**RE: PETITION FOR EXEMPTION:**

**COMPANY REQUESTING EXEMPTION**  **:** ELITE Simulation Solutions, 5700 Dot Com Court, Suite 1010, Oviedo, FL 32765 **CONTACT INFORMATION:** Telephone 407

- 359

-8787 (office) 407

- 766

- 5598 (cellular); email 

### john@flyelite.com
**REQUEST** : In accordance with 14CFR 11.61, ELITE Simulation Solutions, requests exemption of the 10 hour creditable time limitation imposed by 14 CFR § 61.65(i).

“ (i) Use of an aviation training device. A m axim um of 10 hours of instrument time received in an aviation training device may be credited for the instrument time requirements of this section if

—“

**EXTENT OF EXEMPTION**  **REQUESTED:** ELITE Simulation Solutions (ESS) requests exemption from the 10 hour limitation imposed by 14 CFR § 61.65(i). Specifically, ESS request s authority to use the 20 hour provision specified under 14 CFR 61.65(h)(2) as awarded in previous letters of authorization (LOA) for Advanced Aviation Training Devices (AATDs) issu ed to ELITE Simulation Solutions by AFS 8 00.

1. **Background :**  a. Since 2003, ELITE Simulation Solutions has received 9 Letters of Approval for 9 AATDs. Three of these nine LOAs have been issued since 2009. Each LOA authorized 20 hours of IFR flight credit under Section 61.65(e) (2) and 61.65(h)(2). Since the inception of AATDs in 2003 , they became (as shown in the 20 hour credits in the above sections ) , the de facto replacement for discontinued FTD Level 3 devices. b. The latest three LOAs issued in August / September 2013 (attached) use 61.65(i) as the approving authority for instrument experience which reduces authorized IFR flying credits of all “ATDs” to 10 hours. c. 14 CFR 61.65(i) makes a general reference of ATD s (aviation training device s ) and does not m ake the distinction between a Basic ATD and Advanced ATD as d efined in AC 61

- 136. d. Arbitrarily reducing IFR flying credits because of an admitted inconsistency and omission in 61.65(i) is punitive in nature and should not be used as IFR credit authority pending clarification and correction. **2. Reason for Requesting Exemption**  a. For 10 years AATDs have been authorized for 20 IFR credit hours. Correcting an inconsistency in the CFR by reducing hours to 10 credit hours results places an unnecessary economic burde n on all manufacturers of AATDs and customers who are planning to purchase AATD’s. This economic burden threatens the business viability of ESS and all AATD manufacturers in the domestic and foreign training markets and subsequently threatens the liveliho od of many of US citizens. b. The AATD has become an essential component in the “Training Landscape” for flight training organizations engaged in instrument training. The more restrictive interpretation and subsequent rule will result in a substantial negative change to the training programs associated with training pilots seeking an instrument rating. This change, if allowed to remain , will impose a training penalty upon the aviation training industry.3. **Reasons Granting an Exemption I s In the Public Interest:**  a. Reducing the cost of aviation training is in the public interest. The reduction in creditable time for an AATD ultimately makes training for an instrument rating more expensive without improving the quality of the training. b. Th e public as a whole benefits when the efficiency of pilot training is improved through cost reductions. The cost differential between an AATD and FTD or airplane is very substantial due to the more stringent certification requirements of the FTD and the h igh cost of operating an airplane. c. The aviation industry is facing significant challenges related to training (1500 hour rule, impending pilot retirements, overall shortage of well

-trained pilots and crews )

. Reducing the creditable use of the AATD from 2 0 hours to 10 hours is inconsistent with lowering training costs and improved safety, proficiency, efficiency and effectiveness. d. The AATD has been in use at the 20 creditable hour level for several years (since first approved by AFS 8 00) with positive results, and attendant cost savings to the public through the pilots who have trained using the AATD. The decade of AATD use represents thousands of credit hours for thousands of students... many of whom are our professional pilots. The hist ory and value of 20 hours of IFR credit is clear. e. The economy overall has been struggling for several years, with the small business aviation training industry bearing a disproportionate share. Aviation training is expensive and the reduction in creditabl e AATD hours will make business viability more difficult for manufacturers and training organizations using the AATD.

**4. Reasons Safety is Not Compromised**  **:**

**a. T**  raining completed in an AATD using the 20 hour criteria has inherently less risk than the same 20 hours training completed in an aircraft. b. The AATD has been shown to be safe when used within the confines of approval by AFS 8 00. Conversely the use of the AATD with the 20 creditable hour allowance has not been shown to have any unsafe effect on the issuance of the instrument rating. c. ESS AATD s ha ve been in service since 200 3 . During this time, the AATD has been authorized up to 20 hours maximum of creditab le time toward the instrument training time requirements for issuance of the instrument rating. There have been no documented incidents or accidents attributed to the use of the AATD for 20 hours during training for the instrument rating. **d.** Training toward an instrument rating completed in an AATD provides a level of task challenge and learning equal to or better than the same training provided in an aircraft, yet the training environment is lower risk than the same training provided in an aircraft. e. The technology embedded in the AATD has improved continuously since the AATD was first approved . The currently manufactured AATD exhi bits highly advanced capability and a high degree of fidelity between the AATD and a similar training aircraft. Transfer of learning for Tasks learned in an AATD is very high and for most instrument tasks can be applied directly to flying an airplane under instrument conditions.

5. **SUMMARY FOR PUBLICATION IN FEDERAL REGISTER:** ELITE Simulation Solutions, a manu facturer of Advanced Aviation Training Devices, seeks an exemption to rule 14 CFR § 61.65(i) which limits creditable time toward an instrument rating to 10 hours. ELITE Simulation Solutions seeks restoration of 20 hours maximum as previously grante d under Letters of Authorization is sued which used 61.65(e) and (h) as the IFR flying credit authorization**6. RULE FROM WHICH EXEMPTION IS SOUGHT:**  **14 CFR § 61.65(i)** 

7. **ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:**

a. The 10 Hour restriction is, in our opinion, appropriate for a Basic Aviation Training Device (BATD). b. The approval authority for Aviation Training Devices, AFS

- 8 0 0 uses distinct criteria to certify an Aviation Training Device as either a BATD or an AATD. Accordingly, the capabilities of the AATD are more advanced when compared to the BATD, yet regula tion 61.65(i) treats them as equal in terms of capability which is inconsistent with AC 61

- 136. c. We believe the current rule restricting creditable time to 10 hours is excessively restrictive, partially because it doe s not differentiate between the criteria established by AFS 8 00 for certifying the different levels of the device. d. An exemption based on the rule’s lack of distinct ion between capabilities of the BATD and AATD would seem appropriate pending greater analysi s of the differences. e. The AATD is certified by AFS

- 810 under the provisions of AC 61

- 136, using more stringent criteria which results in a training devi ce (AATD) with significantly enhanced capability to impart task concepts and task mastery through train ing . The AATD therefore provides a much more immersive training experience when compared to the BATD

. f. In most cases, the AATD is equipped with more advanced technology than a similar aircraft. When applied to the task performance requirements of Instru ment Training Standard FAA 8081

-4e, the AATD is demonstrably advanced over the BATD

. g. The value of the training completed in an AATD has improved by virtue of improvements in technology. We believe it is also important to consider that many pilots after b eing awarded an instrument rating will go on to more technically advanced aircraft. The technology built into to AATD supports the progression of pilots to more advanced technology. h. The restriction has the effect of being punitive in nature to an entire industry because it affects manufacturers and all training organizations that use the AATD. i. The AATD was a windfall to the (public) training industry precisely because the device is relatively inexpensive compared with an aircraft, it is much safer and less expensive to operate, and it produces a high level of fidelity in training operations. The rule, 61.65(i) , has the effect of debilitating the training industry at a time when economic factors have all but killed aviation training for the public. j. Si nce most countries accept AATDs based on the FAA certification and credits allowed, reducing IFR flying credits to 10 hours will have global implications and will be detrimental for US companies competing in the world market. **k.** For these reasons, in our o pinion, it is appropriate to grant an exemption authorizing a maximum 20 hours of creditable time when training is accomplished using an AATD.

John Dixon President/CEO ELITE Simulation Solutions