Lower-Level Devices The Data-Driven Dilemma World Aviation Training Symposium (WATS) 21-23 April 2015 Dr. Nidal Sammur, Director of Engineering Steven Smith, Staff Scientist This presentation consists of FlightSafety International general capabilities information that does not contain controlled technical data as defined within the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) Part 120.10 or Export Administration Regulations (EAR) Part 734.7-11
Examples of Lower Level Devices FAA Level 6 FTD EASA FNPT Mobile Apps Level D FFS Level 5 FTD Desktop Training Level 4 FTD
What does Lower Level mean? Typically, Lower fidelity Fewer capabilities Less cueing Fewer objective testing requirements Partial functionality Fewer facility requirements Lower cost!
As an Operator, why consider using Lower Level Devices? Lower acquisition, maintenance and operating costs Increase FFS capacity by offloading training tasks to FTD More efficient for smaller, less-capable aircraft types More accessible and distributable Pilots may still receive training credits
As an Owner/Operator, you must balance Device Capabilities Customers Facility Training Req. Regulatory Req. Competition
As an Owner/Operator, you must balance Device Capabilities Customers Facility Training Req. Regulatory Req. Competition
From the perspective of your customers If they are accustom to will they accept? Level D FFS Total Immersive Environment Full Functionality Highest Level of Fidelity Type Rating Lower Level FTD No Environment Partial Functionality Low Level of Fidelity Partial Credit
Your Customers must balance Device Capabilities Training Value
Your Customers must balance Device Capabilities Training Value
Training on FFS vs. Lower Level Devices Level D FFS: Full Type Rating. Credit for Preflight, all Takeoffs & Departures, all Inflight Maneuvers, all Instrument Procedures, Landings & Approaches, Normal & Abnormal Systems Procedures, Emergencies, Postflight Level 6 FTD: Credit for Preflight (no Taxi), Instrument & Rejected Takeoff (w/ Visual), Departures, some Inflight Maneuvers, some Instrument Procedures, Normal & Abnormal Systems Procedures, Emergencies, Postflight Level 5 FTD: If appropriate systems installed, credit for Preflight (no Taxi), Precision & Non-precision Approach (AEO), Normal & Abnormal Systems Procedures, Inflight Fire & Rapid Decompression Emergencies, Postflight Level 4 FTD: If appropriate systems installed, credit for Preflight (no Taxi), Normal & Abnormal Systems Procedures, Postflight Desktop/Mobile: Cockpit/systems familiarization
Requirements drive the device capabilities Operator Sim Manufacturer Define Requirements Training Regulatory Facility End User Build to Requirements Train to Device Capabilities
Approach to building Lower Level Devices Top down OR bottom up?
Building Lower Level Devices Limit the hardware Cockpit Level 6 FTD: enclosed cockpit Levels 4 & 5 FTD: open flight deck Graphical instruments Do not require spare parts Level 6 FTD: Tactile overlay switches Levels 4 & 5 FTD: touch sensitive graphical switches Flight controls Only required for Levels 5 & 6 Force vs. displacement only, no dynamics Visual & Motion systems not required
Building Lower Level Devices Software driven Not all aircraft systems must be simulated Generic aerodynamic model may apply Limited manual and automatic testing (QTG) Complicated systems, such as FMS, can be partially implemented Likely largest percentage of Nonrecurring Engineering (NRE) Dependent on OEM data and/or Licenses
Examples of Data & Licenses Flight Test Data Avionics Engine/FADEC OEM ICD s Cockpit Drawings Flight Controls AFCS
In the past 15 years, simulator Regulatory Requirements FAA AC120-40B/63 EASA JAR FSTD A/H FAA 14 CFR Part 60 EASA CS-FSTD (A/H) ICAO 9625 Vol. I/II Fidelity Faster Computing Higher Definition Visuals Electric Controls & Motion Sophisticated Models Capabilities Post Flight Review Air/Ground Traffic Interoperability UPRT 16
In the past 15 years, we have improved CAD Computers 3D Printing Models Manufacturing Processes
Conclusions Lower Level devices are a great, cost effective tool for augmenting FFS to enhance overall training footprint. Operators, simulator manufactures and end-users must balance device capabilities with requirements. Simulator manufactures should consider a bottom-up approach.