Pt. 60, App. C

14 CFR Ch. I (1-1-19 Edition)

the tolerances. In these cases, the solution is
to compare the results to the MQTG. The
continuing qualification results are compared to the results in the MQTG for acceptance. The flight simulator operator and the
NSPM should look for any change in the
flight simulator performance since initial
qualification.
b. Continuing Qualification Evaluation Test
Results Presentation
(1) Flight simulator operators are encouraged to over-plot continuing qualification
validation test results with MQTG flight
simulator results recorded during the initial
evaluation and as amended. Any change in a
validation test will be readily apparent. In
addition to plotting continuing qualification
validation test and MQTG results, operators
may elect to plot reference data.
(2) There are no suggested tolerances between flight simulator continuing qualification and MQTG validation test results. Investigation of any discrepancy between the
MQTG and continuing qualification flight
simulator performance is left to the discretion of the flight simulator operator and the
NSPM.
(3) Differences between the two sets of results, other than variations attributable to
repeatability issues that cannot be explained
should be investigated.
(4) The flight simulator should retain the
ability to over-plot both automatic and manual validation test results with reference
data.
END INFORMATION
lllllllllllllllllllllll
BEGIN QPS REQUIREMENTS
17.

ALTERNATIVE DATA SOURCES, PROCEDURES, AND INSTRUMENTATION: LEVEL B
SIMULATORS ONLY

a. Sponsors are not required to use the alternative data sources, procedures, and instrumentation. However, any sponsor choosing to use alternative sources must comply
with the requirements in Table C2E.
END QPS REQUIREMENTS
lllllllllllllllllllllll

kpayne on VMOFRWIN702 with $$_JOB

BEGIN INFORMATION
b. It has become standard practice for experienced simulator manufacturers to use
such techniques as a means of establishing
data bases for new simulator configurations
while awaiting the availability of actual
flight test data. The data generated from the
aerodynamic modeling techniques is then
compared to the flight test data when it becomes available. The results of such comparisons have become increasingly consistent, indicating that these techniques, ap-

plied with appropriate experience, are dependable and accurate for the development
of aerodynamic models for use in Level B
simulators.
c. Based on this history of successful comparisons, the NSPM has concluded that those
who are experienced in the development of
aerodynamic models for simulator application can successfully use these modeling
techniques to alter the method for acquiring
flight test data for Level B simulators.
d. The information in Table C2E (Alternative Data Sources, Procedures, and Information) is presented to describe an acceptable alternative to data sources for simulator modeling and validation and an acceptable alternative to the procedures and instrumentation traditionally used to gather
such modeling and validation data.
(1) Alternative data sources that may be
used for part or all of a data requirement are
the Helicopter Maintenance Manual, the
Rotorcraft Flight Manual (RFM), Helicopter
Design Data, the Type Inspection Report
(TIR), Certification Data or acceptable supplemental flight test data.
(2) The sponsor should coordinate with the
NSPM prior to using alternative data
sources in a flight test or data gathering effort.
e. The NSPM position on the use of these
alternative data sources, procedures, and instrumentation is based on the use of a rigorously defined and fully mature simulation
controls system model that includes accurate gearing and cable stretch characteristics (where applicable), determined from actual aircraft measurements. The model does
not require control surface position measurements in the flight test objective data in
these limited applications.
f. Data may be acquired by using an inertial measurement system and a synchronized
video of the calibrated helicopter instruments, including the inclinometer; the force/
position measurements of flight deck controls; and a clear visual directional reference
for a known magnetic bearing (e.g., a runway
centerline). Ground track and wind corrected
heading may be used for sideslip angle.
g. The sponsor is urged to contact the
NSPM for clarification of any issue regarding helicopters with reversible control systems. This table is not applicable to Computer Controlled Aircraft flight simulators.
h. Use of these alternate data sources, procedures, and instrumentation does not relieve the sponsor from compliance with the
balance of the information contained in this
document relative to Level B FFSs.
i. The term  - inertial measurement system -  is used in table C2E includes the use of
a functional global positioning system
(GPS).
j. Synchronized video for the use of alternative data sources, procedures, and instrumentation should have:

380

VerDate Sep<11>2014

16:30 Jun 25, 2019

Jkt 247047

PO 00000

Frm 00390

Fmt 8010

Sfmt 8002

Q:\14\14V2.TXT

PC31