367 

Federal Aviation Administration, DOT 

Pt. 60, App. C 

control the helicopter dynamics, particu-
larly in the presence of external disturb-
ances. The motion system should meet basic 
objective performance criteria, and be sub-
jectively tuned at the pilot’s seat position to 
represent the linear and angular accelera-
tions of the helicopter during a prescribed 
minimum set of maneuvers and conditions. 
The response of the motion cueing system 
should be repeatable. 

(2) The Motion System tests in Section 3 of 

Table C2A are intended to qualify the FFS 
motion cueing system from a mechanical 
performance standpoint. Additionally, the 
list of motion effects provides a representa-
tive sample of dynamic conditions that 
should be present in the flight simulator. An 
additional list of representative, training- 
critical maneuvers, selected from Section 1, 
(Performance tests) and Section 2, (Handling 
Qualities tests) in Table C2A, that should be 
recorded during initial qualification (but 
without tolerance) to indicate the flight sim-
ulator 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 mo-
tion system hardware, and to check the in-
tegrity of the motion set-up with regard to 
calibration and wear. These tests are inde-
pendent of the motion cueing software and 
should be considered robotic tests. 

c. Motion System Repeatability. The in-

tent of this test is to ensure that the motion 
system software and motion system hard-
ware have not degraded or changed over 
time. This diagnostic test should be com-
pleted during continuing qualification 
checks in lieu of the robotic tests. This will 
allow an improved ability to determine 
changes in the software or determine deg-
radation in the hardware. The following in-
formation delineates the methodology that 
should be used for this test. 

(1) Input: The inputs should be such that 

rotational accelerations, rotational rates, 
and linear accelerations are inserted before 
the transfer from helicopter center of grav-
ity 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 ac-
celeration; 

(b) Motion actuators position. 
d. Motion Cueing Performance Signature. 
(1) Background. The intent of this test is 

to provide quantitative time history records 
of motion system response to a selected set 

of automated QTG maneuvers during initial 
qualification. It is not intended to be a com-
parison of the motion platform accelerations 
against the flight test recorded accelerations 
(i.e., not to be compared against helicopter 
cueing). If there is a modification to the ini-
tially qualified motion software or motion 
hardware (e.g., motion washout filter, simu-
lator payload change greater than 10%) then 
a new baseline may need to be established. 

(2) Test Selection. The conditions identi-

fied in Section 3.e. in Table C2A are those 
maneuvers where motion cueing is the most 
discernible. They are general tests applicable 
to all types of helicopters and should be com-
pleted for motion cueing performance signa-
ture at any time acceptable to the NSPM 
prior to or during the initial qualification 
evaluation, and the results included in the 
MQTG. 

(3) Priority. Motion system should be de-

signed with the intent of placing greater im-
portance on those maneuvers that directly 
influence pilot perception and control of the 
helicopter motions. For the maneuvers iden-
tified in section 3.e. in Table C2A, the flight 
simulator motion cueing system should have 
a high tilt co-ordination gain, high rota-
tional gain, and high correlation with re-
spect to the helicopter simulation model. 

(4) Data Recording. The minimum list of 

parameters provided should allow for the de-
termination of the flight simulator’s motion 
cueing performance signature for the initial 
qualification evaluation. The following pa-
rameters are recommended as being accept-
able to perform such a function: 

(a) Flight model acceleration and rota-

tional rate commands at the pilot reference 
point; 

(b) Motion actuators position; 
(c) Actual platform position; 
(d) Actual platform acceleration at pilot 

reference point. 

e. Motion Vibrations. 
(1) Presentation of results. The char-

acteristic motion vibrations may be used to 
verify that the flight simulator can repro-
duce the frequency content of the helicopter 
when flown in specific conditions. The test 
results should be presented as a Power Spec-
tral Density (PSD) plot with frequencies on 
the horizontal axis and amplitude on the 
vertical axis. The helicopter data and flight 
simulator data should be presented in the 
same format with the same scaling. The al-
gorithms used for generating the flight simu-
lator data should be the same as those used 
for the helicopter data. If they are not the 
same then the algorithms used for the flight 
simulator data should be proven to be suffi-
ciently comparable. As a minimum the re-
sults along the dominant axes should be pre-
sented 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 

VerDate Sep<11>2014 

16:30 Jun 25, 2019

Jkt 247047

PO 00000

Frm 00377

Fmt 8010

Sfmt 8002

Q:\14\14V2.TXT

PC31

kpayne on VMOFRWIN702 with $$_JOB