develop and implement high fidelity simulation models; and

(b) Predict the handling and performance characteristics of a helicopter with sufficient accuracy to avoid additional flight test activities for those handling and performance characteristics.

(2) Have an engineering simulator that:

(a) Is a physical entity, complete with a flight deck representative of the simulated class of helicopter;

(b) Has controls sufficient for manual flight;

(c) Has models that run in an integrated manner;

(d) Had fully flight-test validated simulation models as the original or baseline simulation models;

(e) Has an out-of-the-flight deck visual system;

(f) Has actual avionics boxes interchangeable with the equivalent software simulations to support validation of released software;

(g) Uses the same models as released to the training community (which are also used to produce stand-alone proof-of-match and checkout documents);

(h) Is used to support helicopter development and certification; and

(i) Has been found to be a high fidelity representation of the helicopter by the manufacturer's pilots (or other acceptable data supplier), certificate holders, and the NSPM.

(3) Use the engineering simulator to produce a representative set of integrated proof-of-match cases.

(4) Use a configuration control system covering hardware and software for the operating components of the engineering simulator.

(5) Demonstrate that the predicted effects of the change(s) are within the provisions of sub-paragraph “a” of this section, and confirm that additional flight test data are not required.

d. Additional Requirements for Validation Data

(1) When used to provide validation data, an engineering simulator must meet the simulator standards currently applicable to training simulators except for the data package.

(2) The data package used must be:

(a) Comprised of the engineering predictions derived from the helicopter design, development, or certification process;

(b) Based on acceptable aeronautical principles with proven success history and valid outcomes for aerodynamics, engine operations, avionics operations, flight control applications, or ground handling;

(c) Verified with existing flight-test data; and

(d) Applicable to the configuration of a production helicopter, as opposed to a flight-test helicopter.

(3) Where engineering simulator data are used as part of a QTG, an essential match must exist between the training simulator and the validation data.

(4) Training flight simulator(s) using these baseline and modified simulation models must be qualified to at least internationally recognized standards, such as contained in the ICAO Document 9625, the “Manual of Criteria for the Qualification of Flight Simulators.”

End QPS Requirement

 

10. [Reserved]

11. Validation Test Tolerances

 

Begin Information

a. Non-Flight-Test Tolerances. If engineering simulator data or other non-flight-test data are used as an allowable form of reference validation data for the objective tests listed in Table C2A of this attachment, the data provider must supply a well-documented mathematical model and testing procedure that enables a replication of the engineering simulation results within 20% of the corresponding flight test tolerances.

b. Background

(1) The tolerances listed in Table C2A of this attachment are designed to measure the quality of the match using flight-test data as a reference.

(2) Good engineering judgment should be applied to all tolerances in any test. A test is failed when the results fall outside of the prescribed tolerance(s).

(3) Engineering simulator data are acceptable because the same simulation models used to produce the reference data are also used to test the flight training simulator (i.e., the two sets of results should be “essentially” similar).

(4) The results from the two sources may differ for the following reasons:

(a) Hardware (avionics units and flight controls);

(b) Iteration rates;

(c) Execution order;

(d) Integration methods;

(e) Processor architecture;

(f) Digital drift, including:

(i) Interpolation methods;

(ii) Data handling differences;

(iii) Auto-test trim tolerances.

(5) The tolerance limit between the reference data and the flight simulator results is generally 20% of the corresponding “flight-test” tolerances. However, there may be cases where the simulator models used are of higher fidelity, or the manner in which they are cascaded in the integrated testing loop have the effect of a higher fidelity, than those supplied by the data provider. Under these circumstances, it is possible that an error greater than 20% may be generated. An error greater than 20% may be acceptable if the simulator sponsor can provide an adequate explanation.

(6) Guidelines are needed for the application of tolerances to engineering-simulator-generated validation data because:

(a) Flight-test data are often not available due to sound technical reasons;

(b) Alternative technical solutions are being advanced; and

(c) The costs are high.

12. Validation Data Roadmap

a. Helicopter manufacturers or other data suppliers should supply a validation data roadmap (VDR) document as part of the data package. A VDR document contains guidance material from the helicopter validation data supplier recommending the best possible sources of data to be used as validation data in the QTG. A VDR is of special value when requesting interim qualification, qualification of simulators for helicopters certificated prior to 1992, and qualification of alternate engine or avionics fits. A sponsor seeking to have a device qualified in accordance with the standards contained in this QPS appendix should submit a VDR to the NSPM as early as possible in the planning stages. The NSPM is the final authority to approve the data to be used as validation material for the QTG. The NSPM and the Joint Aviation Authorities' Synthetic Training Devices Advisory Board have committed to maintain a list of agreed VDRs.

b. The VDR should identify (in matrix format) sources of data for all required tests. It should also provide guidance regarding the validity of these data for a specific engine type, thrust rating configuration, and the revision levels of all avionics affecting helicopter handling qualities and performance. The VDR should include rationale or explanation in cases where data or parameters are missing, engineering simulation data are to be used, flight test methods require explanation, or where there is any deviation from data requirements. Additionally, the document should refer to other appropriate sources of validation data (e.g., sound and vibration data documents).

c. The Sample Validation Data Roadmap (VDR) for helicopters, shown in Table C2D, depicts a generic roadmap matrix identifying sources of validation data for an abbreviated list of tests. This sample document uses fixed wing parameters instead of helicopter values. It is merely a sample and does not provide actual data. A complete matrix should address all test conditions for helicopter application and provide actual data and data sources.

d. Two examples of rationale pages are presented in Appendix F of IATA Flight Simulator Design and Performance Data Requirements document. These illustrate the type of helicopter and avionics configuration information and descriptive engineering rationale used to describe data anomalies or provide an acceptable basis for using alternative data for QTG validation requirements.

End Information

 
eCFR graphic er09my08.036.gif

View or download PDF

Begin Information

 

13. [Reserved]

14. Acceptance Guidelines for Alternative Avionics (Flight-Related Computers and Controllers)

a. Background

(1) For a new helicopter type, the majority of flight validation data are collected on the first helicopter configuration with a “baseline” flight-related avionics ship-set; (see subparagraph b.(2) of this section). These data are then used to validate all flight simulators representing that helicopter type.

(2) Additional validation data may be needed for flight simulators representing a helicopter with avionics of a different hardware design than the baseline, or a different software revision than that of previously validated configurations.

(3) When a flight simulator with additional or alternate avionics configurations is to be qualified, the QTG should contain tests against validation data for selected cases where avionics differences are expected to be significant.

b. Approval Guidelines For Validating Alternate Avionics

(1) The following guidelines apply to flight simulators representing helicopters with a revised avionics configuration, or more than one avionics configuration.

(2) The baseline validation data should be based on flight test data, except where other data are specifically allowed (e.g., engineering flight simulator data).

(3) The helicopter avionics can be segmented into two groups, systems or components whose functional behavior contributes to the aircraft response presented in the QTG results, and systems that do not. The following avionics are examples of contributory systems for which hardware design changes or software revisions may lead to significant differences in the aircraft response relative to the baseline avionics configuration: Flight control computers and controllers for engines, autopilot, braking system, and nosewheel steering system, if applicable. Related avionics such as augmentation systems should also be considered.

(4) The acceptability of validation data used in the QTG for an alternative avionics fit should be determined as follows:

(a) For changes to an avionics system or component that do not affect QTG validation test response, the QTG test can be based on validation data from the previously validated avionics configuration.

(b) For an avionics change to a contributory system, where a specific test is not affected by the change (e.g., the avionics change is a Built In Test Equipment (BITE) update or a modification in a different flight phase), the QTG test can be based on validation data from the previously-validated avionics configuration. The QTG should include authoritative justification (e.g., from the helicopter manufacturer or system supplier) that this avionics change does not affect the test.

(c) For an avionics change to a contributory system, the QTG may be based on validation data from the previously-validated avionics configuration if no new functionality is added and the impact of the avionics change on the helicopter response is based on acceptable aeronautical principles with proven success history and valid outcomes. This should be supplemented with avionics-specific validation data from the helicopter manufacturer's engineering simulation, generated with the revised avionics configuration. The QTG should include an explanation of the nature of the change and its effect on the helicopter response.

(d) For an avionics change to a contributory system that significantly affects some tests in the QTG, or where new functionality is added, the QTG should be based on validation data from the previously validated avionics configuration and supplemental avionics-specific flight test data sufficient to validate the alternate avionics revision. Additional flight test validation data may not be needed if the avionics changes were certified without the need for testing with a comprehensive flight instrumentation package. The helicopter manufacturer should coordinate flight simulator data requirements in advance with the NSPM.

(5) A matrix or “roadmap” should be provided with the QTG indicating the appropriate validation data source for each test. The roadmap should include identification of the revision state of those contributory avionics systems that could affect specific test responses.

15. Transport Delay Testing

a. This paragraph describes how to determine the introduced transport delay through the flight simulator system so that it does not exceed a specific time delay. The transport delay should be measured from control inputs through the interface, through each of the host computer modules and back through the interface to motion, flight instrument, and visual systems. The transport delay should not exceed the maximum allowable interval.

b. Four specific examples of transport delay are:

(1) Simulation of classic non-computer controlled aircraft;

(2) Simulation of Computer Controlled Aircraft using real helicopter black boxes;

(3) Simulation of Computer Controlled Aircraft using software emulation of helicopter boxes;

(4) Simulation using software avionics or rehosted instruments.

c. Figure C2C illustrates the total transport delay for a non-computer-controlled helicopter or the classic transport delay test. Since there are no helicopter-induced delays for this case, the total transport delay is equivalent to the introduced delay.

d. Figure C2D illustrates the transport delay testing method using the real helicopter controller system.

e. To obtain the induced transport delay for the motion, instrument and visual signal, the delay induced by the helicopter controller should be subtracted from the total transport delay. This difference represents the introduced delay and should not exceed the standards prescribed in Table C1A.

f. Introduced transport delay is measured from the flight deck control input to the reaction of the instruments and motion and visual systems (See Figure C2C).

g. The control input may also be introduced after the helicopter controller system input and the introduced transport delay may be measured directly from the control input to the reaction of the instruments, and simulator motion and visual systems (See Figure C2D).

h. Figure C2E illustrates the transport delay testing method used on a flight simulator that uses a software emulated helicopter controller system.

i. It is not possible to measure the introduced transport delay using the simulated helicopter controller system architecture for the pitch, roll and yaw axes. Therefore, the signal should be measured directly from the pilot controller. The flight simulator manufacturer should measure the total transport delay and subtract the inherent delay of the actual helicopter components because the real helicopter controller system has an inherent delay provided by the helicopter manufacturer. The flight simulator manufacturer should ensure that the introduced delay does not exceed the standards prescribed in Table C1A.

j. Special measurements for instrument signals for flight simulators using a real helicopter instrument display system instead of a simulated or re-hosted display. For flight instrument systems, the total transport delay should be measured and the inherent delay of the actual helicopter components subtracted to ensure that the introduced delay does not exceed the standards prescribed in Table C1A.

(1) Figure C2FA illustrates the transport delay procedure without helicopter display simulation. The introduced delay consists of the delay between the control movement and the instrument change on the data bus.

(2) Figure C2FB illustrates the modified testing method required to measure introduced delay due to software avionics or re-hosted instruments. The total simulated instrument transport delay is measured and the helicopter delay should be subtracted from this total. This difference represents the introduced delay and should not exceed the standards prescribed in Table C1A. The inherent delay of the helicopter between the data bus and the displays is indicated in figure C2FA. The display manufacturer should provide this delay time.

k. Recorded signals. The signals recorded to conduct the transport delay calculations should be explained on a schematic block diagram. The flight simulator manufacturer should also provide an explanation of why each signal was selected and how they relate to the above descriptions.

l. Interpretation of results. Flight simulator results vary over time from test to test due to “sampling uncertainty.” All flight simulators run at a specific rate where all modules are executed sequentially in the host computer. The flight controls input can occur at any time in the iteration, but these data will not be processed before the start of the new iteration. For example, a flight simulator running at 60 Hz may have a difference of as much as 16.67 msec between results. This does not mean that the test has failed. Instead, the difference is attributed to variation in input processing. In some conditions, the host simulator and the visual system do not run at the same iteration rate, so the output of the host computer to the visual system will not always be synchronized.

m. The transport delay test should account for both daylight and night modes of operation of the visual system. In both cases, the tolerances prescribed in Table C1A should be met and the motion response should occur before the end of the first video scan containing new information.

eCFR graphic er09my08.037.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.038.gif

View or download PDF

16. Continuing Qualification Evaluations—Validation Test Data Presentation

a. Background

(1) The MQTG is created during the initial evaluation of a flight simulator. This is the master document, as amended, to which flight simulator continuing qualification evaluation test results are compared.

(2) The currently accepted method of presenting continuing qualification evaluation test results is to provide flight simulator results over-plotted with reference data. Test results are carefully reviewed to determine if the test is within the specified tolerances. This can be a time consuming process, particularly when reference data exhibits rapid variations or an apparent anomaly requiring engineering judgment in the application of the tolerances. In these cases, the solution is to compare the results to the MQTG. The continuing qualification results are compared to the results in the MQTG for acceptance. The flight simulator operator and the NSPM should look for any change in the flight simulator performance since initial qualification.

b. Continuing Qualification Evaluation Test Results Presentation

(1) Flight simulator operators are encouraged to over-plot continuing qualification validation test results with MQTG flight simulator results recorded during the initial evaluation and as amended. Any change in a validation test will be readily apparent. In addition to plotting continuing qualification validation test and MQTG results, operators may elect to plot reference data.

(2) There are no suggested tolerances between flight simulator continuing qualification and MQTG validation test results. Investigation of any discrepancy between the MQTG and continuing qualification flight simulator performance is left to the discretion of the flight simulator operator and the NSPM.

(3) Differences between the two sets of results, other than variations attributable to repeatability issues that cannot be explained should be investigated.

(4) The flight simulator should retain the ability to over-plot both automatic and manual validation test results with reference data.

End Information

 

Begin QPS Requirements

17. Alternative Data Sources, Procedures, and Instrumentation: Level B Simulators Only

a. Sponsors are not required to use the alternative data sources, procedures, and instrumentation. However, any sponsor choosing to use alternative sources must comply with the requirements in Table C2E.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

b. It has become standard practice for experienced simulator manufacturers to use such techniques as a means of establishing data bases for new simulator configurations while awaiting the availability of actual flight test data. The data generated from the aerodynamic modeling techniques is then compared to the flight test data when it becomes available. The results of such comparisons have become increasingly consistent, indicating that these techniques, applied with appropriate experience, are dependable and accurate for the development of aerodynamic models for use in Level B simulators.

c. Based on this history of successful comparisons, the NSPM has concluded that those who are experienced in the development of aerodynamic models for simulator application can successfully use these modeling techniques to alter the method for acquiring flight test data for Level B simulators.

d. The information in Table C2E (Alternative Data Sources, Procedures, and Information) is presented to describe an acceptable alternative to data sources for simulator modeling and validation and an acceptable alternative to the procedures and instrumentation traditionally used to gather such modeling and validation data.

(1) Alternative data sources that may be used for part or all of a data requirement are the Helicopter Maintenance Manual, the Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM), Helicopter Design Data, the Type Inspection Report (TIR), Certification Data or acceptable supplemental flight test data.

(2) The sponsor should coordinate with the NSPM prior to using alternative data sources in a flight test or data gathering effort.

e. The NSPM position on the use of these alternative data sources, procedures, and instrumentation is based on the use of a rigorously defined and fully mature simulation controls system model that includes accurate gearing and cable stretch characteristics (where applicable), determined from actual aircraft measurements. The model does not require control surface position measurements in the flight test objective data in these limited applications.

f. Data may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments, including the inclinometer; the force/position measurements of flight deck controls; and a clear visual directional reference for a known magnetic bearing (e.g., a runway centerline). Ground track and wind corrected heading may be used for sideslip angle.

g. The sponsor is urged to contact the NSPM for clarification of any issue regarding helicopters with reversible control systems. This table is not applicable to Computer Controlled Aircraft flight simulators.

h. Use of these alternate data sources, procedures, and instrumentation does not relieve the sponsor from compliance with the balance of the information contained in this document relative to Level B FFSs.

i. The term “inertial measurement system” is used in table C2E includes the use of a functional global positioning system (GPS).

j. Synchronized video for the use of alternative data sources, procedures, and instrumentation should have:

(1) sufficient resolution to allow magnification of the display to make appropriate measurement and comparisons; and

(2) sufficient size and incremental marking to allow similar measurement and comparison. The detail provided by the video should provide sufficient clarity and accuracy to measure the necessary parameter(s) to at least 12 of the tolerance authorized for the specific test being conducted and allow an integration of the parameter(s) in question to obtain a rate of change.

End Information

 

Table C2E—Alternative Data Sources, Procedures, and Instrumentation

[The standards in this table are required if the data gathering methods described in paragraph 9 of Appendix C are not used]

QPS requirementsInformation
Table of objective testsLevel By onlyAlternative data sources, procedures, and instrumentationNotes
Test entry number and title
1.a.1.a. Performance. Engine Start and AccelerationsXData may be acquired using a synchronized video recording of all engine instruments, start buttons, means for fuel introduction and means for moving from “idle” to “flight.” A stopwatch is necessary
1.a.1.b. Performance. Steady State Idle and Operating RPM ConditionsXData may be acquired using a synchronized video recording of all engine instruments, and include the status of the means for moving from “idle” to “flight.”
1.a.2. Performance. Power Turbine Speed TrimXData may be acquired using a synchronized video recording of all engine instruments. Speed trim actuator position may be hand recorded
1.a.3. Performance. Engine and Rotor Speed GoverningXData may be acquired by using a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
1.b.1. Performance. On Surface Taxi. Minimum Radius TurnXTIR, AFM, or Design data may be used
1.b.2. Performance. On Surface Taxi Rate of Turn vs. Nosewheel Steering AngleXData may be acquired by using a constant tiller position (measured with a protractor), or full pedal application for steady state turn, and synchronized video of heading indicator. If less than full pedal is used, pedal position must be recordedA single procedure may not be adequate for all rotorcraft steering systems. Appropriate measurement procedures must be devised and proposed for NSPM concurrence.
1.b.3. Performance. TaxiXData may be acquired by using a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
1.b.4. Performance. BrakeXData may be acquired using a stopwatch and a means for measuring distance such as runway distance markers conforming with runway distance marker standards
1.c.1. Performance. Running TakeoffXPreliminary certification data may be used. Data may be acquired by using a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls. Collective, cyclic, and pedal position time history must be recorded from the start of collective movement through to normal climb. Indicated torque settings may be hand recorded at the moment of lift-off and in a steady normal climb
1.c.2. Performance. One Engine Inoperative (OEI), continued takeoffXData may be acquired by using a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls. Collective, cyclic, and pedal position time history must be recorded from the start of collective movement through to normal OEI climb. Indicated torque settings may be hand recorded at the moment of lift-off and in a steady normal OEI climb
1.f. Performance. Level Flight. Trimmed Flight Control PositionsXData may be acquired by using a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
1.g. Performance. Normal Climb. Trimmed Flight Control PositionsXData may be acquired by using a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
1.h.1. Descent Performance and Trimmed Flight Control PositionsXData may be acquired by using a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
1.h.2. Autorotation Performance and Trimmed Flight Control PositionsXData may be acquired by using a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
1.j.1. Performance. Running Landing All EnginesXData may be acquired by using a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
1.j.2. Performance. Running Landing One Engine InoperativeXData may be acquired by using a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
1.j.3. Performance. Balked LandingXData may be acquired by using a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls. The synchronized video must record the time of the “balk landing” decision
2.a.1. Handling Qualities. Static Control Checks. Cyclic Controller Position vs. ForceXControl positions can be obtained using continuous control position recordings. Force data may be acquired by using a hand held force gauge so that the forces can be cross-plotted against control position in each of the control axes
2.a.2. Handling Qualities. Static Control Checks. Collective/Pedals vs. ForceXControl positions can be obtained using continuous control position recordings. Force data may be acquired by using a hand held force gauge so that the forces can be cross-plotted against control position in each of the control axes
2.a.3. Handling Qualities. Brake Pedal Force vs. PositionXBrake pedal positions can be obtained using continuous position recordings. Force data may be acquired by using a hand held force gauge so that the forces can be cross-plotted against brake pedal position
2.a.4. Handling Qualities. Trim System Rate (all applicable systems)XControl positions can be obtained using continuous control position recordings plotted against time to provide rate in each applicable system
2.a.6. Handling Qualities. Control System FreeplayXData may be acquired by direct measurement
2.c.1. Longitudinal Handling Qualities. Control ResponseXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system, a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
2.c.2. Longitudinal Handling Qualities. Static StabilityXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system, a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
2.c.3.a. Longitudinal Handling Qualities. Dynamic Stability, Long Term ResponseXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system, a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
2.c.3.b. Longitudinal Handling Qualities. Dynamic Stability, Short Term ResponseXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system, a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
2.c.4. Longitudinal Handling Qualities. Maneuvering stabilityXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system, a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
2.d.1.a. Lateral Handling Qualities. Control ResponseXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system, a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments and the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
2.d.1.b Directional Handling Qualities. Control Response.XData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated helicopter instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck directional controls
2.d.2. Handling Qualities. Directional Static StabilityXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of calibrated helicopter instruments and force/position measurements of flight deck directional controls
2.d.3.a. Handling Qualities. Dynamic Lateral and Directional Stability Lateral-Directional OscillationsXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments, the force/position measurements of flight deck controls, and a stop watch
2.d.3.b. Handling Qualities. Dynamic Lateral and Directional Stability Spiral StabilityXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments, the force/position measurements of flight deck controls, and a stop watch
2.d.3.c. Handling Qualities. Dynamic Lateral and Directional Stability. Adverse/Proverse YawXData may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized video of the calibrated helicopter instruments, the force/position measurements of flight deck controls
 

Begin Information

18. Visual Display Systems.

a. Basic principles of a FFS collimated display:

(1) The essential feature of a collimated display is that light rays coming from a given point in a picture are parallel. There are two main implications of the parallel rays:

(a) The viewer's eyes focus at infinity and have zero convergence, providing a cue that the object is distant; and

(b) The angle to any given point in the picture does not change when viewed from a different position so the object behaves geometrically as though it were located at a significant distance from the viewer. These cues are self-consistent, and are appropriate for any object that has been modeled as being at a significant distance from the viewer.

(2) In an ideal situation the rays are perfectly parallel, but most implementations provide only an approximation to the ideal. Typically, an FFS display provides an image located not closer than about 20-33 ft (6-10 m) from the viewer, with the distance varying over the field-of-view. A schematic representation of a collimated display is provided in Figure C2A.

(3) Collimated displays are well suited to many simulation applications as the area of interest is relatively distant from the observer so the angles to objects should remain independent of viewing position. Consider the view of the runway seen by the flight crew lined up on an approach. In the real world, the runway is distant and the light rays from the runway to the eyes are parallel. The runway appears to be straight ahead to both crew members. This situation is well simulated by a collimated display and is presented in Figure C2B. Note that the distance to the runway has been shortened for clarity. If drawn to scale, the runway would be farther away and the rays from the two seats would be closer to being parallel.

(4) While the horizontal field-of-view of a collimated display can be extended to approximately 210°-220°, the vertical field-of-view has been limited to about 40°-45°. These limitations result from tradeoffs in optical quality and interference between the display components and flight deck structures, but were sufficient to meet FFS regulatory approval for Helicopter FFSs. However, recent designs have been introduced with vertical fields of view of up to 60° for helicopter applications.

b. Basic principles of a FFS dome (or non-collimated) display:

(1) The situation in a dome display is shown in Figure C2C. As the angles can be correct for only one eye point at a time, the visual system in the figure has been aligned for the right seat eye point position. The runway appears to be straight ahead of the aircraft for this viewer. For the left seat viewer, however, the runway appears to be somewhat to the right of the aircraft. As the aircraft is still moving towards the runway, the perceived velocity vector will be directed towards the runway and this will be interpreted as the aircraft having some yaw offset.

(2) The situation is substantially different for near field objects encountered in helicopter operations close to the ground. In those cases, objects that should be interpreted as being close to the viewer will be misinterpreted as being distant in a collimated display. The errors can actually be reduced in a dome display.

(3) The field-of-view possible with a dome display can be larger than that of a collimated display. Depending on the configuration, a field-of-view of 240° by 90° is possible and can be exceeded.

c. Additional display considerations

(1) While the situations described above are for discrete viewing positions, the same arguments can be extended to moving eye points produced by the viewer's head movement. In the real world, the parallax effects resulting from head movement provide distance cues. The effect is particularly strong for relative movement of flight deck structure in the near field and modeled objects in the distance. Collimated displays will provide accurate parallax cues for distant objects, but increasingly inaccurate cues for near field objects. The situation is reversed for dome displays.

(2) Stereopsis cues resulting from the different images presented to each eye for objects relatively close to the viewer also provide depth cues. Again, the collimated and dome displays provide more or less accurate cues depending on the modeled distance of the objects being viewed.

d. Training implications

(1) In view of the basic principles described above, it is clear that neither display approach provides a completely accurate image for all possible object distances. The sponsor should consider the training role of the FFS when configuring the display system to make the optimum choice. Factors that should be considered include relative importance of training tasks at low altitudes, the role of the two crew members in the flying tasks, and the field-of-view required for specific training tasks.

eCFR graphic er09my08.039.gif

View or download PDF

Attachment 3 to Appendix C to Part 60—Simulator Subjective Evaluation

 

Begin QPS Requirements

1. Requirements

a. Except for special use airport models, all airport models required by this part must be representations of real-world, operational airports or representations of fictional airports and must meet the requirements set out in Tables C3B or C3C of this attachment, as appropriate.

b. If fictional airports are used, the sponsor must ensure that navigational aids and all appropriate maps, charts, and other navigational reference material for the fictional airports (and surrounding areas as necessary) are compatible, complete, and accurate with respect to the visual presentation and airport model of this fictional airport. An SOC must be submitted that addresses navigation aid installation and performance and other criteria (including obstruction clearance protection) for all instrument approaches to the fictional airports that are available in the simulator. The SOC must reference and account for information in the terminal instrument procedures manual and the construction and availability of the required maps, charts, and other navigational material. This material must be clearly marked “for training purposes only.”

c. When the simulator is being used by an instructor or evaluator for purposes of training, checking, or testing under this chapter, only airport models classified as Class I, Class II, or Class III may be used by the instructor or evaluator. Detailed descriptions/definitions of these classifications are found in Appendix F of this part.

d. When a person sponsors an FFS maintained by a person other than a U.S. certificate holder, the sponsor is accountable for that FFS originally meeting, and continuing to meet, the criteria under which it was originally qualified and the appropriate Part 60 criteria, including the visual scenes and airport models that may be used by instructors or evaluators for purposes of training, checking, or testing under this chapter.

e. Neither Class II nor Class III airport visual models are required to appear on the SOQ, and the method used for keeping instructors and evaluators apprised of the airport models that meet Class II or Class III requirements on any given simulator is at the option of the sponsor, but the method used must be available for review by the TPAA.

f. When an airport model represents a real world airport and a permanent change is made to that real world airport (e.g., a new runway, an extended taxiway, a new lighting system, a runway closure) without a written extension grant from the NSPM (described in paragraph 1.g., of this section), an update to that airport model must be made in accordance with the following time limits:

(1) For a new airport runway, a runway extension, a new airport taxiway, a taxiway extension, or a runway/taxiway closure—within 90 days of the opening for use of the new airport runway, runway extension, new airport taxiway, or taxiway extension; or within 90 days of the closure of the runway or taxiway.

(2) For a new or modified approach light system—within 45 days of the activation of the new or modified approach light system.

(3) For other facility or structural changes on the airport (e.g., new terminal, relocation of Air Traffic Control Tower)—within 180 days of the opening of the new or changed facility or structure.

g. If a sponsor desires an extension to the time limit for an update to a visual scene or airport model or has an objection to what must be updated in the specific airport model requirement, the sponsor must provide a written extension request to the NSPM stating the reason for the update delay and a proposed completion date or provide an explanation for the objection, explaining why the identified airport change will not have an impact on flight training, testing, or checking. A copy of this request or objection must also be sent to the POI/TCPM. The NSPM will send the official response to the sponsor and a copy to the POI/TCPM; however, if there is an objection, after consultation with the appropriate POI/TCPM regarding the training, testing, or checking impact, the NSPM will send the official response to the sponsor and a copy to the POI/TCPM.

End QPS Requirements

 

Begin Information

2. Discussion

a. The subjective tests provide a basis for evaluating the capability of the simulator to perform over a typical utilization period; determining that the simulator competently simulates each required maneuver, procedure, or task; and verifying correct operation of the simulator controls, instruments, and systems. The items listed in the following Tables are for simulator evaluation purposes only. They may not be used to limit or exceed the authorizations for use of a given level of simulator as described on the SOQ or as approved by the TPAA. All items in the following paragraphs are subject to an examination.

b. The tests in Table C3A, Operations Tasks, in this attachment address pilot functions, including maneuvers and procedures (called flight tasks), and are divided by flight phases. The performance of these tasks by the NSPM includes an operational examination of the visual system and special effects. There are flight tasks included to address some features of advanced technology helicopters and innovative training programs.

c. The tests in Table C3A, Operations Tasks, and Table C3G, Instructor Operating Station, in this attachment address the overall function and control of the simulator including the various simulated environmental conditions; simulated helicopter system operation (normal, abnormal, and emergency); visual system displays; and special effects necessary to meet flight crew training, evaluation, or flight experience requirements.

d. All simulated helicopter systems functions will be assessed for normal and, where appropriate, alternate operations. Normal, abnormal, and emergency operations associated with a flight phase will be assessed during the evaluation of flight tasks or events within that flight phase. Simulated helicopter systems are listed separately under “Any Flight Phase” to ensure appropriate attention to systems checks. Operational navigation systems (including inertial navigation systems, global positioning systems, or other long-range systems) and the associated electronic display systems will be evaluated if installed. The NSP pilot will include in his report to the TPAA, the effect of the system operation and any system limitation.

e. Simulators demonstrating a satisfactory circling approach will be qualified for the circling approach maneuver and may be approved for such use by the TPAA in the sponsor's FAA-approved flight training program. To be considered satisfactory, the circling approach will be flown at maximum gross weight for landing, with minimum visibility for the helicopter approach category, and must allow proper alignment with a landing runway at least 90° different from the instrument approach course while allowing the pilot to keep an identifiable portion of the airport in sight throughout the maneuver (reference—14 CFR 91.175(e)).

f. At the request of the TPAA, the NSP Pilot may assess the simulator for a special aspect of a sponsor's training program during the functions and subjective portion of an evaluation. Such an assessment may include a portion of a Line Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) scenario or special emphasis items in the sponsor's training program. Unless directly related to a requirement for the qualification level, the results of such an evaluation would not affect the qualification of the simulator.

g. This appendix addresses helicopter simulators at Levels B, C, and D because there are no Level A Helicopter simulators.

h. The FAA intends to allow the use of Class III airport models on a limited basis when the sponsor provides the TPAA (or other regulatory authority) an appropriate analysis of the skills, knowledge, and abilities (SKAs) necessary for competent performance of the tasks in which this particular media element is used. The analysis should describe the ability of the FFS/visual media to provide an adequate environment in which the required SKAs are satisfactorily performed and learned. The analysis should also include the specific media element, such as the visual scene or airport model. Additional sources of information on the conduct of task and capability analysis may be found on the FAA's Advanced Qualification Program (AQP) Web site at: http://www.faa.gov/education__research/training/aqp/.

h. The TPAA may accept Class III airport models without individual observation provided the sponsor provides the TPAA with an acceptable description of the process for determining the acceptability of a specific airport model, outlines the conditions under which such an airport model may be used, and adequately describes what restrictions will be applied to each resulting airport or landing area model. Examples of situations that may warrant Class III model designation by the TPAA include the following:

(a) Training, testing, or checking on very low visibility operations, including SMGCS operations.

(b) Instrument operations training (including instrument takeoff, departure, arrival, approach, and missed approach training, testing, or checking) using—

(i) A specific model that has been geographically “moved” to a different location and aligned with an instrument procedure for another airport.

(ii) A model that does not match changes made at the real-world airport (or landing area for helicopters) being modeled.

(iii) A model generated with an “off-board” or an “on-board” model development tool (by providing proper latitude/longitude reference; correct runway or landing area orientation, length, width, marking, and lighting information; and appropriate adjacent taxiway location) to generate a facsimile of a real world airport or landing area.

i. Previously qualified simulators with certain early generation Computer Generated Image (CGI) visual systems, are limited by the capability of the Image Generator or the display system used. These systems are:

(1) Early CGI visual systems that are exempt from the necessity of including runway numbers as a part of the specific runway marking requirements are:

(a) Link NVS and DNVS.

(b) Novoview 2500 and 6000.

(c) FlightSafety VITAL series up to, and including, VITAL III, but not beyond.

(d) Redifusion SP1, SP1T, and SP2.

(2) Early CGI visual systems are excepted from the necessity of including runway numbers unless the runway is used for LOFT training sessions. These LOFT airport models require runway numbers, but only for the specific runway end (one direction) used in the LOFT session. The systems required to display runway numbers only for LOFT scenes are:

(a) FlightSafety VITAL IV.

(b) Redifusion SP3 and SP3T.

(c) Link-Miles Image II.

(3) The following list of previously qualified CGI and display systems are incapable of generating blue lights. These systems are not required to have accurate taxi-way edge lighting are:

(a) Redifusion SP1 and SP1T.

(b) FlightSafety Vital IV.

(c) Link-Miles Image II and Image IIT

(d) XKD displays (even though the XKD image generator is capable of generating blue colored lights, the display cannot accommodate that color).

End Information

 

Table C3A—Functions and Subjective Tests

QPS requirements
Entry No. Operations tasks Simulator level
B C D
Tasks in this table are subject to evaluation if appropriate for the helicopter simulated as indicated in the SOQ Configuration List or the level of simulator qualification involved. Items not installed or not functional on the simulator and, therefore, not appearing on the SOQ Configuration List, are not required to be listed as exceptions on the SOQ.
1. Preparation for Flight
1.a.Flight deck check: Switches, indicators, systems, and equipmentXXX
2. APU/Engine start and run-up
2.a.Normal start proceduresXXX
2.b.Alternate start proceduresXXX
2.c.Abnormal starts and shutdowns (e.g., hot start, hung start)XXX
2.d.Rotor engagementXXX
2.e.System checksXXX
3. Taxiing—Ground
3.aPower required to taxiXXX
3.b.Brake effectivenessXXX
3.c.Ground handlingXXX
3.d.Water handling (if applicable)XX
3.e.Abnormal/emergency procedures:
3.e.1.Brake system failureXXX
3.e.2.Ground resonanceXX
3.e.3.Dynamic rolloverXX
3.e.4.Deployment of emergency floats/water landingXX
3.e.5.Others listed on the SOQAXX
4. Taxiing—Hover
4.a.Takeoff to a hoverXXX
4.b.Instrument response:
4.b.1.Engine instrumentsXXX
4.b.2.Flight instrumentsXXX
4.b.3.Hovering turnsXXX
4.c.Hover power checks:
4.c.1.In ground effect (IGE)XXX
4.c.2.Out of ground effect (OGE)XXX
4.d.Crosswind/tailwind hoverXXX
4.e.Translating tendencyXXX
4.f.External load operations:
4.f.1.HookupXX
4.f.2.ReleaseXX
4.f.3.Winch operationsXX
4.g.Abnormal/emergency procedures:
4.g.1.Engine failureXXX
4.g.2.Fuel governing system failureXXX
4.g.3.Settling with power (OGE)XXX
4.g.4.Hovering autorotationXX
4.g.5.Stability augmentation system failureXXX
4.g.6.Directional control malfunctionXXX
4.g.7.Loss of tail rotor effectiveness (LTE)XX
4.g.8.Others listed on the SOQAXX
4.h.Pre-takeoff checksXXX
5. Takeoff/Translational Flight
5.a.Forward (up to effective translational lift)XX
5.b.Sideward (up to limiting airspeed)XX
5.c.Rearward (up to limiting airspeed)XX
6. Takeoff and Departure Phase
6.a.NormalXXX
6.a.1.From groundXXX
6.a.2.From hoverXXX
6.a.2.a.Cat AXXX
6.a.2.b.Cat BXXX
6.a.3.RunningXXX
6.a.4.Crosswind/tailwindXXX
6.a.5.Maximum performanceXXX
6.a.6.InstrumentXXX
6.a.7.Takeoff from a confined areaXXX
6.a.8.Takeoff from a pinnacle/platformXXX
6.a.9.Takeoff from a slopeXXX
6.a.10.External load operationsXX
6.b.Abnormal/emergency procedures:XXX
6.b.1.Takeoff with engine failure after critical decision point (CDP)XXX
6.b.1.a.Cat AXX
6.b.1.b.Cat BXX
6.c.Rejected takeoff
6.c.1.LandXXX
6.c.2.Water (if appropriate)XXX
6.d.Instrument departureXXX
6.e.Others as listed on the SOQAXX
7. Climb
7.a.NormalXXX
7.b.Obstacle clearanceXXX
7.c.VerticalXX
7.d.One engine inoperativeXXX
7.e.Others as listed on the SOQAXX
8. Cruise
8.aPerformanceXXX
8.b.Flying qualitiesXXX
8.c.TurnsXXX
8.c.1.TimedXXX
8.c.2.NormalXXX
8.c.3.SteepXXX
8.d.Accelerations and decelerationsXXX
8.e.High speed vibrationsXXX
8.f.External Load Operations (see entry 4.f. of this table)XX
8.g.Abnormal/emergency proceduresXXX
8.g.1.Engine fireXXX
8.g.2Engine failureXXX
8.g.3.Inflight engine shutdown and restartXXX
8.g.4.Fuel governing system failuresXXX
8.g.5.Directional control malfunctionXXX
8.g.6.Hydraulic failureXXX
8.g.7.Stability system failureXXX
8.g.8.Rotor vibrationsXXX
8.g.9.Recovery from unusual attitudesXXX
9. Descent
9.a.NormalXXX
9.b.Maximum rateXXX
9.c.Autorotative
9.c.1.Straight-inXXX
9.c.2.With turnXXX
9.d.External LoadXX
10. Approach
10.a.Non-precisionXXX
10.a.1.All engines operatingXXX
10.a.2.One or more engines inoperativeXXX
10.a.3.Approach procedures:XXX
10.a.3.a.NDBXXX
10.a.3.b.VOR, RNAV, TACANXXX
10.a.3.c.ASRXXX
10.a.3.d.CirclingXXX
10.a.3.e.Helicopter onlyXXX
10.a.4.Missed approachXXX
10.a.4.a.All engines operatingXXX
10.a.4.b.One or more engines inoperativeXXX
10.b.PrecisionXXX
10.b.1.All engines operatingXXX
10.b.2.Manually controlled—one or more engines inoperativeXXX
10.b.3.Approach procedures:XXX
10.b.3.a.PARXXX
10.b.3.b.MLSXXX
10.b.3.c.ILSXXX
10.b.3.c.(1) Manual (raw data)XXX
10.b.3.c.(2) Flight director onlyXXX
10.b.3.c.(3) Autopilot* onlyXXX
10.b.3.c.(4) Cat IXXX
10.b.3.c.(5) Cat IIXXX
10.b.4.Missed approach:
10.b.4.a.All engines operatingXXX
10.b.4.b.One or more engines inoperativeXXX
10.b.4.c.Stability system failureXXX
10.c.Others as listed on the SOQAXX
11. Landings and Approaches to Landings
11.a.Visual Approaches:
11.a.1.NormalXXX
11.a.2.SteepXXX
11.a.3.ShallowXXX
11.a.4.CrosswindXXX
11.a.5.Category A profileXX
11.a.6.Category B profileXX
11.a.7.External LoadXX
11.b.Abnormal/emergency procedures:
11.b.1.Directional control failureXXX
11.b.2.Hydraulics failureXXX
11.b.3.Fuel governing failureXXX
11.b.4.AutorotationXXX
11.b.5.Stability system failureXXX
11.b.6.Others listed on the SOQAXX
11c.Landings:
11.c.1.Normal:
11.c.1.a.RunningXXX
11.c.1.b.From HoverXXX
11.c.2.Pinnacle/platformXXX
11.c.3.Confined areaXXX
11.c.4.SlopeXX
11.c.5.CrosswindXXX
11.c.6.TailwindXXX
11.c.7.Rejected LandingXXX
11.c.8.Abnormal/emergency procedures:
11.c.8.a.From autorotationXX
11.c.8.b.One or more engines inoperativeXXX
11.c.8.c.Directional control failureXXX
11.c.8.d.Hydraulics failureXXX
11.c.8.e.Stability augmentation system failureXXX
11.c.9.Other (listed on the SOQ)AXX
12. Any Flight Phase
12.a.1.Air conditioningXXX
12.a.2.Anti-icing/deicingXXX
12.a.3.Auxiliary power-plantXXX
12.a.4.CommunicationsXXX
12.a.5.ElectricalXXX
12.a.6.Fire detection and suppressionXXX
12.a.7.StabilizerXXX
12.a.8.Flight controlsXXX
12.a.9.Fuel and oilXXX
12.a.10.HydraulicXXX
12.a.11.Landing gearXXX
12.a.12.OxygenXXX
12.a.13.PneumaticXXX
12.a.14.PowerplantXXX
12.a.15.Flight control computersXXX
12.a.16.Stability and control augmentationXXX
12.b.Flight management and guidance system:
12.b.1.Airborne radarXXX
12.b.2.Automatic landing aidsXXX
12.b.3.AutopilotXXX
12.b.4.Collision avoidance systemXXX
12.b.5.Flight data displaysXXX
12.b.6.Flight management computersXXX
12.b.7.Heads-up displaysXXX
12.b.8.Navigation systemsXXX
12.c.Airborne procedures:
12.c.1.HoldingXXX
12.c.2.Air hazard avoidanceXXX
12.c.3.Retreating blade stall recoveryXXX
12.c.4.Mast bumpingXXX
12.c.5Loss of directional controlXXX
12.c.6.Loss of tail rotor effectivenessXX
12.c.7.Other (listed on the SOQ)AXX
13. Engine Shutdown and Parking
13.a.Engine and systems operationXXX
13.b.Parking brake operationXXX
13.c.Rotor brake operationXXX
13.d.Abnormal/emergency proceduresXXX

*“Autopilot” means attitude retention mode of operation.

Note: An “A” in the table indicates that the system, task, or procedure may be examined if the appropriate aircraft system or control is simulated in the FFS and is working properly.

Table C3B—Functions and Subjective Tests

QPS requirements
Entry No.Visual requirements for qualification at the stated level
class I airport or landing area models
Simulator level
BCD
This table specifies the minimum airport visual model content and functionality to qualify a simulator at the indicated level. This table applies only to the airport scenes required for simulator qualification; i.e., two helicopter landing area models for Level B simulators; four helicopter landing area models for Level C and Level D simulators.
1.Functional test content requirements
   The following is the minimum airport/landing area model content requirement to satisfy visual capability tests, and provides suitable visual cues to allow completion of all functions and subjective tests described in this attachment for simulators at Level B.
1.a.A minimum of one (1) representative airport and one (1) representative helicopter landing area model. The airport and the helicopter landing area may be contained within the same model. If but if this option is selected, the approach path to the airport runway(s) and the approach path to the helicopter landing area must be different. The model(s) used to meet the following requirements may be demonstrated at either a fictional or a real-world airport or helicopter landing area, but each must be acceptable to the sponsor's TPAA, selectable from the IOS, and listed on the SOQX
1.b.The fidelity of the visual scene must be sufficient for the aircrew to visually identify the airport and/or helicopter landing area; determine the position of the simulated helicopter within the visual scene; successfully accomplish take-offs, approaches, and landings; and maneuver around the airport on the ground, or hover taxi, as necessaryX
1.c.Runways:
1.c.1.Visible runway numberX
1.c.2.Runway threshold elevations and locations must be modeled to provide sufficient correlation with helicopter systems (e.g., altimeter)X
1.c.3.Runway surface and markingsX
1.c.4.Lighting for the runway in use including runway edge and centerlineX
1.c.5.Lighting, visual approach aid (VASI or PAPI) and approach lighting of appropriate colorsX
1.c.6.Representative taxiway lightsX
1.d.Other helicopter landing area:
1.d.1.Standard heliport designation (“H”) marking, properly sized and orientedX
1.d.2.Perimeter markings for the Touchdown and Lift-Off Area (TLOF) or the Final Approach and Takeoff Area (FATO), as appropriateX
1.d.3.Perimeter lighting for the TLOF or the FATO areas, as appropriateX
1.d.4.Appropriate markings and lighting to allow movement from the runway or helicopter landing area to another part of the landing facilityX
2.Functional test content requirements for Level C and Level D simulators
   The following is the minimum airport/landing area model content requirement to satisfy visual capability tests, and provide suitable visual cues to allow completion of all functions and subjective tests described in this attachment for simulators at Level C and Level D. Not all of the elements described in this section must be found in a single airport/landing area scene. However, all of the elements described in this section must be found throughout a combination of the four (4) airport/landing area models described in entry 2.a. The representations of the hazards (as described in 2.d.) must be “hard objects” that interact as such if contacted by the simulated helicopter. Additionally, surfaces on which the helicopter lands must be “hard surfaces.” The model(s) used to meet the following requirements must be demonstrated at either a fictional or a real-world airport or helicopter landing area, and each must be acceptable to the sponsor's TPAA, selectable from the IOS, and listed on the SOQ.
2.a.There must be at least the following airport/helicopter landing areas.
2.a.1.At least one (1) representative airportXX
2.a.2.At least three representative non-airport landing areas, as follows:
2.a.2.aAt least one (1) representative helicopter landing area situated on a substantially elevated surface with respect to the surrounding structures or terrain (e.g., building top, offshore oil rig)XX
2.a.2.b.At least one (1) helicopter landing area that meets the definition of a “confined landing area”XX
2.a.2.c.At least one (1) helicopter landing area on a sloped surface where the slope is at least 212 °XX
2.b.For each of the airport/helicopter landing areas described in 2.a., the simulator must be able to provide at least the following:XX
2.b.1.A night and twilight (dusk) environment.XX
2.b.2.A daylight environmentX
2.c.Non-airport helicopter landing areas must have the following:
2.c.1.Representative buildings, structures, and lighting within appropriate distancesXX
2.c.2.Representative moving and static clutter (e.g., other aircraft, power carts, tugs, fuel trucks)XX
2.c.3.Representative depiction of terrain and obstacles as well as significant and identifiable natural and cultural features, within 25 NM of the reference landing areaXX
2.c.4.Standard heliport designation (“H”) marking, properly sized and orientedXX
2.c.5.Perimeter markings for the Touchdown and Lift-Off Area (TLOF) or the Final Approach and Takeoff Area (FATO), as appropriateXX
2.c.6.Perimeter lighting for the TLOF or the FATO areas, as appropriateXX
2.c.7.Appropriate markings and lighting to allow movement from the area to another part of the landing facility, if appropriateXX
2.c.8.Representative markings, lighting, and signage, including a windsock that gives appropriate wind cuesXX
2.c.9.Appropriate markings, lighting, and signage necessary for position identification, and to allow movement from the landing area to another part of the landing facilityXX
2.c.10.Representative moving and static ground traffic (e.g., vehicular and aircraft), including the ability to present surface hazards (e.g., conflicting traffic, vehicular or aircraft, on or approaching the landing area)XX
2.c.11.Portrayal of landing surface contaminants, including lighting reflections when wet and partially obscured lights when snow is present, or suitable alternative effectsXX
2.d.All of the following three (3) hazards must be presented in a combination of the three (3) non-airport landing areas (described in entry 2.a.2. of this table) and each of these non-airport landing areas must have at least one of the following hazards:
2.d.1.Other airborne trafficXX
2.d.2.Buildings, trees, or other vertical obstructions in the immediate landing areaXX
2.d.3.Suspended wires in the immediate landing areaXX
2.e.Airport applications. Each airport must have the following:
2.e.1.At least one runway designated as “in-use”, appropriately marked and capable of being lighted fullyXX
2.e.2.Runway threshold elevations and locations must be modeled to provide sufficient correlation with helicopter systems (e.g., HGS, GPS, altimeter). Slopes in runways, taxiways, and ramp areas, if depicted in the visual scene, may not cause distracting or unrealistic effects, including pilot eye-point height variationXXX
2.e.3.Appropriate approach lighting systems and airfield lighting for a VFR circuit and landing, non-precision approaches and landings, and precision approaches and landings, as appropriate.XX
2.e.4.Representative taxiway lightsX
3.Airport or landing area model management
   The following is the minimum visual scene management requirements
3.a.Runway and helicopter landing area approach lighting must fade into view in accordance with the environmental conditions set in the simulatorXXX
3.b.The direction of strobe lights, approach lights, runway edge lights, visual landing aids, runway centerline lights, threshold lights, touchdown zone lights, and TLOF or FATO lights must be replicatedXXX
4.Visual feature recognition.
   The following are the minimum distances at which runway features must be visible. Distances are measured from runway threshold or a helicopter landing area to a helicopter aligned with the runway or helicopter landing area on an extended 3° glide-slope in simulated meteorological conditions. For circling approaches, all tests apply to the runway used for the initial approach and to the runway of intended landing
4.a.For runways: Runway definition, strobe lights, approach lights, and runway edge lights from 5 sm (8 km) of the runway thresholdXXX
4.b.For runways: Centerline lights and taxiway definition from 3 sm (5 km)XXX
4.c.For runways: Visual Approach Aid lights (VASI or PAPI) from 3 sm (5 km) of the thresholdX
4.d.For runways: Visual Approach Aid lights (VASI or PAPI) from 5 sm (8 km) of the thresholdXX
4.e.For runways: Runway threshold lights and touchdown zone lights from 2 sm (3 km)XXX
4.f.For runways and helicopter landing areas: Markings within range of landing lights for night/twilight scenes and the surface resolution test on daylight scenes, as requiredXXX
4.g.For circling approaches, the runway of intended landing and associated lighting must fade into view in a non-distracting mannerXXX
4.h.For helicopter landing areas: Landing direction lights and raised FATO lights from 1 sm (1.5 km)XXX
4.i.For helicopter landing areas: Flush mounted FATO lights, TOFL lights, and the lighted windsock from 0.5 sm (750 m)X
4.j.Hover taxiway lighting (yellow/blue/yellow cylinders) from TOFL areaX
5.Airport or helicopter landing area model content
   The following prescribes the minimum requirements for an airport/helicopter landing area model and identifies other aspects of the environment that must correspond with that model for simulators at Level B, Level C, and Level D. For circling approaches, all tests apply to the runway used for the initial approach and to the runway of intended landing. If all runways or landing areas in a visual model used to meet the requirements of this attachment are not designated as “in use,” then the “in use” runways/landing areas must be listed on the SOQ (e.g., KORD, Rwys 9R, 14L, 22R). Models of airports or helicopter landing areas with more than one runway or landing area must have all significant runways or landing areas not “in-use” visually depicted for airport runway/landing area recognition purposes. The use of white or off-white light strings that identify the runway or landing area for twilight and night scenes are acceptable for this requirement; and rectangular surface depictions are acceptable for daylight scenes. A visual system's capabilities must be balanced between providing visual models with an accurate representation of the airport and a realistic representation of the surrounding environment. Each runway or helicopter landing area designated as an “in-use” runway or area must include the following detail that is developed using airport pictures, construction drawings and maps, or other similar data, or developed in accordance with published regulatory material; however, this does not require that such models contain details that are beyond the design capability of the currently qualified visual system. Only one “primary” taxi route from parking to the runway end or helicopter takeoff/landing area will be required for each “in-use” runway or helicopter takeoff/landing area.
5.a.The surface and markings for each “in-use” runway or helicopter landing area must include the following:
5.a.1.For airports: Runway threshold markings, runway numbers, touchdown zone markings, fixed distance markings, runway edge markings, and runway centerline stripesXXX
5.a.2.For helicopter landing areas: Markings for standard heliport identification (“H”) and TOFL, FATO, and safety areasXXX
5.b.The lighting for each “in-use” runway or helicopter landing area must include the following:
5.b.1.For airports: Runway approach, threshold, edge, end, centerline (if applicable), touchdown zone (if applicable), leadoff, and visual landing aid lights or light systems for that runwayXXX
5.b.2.For helicopter landing areas: landing direction, raised and flush FATO, TOFL, windsock lightingXXX
5.c.The taxiway surface and markings associated with each “in-use” runway or helicopter landing area must include the following:
5.c.1.For airports: Taxiway edge, centerline (if appropriate), runway hold lines, and ILS critical area(s)XXX
5.c.2.For helicopter landing areas: taxiways, taxi routes, and apronsXXX
5.d.The taxiway lighting associated with each “in-use” runway or helicopter landing area must include the following:
5.d.1.For airports: Runway edge, centerline (if appropriate), runway hold lines, ILS critical areasXXX
5.d.2.For helicopter landing areas: taxiways, taxi routes, and apronsXXX
5.d.3.For airports: taxiway lighting of correct colorX
5.e.Airport signage associated with each “in-use” runway or helicopter landing area must include the following:
5.e.1.For airports: Signs for runway distance remaining, intersecting runway with taxiway, and intersecting taxiway with taxiwayXXX
5.e.2.For helicopter landing areas: as appropriate for the model usedXXX
5.f.Required visual model correlation with other aspects of the airport or helicopter landing environment simulation:
5.f.1.The airport or helicopter landing area model must be properly aligned with the navigational aids that are associated with operations at the “in-use” runway or helicopter landing areaXXX
5.f.2.The simulation of runway or helicopter landing area contaminants must be correlated with the displayed runway surface and lighting where applicableXX
6.Correlation with helicopter and associated equipment
   The following are the minimum correlation comparisons that must be made for simulators at Level B, Level C, and Level D
6.a.Visual system compatibility with aerodynamic programmingXXX
6.b.Visual cues to assess sink rate and depth perception during landingsXXX
6.c.Accurate portrayal of environment relating to flight simulator attitudesXXX
6.d.The visual scene must correlate with integrated helicopter systems (e.g., terrain, traffic and weather avoidance systems and Head-up Guidance System (HGS))XX
6.e.Representative visual effects for each visible, own-ship, helicopter external light(s)—taxi and landing light lobes (including independent operation, if appropriate)XXX
6.f.The effect of rain removal devicesXX
7.Scene quality
The following are the minimum scene quality tests that must be conducted for simulators at Level B, Level C, and Level D.
7.a.Surfaces and textural cues must be free from apparent and distracting quantization (aliasing)XX
7.b.System capable of portraying full color realistic textural cuesXX
7.c.The system light points must be free from distracting jitter, smearing or streakingXXX
7.d.Demonstration of occulting through each channel of the system in an operational sceneXXX
7.e.Demonstration of a minimum of ten levels of occulting through each channel of the system in an operational sceneXX
7.f.System capable of providing focus effects that simulate rain.XX
7.g.System capable of providing focus effects that simulate light point perspective growthXX
7.h.Runway light controls capable of six discrete light steps (0-5)XXX
8.Environmental effects.
   The following are the minimum environmental effects that must be available in simulators at Level B, Level C, and Level D.
8.a.The displayed scene corresponding to the appropriate surface contaminants and include appropriate lighting reflections for wet, partially obscured lights for snow, or alternative effectsX
8.b.Special weather representations which include:
8.b.1.The sound, motion and visual effects of light, medium and heavy precipitation near a thunderstorm on take-off, approach, and landings at and below an altitude of 2,000 ft (600 m) above the surface and within a radius of 10 sm (16 km) from the airport or helicopter landing areaX
8.b.2.One airport or helicopter landing area with a snow scene to include terrain snow and snow-covered surfacesX
8.c.In-cloud effects such as variable cloud density, speed cues and ambient changesXX
8.d.The effect of multiple cloud layers representing few, scattered, broken and overcast conditions giving partial or complete obstruction of the ground sceneXX
8.e.Visibility and RVR measured in terms of distance. Visibility/RVR checked at 2,000 ft (600 m) above the airport or helicopter landing area and at two heights below 2,000 ft with at least 500 ft of separation between the measurements. The measurements must be taken within a radius of 10 sm (16 km) from the airport or helicopter landing areaXXX
8.f.Patchy fog giving the effect of variable RVRX
8.g.Effects of fog on airport lighting such as halos and defocusXX
8.h.Effect of own-ship lighting in reduced visibility, such as reflected glare, including landing lights, strobes, and beaconsXX
8.i.Wind cues to provide the effect of blowing snow or sand across a dry runway or taxiway selectable from the instructor stationX
8.j.“White-out” or “Brown-out” effects due to rotor downwash beginning at a distance above the ground equal to the rotor diameterX
9.Instructor control of the following:
   The following are the minimum instructor controls that must be available in Level B, Level C, and Level D simulators, as indicated.
9.a.Environmental effects, e.g. cloud base, cloud effects, cloud density, visibility in statute miles/ kilometers and RVR in feet/metersXXX
9.b.Airport or helicopter landing area selectionXXX
9.c.Airport or helicopter landing area lighting, including variable intensityXXX
9.d.Dynamic effects including ground and flight trafficXX
End QPS Requirement
Begin Information
10.An example of being able to “combine two airport models to achieve two “in-use” runways: One runway designated as the “in-use” runway in the first model of the airport, and the second runway designated as the “in-use” runway in the second model of the same airport. For example, the clearance is for the ILS approach to Runway 27, Circle to Land on Runway 18 right. Two airport visual models might be used: the first with Runway 27 designated as the “in use” runway for the approach to runway 27, and the second with Runway 18 Right designated as the “in use” runway. When the pilot breaks off the ILS approach to runway 27, the instructor may change to the second airport visual model in which runway 18 Right is designated as the “in use” runway, and the pilot would make a visual approach and landing. This process is acceptable to the FAA as long as the temporary interruption due to the visual model change is not distracting to the pilot.
11.Sponsors are not required to provide every detail of a runway, but the detail that is provided should be correct within reasonable limits.
End Information

Table C3C—Functions and Subjective Tests

QPS requirements
Entry No.Visual scene content additional airport or landing area models beyond minimum required for qualification
Class II airport or landing area models
Simulator level
BCD
This table specifies the minimum airport or helicopter landing area visual model content and functionality necessary to add visual models to a simulator's visual model library (i.e., beyond those necessary for qualification at the stated level) without the necessity of further involvement of the NSPM or TPAA.
1.Airport or landing area model management
   The following is the minimum visual scene management requirements for simulators at Levels B, C, and D.
1.a.The installation and direction of the following lights must be replicated for the “in-use” surface:
1.a.1.For “in-use” runways: Strobe lights, approach lights, runway edge lights, visual landing aids, runway centerline lights, threshold lights, and touchdown zone lightsXXX
1.a.2.For “in-use” helicopter landing areas: ground level TLOF perimeter lights, elevated TLOF perimeter lights (if applicable), Optional TLOF lights (if applicable), ground FATO perimeter lights, elevated TLOF lights (if applicable), landing direction lightsXXX
2.Visual feature recognition
   The following are the minimum distances at which runway or landing area features must be visible for simulators at Levels B, C, and D. Distances are measured from runway threshold or a helicopter landing area to an aircraft aligned with the runway or helicopter landing area on a 3° glide-slope from the aircraft to the touchdown point, in simulated meteorological conditions. For circling approaches, all tests apply to the runway used for the initial approach and to the runway of intended landing.
2.a.For Runways:
2.a.1.Strobe lights, approach lights, and edge lights from 5 sm (8 km) of the thresholdXXX
2.a.2.Centerline lights and taxiway definition from 3 sm (5 km)XXX
2.a.3.Visual Approach Aid lights (VASI or PAPI) from 3 sm (5 km) of the thresholdX
2.a.4.Visual Approach Aid lights (VASI or PAPI) from 5 sm (8 km) of the thresholdXX
2.a.5.Threshold lights and touchdown zone lights from 2 sm (3 km)XXX
2.a.6.Markings within range of landing lights for night/twilight (dusk) scenes and as required by the surface resolution test on daylight scenesXXX
2.a.7.For circling approaches, the runway of intended landing and associated lighting must fade into view in a non-distracting mannerXXX
2.b.For Helicopter landing areas:
2.b.1.Landing direction lights and raised FATO lights from 1 sm (1.5 km)XXX
2.b.2.Flush mounted FATO lights, TOFL lights, and the lighted windsock from 0.5 sm (750 m)XX
2.b.3.Hover taxiway lighting (yellow/blue/yellow cylinders) from TOFL areaXX
2.b.4.Markings within range of landing lights for night/twilight (dusk) scenes and as required by the surface resolution test on daylight scenesXXX
3.Airport or Helicopter landing area model content
   The following prescribes the minimum requirements for what must be provided in an airport visual model and identifies other aspects of the airport environment that must correspond with that model for simulators at Level B, C, and D. The detail must be developed using airport pictures, construction drawings and maps, or other similar data, or developed in accordance with published regulatory material; however, this does not require that airport or helicopter landing area models contain details that are beyond the designed capability of the currently qualified visual system. For circling approaches, all requirements of this section apply to the runway used for the initial approach and to the runway of intended landing. Only one “primary” taxi route from parking to the runway end or helicopter takeoff/landing area will be required for each “in-use” runway or helicopter takeoff/landing area.
3.a.The surface and markings for each “in-use” runway or helicopter landing area must include the following:
3.a.1.For airports: Runway threshold markings, runway numbers, touchdown zone markings, fixed distance markings, runway edge markings, and runway centerline stripesXXX
3.a.2.For helicopter landing areas: Standard heliport marking (“H”), TOFL, FATO, and safety areasXXX
3.b.The lighting for each “in-use” runway or helicopter landing area must include the following:
3.b.1.For airports: Runway approach, threshold, edge, end, centerline (if applicable), touchdown zone (if applicable), leadoff, and visual landing aid lights or light systems for that runwayXXX
3.b.2.For helicopter landing areas: Landing direction, raised and flush FATO, TOFL, windsock lightingXXX
3.c.The taxiway surface and markings associated with each “in-use” runway or helicopter landing area must include the following:
3.c.1.For airports: Taxiway edge, centerline (if appropriate), runway hold lines, and ILS critical area(s)XXX
3.c.2.For helicopter landing areas: Taxiways, taxi routes, and apronsXXX
3.d.The taxiway lighting associated with each “in-use” runway or helicopter landing area must include the following:
3.d.1.For airports: Runway edge, centerline (if appropriate), runway hold lines, ILS critical areasXXX
3.d.2.For helicopter landing areas: Taxiways, taxi routes, and apronsXXX
3.d.3.For airports: Taxiway lighting of correct colorX
4.Required visual model correlation with other aspects of the airport environment simulation
   The following are the minimum visual model correlation tests that must be conducted for Level B, Level C, and Level D simulators, as indicated.
4.a.The airport model must be properly aligned with the navigational aids that are associated with operations at the “in-use” runwayXXX
4.b.Slopes in runways, taxiways, and ramp areas, if depicted in the visual scene, must not cause distracting or unrealistic effectsXXX
5.Correlation with helicopter and associated equipment
   The following are the minimum correlation comparisons that must be made for simulators at Level B, C, and D.
5.a.Visual system compatibility with aerodynamic programmingXXX
5.b.Accurate portrayal of environment relating to flight simulator attitudesXXX
5.c.Visual cues to assess sink rate and depth perception during landingsXXX
6.Scene quality
   The following are the minimum scene quality tests that must be conducted for simulators at Level B, C, and D.
6.a.Light points free from distracting jitter, smearing or streakingXXX
6.b.Surfaces and textural cues free from apparent and distracting quantization (aliasing)XX
6.c.Correct color and realistic textural cuesX
7.Instructor controls of the following:
   The following are the minimum instructor controls that must be available in Level B, Level C, and Level D simulators, as indicated.
7.a.Environmental effects, e.g., cloud base (if used), cloud effects, cloud density, visibility in statute miles/kilometers and RVR in feet/metersXXX
7.b.Airport/Heliport selectionXXX
7.c.Airport lighting including variable intensityXXX
7.d.Dynamic effects including ground and flight trafficXX
End QPS Requirements
Begin Information
8.Sponsors are not required to provide every detail of a runway or helicopter landing area, but the detail that is provided must be correct within the capabilities of the systemXXX
End Information

Table C3D—Functions and Subjective Tests

QPS requirementsInformation
Entry No.Motion system (and special
aerodynamic model) effects
Simulator levelNotes
BCD
This table specifies motion effects that are required to indicate the threshold at which a flight crewmember must be able to recognize an event or situation. Where applicable, flight simulator pitch, side loading and directional control characteristics must be representative of the helicopter.
1Runway rumble, oleo deflection, ground speed, uneven runway, runway and taxiway centerline light characteristics:
Procedure: After the helicopter has been pre-set to the takeoff position and then released, taxi at various speeds with a smooth runway and note the general characteristics of the simulated runway rumble effects of oleo deflections. Repeat the maneuver with a runway roughness of 50%, then with maximum roughness. Note the associated motion vibrations affected by ground speed and runway roughness
XXXIf time permits, different gross weights can also be selected as this may also affect the associated vibrations depending on helicopter type. The associated motion effects for the above tests should also include an assessment of the effects of rolling over centerline lights, surface discontinuities of uneven runways, and various taxiway characteristics.
2Friction Drag from Skid-type Landing Gear:
Procedure: Perform a running takeoff or a running landing and note an increase in a fuselage vibration (as opposed to rotor vibration) due to the friction of dragging the skid along the surface. This vibration will lessen as the ground speed decreases
XX
3.Rotor Out-of-Track and/or Out-of-Balance condition:
Procedure: Select the malfunction or condition from the IOS. Start the engine(s) normally and check for an abnormal vibration for an Out-of-Track condition and check for an abnormal vibration for an Out-of-Balance condition
XXXDoes not require becoming airborne. The abnormal vibration for Out-of-Track and Out-of-Balance conditions should be recognized in the frequency range of the inverse of the period for each; i.e., 1/P for vertical vibration, and 1/P for lateral vibration.
4.Bumps associated with the landing gear:
Procedure: Perform a normal take-off paying special attention to the bumps that could be perceptible due to maximum oleo extension after lift-off
XXXWhen the landing gear is extended or retracted, motion bumps can be felt when the gear locks into position.
5.Buffet during extension and retraction of landing gear:
Procedure: Operate the landing gear. Check that the motion cues of the buffet experienced represent the actual helicopter
XXX
6.Failure of Dynamic Vibration Absorber or similar system as appropriate for the helicopter (e.g., droop stop or static stop):
Procedure: May be accomplished any time the rotor is engaged. Select the appropriate failure at the IOS, note an appropriate increase in vibration and check that the vibration intensity and frequency increases with an increase in RPM and an increase in collective application
XXX
7.Tail Rotor Drive Failure:
Procedure: With the engine(s) running and the rotor engaged—select the malfunction and note the immediate increase of medium frequency vibration
XXXThe tail rotor operates in the medium frequency range, normally estimated by multiplying the tail rotor gear box ratio by the main rotor RPM. The failure can be recognized by an increase in the vibrations in this frequency range.
8.Touchdown cues for main and nose gear:
Procedure: Conduct several normal approaches with various rates of descent. Check that the motion cues for the touchdown bumps for each descent rate are representative of the actual helicopter
XXX
9.Tire failure dynamics:
Procedure: Simulate a single tire failure and a multiple tire failure
XXThe pilot may notice some yawing with a multiple tire failure selected on the same side. This should require the use of the pedal to maintain control of the helicopter. Dependent on helicopter type, a single tire failure may not be noticed by the pilot and may not cause any special motion effect. Sound or vibration may be associated with the actual tire losing pressure.
10.Engine malfunction and engine damage:
Procedure: The characteristics of an engine malfunction as prescribed in the malfunction definition document for the particular flight simulator must describe the special motion effects felt by the pilot. Note the associated engine instruments varying according to the nature of the malfunction and note the replication of the effects of the airframe vibration
XXX
11.Tail boom strikes:
Procedure: Tail-strikes can be checked by over-rotation of the helicopter at a quick stop or autorotation to the ground
XXXThe motion effect should be felt as a noticeable nose down pitching moment.
12.Vortex Ring State (Settling with Power):
Procedure: Specific procedures may differ between helicopters and may be prescribed by the Helicopter Manufacturer or other subject matter expert. However, the following information is provided for illustrative purposes *  *  * To enter the maneuver, reduce power below hover power. Hold altitude with aft cyclic until the airspeed approaches 20 knots. Then allow the sink rate to increase to 300 feet per minute or more as the attitude is adjusted to obtain an airspeed of less than 10 knots
XXWhen the aircraft begins to shudder, the application of additional up collective increases the vibration and sink rate. One recovery method is to decrease collective to enter vertical autorotation and/or use cyclic inputs to gain horizontal airspeed and exit from vortex ring state.
13.Retreating Blade Stall:
Procedure: Specific procedures may differ between helicopters and may be prescribed by the Helicopter Manufacturer or other subject matter expert. However, the following information is provided for illustrative purposes: To enter the maneuver, increase forward airspeed; the effect will be recognized through the development of a low frequency vibration, pitching up of the nose, and a roll in the direction of the retreating blade. High weight, low rotor RPM, high density altitude, turbulence or steep, abrupt turns are all conducive to retreating blade stall at high forward airspeeds
XXCorrect recovery from retreating blade stall requires the collective to be lowered first, which reduces blade angles and the angle of attack. Aft cyclic can then be used to slow the helicopter.
14.Translational Lift Effects:
Procedure: From a stabilized in-ground-effect (IGE) Hover begin a forward acceleration. When passing through the effective translational lift range, the noticeable effect will be a possible nose pitch-up in some helicopters, an increase in the rate of climb, and a temporary increase in vibration level (in some cases this vibration may be pronounced). This effect is experienced again upon deceleration through the appropriate speed range. During deceleration, the pitch and rate of climb will have the reverse effect, but there will be a similar, temporary increase in vibration level
XXX

Table C3E—Functions and Subjective Tests

QPS Requirements
Entry numberSound systemSimulator level
BCD
The following checks are performed during a normal flight profile, motion system ON.
1.Precipitation.XX
2.Rain removal equipment.XX
3.Helicopter noises used by the pilot for normal helicopter operation.XX
4.Abnormal operations for which there are associated sound cues, including engine malfunctions, landing gear or tire malfunctions, tail boomXX
5.Sound of a crash when the flight simulator is landed in excess of limitationsXX

Table C3F—Functions and Subjective Tests

QPS Requirements
Entry numberSpecial effectsSimulator level
BCD
This table specifies the minimum special effects necessary for the specified simulator level.
1.Braking Dynamics:
Representations of the dynamics of brake failure (flight simulator pitch, side-loading, and directional control characteristics representative of the helicopter), including antiskid and decreased brake efficiency due to high brake temperatures (based on helicopter related data), sufficient to enable pilot identification of the problem and implementation of appropriate procedures
XX
2.Effects of Airframe and Engine Icing: Required only for those helicopters authorized for operations in known icing conditions
Procedure: With the simulator airborne, in a clean configuration, nominal altitude and cruise airspeed, autopilot on and auto-throttles off, engine and airfoil anti-ice/de-ice systems deactivated; activate icing conditions at a rate that allows monitoring of simulator and systems response
Icing recognition will include an increase in gross weight, airspeed decay, change in simulator pitch attitude, change in engine performance indications (other than due to airspeed changes), and change in data from pitot/static system, or rotor out-of-track/balance. Activate heating, anti-ice, or de-ice systems independently. Recognition will include proper effects of these systems, eventually returning the simulated helicopter to normal flight
XX

Table C3G—Functions and Subjective Tests

QPS Requirements
Entry numberInstructor Operating Station (IOS)Simulator level
BCD
Functions in this table are subject to evaluation only if appropriate for the helicopter or the system is installed on the specific simulator.
1.Simulator Power Switch(es)XXX
2.Helicopter conditions.
2.a.Gross weight, center of gravity, fuel loading and allocationXXX
2.b.Helicopter systems statusXXX
2.c.Ground crew functionsXXX
3.Airports/Heliports.
3.a.Number and selectionXXX
3.b.Runway or landing area selectionXXX
3.c.Landing surface conditions (rough, smooth, icy, wet, dry, snow)XXX
3.d.Preset positionsXXX
3.e.Lighting controlsXXX
4.Environmental controls.
4.aVisibility (statute miles/kilometers)XXX
4.b.Runway visual range (in feet/meters)XXX
4.c.TemperatureXXX
4.d.Climate conditionsXXX
4.e.Wind speed and directionXXX
5.Helicopter system malfunctions (Insertion/deletion).XXX
6.Locks, Freezes, and Repositioning.
6.a.Problem (all) freeze/releaseXXX
6.b.Position (geographic) freeze/releaseXXX
6.c.Repositioning (locations, freezes, and releases)XXX
6.d.Ground speed controlXXX
7.Remote IOS.XXX
8.Sound Controls. On/off/adjustmentXXX
9.Motion/Control Loading System.
9.a.On/off/emergency stopXXX
10.Observer Seats/Stations. Position/Adjustment/Positive restraint systemXXX

Attachment 4 to Appendix C to Part 60—SAMPLE DOCUMENTS

Table of Contents

Title of Sample

Figure C4A   Sample Letter, Request for Initial, Upgrade, or Reinstatement Evaluation.

Figure C4B   Attachment: FFS Information Form

Figure A4C   Sample Letter of Compliance

Figure C4D   Sample Qualification Test Guide Cover Page

Figure C4E   Sample Statement of Qualification—Certificate

Figure C4F   Sample Statement of Qualification—Configuration List

Figure C4G   Sample Statement of Qualification—List of Qualified Tasks

Figure C4H   Sample Continuing Qualification Evaluation Requirements Page

Figure C4I   Sample MQTG Index of Effective FFS Directives

eCFR graphic er09my08.040.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.041.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.042.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.043.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.044.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.045.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.046.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.047.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.048.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.049.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.050.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.051.gif

View or download PDF

eCFR graphic er09my08.052.gif

View or download PDF

Attachment 5 to Appendix C to Part 60—FSTD DIRECTIVES APPLICABLE TO HELICOPTER FFSs

Flight Simulation Training Device (FSTD) Directive

FSTD Directive 1. Applicable to all FFSs, regardless of the original qualification basis and qualification date (original or upgrade), having Class II or Class III airport models available.

Agency: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT

Action: This is a retroactive requirement to have all Class II or Class III airport models meet current requirements.

 

Summary: Notwithstanding the authorization listed in paragraph 13b in Appendices A and C of this part, this FSTD Directive requires each certificate holder to ensure that by May 30, 2009, except for the airport model(s) used to qualify the simulator at the designated level, each airport model used by the certificate holder's instructors or evaluators for training, checking, or testing under this chapter in an FFS, meets the definition of a Class II or Class III airport model as defined in 14CFR part 60. The completion of this requirement will not require a report, and the method used for keeping instructors and evaluators apprised of the airport models that meet Class II or Class III requirements on any given simulator is at the option of the certificate holder whose employees are using the FFS, but the method used must be available for review by the TPAA for that certificate holder.

Dates: FSTD Directive 1 becomes effective on May 30, 2008.

Specific Requirements:

1. Part 60 requires that each FSTD be:

a. Sponsored by a person holding or applying for an FAA operating certificate under Part 119, Part 141, or Part 142, or holding or applying for an FAA-approved training program under Part 63, Appendix C, for flight engineers, and

b. Evaluated and issued an SOQ for a specific FSTD level.

2. FFSs also require the installation of a visual system that is capable of providing an out-of-the-flight-deck view of airport models. However, historically these airport models were not routinely evaluated or required to meet any standardized criteria. This has led to qualified simulators containing airport models being used to meet FAA-approved training, testing, or checking requirements with potentially incorrect or inappropriate visual references.

3. To prevent this from occurring in the future, by May 30, 2009, except for the airport model(s) used to qualify the simulator at the designated level, each certificate holder must assure that each airport model used for training, testing, or checking under this chapter in a qualified FFS meets the definition of a Class II or Class III airport model as defined in Appendix F of this part.

4. These references describe the requirements for visual scene management and the minimum distances from which runway or landing area features must be visible for all levels of simulator. The visual scene or airport model must provide, for each “in-use runway” or “in-use landing area,” runway or landing area surface and markings, runway or landing area lighting, taxiway surface and markings, and taxiway lighting. Additional requirements include correlation of the visual scenes or airport models with other aspects of the airport environment, correlation of the aircraft and associated equipment, scene quality assessment features, and the extent to which the instructor is able to exercise control of these scenes or models.

5. For circling approaches, all requirements of this section apply to the runway used for the initial approach and to the runway of intended landing.

6. The details in these scenes or models must be developed using airport pictures, construction drawings and maps, or other similar data, or be developed in accordance with published regulatory material. However, FSTD Directive 1 does not require that airport models contain details that are beyond the initially designed capability of the visual system, as currently qualified. The recognized limitations to visual systems are as follows:

a. Visual systems not required to have runway numbers as a part of the specific runway marking requirements are:

(1) Link NVS and DNVS.

(2) Novoview 2500 and 6000.

(3) FlightSafety VITAL series up to, and including, VITAL III, but not beyond.

(4) Redifusion SP1, SP1T, and SP2.

b. Visual systems required to display runway numbers only for LOFT scenes are:

(1) FlightSafety VITAL IV.

(2) Redifusion SP3 and SP3T.

(3) Link-Miles Image II.

c. Visual systems not required to have accurate taxiway edge lighting are:

(1) Redifusion SP1.

(2) FlightSafety Vital IV.

(3) Link-Miles Image II and Image IIT

(4) XKD displays (even though the XKD image generator is capable of generating blue colored lights, the display cannot accommodate that color).

7. A copy of this Directive must be filed in the MQTG in the designated FSTD Directive Section, and its inclusion must be annotated on the Index of Effective FSTD Directives chart. See Attachment 4, Appendices A through D of this part for a sample MQTG Index of Effective FSTD Directives chart.

[Doc. No. FAA-2002-12461, 73 FR 26490, May 9, 2008, as amended by Docket FAA-2018-0119, Amdt. 60-5, 83 FR 9170, Mar. 5, 2018; Amdt. 60-6, 83 FR 30275, June 27, 2018]

Appendix D to Part 60—Qualification Performance Standards for Helicopter Flight Training Devices

 

Begin Information

This appendix establishes the standards for Helicopter Flight Training Device (FTD) evaluation and qualification at Level 4, Level 5, Level 6, or Level 7. The NSPM is responsible for the development, application, and implementation of the standards contained within this appendix. The procedures and criteria specified in this appendix will be used by the NSPM, or a person or persons assigned by the NSPM when conducting helicopter FTD evaluations.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction.

2. Applicability (§§60.1, 60.2).

3. Definitions (§60.3).

4. Qualification Performance Standards (§60.4).

5. Quality Management System (§60.5).

6. Sponsor Qualification Requirements (§60.7).

7. Additional Responsibilities of the Sponsor (§60.9).

8. FTD Use (§60.11).

9. FTD Objective Data Requirements (§60.13).

10. Special Equipment and Personnel Requirements for Qualification of the FTD (§60.14).

11. Initial (and Upgrade) Qualification Requirements (§60.15).

12. Additional Qualifications for Currently Qualified FTDs (§60.16).

13. Previously Qualified FTDs (§60.17).

14. Inspection, Continuing Qualification Evaluation, and Maintenance Requirements (§60.19).

15. Logging FTD Discrepancies (§60.20).

16. Interim Qualification of FTDs for New Helicopter Types or Models (§60.21).

17. Modifications to FTDs (§60.23).

18. Operations with Missing, Malfunctioning, or Inoperative Components (§60.25).

19. Automatic Loss of Qualification and Procedures for Restoration of Qualification (§60.27).

20. Other Losses of Qualification and Procedures for Restoration of Qualification (§60.29).

21. Recordkeeping and Reporting (§60.31).

22. Applications, Logbooks, Reports, and Records: Fraud, Falsification, or Incorrect Statements (§60.33).

23. [Reserved]

24. Levels of FTD.

25. FTD Qualification on the Basis of a Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement (BASA) (§60.37).

Attachment 1 to Appendix D to Part 60—General FTD Requirements.

Attachment 2 to Appendix D to Part 60—Flight Training Device (FTD) Objective Tests.

Attachment 3 to Appendix D to Part 60—Flight Training Device (FTD) Subjective Evaluation.

Attachment 4 to Appendix D to Part 60—Sample Documents.

End Information

 

1. Introduction