Directive to support the Crewmember and Aircraft Dispatcher Training
Final Rule. The number of respondents would be limited to those
Sponsors that maintain FSTDs which may require additional qualification
in accordance with the FSTD Directive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\ The FAA estimated this from the number of previously
qualified FSTDs that simulate aircraft which are currently used in
U.S. part 121 air carrier operations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Frequency: This additional information collection would include
both a one-time event and an increase to the annual part 60 information
collection requirements.
    Annual Burden Estimate: The FAA estimates that for each additional
qualified task required in accordance with FSTD Directive 2, the one-
time information collection burden to each FSTD Sponsor would be
approximately 0.85 hours per FSTD for each additional qualified
task.\24\ Assuming all five of the additional qualified tasks would be
required for each of the estimated 322 FSTDs (including qualification
for full stall training, upset recovery training, airborne icing
training, takeoff and landing in gusting crosswinds, and bounced
landing training), the cumulative one-time information collection
burden would be approximately 1,369 hours. This collection burden would
be distributed over a time period of approximately 3

years. This 3 year time period represents the compliance period of the
proposed FSTD Directive.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \24\ The 0.85 hour burden is derived from the existing Part 60
Paperwork Reduction Act supporting statement (OMB-2120-0680), Table
5 (Sec.  60.16) and includes estimated time for the FSTD Sponsor's
staff to draft and send the letter as well as estimated time for
updating the approved MQTG with new test results.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The one-time information collection burden to the Federal
government is estimated at approximately 0.6 hours per FSTD for each
qualified task to include Aerospace Engineer review and preparation of
an FAA response.\25\ Assuming all five of the additional qualified
tasks would be required for each of the estimated 322 FSTDs, the
cumulative one-time information collection burden to the Federal
government would be approximately 966 hours. The modification of the
FSTD's Statement of Qualification would be incorporated with the FSTD's
next scheduled evaluation, so this would not impose additional burden.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \25\ The 0.6 hour burden on the Federal government is also
derived from the existing Part 60 Paperwork Reduction Act supporting
statement (OMB-2120-0680), Table 5 (Sec.  60.16).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because the number of objective tests required to maintain FSTD
qualification would increase slightly with this proposal, the annual
information collection burden would also increase under the FSTD
inspection and maintenance requirements of Sec.  60.19. This additional
information collection burden is estimated by increasing the average
number of required objective tests for Level C and Level D FSTDs by
four tests.\26\ For the estimated 322 FSTDs that may be affected by the
FSTD Directive, this will result in an additional 129 hours of annual
information collection burden to FSTD Sponsors. This additional
collection burden is based upon 0.1 hours \27\ per test for a simulator
technician to document as required by Sec.  60.19. The additional
information collection burden to the Federal government would also
increase by approximately 43 hours \28\ due to the additional tests
that may be sampled and reviewed by the FAA during continuing
qualification evaluations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \26\ For previously qualified FSTDs, the requirements of FSTD
Directive 2 will add a maximum of four additional objective
test cases to the existing requirements.
    \27\ The 0.1 hour burden is derived from the existing Part 60
Paperwork Reduction Act supporting statement (OMB-2120-0680), Table
6 (Sec.  60.19) and includes estimated time for the FSTD Sponsor's
staff to document the completion of required annual objective
testing.
    \28\ This information collection burden is based upon 0.1 hours
per test required for FAA personnel to review. These four additional
tests are subject to the approximately 33% of which may be spot
checked by FAA personnel on site during a continuing qualification
evaluation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    For new FSTDs qualified after the proposal becomes effective, the
changes to the QPS appendices proposed to align with ICAO 9625 as well
as the new requirements for the evaluation of stall and icing training
maneuvers would result in an estimated average increase of four
objective tests \29\ that would require annual documentation as
described in Sec.  60.19. For the estimated 22 new \30\ Level C and
Level D FSTDs that may be initially qualified annually by the FAA, this
will result in an additional 9 hours of annual information collection
burden to FSTD Sponsors and an additional 3 hours of annual information
collection burden to the Federal government. For newly qualified FSTDs,
this proposal does not increase the frequency of reporting for FSTD
sponsors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \29\ These four additional tests were estimated through
comparison between the current and proposed list of objective tests
required for qualification (Table A2A). Note that the total number
of tests can vary between FSTDs as a function of aircraft type, test
implementation, and the employment of certain technologies that
would require additional testing.
    \30\ Based upon internal records review, the FAA calculated the
number of newly qualified FSTDs at approximately 22 per year over a
ten year period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The agency is soliciting comments to--
    (1) Evaluate whether the proposed information requirement is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency,
including whether the information would have practical utility;
    (2) Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden;
    (3) Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
    (4) Minimize the burden of collecting information on those who are
to respond, including by using appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or other forms
of information technology.
    Individuals and organizations may send comments on the information
collection requirement to the address listed in the ADDRESSES section
at the beginning of this preamble by October 8, 2014. Comments also
should be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Desk Officer for FAA,
New Executive Building, Room 10202, 725 17th Street NW., Washington, DC
20053.

F. International Compatibility and Cooperation

    In keeping with U.S. obligations under the Convention on
International Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to conform to ICAO
Standards and Recommended Practices to the maximum extent practicable.
The FAA has determined that there are no ICAO Standards and Recommended
Practices that correspond to these proposed changes to the part 60
regulations. While the FAA has proposed to align the part 60
qualification standards for Level 7 FTDs and Level D fixed wing FFSs
with that of ICAO Document 9625, the FSTD qualification guidance
contained within ICAO 9625 are not defined in an ICAO Annex as a
Standard and Recommended Practice and are considered guidance material.
    Executive Order 13609, Promoting International Regulatory
Cooperation, (77 FR 26413, May 4, 2012) promotes international
regulatory cooperation to meet shared challenges involving health,
safety, labor, security, environmental, and other issues and reduce,
eliminate, or prevent unnecessary differences in regulatory
requirements. The FAA has analyzed this action under the policy and
agency responsibilities of Executive Order 13609, Promoting
International Regulatory Cooperation. The agency has determined that
this action would promote the elimination of differences between U.S.
aviation standards and those of other civil aviation authorities by
aligning evaluation standards for similar FSTD fidelity levels to the
latest internationally recognized FSTD evaluation guidance in the ICAO
9625 document.

G. Environmental Analysis

    FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA actions that are categorically
excluded from preparation of an environmental assessment or
environmental impact statement under the National Environmental Policy
Act in the absence of extraordinary circumstances. The FAA has
determined this rulemaking action qualifies for the categorical
exclusion identified in paragraph 312f and involves no extraordinary
circumstances.

V. Executive Order Determinations

A. Executive Order 13132, Federalism

    The FAA has analyzed this proposed rule under the principles and
criteria of Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The agency has
determined that this action would not have a substantial direct effect
on the States, or the relationship between the Federal Government and
the States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among
the various levels of government, and, therefore, would not have
Federalism implications.

B. Executive Order 13211, Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy
Supply, Distribution, or Use

    The FAA analyzed this proposed rule under Executive Order 13211,
Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The agency has determined that it
would not be a ``significant energy action'' under the executive order
and would not be likely to have a significant adverse effect on the
supply, distribution, or use of energy.

VI. Additional Information

A. Comments Invited

    The FAA invites interested persons to participate in this
rulemaking by submitting written comments, data, or views. The agency
also invites comments relating to the economic, environmental, energy,
or federalism impacts that might result from adopting the proposals in
this document. The most helpful comments reference a specific portion
of the proposal, explain the reason for any recommended change, and
include supporting data. To ensure the docket does not contain
duplicate comments, commenters should send only one copy of written
comments, or if comments are filed electronically, commenters should
submit only one time.
    The FAA will file in the docket all comments it receives, as well
as a report summarizing each substantive public contact with FAA
personnel concerning this proposed rulemaking. Before acting on this
proposal, the FAA will consider all comments it receives on or before
the closing date for comments. The FAA will consider comments filed
after the comment period has closed if it is possible to do so without
incurring expense or delay. The agency may change this proposal in
light of the comments it receives.
    Proprietary or Confidential Business Information: Commenters should
not file proprietary or confidential business information in the
docket. Such information must be sent or delivered directly to the
person identified in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section of
this document, and marked as proprietary or confidential. If submitting
information on a disk or CD ROM, mark the outside of the disk or CD
ROM, and identify electronically within the disk or CD ROM the specific
information that is proprietary or confidential.
    Under 14 CFR 11.35(b), if the FAA is aware of proprietary
information filed with a comment, the agency does not place it in the
docket. It is held in a separate file to which the public does not have
access, and the FAA places a note in the docket that it has received
it. If the FAA receives a request to examine or copy this information,
it treats it as any other request under the Freedom of Information Act
(5 U.S.C. 552). The FAA processes such a request under Department of
Transportation procedures found in 49 CFR part 7.

B. Availability of Rulemaking Documents

    An electronic copy of rulemaking documents may be obtained from the
Internet by--
    1. Searching the Federal eRulemaking Portal (http://www.regulations.gov);
    2. Visiting the FAA's Regulations and Policies Web page at http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies or
    3. Accessing the Government Printing Office's Web page at http://www.fdsys.gov.
    Copies may also be obtained by sending a request to the Federal
Aviation Administration, Office of Rulemaking, ARM-1, 800 Independence
Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>.
Commenters must identify the docket or notice number of this
rulemaking.
    All documents the FAA considered in developing this proposed rule,
including economic analyses and technical reports, may be accessed from
the Internet through the Federal eRulemaking Portal referenced in item
(1) above.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 60

    Airmen, Aviation safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

The Proposed Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration proposes to amend chapter I of title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations as follows:

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

0
1. The authority citation for part 60 is revised to read as follows:

    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).

0
2. Amend Sec.  60.15 by revising paragraph (e) to read as follows:

Sec.  60.15  Initial Qualification requirements.

* * * * *
    (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
FSTD's permanent location, except as provided for in the applicable
QPS.
* * * * *
0
3. Amend Sec.  60.17 by revising paragraph (a) to read as follows:

Sec.  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 [effective date of final rule]
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.
0
4. Amend Sec.  60.19 by revising paragraphs (b)(4) and (b)(5) to read
as follows:

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

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (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.
* * * * *
0
5. Amend Sec.  60.23 by adding new paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows:

Sec.  60.23  Modifications to FSTDs.

    (a) * * *
    (3) 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.
* * * * *
0
6. Part 60 is amended by revising Appendix A to read as follows:

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 (Sec. Sec.  60.1 and 60.2).
3. Definitions (Sec.  60.3).
4. Qualification Performance Standards (Sec.  60.4).
5. Quality Management System (Sec.  60.5).
6. Sponsor Qualification Requirements (Sec.  60.7).
7. Additional Responsibilities of the Sponsor (Sec.  60.9).
8. FFS Use (Sec.  60.11).
9. FFS Objective Data Requirements (Sec.  60.13).
10. Special Equipment and Personnel Requirements for Qualification
of the FFS (Sec.  60.14).
11. Initial (and Upgrade) Qualification Requirements (Sec.  60.15).
12. Additional Qualifications for a Currently Qualified FFS (Sec.
60.16).
13. Previously Qualified FFSs (Sec.  60.17).
14. Inspection, Continuing Qualification Evaluation, and Maintenance
Requirements (Sec.  60.19).
15. Logging FFS Discrepancies (Sec.  60.20).
16. Interim Qualification of FFSs for New Airplane Types or Models
(Sec.  60.21).
17. Modifications to FFSs (Sec.  60.23).
18. Operations With Missing, Malfunctioning, or Inoperative
Components (Sec.  60.25).
19. Automatic Loss of Qualification and Procedures for Restoration
of Qualification (Sec.  60.27).
20. Other Losses of Qualification and Procedures for Restoration of
Qualification (Sec.  60.29).
21. Record Keeping and Reporting (Sec.  60.31).
22. Applications, Logbooks, Reports, and Records: Fraud,
Falsification, or Incorrect Statements (Sec.  60.33).
23. Specific FFS Compliance Requirements (Sec.  60.35).
24. [Reserved]
25. FFS Qualification on the Basis of a Bilateral Aviation Safety
Agreement (BASA) (Sec.  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.
Attachment 7 to Appendix A to Part 60--Additional Simulator
Qualification Requirements for Stall, Upset Recognition and
Recovery, and Engine and Airframe Icing Training Tasks.

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,<PHONE_NUMBER>. The general email address for the
NSP office is<EMAIL_ADDRESS>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
Simulator 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 Simulators, as amended.
    (26) Airplane Flight Simulator Evaluation Handbook, Volume I, as
amended and Volume II, as amended, The Royal Aeronautical Society,
London, UK.
    (27) FAA Publication FAA-S-8081 series (Practical Test Standards
for Airline Transport Pilot Certificate, Type Ratings, Commercial
Pilot, 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 (Sec. Sec.  60.1 and 60.2)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Begin Information

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

End Information

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Definitions (Sec.  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 (Sec.  60.4)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Begin Information

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

End Information

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

5. Quality Management System (Sec.  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 (Sec.  60.7)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Begin Information

    a. The intent of the language in Sec.  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 Sec.  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 Sec.  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 Sec.
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 Sec.  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
FFSs performance and handling qualities represent the airplane (as
described in Sec.  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 Sec.
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 Sec.  60.7(d)(2)).

End Information

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Begin Information

    The phrase ``as soon as practicable'' in Sec.  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 (Sec.  60.11)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Begin Information

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

End Information

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

9. FFS Objective Data Requirements (Sec.  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 Sec.  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 Sec.
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 (Sec.  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 (Sec.  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 Sec.  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 Sec.  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) A continuing qualification evaluation 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 Sec.  60.19. See Attachment 4, Figure A4G,
of this appendix 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 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. 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 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 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 flightcrew member 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 Sec.  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 Sec.
60.15(g)(6), include windshear training and circling approaches.

End Information

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Begin Information

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

End Information

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

13. Previously Qualified FFSs (Sec.  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 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 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 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
Sec.  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 Sec.  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 (Sec.  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 Sec.  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 Sec.
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
airplane systems. This examination is normally accomplished
simultaneously with the subjective evaluation requirements.

End Information

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

15. Logging FFSs Discrepancies (Sec.  60.20)

Begin Information

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

End Information

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Begin Information

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

End Information

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

17. Modifications to FFSs (Sec.  60.23)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Begin QPS Requirements

    a. The notification described in Sec.  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 Sec.  60.15(b) are addressed by
the appropriate personnel as described in that section.

End QPS Requirements

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Begin Information

    c. 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.
    d. Examples of MQTG changes that do not require FAA notification
under Sec.  60.23(a) are limited to repagination, correction of
typographical or grammatical errors, typesetting, or presenting
additional parameters on existing test result formats. All changes
regardless of nature should be documented in the MQTG revision
history.

End Information

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

18. Operation With Missing, Malfunctioning, or Inoperative Components
(Sec.  60.25)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Begin Information

    a. The sponsor's responsibility with respect to Sec.  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
Sec.  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 Sec.
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 (Sec.  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 (Sec.  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 (Sec.  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 Sec.  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 (Sec.  60.33)

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Begin Information

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

23. Specific FFS Compliance Requirements (Sec.  60.35)

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

24. [Reserved]

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

    No additional regulatory or informational material applies to
Sec.  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

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.002

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.003

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.004

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.005

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.006

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.007

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.008

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.009

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.010

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.011

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.012

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.013

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.014

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.015

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.016

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.017

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.018

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.019

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.020

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.021

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.022

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.023

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.024

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.025

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.026

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.027

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.028

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.029

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.030

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.031

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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 of 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 Sec.  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. If a test is supported
by airplane data at one extreme weight or CG, another test supported
by airplane 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
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

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.033

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.034

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.035

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.036

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.037

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.038

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.039

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.040

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.041

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.042

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.043

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.044

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.045

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.046

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.047

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.048

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.049

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.050

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.051

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.052

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.053

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.054

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.055

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.056

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.057

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.058

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.059

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.060

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.061

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.062

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.063

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.064

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.065

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.066

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.067

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.068

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.069

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.070

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.071

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.072

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.073

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.074

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.075

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.076

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

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.
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.077

BILLING CODE 4910-13-C

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, 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 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. These tests can be run at any
time deemed acceptable to the NSPM prior to and/or during the
initial qualification.
    (3) Transfer Functions. The frequency responses describe the
relations between aircraft motions and simulator motions. The
relations are explained below per individual test. Tests 1, 3, 5, 6,
8 and 10 show the direct transfer relations, while tests 2, 4, 7 and
9 show the cross-coupling relations.

1. FSTD pitch response to aircraft pitch input
2. FSTD surge specific force response due to aircraft pitch input
3. FSTD roll response to aircraft roll input
4. FSTD sway specific force response due to aircraft roll input
5. FSTD yaw response to aircraft yaw input
6. FSTD surge specific force response to aircraft surge input
7. FSTD pitch rate and pitch acceleration response to aircraft surge
input
8. FSTD sway specific force response to aircraft sway input
9. FSTD roll rate and pitch acceleration response to aircraft sway
input
10. FSTD heave specific force response to aircraft heave input

    (4) Frequency Range. The tests should be conducted by
introducing sinusoidal inputs at discrete input frequencies entered
at the output of the flight model, transformed to the pilot
reference position just before the motion cueing computations, and
measured at the response of the FSTD platform. For each relation
defined in section (3), measurements must be taken in at least 12
discrete frequencies within a range of 0.0159 and 2.515 Hz.
    (5) Input Signal Amplitude. The tests applied here to the motion
cueing system are intended to qualify its response to normal control
inputs during maneuvering (i.e. not aggressive or excessively hard
control inputs). It is necessary to excite the system in such a
manner that the response is measured with a high signal-to-noise
ratio,

and that the possible non-linear elements in the motion cueing
system are not overly excited.
    (6) Presentation of Results. The measured modulus and phase
should be tabulated for the twelve frequencies and for each of the
transfer relations given section (3). The results should also be
plotted for each component in a modulus versus phase plot. The
modulus should range from 0.0 to 1.0 along the horizontal axis, and
the absolute value of the phase from 0 to 180 degrees along the
vertical axis. An example is shown in Figure A2C.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP10JY14.079

    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 x 10-3 g-rms\2\/Hz would describe a
heavy buffet and may be seen in the deep stall regime.
Alternatively, a 1 x 10-6 g-rms\2\/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-rms\2\ 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 1/3 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
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Continuing
                                                                      Initial      qualification     Absolute
                      Band center frequency                           results         results       difference
                                                                      (dBSPL)         (dBSPL)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
50..............................................................            75.0            73.8             1.2
63..............................................................            75.9            75.6             0.3
80..............................................................            77.1            76.5             0.6
100.............................................................            78.0            78.3             0.3
125.............................................................            81.9            81.3             0.6
160.............................................................            79.8            80.1             0.3
200.............................................................            83.1            84.9             1.8
250.............................................................            78.6            78.9             0.3
315.............................................................            79.5            78.3             1.2
400.............................................................            80.1            79.5             0.9
500.............................................................            80.7            79.8             0.9
630.............................................................            81.9            80.4             1.5
800.............................................................            73.2            74.1             0.9
1000............................................................            79.2            80.1             0.9
1250............................................................            80.7            82.8             2.1
1600............................................................            81.6            78.6             3.0
2000............................................................            76.2            74.4             1.8
2500............................................................            79.5            80.7             1.2
3150............................................................            80.1            77.1             3.0
4000............................................................            78.9            78.6             0.3
5000............................................................            80.1            77.1             3.0
6300............................................................            80.7            80.4             0.3
8000............................................................            84.3            85.5             1.2
10000...........................................................            81.3            79.8             1.5
12500...........................................................            80.7            80.1             0.6
16000...........................................................            71.1            71.1             0.0
                                                                 --------------------------------
                                                                              Average                        1.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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