183 

Federal Aviation Administration, DOT 

Pt. 60, App. A 

B. Upset Prevention and Recovery Training 

(UPRT) Maneuver Evaluation (Table A1A, 
Section 2.n.) 

1. Applicability: This attachment applies 

to all simulators that are used to satisfy 
training requirements for upset prevention 
and recovery training (UPRT) maneuvers. 
For the purposes of this attachment (as de-
fined in the Airplane Upset Recovery Train-
ing Aid), an aircraft upset is generally de-
fined as an airplane unintentionally exceed-
ing the following parameters normally expe-
rienced in line operations or training: 

a. Pitch attitude greater than 25 degrees 

nose up; 

b. Pitch attitude greater than 10 degrees 

nose down; 

c. Bank angles greater than 45 degrees; and 
d. Within the above parameters, but flying at 

airspeeds inappropriate for the conditions. 

FSTDs that will be used to conduct training 
maneuvers where the FSTD is either reposi-
tioned into an aircraft upset condition or an 
artificial stimulus (such as weather phe-
nomena or system failures) is applied that is 
intended to result in a flightcrew entering an 
aircraft upset condition must be evaluated 
and qualified in accordance with this sec-
tion. 

2. General Requirements: The general re-

quirement for UPRT qualification in Table 
A1A defines three basic elements required 
for qualifying an FSTD for UPRT maneu-
vers: 

a. FSTD Training Envelope: Valid UPRT 

should be conducted within the high and 
moderate confidence regions of the FSTD 
validation envelope as defined in para-
graph 3 below. 

b. Instructor Feedback: Provides the instruc-

tor/evaluator with a minimum set of feed-
back tools to properly evaluate the train-
ee’s performance in accomplishing an 
upset recovery training task. 

c. Upset Scenarios: Where dynamic upset 

scenarios or aircraft system malfunctions 
are used to stimulate the FSTD into an 
aircraft upset condition, specific guidance 
must be available to the instructor on the 
IOS that describes how the upset scenario 
is driven along with any malfunction or 
degradation in FSTD functionality that is 
required to stimulate the upset. 

3. FSTD Validation Envelope: For the pur-

poses of this attachment, the term ‘‘flight 
envelope’’ refers to the entire domain in 
which the FSTD is capable of being flown 
with a degree of confidence that the FSTD 
responds similarly to the airplane. This en-
velope can be further divided into three sub-
divisions (see Appendix 3–D of the 

Airplane 

Upset Recovery Training Aid

): 

a. Flight test validated region: This is the 

region of the flight envelope which has 
been validated with flight test data, typi-

cally by comparing the performance of the 
FSTD against the flight test data through 
tests incorporated in the QTG and other 
flight test data utilized to further extend 
the model beyond the minimum require-
ments. Within this region, there is high 
confidence that the simulator responds 
similarly to the aircraft. Note that this re-
gion is not strictly limited to what has 
been tested in the QTG; as long as the 
aerodynamics mathematical model has 
been conformed to the flight test results, 
that portion of the mathematical model 
can be considered to be within the flight 
test validated region. 

b. Wind tunnel and/or analytical region: This 

is the region of the flight envelope for 
which the FSTD has not been compared to 
flight test data, but for which there has 
been wind tunnel testing or the use of 
other reliable predictive methods (typi-
cally by the aircraft manufacturer) to de-
fine the aerodynamic model. Any exten-
sions to the aerodynamic model that have 
been evaluated in accordance with the defi-
nition of an exemplar stall model (as de-
scribed in the stall maneuver evaluation 
section) must be clearly indicated. Within 
this region, there is moderate confidence 
that the simulator will respond similarly 
to the aircraft. 

c. Extrapolated: This is the region extrapo-

lated beyond the flight test validated and 
wind tunnel/analytical regions. The ex-
trapolation may be a linear extrapolation, 
a holding of the last value before the ex-
trapolation began, or some other set of val-
ues. Whether this extrapolated data is pro-
vided by the aircraft or simulator manu-
facturer, it is a ‘‘best guess’’ only. Within 
this region, there is low confidence that 
the simulator will respond similarly to the 
aircraft. Brief excursions into this region 
may still retain a moderate confidence 
level in FSTD fidelity; however, the in-
structor should be aware that the FSTD’s 
response may deviate from the actual air-
craft. 

4. Instructor Feedback Mechanism: For the 

instructor/evaluator to provide feedback to 
the student during UPRT maneuver training, 
additional information must be accessible 
that indicates the fidelity of the simulation, 
the magnitude of trainee’s flight control in-
puts, and aircraft operational limits that 
could potentially affect the successful com-
pletion of the maneuver(s). At a minimum, 
the following must be available to the in-
structor/evaluator: 
a. FSTD Validation Envelope: The FSTD 

must employ a method to display the 
FSTD’s expected fidelity with respect to 
the FSTD validation envelope. This may be 
displayed as an angle of attack vs sideslip 
(alpha/beta) envelope cross-plot on the In-
structor Operating System (IOS) or other 
alternate method to clearly convey the 

VerDate Sep<11>2014 

16:30 Jun 25, 2019

Jkt 247047

PO 00000

Frm 00193

Fmt 8010

Sfmt 8002

Q:\14\14V2.TXT

PC31

kpayne on VMOFRWIN702 with $$_JOB