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 maximum 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 requests 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) issued to ELITE Simulation 

Solutions by AFS 800.

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 ATDs (aviation training devices) and does 

not make the distinction between a Basic ATD and Advanced ATD as defined 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 burden 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 livelihood 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 Is 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. The 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 high 

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 20 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 800) 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 history 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 creditable AATD hours will make business viability more 

difficult for manufacturers and training organizations using the AATD. 

4. Reasons Safety is Not Compromised:

a. Training 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 

800. 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 AATDs have been in service since 2003. During this time, the AATD has been 

authorized up to 20 hours maximum of creditable 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 exhibits 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 manufacturer 

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 granted under Letters of Authorization issued 

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-800 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 regulation 

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 does not differentiate between the criteria established by 

AFS 800 for certifying the different levels of the device.

d. An exemption based on the rule’s lack of distinction between capabilities of the BATD 

and AATD would seem appropriate pending greater analysis 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 device (AATD) with significantly enhanced

capability to impart task concepts and task mastery through training. 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 Instrument 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 being 

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. Since 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 opinion, 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