82
14 CFR Ch. I (1–1–14 Edition)
Pt. 60, App. A
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 ac-
tivities 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 simula-
tion models as the original or baseline sim-
ulation models;
(e) Has an out-of-the-flight deck visual sys-
tem;
(f) Has actual avionics boxes interchange-
able with the equivalent software simula-
tions to support validation of released soft-
ware;
(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 rep-
resentation of the airplane by the manufac-
turer’s pilots (or other acceptable data sup-
plier), certificate holders, and the NSPM.
(3) Use the engineering simulator/simula-
tion to produce a representative set of inte-
grated proof-of-match cases.
(4) Use a configuration control system cov-
ering hardware and software for the oper-
ating components of the engineering simu-
lator/simulation.
(5) Demonstrate that the predicted effects
of the change(s) are within the provisions of
sub-paragraph ‘‘a’’ of this section, and con-
firm that additional flight test data are not
required.
d. Additional Requirements for Validation
Data
(1) When used to provide validation data,
an engineering simulator must meet the sim-
ulator standards currently applicable to
training simulators except for the data pack-
age.
(2) The data package used must be:
(a) Comprised of the engineering pre-
dictions derived from the airplane design, de-
velopment, or certification process;
(b) Based on acceptable aeronautical prin-
ciples with proven success history and valid
outcomes for aerodynamics, engine oper-
ations, avionics operations, flight control ap-
plications, or ground handling;
(c) Verified with existing flight-test data;
and
(d) Applicable to the configuration of a
production airplane, as opposed to a flight-
test airplane.
(3) Where engineering simulator data are
used as part of a QTG, an essential match
must exist between the training simulator
and the validation data.
(4) Training flight simulator(s) using these
baseline and modified simulation models
must be qualified to at least internationally
recognized standards, such as contained in
the ICAO Document 9625, the ‘‘Manual of Cri-
teria for the Qualification of Flight Simula-
tors.’’
E
ND
QPS R
EQUIREMENT
lllllllllllllllllllllll
10. [R
ESERVED
]
11. V
ALIDATION
T
EST
T
OLERANCES
lllllllllllllllllllllll
B
EGIN
I
NFORMATION
a. Non-Flight-Test Tolerances
(1) If engineering simulator data or other
non-flight-test data are used as an allowable
form of reference validation data for the ob-
jective tests listed in Table A2A of this at-
tachment, the data provider must supply a
well-documented mathematical model and
testing procedure that enables a replication
of the engineering simulation results within
20% of the corresponding flight test toler-
ances.
b. Background
(1) The tolerances listed in Table A2A of
this attachment are designed to measure the
quality of the match using flight-test data as
a reference.
(2) Good engineering judgment should be
applied to all tolerances in any test. A test
is failed when the results clearly fall outside
of the prescribed tolerance(s).
(3) Engineering simulator data are accept-
able because the same simulation models
used to produce the reference data are also
used to test the flight training simulator
(i.e., the two sets of results should be ‘‘es-
sentially’’ similar).
(4) The results from the two sources may
differ for the following reasons:
(a) Hardware (avionics units and flight
controls);
(b) Iteration rates;
(c) Execution order;
(d) Integration methods;
(e) Processor architecture;
(f) Digital drift, including:
(i) Interpolation methods;
(ii) Data handling differences; and
(iii) Auto-test trim tolerances.
(5) The tolerance limit between the ref-
erence data and the flight simulator results
is generally 20% of the corresponding
‘‘flight-test’’ tolerances. However, there may
VerDate Mar<15>2010
20:48 Jan 30, 2014
Jkt 232047
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 8010
Sfmt 8002
Q:\14\14V2.TXT
ofr150
PsN: PC150