DOT/FAA/A.\1-95!6 

Chf:(t' o~- ,.\Yi3.r :rn~ \-1edicine 

\0.':.,,-~~i·,H·>:qn ;) r· !{)) ... {): -·- ... "t"'""- ........... ..._ -~ -· 

19950320 l\4 

Development of Qualification 

Guidelines for Personal 

Computer BaceA A:u;_,.;~-;.,.~ • .:t U .l I.. 'I .I.Q.IIi..I.U.U. 

Training Devkes 

Kc\.·~:1 \X.'. \\-'~~E2:n~ 

Ro!Yert E. Bb.nc!la:d 

•11 ! ' ... n., ~ "i-·· (Y-l- h a '7~1.,~ '- r:.ano .... 3: L ••. "'· :.. "'"~ C!11 • _ ........... · 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

oTIC 

ELECTE 

. -··. . --..... ------__.; 

Technical Repc!'t Documentation Page 

.. Report No . 2. Govemment A~cassion Nc. 3. Racipient's ~teiog No. I 

DOT/FAA/A!-1-95/6 

I 4. Tr.~ inc! S:.ot:t.'!:e 5. Repor: Oiiit& 

!Development of Qual~fication Guidelines for February 1995 

IPe~sonal Computer-E~sed Aviation Training Devices 

I 9. Pl'r.for'l"!'!i!"!g Org~nita<:ion Code 

,7. Au~•;s; s. ?ericrmin; Orga"'!izat:cn Repo~ No. 

Wi!.liatr~.s and Robert. E. Blanchard l 

1 Kev:.n w. 

s Performin;: Or;arizatiO."l Name and Addiess ,0. W"'·«. Unit N::~-. iTRA!SJ l 

FAA Civil Aerol:'.edical Institute I ' 

P.O. ilox 25082 

I I Oklahoma City, OK 73125 11. C:~tr~=: ~ Gr!!r!: N:. I • I 

I 

12. Sponso:lng A;EnCY neme and Ath:;-~s:; I i3. Ty"'J')II oi Re;!)rt a.-:.ci PMoc! Co>Jerad I FAA Office of Aviation Medicine 

Federal Aviation Ad:ninistra~ion I 800 Independence Avenue, SWa 

washington, DC 20591 14. S;,onsor.n; Age.-:.ey Code I 

i I 

15. ~u;ple~~t~ Notes ., 

1 6. A:m:ract 

R.ecen't. ad'\·ances i.:l the capab:.l:.ties of personal co~p~ters !laYe res...:lteC. i~ a:> 

i:1crease i:t t?le nur:.ber of flight si::mlatior: programs oade available as ?erso:1a2. 

I i C..:xnn".lter-Based Avia~:..on ":"rair:i.cg De'\:"ices {P~~T:Js}. The pot:e .1tial !:;le:nefit:s of ?CA':'~s 

, hcr...re been recosn:..ze::i by researcr..ers a::d so=tware/hard·.-..-are deve:opers a:::.:.te. ':he 

Jpu~ose of this report is ~wo=old: l} present a cc~cep~ua1 apprcac~ based ~po~ hu~ar. 

j

l lear~ing pr~nci.ples and available flig~t trai~i~g Oa~a for use :.~ ~he deve:cp~en~ ar.~ 

eva:uacion of P~TDs; and 2} provide a detaileC ~ec~,i.cal pla~ fer a~ i~itia: effor~ 

~o develop and test guideli~es ~or assessi~g ~~e use of ?~7~s in a ~rai~in~ I ;;:"::::":,:' a '''"'' •"~' ooo~ooco< >• ••••"'"""• •''' •'- ••~"''"'"'~ ••••-< << 

t 7. K.ev Wer~ -:a. 0-sUl~;..-:..zr: S~ate:""~c--:-:. 

~ PerS\,)!lal Comp~te::--Based A;riation :Co:::;r::ent is avai2.able to t.he pv.~lic 

T~aining Devices, F:ig::.t: ':'~aining. 

1 !~s~~~ent F:~g~t Spr~::gf::e:C., 

i 

I Psychology, Applied Psyc~ol~/ Vi~g~~~a 22161 

fl~9>.~s~~=-=-~·~·~'Y~C"-••~,.=-.-.• ~a•!~t-~•~s~nr-:,~o=~~,c-----~,;,o.-~s;~:~c:""i-.~.-C~-o~s~s'-it-.~,o~'~!~,.~.~=~'~":.~.----=-----c-~r;2~1-.~N~o~.~c~:<p>..~,~,~,------~-o~~2~~• .• ~·,7,-------------j 

- lJ:.classifieC. Un;:lassi::ieC.. 

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72! 
ACK.'IIO"NLEDGME:'\ITS 

This project was jointly sponsored by AFS-800 and AFS-200. with direction and support prcv:ded 

by Larry Basha.'ll (AFS-&40), Jan DeMuth (AFS-210), Hop Potter (AFS-214), and Tom Longridge (AFS230). Program ma.11agement was provided by Ron Simmons (ARD-2!0). 

input. 

!n addition, appreciation is expresse-d to Dermis Beringer (AAM-514) for his technical review and 

lll 

Accesion For 

NTIS CRA&I 

OTIC TAB 

Unannounced 

Justificatior. ---··--·-- =.:.:::::=:j 

By 

Oist;ib~tio~ j" 

Availability COdes 

D. t I Avail a no; or ---1 15 Special 

W-tl I f 
TABLE OF COl\ TENTS 

BACKGROUND .............................................................................................. ! 

PC-Based Training Devices ........................................................................ I 

Potential Benefits cf PCA TDs .................................................................... l 

Purpose and Development Plan ................................................................... 2 

DEVELOPMENT OF PCATD QUALIFICATION GUIDELINES ................................ 2 

Step 1 - Develop PCATD Qualification Concept .............................................. 2 

Ba>ie Premises .............................................................................. 5 

Promoting Positive Transli:r .............................................................. 5 

Avoiding Negative Transfer ............................................................. 7 

Taking Advantage of the Learning Media . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............................. 8 

Use in Training ............................................................................ 8 

Step 2 - Develop Flight Task Data Base ........................................................ 9 

Step 3 - Analyze Flight Task Data Base...................... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .................... 10 

Step 4- Develop Prototype Set of Qualification Guidelines ................................. 10 

Step 5 - Test Application of Prototype Guidelines ............................................ 11 

Step 6 - Develop PQT Computer Software ..................................................... 11 

Step 7- Conduct PCATD and PQT Field Evaluation ........................................ 12 

Step 8 - Prepare End Products and Documentation ........................................... 12 

FOLLOW-ON DEVELOPMENT ......................................................................... 12 

EXPECTED BENEFlTS .................................................................................... 13 

F.-\A .................................................................................................... 13 

PCATD Developers ................................................................................ !3 

Training Cmnmunity ................................................................................ IS 

REFERENCES ................................................................................................ 16 

APPE?I.'DIX A 

EXPA!'.'DED FLIGHT TASK LISTING FOR AIRCRAFT I~STRL'ME~T RATI~G ....... Al 

APPE:'\'DIX B 

BASELil'.'E QUALIFICATION GCIDELDIES ....................................................... Bl 

Controls ............................................................................................... Bl 

Displays ...................................................................................... Bl 

Flight Dynamics ............................................................................ B2 

Instructional Management ................................................................. B2 

APPE~IXC 

EXAMPLE TASK ANALYSIS ............................................................................ Cl 

ADA2S29b 1 
DEVELOPMEI'\1 OF QUAL!F!CATIO~ GUIDELINES FOR PERSONAL COMPlJTER·BASED 

AVIATiON TRAINING DEVICES 

BACKGRO'l'ND 

PC-Based Training Devices 

Recent advanct'' in ·lte capabilities of personal 

co:'1puters have resulted in an increase in the number of flight simulation programs made available as 

Personal Computer-Based Aviation Training Devices (PCA TDs). Th.:s~ devices are relatively inexpensive, compared with flight training devices and 

simulators that more closely approximate tbe physical characteristics of an acrual aircraft. Aviation 

training devices should be distinguished from formal flight training devices, as defmed in FAA 

Order AC 120-45A. The primary difference between the two is that the PCA TD is an integrated, 

ground-based training device that would be used 

solely for aviation training purposes, and not for 

airmen qualification or certification. The appropriate use of PCA IDs by flight tmining schools and 

individuals would greatly benefit the delivery of 

flight training instruction and enhance training effectiveness and flight safety. 

The regulatory mission of the FAA includes establishing a sound basis for qualifying equipment, airmen training and certification programs, including 

the use of instructional aids and devices. Traditional 

approaches to crediting flight training devices and 

simulators heavily weights the physical fidelity, or 

similarity of the device, to an acrual aircraft. This 

approach results in the production of extremely expensive training equipment, particularly if motion 

simulation is included. Further, it has been shown 

that high physical fidelity is not necessary to 

achieve acceptable transfer levels for certain flight 

training tasks (Lintern, Roscoe, Koonce, & Segal, 

1990; Ortiz, 1993; Phillips, Hulin, & Lamermayer. 

1993). This finding provides a useful oppornmity 

for utilizing relatively inexpensive PCA TD t~chnctogy with relatively low physical t1delity for training 

specific sets of flight tasks. 

1 

Anod·.er expectation based on traditional crediting 

approaches is that training time on PCATDs should 

be creditable with a number of flight hours considered equivalent to training time in an aircraft based 

on training transfer equations. However, transfer of 

training estimates for a particular PCATD tend to 

vary, depending on the particular task being learned 

and the !earning characteristics of the individual 

using the device. This joint variability makes it inadvisable to attempt to credit experience in a 

PCA TD with some number of aircraft flight hours. 

The best course would be to limit use of PCA TDs 

to the role of training aids within an integrated 

ground/flight training environment. The potential 

contribution of a particular PCA TD should be 

evaluated on a task-by-task basis, according to 

whether, based on a set of rules or guidelines, the 

de~·ice could be expected to produce some minimally acceptable level of positive transfer of training to an airplane on a specific task. 

Potential Benefits of PCA TDs 

The potential benefits of K:-based aviation training 

devices have been recognized by researchers and 

software/hardware developers alike, as is attested to 

by a recent collection of papers on t.'le use of PCbased systems for instrument flight training 

(Sadlowe, 1991). Evidence of their effectiveness is 

also growing (Hampton, Moroney, Kirton. Biers. 

Eisterhoutd, King, Wright, 1993}. Before these 

benefits can be enjoyed, however, guidelines must 

be established regarding the characteristics that are 

recmmnended in a PCA TD for it to be an effective 

training device. 

The use of PCA TDs should enhance safety because 

studt.nts could gain at leas~ minimum proficiency 

before attempting most flying maneuvers. In addition, training time could be reduced, which shou!d 

result in a reduction of costs for both students and 

flight schools. By reducing costs, th~ 11ight school 
should be able to a!tract additional students, thereby 

increasing its student load and potential business. 

A!so, the ability of students to gain self-guided 

practice at some tasks and maneuvers should improve skill maintenam:e and pilot proficiency. 

Purpose and Development Plan 

The purpose of this report is twofold: I) present a 

conceptual approach based upon human learning 

principles and available flight training data for use 

in the development and evaluation of PCA IDs; and 

2) provide a detailed technical plan for an initial effort to develop and test guideline! .. for assessing the 

use of PCA TDs in a training curriculum of a flight 

school conducted in accordance with the regulations 

stated in FAR Part 141. The initial user-client is the 

FAA safety inspector from a local Flight Standards 

District Office (FSDO), who has the responsibility 

of approving Part 141 flight training curricula. In 

follow-on work, the feasibility of extending these 

guidelines to other ratings could be explored, as 

well as extending them to other potential client-user 

groups, such as Part 141 school curriculum developers, PCA TD hardware and software developers, 

and eventually, to individual users desiring to select 

a PCATD for self-guided use. 

Figure 1 provides a milestone chart of how development will proceed on a conceptual basis for 

PCA TD qualification and of the actual qualification 

guidelines. Results of Step 1, De dop PC.\ TD 

Qualification Concept. are provided below. Results 

of the remaining steps in guideline development will 

be provided in subsequent reports. An initial set of 

guidelines for the instrument rating curriculum, 

packaged for the FSDO inspector, is expected to be 

available by the end of Oct. l, 1994. These guidelines can be expanded to include other certificates, 

rating areas and client-users after the guidelines 

have be~n subjected tv scientific verification and 

user acceptance testing. Th:: steps to be accomplished and' their relaricnship to each other in the 

development of PCA TD qualification guidelin;:s are 

shown in Figure 2. The guidelines will be orgaJ'Jzed 

into a procedural form that wm be called the 

2 

PCATD Qualification Tool (PQT). Numbers in the 

figure identify the individual steps to be accomplished. As can be seen from the figure, there are 

eight primary steps involved in !he approach. 

DEVELOPMENT OF PCATD 

QUALIFICATION GUIDELINES 

Step 1 • Develop PCA TD Qualliication Concept 

The first step in the task plan involved developing a 

concept for incorporating PCA TD technology into 

the ground and flight training envirorunent (See 

Figure 1 for the time frame on this task). The goal 

was not to provide a method of qualifying PCATDs, 

but to allow for their appropriate and effective use 

within the flight traini.'lg community. An important 

FAA responsibility is approving ::urricula to be 

used by Part 141 flight training schools. Previous 

attempts at generating qualification guidelines for 

PCATDs (e.g., Forster. 1991) have not recognized 

the possibility of task-specific guidelines. Given the 

existence of task-specific qualification guidelines, 

approval of a Part 141 curriculum utilizing training 

on a PCA TD would involve not only looking at the 

PCATD itself, but also at the plan for its use within 

the curriculum. Basically, the PCATD should not 

be used f0r training tasks in which it is not capable 

of producing an acceptabie level of training transfer. Review of the training curriculum by a FSDO 

inspector using PCA TD qaalification guidelines 

should ensure that protection. This task involved the 

review of applicable literature on flight training and 

simulation 2nd on the development and capabilities 

of PC-ba>ed aviation :raining software and hardware. This background was important to sub~equent 

development of the theoretical st.\'1lCture needed for 

the qualification concept. 

A review of Agency regulatory needs and policies 

concerning PCA TD utilization was performed to 

ensure that the aprroach taken was consistent wit.'! 

those issues. The information collected from those 

reviews was used to develop an initial concept for 

qualifying the man.'ler in which PCA TDs are bcor 

ADA292%l 
I Tnk 11om2 

1.0 Dew!O? PCA TO 0Jalffication Conc:ep: .. · i 1 j' 

1 

1· 1 ! I ! 1 j I I 

1.2 ,,,Re,;ewrelevanttfterature Review Agency guidelinos/pofltiea 1ff·~rnt~!1' i J ' I, 1 1 

• lll,.l\l ,

1

1 11·,. 

i:!~:~:==~~~elines ! I ! l i J i I J i I II, ! II, I, II I,J 

2.0 Develop flight taak data base (lnstrumer1ts); I 1 I , 

1

1' I I I 1 1 

2.1 Review Praelical Test Standards I i I• i I ' I 1 ! i I '1 I j I 

2.2 Cansuft !llgltt school syllabi ' ! ; i i :.

1 

~! I' I j ' I ,

11 

I ~ !I' J 1 1 I 

2.3 Establish task performance aile<'.a I ' ,· 1 ,·

1 

'· : ' 1

1 ; ' I '• ' I ' 

2.4 Revise ~la base Ui~ CFII i'lput : !

11

, il '. :, '

1 11

i ; 'j I' 1 l . ! 11 

2.5 Extsnd data base to Private and 1 ' 1 1 1 1 H'tl · · · 

Commercial ratings I I 

1

, 1

1

11

1 

! l 1 1 i I I 1 1 i 1 i : j i i 

! i ' i I I I I I ! I I I i I II 

3.0 Perform Analysis ofTaak Data Base I , I i i 1 I 1 i I 1·. .l 

1

,·, '! ',·,: 1

1 1

1

1 1

1 

! 

3., Identify task abjectiws 1 : :

1 •

1

1

1 

~B~~a~~ * ,1 . 1 • , 3.2 Determine took requirements I 1 I 1 j 1 . 1

1. i i 1 : i i 

3.31der.tify training app<oadlestobjeclives ; .

1 

, 1 ' 1 1 1 1 • 

I i

i 

1

• '

1 I, •1 :.1+ 1' i, 1· 

11

1 •, I 1 , 3.4 Determine lnitlatllight con~itlcns and . , 

masterycriteria .. 

1 

1 Jl l1'l i1' 1' 'I 'i 'I 

3.5 lnctJ~porate flight t:aining manual ; ! I . i 

1 

!... j : · · t · 1 • ; 1 ! ! 1 I ! t : 

3.6 ~'::!':'t analysis to Private and : ,· II' II , ;

1

· '

1

1 i i !I : I !1, ) ,, i tH+· ; , . 

1 ! j I f 

Commercial ratings f ' I 1 1 I 1 1 I · ' 

·. ]' Ill, :, '1·.:., ',i, .! ,! ; ,! 111 '; • i I il ! . ; 1 \ !. 

4.0 De.-lop Protolype Sel of Guidelines , '· 1 ' , 1 1,' ' i i J ' I ! ' : 11 i 1 

.c.'\ Review current PCA TO technology +~-H+;.r+f+l++-!+"++-f- j 1 ! i ! ! ' l 

4.21dentify general PCATO guidelines : I ~.: ! I : i [ I[ 1 i ' ' I I I I I II '

1

, ! I ! l 

4.3tden''f'• task·spocif~<: guidelines 1 · • ' I ! i ' I 1· • 

4.4 Ferf;;:, user ,.,..;aw of guidelines 'i i, i : j : ! I j I I ! ! II r j ! .lJ. 1 II 'I I ! 

4.5 Eldend guideline development to ; l l i 1 1 1 ! 1 1 -:1 ~ ' ! 

Private and Commercia! ratings ; 1 ' I ! i 1

• 1 ! : l ' :.

1

'. I; ~ I ~ : l 

; ,: : i . I ,. i 1 ! I! ' .· , ! ! '1 ; i 5.0TestApprtcotionofPrototypeGuidecnes 1 

1

. : 1 ' 1 

5. t CanduC: aceeptancalfeaolb~fty tes! ,· .' 1 i i i i i II I 1 ! i ! ' I ' l 

5.2 Re•'lselupgracle guldetines : , •

1

; '! 1 ; " , I I i .#

1 

:. 1 i , l 

5.3 Collect and analyze perfonnam:e data .i ' I 1 ! ' ' 1 1 ! l 1 

i. i ·' :, i I 1

1 

i: · 111 ' 

I'! I :!:: i i"~ l'JI!,i 8.0 Devolop PQT SoftwiNe 

6.1 Orgal"'jze .guidelines to binary scurir19 

format 

6.2 Sel~ softw'are development pack~e 

6.3 .Design user interface 

6.4 Write software eode 

6.5 Conduct software beia version test 

6.6 Extend software development to 

Private and Commercial ratinQs 

7.0 Conduct PCATOIPQT Foeld Evaluation 

7 .1 Select lest faeihly 

7.2 Develop eva!uallan !03! plan 

7.3 Canduclstudy 

:.1 t ::1 :1 ! !~ t !:I :II ;! j ~ I ! i I ~ I ~ I 1 l ' ' ' . 

~i! l!i ! l!'tiTW- ~'1 'l j 

! ; ; I: '' ' ! i ,, i ! : i I ...,.· •. ! !'I, l ' ' ' I! : I: ·, I ' 

1 •

1 

i . ! i ; i ; ' ·I, I 

l . j : l l j I ! j ~ l II I t \ i \ 

l ! I. J i I l ,. l: ; r ·,·.· r ! ; l ! ~,. i : ' i ; I' I II ) i \ . I' . ·,· j 

·, 't'. 'I , , ~: 'i' ,•, 

7.-4 Revise/upgrade guidelines ! 1 I ; ! i ~, ... 1 I' ,i.l ',i,. '1.1 II ! .: I ,i ~.~ 

:

••• ~. ~ ! ) i I . 8.0 Prepare End Prod"c!s and Docume~tio.' [ I 

8.1 Prepare Advisory Circular 1 

8.2 Prepare technical reports i 1 ; 

8.3 Exiend documentation to Pr.vate and \ j . Commerdal ratings : 1 

' I; I I iL: I' ,j 

l

' ' ; li • I ! !, ·I; . !' ,·1· ; ' --.1 :,·. ! i ' , j : , ..,.. I : 

:: l i i :j'! : i I' ! I, j:! :T) 

Figure l. PCATD guideline development and evaluation schedule. 

3 
Training/Simulation Literature 

Agency Needs and Policies 

Deve!op PCATD 

Qualification 

Concept 

Practical Test Standards 

Flight Training Handbook 

Private Pilot Maneuvers Manual 

Puct Subject Matter Experts 

Flight Scnool Syllal)i 

Develop FrJQht 

Task Data Ease 

lnpu'JOutput Task Objectives and 

Requi;ernents Conditions 

and Instructional+-- Task Actions and 

Procedures S:;<;tem Design Initial Conditions 

Common Task Errors 

1 Deveiop Prototype 

i Setof 

· QualifiCation 

Guidelines 

Initial Application of 

Prototype Guid~lines 

bv Selected FSDO 

Inspectors 

8i 

Develop and Test 

the Qualification 

Tool Software 

Conduct POT 

Field Evaluation 

Prepare End 

Products and 

Documentation 

Figure 2. Development of PCATD qualification guidelines. 

porated into ground and flight training curricula 

while minimizi:1g Agency regulatory involvement 

and at the same time providing for broad utilization 

of PCA 1D current end future tccbnQ}Qgy. Our roncept involves the use of a set of qualification guidelines based on a detailed fli:;ht task data base wi!h 

criterion-referenced levels of acceptable performance. These task-referenced guidelines would provide assurance of, but would not guarantee, at least 

some transfer of training from a particular PCA TD 

to the training aircraft_ This approach is based on 

the proposition that skill learning occurs in stages, 

and th<.t a PCA TD must possess the ~bility to sup4 

port at least initial-stage learning of a particular !ask 

(or task set) if useful transfer is to occur_ 

This task-bllSed approach is similar ro mat used for 

the Advanced. Qualification Program (AQP) for 

qualification events and associated flight training 

equipment (AC 120-54. Appendix C). The resulting 

PCA TD qualification guidelines will be incorporated into an analytic tool. which can be computerized and employed by a number of potential user 

groups in determining the individual ar relative 

merits of specific PCA TD designs_ 

ADA292%1 
The proposed guidelines would be based on an 

analytical process by which !he specific input/ output 

requirements of a given training objective (task 

element} would be identified and compared to the 

specific hardware/software characteristics of a 

given PCA TD in providing those necessary input! output requirements. An evaluation score would 

be provided based on task and task set assessmems 

with respect to the acceptability of the candidate 

PCA TD in fulfilling specific learning objectives. 

The proposed guidelines would be used for qualifying a PCATD for training only, and not for proficiency assessmenr. 

PCATD qualification guidclir.es can be categorized 

according to whether they apply to the simulation 

fidelity of the training device or to managing the 

instructional envirorunent (e.g., allowing the ability 

to pause !he system during simulation of a maneuver). In addition, !he guidelines can be categorized 

according to whether t.'ley relate to every task to be 

trained, or only to specific tasks or task sets. An 

example of a guideline that would apply across all 

tasks would be a requirement !hat the instrument 

layout of the training device correspond ro that of a 

common training aircraft. This guideline would 

hold true regardless of !he task be:ng trained. 

Basic Premises 

Our conceptual approach for developing PCATD 

quaHfication guidelines centers around three premises. The first premise is that guideline development 

should be driven by a detailed analysis of the specific learning objectives to be accomplished using 

the device. If a device can support the learning t..'lat 

is expected to occur on a specified task element, 

then that is a suftident criterion to qualify the device for the training of that task element. Another 

way of stating this concept is in terms of transfer of 

training. To be qualified for use as an aid in instructing on a particular task, a PCA TO must provide some minimal level of transfer of training for 

!hat task. 

5 

The second premise is that the developmenr of 

guidelines for a training device should also be 

driven by the objective of avoidi.qg producing invalid expectations in the trainee when the task is transferred to the airplane; or, producing negative 

transfer of training. 

The third premise is that guideline development 

should be driven by the need to take full advantage 

of the medium to be used for training; !hat is, the 

personal computer. PCs present unique opportunities for enhancing the learning environment for 

aviation training. 

In sulTh-nary ~ L.1e three premises fer developing 

PCATD qualification guidelines are l) provide a 

minimal level of positive transfer of training from 

the PCA TD to the airplane; 2) avoid negative tr..nsfer; i.e,, establishing false expectations; and 3) take 

advantage of the training delivery medium, Yhe 

computer. Each premise is destribed in more detail 

below. 

Promoting Positive Tranq€'r 

Positive training transfer is not an all-or-nothing 

phenomenon. Every complex skill is composed of a 

number of component skills. These component 

skills can consist of a motor movement. perception. 

retrieval of information from memory, or processing infonnation. When endeavoring to master a 

complex skill, it is important to note that skill acquisition, including the acquisition of complex psychomotor skills. occurs in discrete stages 

(Anderson, 1982, 1987; Fitts, 1962; Rasmussen, 

1986). All of these researchers propose three stages 

of skill acquisition. These stages proc.eed from 1) 

the understanding of task objectives, task parameters, and any procedures involved, through 2} the 

establishment of correct patterns of behavior. and 

finally 3) to the point at which the task becomes 

largely automatic. Learning at later stages is dependent on learning at earlier stages. 

Given the existence of skill acquisition stage~. the 

next major concept, first expressed at least 40 years 
ago (Mi!!er. 1954}, is !P.at £he level of physical fi. 

delity of a training device required at the initial 

stages of skill acquisition is less than that required 

at later stages. As the level of the skill progresses, 

so must the level of physical fidelity of the training 

device. 

During the firs! stage of skill acquisition (Fius · 

cognitive stage), the trainee lear.JS the basic task 

objectives, the location of displays and controls. 

and the relationship between different controls and 

displays within the context of the task. Miller proposed that in the first stage, simple simulations 

(pictures. diagrams, mock-ups) could be used to 

ailow learning to occur. 

During the second stage of ski!! acquisition {Fitts' 

associative stage), the trainee learns to coordinate 

movements am! anticipate actions in the same manner as the actual flight task. During this stage. <he 

trainee learns the basic movements involved in the 

task and when, and under what circumstances. 

those movements are needed. For example, in 

learning to perform a takeoff, the trainee must learn 

to apply back pressure on the stick to rotate the aircraft when airspeed reaches a cemin point and to 

depress right rudder to counteract the left-turning 

tendency of the aircraft and maintain directional 

control during takeoff. The trainee does not need to 

know exactly how much back pressure to put on the 

stick or how far to push on the rudder - yet. That 

level of skill will come during the third, and final 

~tage of skill acquisition. 

The final stage (Fitts' autonomous stage), involves 

refining the skills to the point where they become 

relatively auromatic. Precise motor movements are 

relined until t.lte trainee does not have to expend effort in controlling tl10se movements. What is ultimately required is a refinement of the motor skills 

to fit tbe response characteristics of the aircraft. 

This level Qf finesse is likely to be developed only 

in the aircraft, or a flight simulator or flight training 

device with high physical fidelity. 

6 

Tne PCA TD. ro be usefu1 for ihe training nf a task, 

should be designed to support the learning of t.iar 

task through the first two stages of skill acquisition. 

If it can do so, sufficient positive transfer of training for that task can be expected to occur to support 

the use of the device for that task. 

The relationffiip between incremental transfer, cost, 

and physical fidelicy is shown in Figure 3. according to a rationaie provided by Roscoe (1980). Also 

illustrated is the relationship between stage of 

learning and transition from PCA TD use as a 

ground training aid to its use as a flight training 

device. A basic reality of training device design, 

shown ;'l Figure 3, is that as physical fidelity increases to higher levels of skill training. so must t.'IJ.e 

cost of t.'Je device. 

These curves suggesr r!>.at a steady gain in incremental transfer can be expected for nominal investments in physical fidelity, up to the point at which 

training enters Stage III (autonomous stage) and 

where use of the PCA TD begins to transition from 

that of a grour.d training aid to that of a flight 

training device (see bottom two variables in Figure 

3). AI th.ar poinr. increases in pbyskal fidelity necessary to reach higher levels of skill training result 

in decreasing increments in training transfer. until 

such point that increasing investments in physical 

fidelity result in essentially no appreciable gain in 

incremental learning transfer. 

The shaded portion in Figure 3 depicts the area in 

which incrementa! tr.msfer is greatest relative to the 

costs incurred; i.e .• the area of maximum payoff in 

training effectiveness for investment in PCA TD 

physical fidelity. Beyond !hat point, increasingly 

smaller increments in learning cost increasingly 

more in design investment. 

The challenge to the PCA TD developer is embodied 

in technological innovation in hardware and software design, manufacruri.11g techniques. and in !he 

integration of principles of computer -based instruction (CBI). If, through teclmological in.'1ovation. 

costs could be decrea5ed and learning effectiveness 

ADA292961 
INCREMENTAL 

TRANSFER 

HI 

COST 

LO 

Skill 

Stage ----~)II !II 

Transition 

Ground Training Aid Flight Training Device ) 

Figure 3. Tradeoff beN.•een physical fidelity, cost, and transfer of training effectiveness. 

increased, then the point at which the two curves 

cross can be moved to the right, representing improved training cost-effectiveness. The end result 

would be that higher levels __ .lliill training could be 

performed on the PCA TD, including sor.1e flight 

training ll".aneuvers at a cost considerably less t.l1an 

tlla! of · ~rplane. 

The airplane would most likely be needed ultimately 

for checking and for certification but, with Jess time 

and replications, overall traL'ling costs could be expected to be lesf. As a result, flight training would 

become more affordable. allowing an increased 

number of students to pursue instrument training. 

with the attendant payoff il"' enhanced aviation 

safety. Additionally, with greater affordabilitj, an 

increased number of students would be attracted to 

ab initio flight training programs wim the much 

sought for boost in the economic health of general 

aviation. 

7 

Avoiding Negative Transfer 

To support the first two stages of skill acquisition. a 

trai.lling <'evice would net have to simulat.:: the exact 

!0ok and feel of the aircraft. By concentrating on 

the first two stages of skill acquisition. the level of 

physical fidelity required in the training device is 

much less tha!l would 3e required for the third stage 

of skill acquiSition. The mo,•ement of controls has 

to march only the general characteristics of aircraft 

controls (i.e .. moving the stick forward pilches tile 

nose do-.;.-n, moving the stick to the left causes 

banking to the left. etc.). Likewise, flight dynamics, 

display characteristics. ar.d out-the-window scer...ery 

need only be realistic enm.:gh to support t.lJe learning of the cognitive/procedural aspects of the task. 

Exceptions to this statement occur when the training 

device promotes the establishment of invalid expectatior.s about act'ual flight skills and procedures or 

promotes the formation of baa 1-.abits. The idea of 

a.."' "expectation· is reia:ed to that of a mental model 

(Johnson-Laird, 1983). in that it is a =inee's mental representation of a real-world a:tiv!ty (flying). 

f!.Dl\292% l 
Rasmussen (1988} referred to the first ievel of skiii 

acquisition as knowledge- or model- based behavior 

because trainee actions in a given situation were dependent on their mental model of the system. 

Use of a training device establishes certain expectations about the actual task. Th.:se expectations 

would not be task specific, but would apply to the 

overall task of flying the aircraft. Tnese expectalior'.s can be either valid or invalid. An example of 

establishing an invalid expectation would occur 

through the use of a mouse as a substitute for the 

aircraft yoke. Normal aircraft yokes autmnatica!ly 

return toward a neutral position during flight when 

control press-Jres are released. A mouse control, 

however, has no neutral posltion and, therefore, 

might promote the expectation that the yoke must be 

guided back to a neutral position. 

Taking Advantage of the Learning Media 

In addirion to promoting posirive trili!Sf;;r as.d 

avoiding negative transfer, a third goal in the development of qualification guidelines for PCA 1Ds 

is to make the best possible use of the medium on 

which training will occur. Computer-based training 

systerr•.s provide the opportuniry to deliver training 

to a sruder.t in a reasonably organized fashion, free 

from the biases and limitations of lnllnan instructors. Caro, for instance, s-aggests that t.lJe contem of 

flight training • ... often is based upon tradition a11d 

upon instrucrors' judgments and unique experiences 

ratlJer than upon detailed, syste:na!ic analyses of 

piloting tasks." (Caro, 1988 p. 248). The use of a 

computer-based training system would ensure !llat 

all aspects of a panicular flight msk were covered in 

tbe training. 

The use of Jcw-f'.delity training devices is valid for 

tr-ansition li1rough tl!e first two stages of skill acquisition. as long as care is taken in the design of 

those devi::es to guard against the es":ablishment of 

8 

invauo expectations. However~ even ~.,. the le~·ef uf 

physical fidelity is appropriate for a gi>•en level of 

skill acquisitivn, learning will not occur uniess some 

general principles of i!lstructional design are followed. 

Research on instructional design {for instance, see 

Patrick. 1992) suggests t.!Jat for any kind of training 

to be successful, there are four requirements that 

must be met: J) me traillee must !-.ave a clear notion 

of the objectives of the training (ior our purposes, 

these objectives should be stated at the levei of individual flight tasks); 2) for a given set of training 

objecti\'es, the trainee must know tl1e procedures 

and actions required for achieving the objectives; 3) 

t:Je range of condit!or.s under which the performance occurs must be learned; and, 4) specific feedback must be presented to the trainee regarding task 

performance. 

For a PCA 1D to be useful for training a particular 

!aSk, ir should have the following characteristics: 1) 

sufficient physical fidelity to accommodate training 

t.~rough the first rwo levels of skill acquisition for 

that task; 2) avoidance of physical design characteristics that lead to the establish;nem of invalid expectations regarding actual flyil:lg; and 3) general 

instructional design principles noted above in the 

control of a trailling session. 

Use in Training 

Initial approval of PCATDs will be restricted to 

Pan 141 flight :raining schools. Figure 4 illustrates 

how the currii:ulum approval process would oc..--ur. 

Box 1 denotes that tbe curriculum approval process 

would be irJtiated by application of a flight training 

facility aspiring for approval as a Part 141 training 

school. 
.--. 

6; ~ 

--, '--------

. J ~evie"' and Upgrade of 

1 ! Curriculum 

?art 141 F:ight Schoo! 

Submi!S Curf~!um for 

Approv& 

FS:JO lnspecte< 

?erf~s Ar.a!sysia of 

PCATD Us:t>g POT 

Course Syllabus ~ 3 ~ ~ 

PCATD 

lesso~ Objective 1 x 

Lesson Objective 2 

Lesson Ot'er.ti•e 3 X 

p --,. 

\ 

FSDC :.'\Spector 

E\alua!es ?ai't 141 

,

' . Analys:s of PCATD 

-- CuaHfied? 

_j 

/ 

C:urricu~um Using 

QuaJIT::::ation G~;ldeiines 

Tas: Set 1 Yes 

T asi< Set 2 l>i'J 

i-;'---. - l:.: · FSOO Inspector 

Disaoprcves Cu•riculum 

Tasi< Se: 3 Yes 

Figure 4 . .t-.pprovsl of a Parr 141 curriculum usi:Ig the PCATD qualification guidelines. 

Box 2 shows that the FSDO inspe-::or would firs! 

perform an analysis of the PCA TD being used i:: 

the curriculum using :he PQT. Bcx 3 il':ls!ratcs :hat 

the FSDO L'l.Speccor wouid then u~e the qual:ficari<>n 

guidelines to evaluate a Parr ! 41 curriculun. The 

incorporation of PCA TDs into a fligh! school curriculum requires a met.hod for qualifying PCATDs 

for use on specific lesson objectives using .:riteri~:!­

refere:;c~ tasks arA rask sers. FAR Pa.:1 141.53 

requires FAA approval of training ~ourses. or 

amer.dments to train:ng courses. r.'J:-ough the locai 

FSDO. Par. 141.5:5 speci:'ies the infonnarion t!:at 

must be submitted to the FAA for !his purpose. A 

FSDO inspector, whose task it is to appro,·e a Pan 

141 curriculum, mu~t er.sure lhat the PCATD to b~ 

used in the currkulurn v.·iU be used tu train c~y 

Jmse less'Jn o~je:;tive.~ (:.asks) for wl1i~h it has b-~:1 

approved. 

Box 4 shcr~-s thar the }"'$DO inspecrc:-. after .:ompring the co:;;sc currjCU:n. ... ~ to :he rcs1.llts of ±c 

evaluation of tte PCA TD. veil! decide if rh<! 

9 

~.&"T"r\ •• :,.._;_. ~--~~ ,._ •-~;- ~-1 •. wl-.-.---. •-~~·- •~•·• 

r'"\...!""\ l U l~ ut::J~I!;. 4-."'1~1. tt.: Ud!d \.'lU~~· U..! .... '!'._ U:.!>~ ;.:.1.:1~ 

it is q!!al!fieC to train. If it is not. :h: i...~pe:tcr wiH 

d!~fprove d1e curriculu:n with an exp:.::.rw.rivn oJ 

hou· the PC'ATD is ~ing inaprrorriare:) itpp:l=-d 

(&n: 5]. The St:hool can then :eview ar...J upgrade 

the t:t:r:-iculu..T. a:id begin u":.e approval pro:ess again 

(Box 6.l. lf rhe training de,·ice is being used proper}y ·wirhin rhe curriculur:1. the FSDO in~pe.:'~V: \\·JD 

app:ro\·e the ~u;;1cu2urn. 3r.-C Lie prc~'!:.s }5 C0!!?f'k!:: 

r&--.x 7). 

Stt>p 2 - DeYelop Fl'ght T a'<k Data Ba.<t> 

Step 2. '*hk:t is. 'c:-:emly under\\·ay. i:r~·c-l\·es org2r.izing the flight ra.~~ data base a~cordi."'lg 10 certificate or ra:t~"lg ar.d will be an exp;"~ndct! ve:sio:l of 

those found in the ?ra~;ical Tes; S:ar.d2rds \~g .. 

FAA-S-8081-4:\). inforr:1atior. for !his :as.k ctmlt!~ 

frc:n two m..ain sources. The Ptactica: Ies: Stan~ 

d:u-ds provide a listing cf the flight !asks~ ah:qg with 

:r..inir:mm pe:-formance ;:riteria :or ea.::h ta'\k. Sy~­

la~i frc:r. ~~~e~ted Part 1~: fhgh: sct.i.-x--.ls •J,;i:l he 

i 
used to supplement t.':te flight ta.~k lists. The resulting data base will ~ confmned and extended using 

certified flight inst!uctors for ins!nlment flying 

(CFilsi .1s subject matter experts. A listing of an 

expa.<ded version of flight tasks taken from the Instmtnent Rating Practical Test Standards (FAA-S808 l-4A) and other sources is gi·•en in Appendix 

A. 

Sr~p 3 - Analyze Flight Task Data Sase 

Src:p 3 will involve conductL'lg a task analysis to 

identify the tra:nlng device characteristics required 

for completing each task. Figure 2 places the task 

analysis within t.'Je overall context cf the approa.:h. 

The first step in th~ task ana!ysi~ will be to break 

down the tasks to the task element level. It is expe<!ed that mastery oi ~"'TTe task ~lem:!ms on rlu: 

PCA TD will transfer reasonably well to tile aircraft, 

\1:hile o!hers will not. In addition. it is ::xpected that 

some of the :ask elemems correspond tn learning 

that takes place :n the initizl srages of skiU acquisition. while othe. task elements correspond to 

leami.'lg dta: takes place in later stagl!s of skill acquisition. A PCATD will be judged useful for the 

training of a particular t<;sk if { J) adequate transfer 

C3!! be expected for all early stage task elemenrs, 

and {2) later stage task elements c.an be performed 

.,·!moot the PCA. TD i.r1troducing in•·a!id expcx:tat:onli t-:> the :rainec. 

\Vhar determines whet.l;.er rh~ !earning of a task 

elemem will or will no: trar..sfer adequately !o the 

aircraft are the ir,puts and outputs presemed by tht! 

PCATD to support perfonnance of tllc task element. The identificati.:.n of the required i.-.pms and 

outpu:s will !::e marle through an analysis cf the ta~k 

object:ves and criteria, task nor:1em:lamre. comrois. 

displays, environmental informar:on used in the 

task. and mov;:mcms and proced:~res required ro 

comp!ete ea~h task. It is expected that task elemems 

of a more cognitive ll2.!Ure will reqcire less physical 

fidelity than !hose of a more ps)chomvtor narurc. 

This is due ro the ability to represe:1! cer..ain tasks 

S)mboliQI!y. 

Caro (1988} refers to ihis symbolic represenialion 

;:s mediation. Caro defines a mediator as a word. 

phrase, thought, or action that helps a trainee associate meaning with a particular stimulus and that 

ca.> substitute in training for all action tiJat is overt 

in the aircraft. For example, if a student is required 

to perform u'le task element of tuning a radio to a 

specific frequency during the performance of a task, 

this action can be accomplished in several ways 

during training that will all transfer ad~quately w 

the aircraft. Turnbg a !mob, pushing buttons. or 

clicking on 2 mouse can all subsrimte f(,r the actions 

required to tune the radio. 

The major portion of the data for this step will 

come from pilot s:-.1Es. In:erviews will be conducted v.ith instructors from flight schools. Data 

will be collectee ahem each flight task regarding 

hCiw the task is trained in the aircraft. These data 

will include itew.s such as the initial conditions of 

the task and task objectives. "Initial coLditions" refers to the state of the aircra:'t (relative location, airspeed. heading. altitude, e:c.) at 1!-.e time the task is 

said w have begun. Data regarding the most .:ommon types cf errors :hat students ma.l::e when performing a particular task wili also be collected. The 

task analysis will be Sl.lpplemented \1:ith data from 

commercially published privaie pilot maneuvers 

guides. tl1c lnsrromenr Flying Ha..7dbook (AC 61-

27C). a re>ieu· of current fligh: t.-air.ing programs. 

a ad reJeva.Tl! research Hteraru:e. 

Task\ will be organized according to certificate or 

rating ai:d wil1 be an expanded version of those 

found in me Practical Test Standards. Initially, the 

tasks wili be limited to those i.;volved in ol::>lainlng 

an i.flStrument ra.ting. 

Step 4 - De\·elop Prototype Set of Qualification 

Guidelines 

Step 4 will :m·oJve translating all :;:{ :he data i.;1m a 

prototype set o! qualification g~ideli!:.es that can be 

ccr:1pared to candida:e trainillg device specifi~:ations. To aid in t:te specificat~n of guidelines, a 

bas.e!ine set of qaa!ificatio:J guicelines will be de· 
n~loped to ay and encompass a aujority of :h~ requirements needed for a useful training device. Appendix B contains the set of baseline qualification 

guidelines to be used during t!:e task anz.lysis. Using 

this baseline set of guidelines, each flight task will 

be examined in order to decide whether any further 

guidelines are required to perform training for that 

task. IdentifiCation of further guidelines will be 

made on the basis of the learning objectives fo; that 

task, input and ou!put requirements for the task, and 

any other training ccnsiderations that need to be addressed such as task-specific feedback that is unique 

to the ta>k. 

The guidelines will be organized into four categories: 1) contro:S. 2) displays. 3) flight dynamics. 

and 3) instructional management. The first three 

categories deal wiL'l the simulation of flight and the 

aircraft cockpit. lnstructionai management cilaracteristics of the device manage the nature of, and 

kind of uaining, that can be accomplished using t..'le 

device . .individual approaches to task instruction. 

sucil as pan:-task versus whole-task training. would 

be left up to the discretion of the PCATD developers. 

Development of the guidelines for each task wiit 

proceed on the basis cf ensuring that the device can 

suppon: the performance Gf the task to the levels 

stated in !.he !ask leMP-ing objectives. For example. 

if me flight taSk requires that !.he aircraft maintain 

altirude 'lvithin 100 feet. ain;peed within 10 knots, 

and heading within 10 degrees. then the degree of 

precision and resolution of the aircraft displays and 

out-the-window scene and the level of response of 

the controls should be such that those task objectives can be met. 

In addition. if the task requires a particular movement from the trainee, such as applying back pressure on !he stick duri.llg !be performance of a steep 

turn. tl1en the device should support such a requirement. Because the goal is only to support 

transition t.'trough the fl.l"Sl two stages of skill acquisition. the exact forces required in ~~ aircraft do 

not have to be sL'"Tiulated. o:Jly the general move11 

me-·- ,_,_,·~" The -.. --se ~• '"~ PCATD JS. ., L llt.:t !LUV1W~ • .:. J. ,P"-'.t}'V Vl o;.:,,.,. '-' \.J 

introduce basic objectives, ge!leral location of displays and controls, the relatio!'.shlp between dh~erent controls and displays within the comext llf the 

task. and to allow the trainee to learn to ~:oordinatl' 

movements and anticipate actions in the same manner as in the actual flight task. Appendix C provides 

the results of an analysis of an example instr.unent 

flight task, along with task-specific guidelint'S for 

that task beyond the baseline set of guidelines provided in Appendix B. 

Step 5 - Test Application or Prototype Guidelines 

Tnis will involve an initial test of the usef.1lness and 

acceptabh.ity of fue guidelines by providing !bern to 

a selected :;et of FSDO insjh.9(;tors for use in evaiuating sample Part 141 flight school curricula. Feedback from these user feasibility tests will be used to 

make revisio,1S and additions to the guidelines. In 

addition, initial validation of the guidelino:s could be 

accomplished throug:-t the coliection of performance data from each Part 141 school employing a 

PCATD in its curriculum. Tne perfonnance data 

would be collected and sem to a centraiized location 

to be analyzed. Such data possibly could be used in 

lieu of a formalized empirical vaiidation of !he 

guidelines, shou!d such an approach prove to be 

cost p:ohibitive. 

Afr~r the quaHfication guidelines have been devel .. 

oped. r.:viewed. and feasibility tested, the next step 

in the process would be to incorporate the gui<O~­

li."'l.es into a wmpurer program that will automate !he 

evaluation process. The computeriAed PQT will 

structure the colle~:tion of information about a particular PCA TD and then genen.te a Est of qu::lified 

flight tasks tha~ can be tr-ained using the device. 

Use of the t.1o! would involve a;Jswering a series of 

bin.:ry questio11s regarding various features and 

characteristics about a panicular PCATD. After the 

device evaluator provides responses to each of the 

questions. the system will automatically compare 

I 

I 
those respuo.ses to the quali!' .. "' ... ~ion guidelines for 

each flight task. If there is a match between required and acrual responses for a given task. !he 

computerized PQT will indicate that the device can 

be qualified for training on the task. A list of all 

qualified tasks, grouped by certificate or rating, will 

then be generated. In addition, !he program will be 

able to generate a Jist of guidelines a de•ice lacks. 

lf a manufacturer wanted to produce a device 

qualified for all of the tasks i.woived in achieving a 

specific pilot certification, the program wo~>ld be 

able to generate a list of upgrades for the device !0 

qualify it for training on those tasks. 

First. a software development package will be selected. Next. the user interface will be designed and 

the q:Jalification tool will be coded using the revised 

guideline listing generated during Step 4. 

After the guidelines have been incorporated into the 

PQT, a beta version of PQT software will be developed. The software will be used to qualify a selected sample of PCATD hardware and software 

designs for training tasks from selected cer+Jficates 

and ratings. The ease of using the software wiil be 

evaluated and recommended cha.'lges wili be made. 

Step 7- Comh ...:t • PCATD aDd PQT Field 

Evaluation 

Two questions wiil be addressed in the field e\·a!uation study. The first question involves determining 

the training tr:!.l'ISfer effectiveness of a representative 

sec of PCATDs for a specified set of tasks. This 

study will require use of 'l control group who reu:ive training only in an airplane. The second question will concern me abili1y of the PQT to discrin:inate tasks both within a gi> en PCA TD. bzsed 0:1 

expected transfer effectiveness, and between competing PC/. iDs. In the first instance. the objective 

would be to establish the ability to qualify a 

PCA TD for traiPJng a specific set of tasks for a 

particular certificate or rating. The second instance 

concerns using t!Je PQT to e•-aluate the relative 

predicted training effectiveness of two (or more) 

competing PCA TDs. Subjects will !:>e traine-d on 

12 

both qualified and non-quaUfied 

t.'tose questions. 

This step will involve the support of a flight training 

facility with an ongoing flight training program 

having a sufficiem number of trainees to supply the 

number of subjects required for the study. and with 

adequate facility and aircraft resources. The number 

of candidate PCA TDs selected for study will depend on the number of subjects available and avzilable funding. The initial effort on this task will he 

to develop a detailed test a."ld validation plan such 

that the scope of the study. w;.h respect to hypot.'Jeses tested. can be optimized against available fac;J. 

ity and funding resources. Results of the study will 

indicate (l) the trainh•g- effectiveness of personal 

computer-based aviation !raining devices: and (2) 

whether the PQT is a clependable aid in qualifying 

PCATDs for incorporatioa into Pan !41 flight 

school operations. Results v.. ilt also be used to upgrade and refine the PQT to improve its ability to 

serve mat panicular use. as well as orher poremial 

uses. 

Step 8 - Prepare End Products and 

Docu.'Ilentation 

In addition to a computerized evaluation pro,ess 

that would be distribmed an a fi::>ppy disk. the 

guidelines will be organized into a listing that can 

be disseminated in tl1c form of ar1 FAA advisory 

circular. Users of PCATDs could then select a device on the basis of whether it can meet their training needs. Results of me field evaluation ";!! be 

summarized in a technical report. 

FOLi.OW-ON DEVELOPME..\T 

The screening guidelin.es represemed m the PQT 

de\·eloped initially for the FSDO safety inspector 

could be packaged for use by other potential user 

groups. Broad use of the guidelines would serve to 

consistently upgrade the quality of PC simulation by 

raising the standar;ls of developers and the expectations of users. A]sc. follow-on developme.\1.1 of the 

PQT concept shoujd !ndude other certificates and 

~i.~':C')Ot. 1 
~----------------------------------------------

I 

I 

1 

I 

ratings ro provide for the broadest possible use of 

PCATD technology. This would s-Jmulate pilot 

training at all levels by helping to reduce the cost of 

flight training and increase the number of potential 

students seeking pilot certificates, added ratings, 

and proficiency training. 

Fligh: s.;bools aspiring to qualify for Part 141 approval would be benefited by using the PQT as an 

aid i.'1 selecting a PCATD to incorporate into their 

flight school curriculum. This step would greatly 

increase the likelihood cf obtaining FAA approval, 

without having to replace highly JiJrjted PCATDs 

or !0 revise their curriculum to obtain approval. 

PCATD develope;s constituie a prime user of t."!Je 

PQT guidelines, which would be ideal for planning 

product upgrndes and expanding software developments to increase their product's respons!>eness to 

market expectations and improve their competitive 

positions. Individuals seeking a PCA TD for use in 

self-guided flight training would fin:! the PQT an 

excellent aid in selecting a device that could be expected to pay off in terms of reduced costs of flight 

training. Also, a PCATD that meets PQT guidelines 

would be more likely to be ccnsistent with a Part 

141 training syllabus, should the indivicual choose 

that route for trair.ing. 

As indicated in the milestone chart in Figure I , 

follow-on development for the PQT is scheduled for 

late FY'94 and continued in FY'95. This follow-on 

work wiil involve the inclusion of additional certificates and ratings in the guidelines and packaging for 

ot.lter potential users. Figure S illustrates this expanded use of the qualification guidelines. 1n addition to the in.strumer.r rating, the guidelines could he 

expar.cled to include the private and commercial 

certificate. The packaging of the guidelines can also 

be expanded so that they can be used by Part 141 

Schools, the PCATD development community, anrl 

individuals desiring to engage in self-guided flight 

instruction. In addition to these expanded uses of 

the guidelines, Figure S illusttates how perfounan~ 

data could be collected from each Pan 141 school 

employing a PCA TD in its curriculum that could be 

i3 

used to lend additional s-upport to the va!idit:v of the 

guidelines. The perfor:nano:: data would be collected and S.:."llt to a centralized location t" be attalyzed and studied. The data could be used in lieu of 

a fonna.lized empirical validation of tlre guidelines, 

should such an approach prove ccs! prohibitive. 

EXPECTED BE:'ffiFITS 

The approach recow.:nended here has a nu.-nher of 

benefits for both !he FAA. PCATD developers, ar.C 

the pilot training cmnmunity: 

FA.4. 

• Provides specific guidelines to local FSDO inspectors for approving a PCA TD for use within 

a Pan 141 flight school Cll.'"riculum 

• Avoids the untenable position of trying to develop an hours-based crediting system for 

PCATDs. contingem on an expected level of 

transfer of training 

• Allows market forces to be involved in determining which training devices are the best 

and/or most useful 

• Provides detailed guidance to the PCATD development COIILT.unity as to specific design 

characteristics required to achie~·e task qualification 

• Provides for the aircraft to be used as the validating instnnnent for demonstrating the usefulness of any particular PCATD 

• Limits t.lre need for new govem-nenr regu.!aticm.s 

PCATD Devclope.""S 

• 

• 

• 

• 

Pro".!"des useful ~'!"delm" a.c- f'n.,. '14-,a. n .. ,~ .. ll"\~ont ~W ilo 'Wol •""-' ...s..~... .,......, • "'l.Vt'.t..aa,..a~ 

of robust training systems 

Does not stifle creativity by placing costly 

hardware constraints on the syst:ms 

Allows systems to be eng~red for differe."lt 

levels of training {different certificates and ratings or individual tasks and task sets) 

Provides def.nitive design guidance ro PCATD 

developers on how to a::h:eve m;,re marketable 

and effec:ive PCA TD products 
:.r .. ~· 

Ci -1->-

~J ... ,,, 

..0 

[•0 

·D 

0' 

... 

C

-- -·-·-----~- ... ~ 

~A r P A.$.$-e&Gment 

Ae~areh and 

Developmonl -

est a.1d r:vatuat!oo 

---· .. ·-··-"'. 

,,,...,w ___ '"""7"'1; 

'l- ~:~~-- [·~j;,;~:~-.... - Oovek>pnWlnt PCATD 

Commumry : tocfmolo!IYY 

......,..r:---· --.--,---·-

.;;~~~~-~~rl ~!~i~~~~. POT gut.:te!1nat J qualif\att1on 

opltmtzed gu!dettnes 

------ - r;~;~~;;.~J !itudyor 

pronckJncy 

procuoo .... ..._., .. ____ _ 

Figuro 5. Expanded Use of PCATO Oualificalioln Guidelines 
Training Community 

• Provides for formal integration of PCA' fDs into 

the flight training process 

• Allows more selective, tailored use of PCA TDs 

in both flight schools and by individual trainees 

• P :ovides individuals and flight schools with an 

objective hasis for choosing among PCATD 

options 

• Retains the CFI as an integral part of LIJe training process 

• Accounts for individual differences between 

trainees by providing a way for slower learning 

trainees to increase their training time (at home) 

without greatly increasing costs for them 

• Organizes guidelines according to the particular 

certificate or rating sought, allowing a more focused use of the PCATD 

One final advantage is that this approach will provide the incentive to develop ground and flight 

15 

'r.,~n;nn nY"I"\nr-:~.TnS th.o:~r !lr• mo-r• int"g'"t"d Cur- " "'U.I.U~b Y"Vb&"'-i .. .t uili" MLW u •- a.a • ..,. o.- "" • _. 

remly marketed ground training and flight simulation programs employ two distinct approaches. The 

ground training approach involves teaching flightrelevant knowledge (e.g., procedures, weather, 

flight planning, airport lighting). The flight simulation approach allows the practice of flight skills 

(e.g., takeoffs, landings, turns). The knowledge approach involves more traditional computer-assisted 

instructional methods of providing specific feedback, repetition learning, and review of ;hose areas 

wher• the student needs help. The flight skills approach, on the other hand, has left most of the 

instructional management up to the student. An 

integration of these approaches would result in a 

more effective system for training in both the skills 

and knowledge necessary for flying an aircraft. The 

guidelir.es that would be developed in this project 

would encourage such an integration and lead to 

more effective training systems. 
REFERENCES 

Anderson, J. R. (1982). Acquisition of cognirive 

skill. P5)'chological Review, 89(4), 369-406. 

Anderson, J. R. (198i). Skill acquisition: Compilation of weak-method problem solutions. 

Psychological Review, 94(2), I 92-2 I 0. 

Caro. P. W. (1988). Flight training and simulation. 

In E. L. Wiener & D. C. 2'\agel (Eds.), Human Factors in Aviation. San Diego: Academic Press, 229-261. 

Depanment of Transportation/Federal A>iation 

Administration. Instrument Fiying Handbook. Washington. D.C.: Federal Aviation 

Administration; 1980. Advisory Circular no. 

AC 61-27C. 

Department of Transportaticn:'Federal Aviation 

Admini•tration. Airplane Flight Training 

Device Qualification. Washington, D.C.: 

Federal Aviation Administration: February 

5, 1992. Advisory Circular no. AC l20-45A. 

Department of Transportatio11!federa! Aviation 

Administration. Advanced Qualification 

Program. Washington, D.C.: Federal A>iation Administration; August 9, 1991. Advisory Circular no. AC 120-54. 

Department of T ransportation/F edcral Aviation 

Administration. l11Strument Ratin~ Practical 

Test Sr(]Jldards. Washington, D.C.: Federal 

Aviation Administration Flight Standards 

Service; August. 1989. FAA publication no. 

FAA-S-808J-4A. 

Fitts, P.M. {1962). Factors in complex skill training. 

In Glaser. R. {Ed.} Training research and 

education. University of Pittsburgh. 

(Reprinted in 1965, New York: Wiley.) 

16 

Forster, S. (i99i). Technical requirements for a 

third-generation PC-based instrument flight 

simulator. In Sadlowe, A. S. {Ed.) PC-based 

instrument flight simulation - A first collection of papers. (TS-Vol. 4). ~ew York: 

American Society of Mechanical Engineers. 

Hampton, S., Moroney, W., Kirton, T., Biers, W .. 

Eisterhoutd, J., King, C., and Wright, J. 

(1993). An experiment to determine the 

transfer effectiveness of PC-based training 

devices for teaching instrument flying. 

(CAAR-15471-93·1 ). Washington, D.C.: 

Federal Aviation Administration. 

Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). JJental Jfodels: Toward' a Cognitive Science of Language. Inference, and Consciousness. Cambridge, 

;\fA: Harvard University Press. Cambridge. 

Engl.: Cambridge University Press. 

L. D. (1990}. Transfer of landing skills in 

beginning flight training. Human Factors, 

32(3), 319-327. 

Miller, R. B. (1954). Psychological considerations 

in the design of training equipment. Report No 

54-563. Ohio: Wright Air Development Cemer. 

Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. 

Ortiz, G. A (1993). PC-based flight simulation effectiveness. Proceedings of the Seventh International Journal of A'·iation PsycholoJ;D-· 

(pp. 698-701 ). Columbus, OH. 

Patrick. J. (1992). Training: Research and Practice. 

San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 

Phillips. S. L Hulin. C. L., and I..amennayer, P. J. 

(1993). Uses of part-task trainers in instrument flight training. Proceedings of the Seventh International Journal of Avialion Ps}•-

cholOJ;D' (pp. 743-746). Columbus, OH. 
Rasmussen, J. (!986). lnfonnation Processing and 

H11111an-Machine lntercction: An Approach 

to Cognitive Engineering. Elsevier Science 

Publishing Co.lnc.: New York. 

Roscoe, S. N. (198(1). Transfer and cost effectiveness 

of ground-based flight trainers. In Roscoe, S. 

N. (Ed.) Aviatiou Psychology. Iowa State 

University Press: Ames, Iowa. 

17 

Sadlowe, A. S. (Ed.). (1991). PC-based instrument flight simulation - A first collection 

of papers. (TS-Vol. 4). New York: 

American Society of Mecha."lical Engineer~~. 

ADA292961 
APPENDIX A. 

EXPANDED FLIGHT T.A...SK LISTING FOR AIRCRAFT INSTRUMENT RATING. 

I. 0 Ground Phase 

1.1 Obtaining weather information 

1.2 Cross-country flight planning 

!. 3 Aircraft systems related to IFR ooerations 

1.4 Aircraft flight instruments and navigation 

equipment 

1.5 Instrument cockpit check 

2.0 Flight by Reference to Instruments 

2.1 Straight-and-level flight 

2.2 Change of airspeed 

2.3 Constant airspeed climbs to altitude 

2.4 Constant rate climbs to altirude 

2.5 Constant airspeed descents to altitude 

2.6 Constant rate descents to altitude 

2. 7 Precision descent 

2.8 Non-precision descent 

2.9 Level turns 

2. 10 Standard rate turns 

2.11 Shon turns 

2.12 Climbing turns 

2. !3 Descending turns 

2. 14 Steep turns 

3. 0 Al1Ilatmi!1 snd Emergency Proce.iurc!i 

3.! Unusual attitudes 

3.2 Timed t<!rns 

3.3 Compass turns 

3.4 Partial panel maneuvers 

3. 5 Loss of communications 

3.6 Instrument failure 

3. 7 Systems failure 

3.8 Turbulence 

3.9 Engine failure 

3.10 Lost procedures 

4.0 Ra~io Navigation Procedures 

4.1 VOR Navigation 

4.2 NDB Navigation 

4.3 Localizer & ILS Navigation 

4.4VOR/DME 

Al 

4.5 VOR holding pattern 

4.6 NDB holding pattern 

4. 7 Localizer holding pattern 

4.8 DME holding pattern 

4.9 Intersection holding pattern 

5. 0 Instrument Approaches 

5.1 VOR!VORTAC instrument approach 

procedure 

5.2 NDB instrument approach procedure 

5.3 ILS!MLS instrument approach procedure 

5.4 ILS back course approach procedure 

5.5 RNAV approach procedure 

5.6 Missed approach procedure 

6.0 Communications Procedures 

6.1 Air Traffic Control Clearance 

6.2 Departure clearances 

6. 3 Enroute clearances 

6.4 Arrival clearances 

7.0 Cross-countty Procedures 

7. l Departure procedures 

7.2 Enroutt: procedures 

7.3 Arrival procedures 

AIJA/9?%1 
APPE''!\.'DJX B. 

BASELINE QUALIFICATION Gl.JIDELU\'ES 

This appendix includes the baseline PCATD qualificttion guidelines. The guidelhtes, given below, specify 

general device characteristics that any PC-based simulation device should possess regardless of the type of 

trainicg to be done. These guidelines are divided into four categories: (1) controls, (2) displays, (3) flight 

dynamics, and (4) instruc!ional management. 

Controls. 

Controls used in the PC-based simulation device can be of two types. bot.lt physical and virtual. Both types 

of controls should be recognizable a> to their function and how they can be manipulated so!ely from their 

appearance. This requirement eliminates the use of a keyboard to control the simulated aircraft (although a 

keyboard may still be used in controlling aspects of the simulation su.:h as setting initial aircraft state, 

location, wirui, etc.). A virtual control is defmed here as a realistic graphical representation of a control, 

displayed on the computer screen, that can be unambiguously manipulated through the use of a computer 

input device. An example of a virtual control is a realistic-looking flaps switch that is displayed on the 

computer screen and manipulated through any computer cursor-control device, such as a mouse, or more 

directly with touch-screen technology. The cursor is positioned on the flaps switch and "pressed'. by an 

appropriate action with the input device. A virtual control provides a sense of dire.:t manipulation of a 

control without requiring the presence of external hardware. 

L A physical, self-centering, displacement yoke or control stick that allows continuous adjustment to rate 

of change of pitch and bank. 

2. Physical, self-centering rudder pedals that allow continuous adjustment to rate of change of yaw. 

3. A physical thronle control that allows continuous movement from idle to full power settings. 

4. Physical or virtual controls for flaps, pitch trim, communication and navigation radios. VOR, ADF, and 

a clock or timer. It is not necessary that the pitch trim control relieve control pressure as it does in an 

actual aircraft. However, !he pitch trim control might allow the simulated aircraft to be stabilized at any 

particular pitch attitude with the yoke 01 control stick in the neutra1 position. 

5. Time from control input to recognizable system response (trar..sport delay) should be 300 milJ!secgnds or 

less 

Displays. 

6. Displays represented should include an altimeter. heading indicator. airspeed indicator, vertical speed 

indicator, tum and bank coordinator, attitude indicator, tachometer, flaps setting, pitch t!'im indication, 

communication and navigation radios, VOR (with ILS indicator), with an aural, morse code 

identification feature. ADF, with an aural, morse code identification feature, clock or timer, and a 

magnetic compass. 

7. Relative layout of the primary displays muse correspond to the standard "T" configuration with (a) 

airspeed, (b) attitude and (c) altimeter forming the "cap" with (d) the heading indicator, located in the 

·stem" below the attitude indicator. 

8. Relative size, shape, and information content of displays should resemble those found commonly in a 

single-engine, fixed-pitch propeller, basic training aircraft with a fiXed gear. 

Bl 
9. Disp!ay update should be 10Hz or faster. 

10. Th~ smallest display changes should be discriminable from pilot's n:1rmal operating position and 

correspond to the following information: 

Airspeed indicator Change of lkt. or less in airspeed 

Attitude indicator Change of 2° or less pitch or bank 

Altimeter Change of !Oft. or less in al!irude 

Tum and bank Change of l/4 standard rate tum or less 

Heading indicator Change of l c or iess in heading 

VSI Change of 20ft. ptr min. or less in altitude 

Tachometer Change of 25 RPM or less in engine power output 

VORJILS Change of 112 dot or less in beari'lg deviarion 

ADF Change of I c or less in beari.11g 

Clock or ti.;ner Change of 1 second or less 

11. Displays should reflect dynamic behavior of an actual aircraft display (e.g., VSI 

reading of -500fpm i; reflected by a corresponding movement in altimeter. an increase in throctle is 

reflected by an immediate increase in RPM indicator, etc.). 

Flight Dynamics. 

12. Flight dynar:1ics of the simulated aircraft should be consistent with a single-engine, fiXed gear, basic 

trainmg aircraft with a fixed-pitch propelier. 

!3. Aircraft performance parameters (maximum speed, cruise speed. stall speed. maxin1urn climb rate) 

should be consistent with a single-engine. fixed gear, basic training aircraft with a fil:ed-pitch propeller. 

14. Aircraft venical !ift component should change as a function of bank, consistent with a single-engine. 

fixed gear, basic training aircraft with a fixed-pitch propeller. 

15. Changes in flap set:ing st.ould be accompanied by appropriate changes in flight dynamics. 

Instructional Management. 

16 U•ser should be able to pn•·~- th~ -··~•-, ........ ""+ '"'-"'~ .,..,....;..,. .. .-.... ~ "'1-..o. ..,_,,.....,..,..,,.,. nf ro••A;~.;.~,..-. in~trtl<"'t;nn T",:lo('I·:)T"fi:1nn · dU:!i'l; U: ~J~lCill 41. dU) }J\JillL J.Vl ~l\. }JU.Lj-'V.},\,. Vl ................. UJS Ul,\IU ... UV•• H .. b~'.uub 

the task. 

17. For the purpose of beginning a training session wiL.~ the 3ircraft already in the a~r and ready for the 

perfom1ance of a particular maneuver. the user should be able to manipulate t.'le following system 

parameters independently of the simulation: 

Geographic aircraft location (location with!..'! !he av:!!!ahk d!g!t!wl sp<!re) 

Aircraft heading 

Aircraft airspeed 

Aircraft altitude 

EngbeRPM 

18. The system shnuld be capable of recording both a horizontal and vertical track of aircraft position 

during the perfonnance of a task for later playback and review. 

B2 

Af\ 
APPENDIX C. 

EXAMPLE TASK A."'ALYS!S 

Certificate: instrument Rating 

Task Set: 5.0 Instrument Approaches 

Tasl: 5.1 VOR!VORTAC il'.smrment approach proc~ure 

LearniDc Objectives 

5 .1.1 Initial approach segment 

5 .1.1.1 Take out appropriate approach plate 

5.1.!.2 Find primary and secondary VORs {if present) on approach plate 

5.1.1.3 Set primary VOR frequency on N.~ Vl and icent 

5.1.1.4 Set s:condary VOR frequency on NAV2 and ident 

5.1.1.5 Select final approach h<:ading on OBSl 

5.1.1.6 Select heading from secondary VOR on OB..'\2 for identification of FAF 

5.1. I. 7 From approach plate, note missed approach procedure and MDA 

5.1.1.8 Maintain straight-.md-level flight 

5.1.1.9 Reset heading iOOicator to magnetic compass reading 

5.1.1.1 Tum to headings under direction of ATC. Typical ATC instruCtion is as foilows •Turn left 

heading 210•, maintain 3800 until established on final approach course, cleared for VOR 17L 

;;;pproach at Will Rogers. • 

5.1.1.11 Readback ATC instructions 

5.1.1.12 Monitor co~ direction indicator (CDI) to primary VOR 

5.1.1.13 A& CDI centers, rum to fmal approach heading and track radial inbound 

5 .1.2 Intermediate approach segment 

5.1.2.1 Continue to track r:zdial inbound 

S.1.2.2 R~~e ~ lQ% t~ 20% ~h\le desce!ldin~ to a.p)W.l}lti.ate ~~'.'.t alt~':.llde i.M~t~ <!~ 

approach plat-:: at approximately 500 FPM 

5.1.2.3 Begin level off at appropriate point prior to reaching desired altitude 

5.1.2.4 Maintain straight-and-level flig.it until you reach final approach fix 

5.1.3 Final approach segment 

5.1.3.1 Communicate to tower that FAF has been passed, for example, "Cessna 918, passing Kongg". 

5.1.3.2 Stan timer (in order to identify missed approach point, unless DME equipment is available or 

FAF is positioned at the runway). 

5.1.3.3 Begin descent to appropriate segment altirude at 500-700fpm. 

5. i .3.4 Select bearing on OBS2 for idenlification of next intersection (if applicable) 

5.i.3.5 Select first stage flaps (depending on aircraft, not in a Cessna 172) 

5.1.3.6 Continue to track radial inbound 

5.1.3. 7 Monitor secondary CDI to identify final intersection passage 

5.1.3.8 Level CJff until past final ir.1ersection 

5.1.3.9 l!egin descent to MDA at 500-/00ipm 

Cl 

I 
5.1.3.10Level off at MDA 

5.1.3.11 At missed approach point make decision w perform a missed approach or to land. 

Input R~iwnems: 

Pitch attitude 

Bank attitude 

Yaw attitude 

Race of change of pitch 

Rate of change of bank 

Rate of change of yaw 

Altitude 

Heading 

Airspeed 

Power setting 

VOR station frequency and bearing 

NDB station frequency and bearing 

Instrument approach procedure plates 

TL'lle elapsed from specific points 

Radio conununications from ATC 

Outpu; Requjremems;. 

Rate of change of pitch 

Rare of change of bank 

Rate of change of yaw 

Engine power output 

VOR &1ation frequency 

?-~'DB station frequency 

Course deviation L'ldicaror S~!!ing 

Timer or clock setting 

Radio communications to A TC 

Input/Output Requirements 

Training Considerations 

The user should be able to begin th.e task with the aircrait j?OSitioned in the air. at a reasonable altitude for 

maneuvering. in straight-and-level flight, ar cruising speed. at a position 5 mi.'lmes prior to begi:ming the 

intermediate approa~h segment to allow time to ;.:cure approa~h chan. set up navigational frequencies, reset 

heading indicator to magnetic compass. and re,·icw approach procedure. The system should provide 

feedback regarding the maintenance of neading within 10°. airspeed wi:hin lO knots. ba.'1.\ within se. 

altitude within l 00 feet. CDI withL"l a full-scale deflection prior to the final approach segmen: and a threequarter-scale deflection during final approach. and ADF bearing \\ithin 10'. During final approa~h. t.'le 

system should provide feedback regarding malntainmg a!tit.urle within 100 feet~ bu: no! below the minimum 

descem alrirude m:ril reaching the mi~sed approach point . . >\mounr of crosswind should be \'aried fr<'m no!le 

to at least lO kts. ATC cornmunica:ions can be provided by the inmuc:or. Although the ex=ple used rv.·o 

VQRs. this task can be accomplished using one VOR and m:e ADF. Finally. it is required that at least some 

C2 
of t..~e approaches practiced are 1oca~ to the uainhtg area. wttich requires that u1e PCA TD have 4 lvwi 

navig<~tional data base. 

Baseline qualification guide!lne5 

Controls: 

Physical commwications radio micmpho1:~ 

Displays: 

D.O:te 

Flight Dynamics: 

The presence and amount of wind are reflected in the handling and performarn:e qualities of tl:e si:nulated 

aircraft and are consistent with a single-engine, fixed gear. basic training aircraft with :: fixr i-pit~h 

propeller 

Instructional Management: 

Feedback is presented by the system regarding maintaining the CDI within a specified level of deflection. 

Feedback is presemed by the system regarding maintaining the ADF bearing within a specified level of 

deviation 

Feedback is presented by the system regarding maintaining altirude within 100 feet. but oot below the 

minimum d=ent altitude 

Instrucror can control the amount of wind encountered during the performance of the task botlJ before ..he 

session begins and during the session. 

PCA TD has a navigational area data base t.lJat is local:c the training facility 

. '