US. Department 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

Advisory 

Circular 

AC 120-40B 

Date: 7/ 2Q/Ql 

AIRPLANE SIMULATOR 

QUALIFICATION 

_--.-__ 

Initiated By: ASO- 
. Advisory 

Circular 

AIRPLANE SIMULATOR 

QUALIFICATION 

-- - _.______- -_______ 

Date: 7129191 ACNE. 1%4OB 

Initiated by: ASO- chge~ 

I l PURPOSE. This advisory circular (AC) provides an acceptable means, but not the 

only means, of compliance with the Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) regarding the 

evaluationand qualification of airplane simulatorsused in training programs or airmen 

checking under Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). Criteria specified in this 

AC are those used by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to determine.whether 

a simulator is qualified and the qualification level. While these guidelines are not 

mandatory, they are derived from extensive FAA and industry experience in determining 

compliance with the pertinent FAR. Mandatory terms used in this AC such as "shall" 

or "must" are used only in the sense of ensuring applicability of this particular 

method of compliance when the acceptable method of compliance described herein is 

used. Applicable regulations, must also be referenced to assure compliance with the 

provisions therein. This AC does not change regulatory requirements or create 

additional ones, and does not authorize changes in, or deviations from, regulatory 

requirements. The provisions of the FAR are controlling. This document does not 

interpret the regulations. Interpretations are issued only under established agency 

procedures. This AC applies only to the evaluation of airplane simulators. See, for 

example, AC 120-45, Advanced Training Devices (Airplane Only) Evaluation and 

Qualification. 

2 CANCELLATION. AC 120040A, Airplane Simulator and Visual System Evaluation, dated 

J;ly 31, 1986, is canceled. Operators having simulator improvement or acquisition 

projects in progress on the effective date df this advisory circular have 90 days from 

the effective date to notify the National Simulator Program Manager (NSPM) of those 

projects which the operator desires to complete under the provisions of AC 120-40A. 

3 RELATED FAR SECTIONS. 

.6i Appendix A; 

FAR Part 1; FARSections 61.57, 61.58, and 61.157, FAR Part 

FAR Section 63.39, FAR Part 63 Appendix C; FAR Sections 121.407, 

121.409, 121.439, and 121.441; FAR Part 121 Appendices E, F, and H; FAR Sections 

125.285, 125.287, 125.291, and 125.297; and FAR Sections 135,293, 135.297, 135.323, 

and 135.335. 

.4 RELATED READING MATERIAL. 

Landing Weather Minima; 

AC 120028C, Criteria for Approval of Category III 

AC 12049, Criteria for Approving Category I and Category II 

Landing Minima for FAR 121 Operators; AC 120035B, Line Operational Simulations: LineOriented Flight Training, Special Purpose Operational Training, Line Operational 

Evaluation; AC' 120-41, Criteria for Operational Approval of Airborne Wind Shear 

Alerting and Flight Guidance Systems; AC 120-45, Advanced Training Devices (Airplane 

Only) Evaluation and Qualification; AC 120-46, Use of Advanced Training Devices 

(AirplaneOnly); AC 150/5300-13,Airport Design; AC 150/5340-IF, Marking of Paved Areas 

on Airports; AC 150/5340-4C, Installation Details for Runway Centerline Touchdown Zone 

Lighting Systems; AC 150/5340-19, Taxiway Centerline Lighting System; AC 150/534b-24, 

Runway and Taxiway Edge Lighting System; and AC 150/5345-28D, Precision Approach Path 

Indicator (PAPI) Systems. 
AC 120040B- 7729791 

5 . BACKGROUND. 

a. The availability of advanced technology has permitted greater use of 

flight simulators for training and checking of flight crewmembers. The 

complexity, costs, and operating environment of modern aircraft also has 

encouraged broader use of advanced simulation. Simulators can provide more 

indepth training than can be accomplished in airplanes and provide a very high 

transfer of learning and behavior from the simulator to the airplane. The use 

of simulators, in lieu of airplanes, results in safer flight training and cost 

reductions for the operators. It also achieves fuel conservation and reduction 

in adverse environmental effects. 

b Astechnologyprogressed and the capabilities of flight simulation were 

recognized, FAR revisions were made to permit the increased use of simulators 

in approved training programs. Simulators have been used in training and some 

checking programs since the middle 1950's. Various FAR amendments gradually 

permitted additional simulator credits. The most significant recognition of 

simulator capability has occurred since the early 1970's. In December 1973, FAR 

Amendments 61-62 and 121-108 permitted additional use of visual simulators. 

Amendments to FAR Section 121.439 permitted simulators approved for “the landing 

maneuver” to be substituted for the airplane in a pilot recency of experience 

qualification. These changes to the FAR constituted a significant step toward 

the development of Amendments 61-69 and 121-161 issued June 24, 1980, which 

contained the FAA Advanced Simulation Plan. To support this plan, the National 

Simulator Evaluation Program was established by the FAA in October 1980. The 

program is administered and directed by the NSPM. 

c. The need for standard criteria was necessitated by the use of 

simulators for training and checking. The evolution of the simulator technology 

and the concomitant increased permitted use has required a similar evolution of 

the criteria for simulator qualification. A listing of known simulator criteria 

should, therefore, be informative. The qualification basis for a given simulator 

may be any of the past criteria, depending on when the simulator was first 

approved or last upgraded. The following list provides the effective dates of 

simulator qualification criteria documents: 

FAR Part 121, Appendix B 

AC 121-14 

AC 121014A 

AC 121014B 

FAR Part 121, Appendix H 

AC 121014C 

AC 120-40 

AC 120-40A 

l/9/65 to 2/2/70 

12/19/69 to 2/9/76 

2/9/76 to 10/16/78 

10/16/78 to 8/29/80 

6/30/80 to Present 

8/29/80 to l/31/83 

l/31/83 to 7/31/86 

7/31/86 

Each of these documents has addressed the greater complexity represented by 

succeeding generations of simulators. Complexity of the highest level is not, 

however, required of all simulators. In fact, simulators are divided into levels 

Par 5 
7129191 - AC 120040B 

that authorize additional training and checking with increased simulator 

capability. Until the advent of the Advanced Simulation Plan, there were two 

levels of simulators --nonvisual andvisual. Some visual simulators were approved 

for “the landing maneuver l ” The Advanced Simulation Plan introduced three 

additional levels--Phase I, Phase II, and Phase III. Those visual simulators 

previously approved for “the landing maneuver” were incorporated into Phase I. 

The training and checking credits for nonvisual and visual simulators were 

delineated in FAR Part 61, Appendix A, and FAR Part 121, Appendices E and F. 

Credits for Phases I, II, and III were contained in the Advanced Simulation 

Plan. Four levels of simulators were, therefore, addressed; Basic (nonvisual 

and visual simulators), Phase I, Phase II, and Phase III. Each of the four 

levels is progressively more complex than the preceding level and each contains 

all the features of preceding levels plus the requirements for the designated 

level. As the technology has advanced, so has the qualification guidance. 

Efforts to keep the criteria updated are, therefore, ongoing with active 

participation from both industry and government resources. 

d Continuing this same process, the FAA, in coordination with industry, 

has reiiewed a wide spectrum of devices used in training in order to provide 

guidance on required standards and permitted uses. While recognizing the 

requirement to categorize and define training devices, it became obvious that 

the designation of simulators was outmoded. The concept of phases was no longer 

applicable since it derived from an FAR provision which allowed operators to 

upgrade their simulator inventories in phases while enjoying certain simulator 

use privileges. The concept of upgrade in phases is essentially complete and 

the designation of “phase” for identification of simulator complexitv is no 

longer descriptive. Operators no longer begin at a lower level of qualification 

and upgrade in phases. The tendency is to acquire a given level simulator that 

best suits their position. Therefore, simulators were redesignated. The new 

designations and their relationships with the simulator definitions used 

previously and in FAR Part 121, Appendix H, are: 

Level A - Visual 

Level B - Phase I 

Level C - Phase II 

Level D - Phase III 

Nonvisual simulators are now grouped with Level 6 training devices, but must meet 

the requirements, except for visual, of a Level A simulator. There is no other 

change in their characteristics or description; just their “name.” Alphabetic 

designations were chosen for simulators to maintain a distinction from the 

numerically designated training devices. 

6 . DEFINITIONS. 

a. Airplane Simulator is a full size replica of a specific type or make, 

model, and series airplane cockpit, including the assemblage of equipment and 

computer programs necessary to represent the airplane in ground and flight 

operations, a visual system providing an out-of-the-cockpit view, and a force 

Par 5 
AC 120~40B-. 7129191 

cueing system which provides cues at least equivalent to that of a three 

degrees-of-freedommotion system; and is incompliance withtheminimum standards 

for Level A simulator. 

b Approval Test Guide (ATG) is a document designed to validate that the 

performance and handling qualities of a simulator agree within prescribed limits 

with those of the airplane and that all applicable regulatory requirements have 

been met. The ATG includes both the airplane and simulator data used to support 

the validation. The Master Approval Test Guide (MATG) is the FAA approved ATG 

and incorporates the results of FAA witnessed tests. The MATG serves as the 

reference for future evaluations. 

c. Convertible Simulator is a simulator in which hardware and software 

can be changed so that the simulator becomes a replica of a different model, 

usually of the same type airplane. Thus, the same simulator platform, cockpit 

shell, motion system, visual system, computers, and necessary peripheral 

equipment can be used in more than one simulation. 

s 

d Highlight Brightness is the area of maximum displayed brightness which 

satisfies the brightness test in appendix 1, item 4k. 

e. Latency is the additional time beyond that of the basic airplane 

perceivable response time due to the response time of the simulator. This 

includes the update rate of the computer system combined with the respective time 

delays of the motion system, visual system or instruments. 

f NSPM is the FAA Manager responsible for the overall administration and 

direction of the National Simulator Evaluation Program. 

g* Operator, as used in this AC, identifies the person or organization 

requesting FAA qualification of a simulator and is responsible for continuing 

qualification and liaison with the FAA. 

h . Simulation Data are the various types of data used by the simulator 

manufacturer and the applicant to design, manufacture, and test the flight 

simulator. Normally, the airplane manufacturer will supply airplane data to the 

simulator manufacturer. 

i. Simulator Evaluation Specialist is anFAA technical specialist trained 

to evaluate simulators and to provide expertise on matters concerning airplane 

simulation. 

j. Snapshot is a presentation of one or more variables at a given instant 

of time. A snapshot is appropriate for a steady state condition in which the 

variables are constant with time. 

k Statement of Compliance (SOC) is a certification from the operator that 

specific requirements have been met. It must provide references to needed 

sources of information for showing compliance, rationale to explain how the 

4 Par 6 
7/29/91 AC 120~40B 

referenced material is used, mathematical equations and parameter values used, 

and conclusions reached. 

1 

to time. 

Time History is a presentation of the change of a variable with respect 

It is usually in the form of a continuous data plot over the time 

period of interest or a printout of test parameter values recorded at multiple 

constant time intervals over the time period of interest. 

IL Transport Delay is the total simulator system processing time required 

for an input signal from a pilot primary flight control until motion system, 

visual system, or instrument response. It is the overall time delay incurred 

from signal input until output response. It does not include the characteristic 

delay of the airplane simulated. ’ 

n. Upgrade, for the purpose of this AC, means the improvement or 

enhancement of a simulator for the purpose of achieving a higher level 

qualification. 

0. Validation Flight Test Data, for the purpose of this AC, are 

performance, stability and control, and other necessary test parameters 

electrically or electronically recorded in an airplane using a calibrated data 

acquisition system of sufficient resolution and verified as accurate by the 

company performing the test to establish a reference set of relevant parameters 

to which like simulator parameters can be compared. Other data, such as 

photographic data, maybe consideredacceptable flight test dataafter evaluation 

by the NSPM. 

P* Visual System Response Time is the interval from an abrupt control 

input to the completion of the visual display scan of the first video field 

containing the resulting different information. 

7 . DISCUSSION. 

a. The procedures and criteria for simulator evaluations under the 

National Simulator Evaluation Program are contained in this AC. A simulator, 

qualified by the NSPM in accordance with the guidance and standards herein, will 

be recommended to the operator’s principal operations inspector (POI) or 

certificate holding district office, as appropriate, for approval for use within 

an operator’s training program. 

b l Evaluation of simulators used for training or certification of airmen 

under Title 14 CFR fall under the direction of the National Simulator Evaluation 

Program. A simulator will be evaluated under the provisions of this AC if it 

is used in a training program approved under FAR Parts 63, 121, 125, or 135; or 

if it is used by an operator in the course of conducting the Pilot-in-command 

proficiency check required by FAR Section 61.58 or the issuance of an airline 

transport pilot certificate or type rating in accordance with the provisions of 

FAR Section 61.157. 

Par 6 5 
AC 12040B 7724741 

. 

c. Under the National Simulator Evaluation Program concept, a simulator 

is evaluated for a specific operator by an FAA Simulator Evaluation Specialist. 

Based on a successful evaluation, the NSPM will certify that the simulator meets 

the criteria of a specific level of qualification. Upon qualification by the 

NSPM, approval for use of the simulator in a particular training program will 

be determined by the PO1 in the case of FAR Parts 63, 121, 125, or 135 

certificate holders or by the Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) responsible 

for oversight of a training center when the training center is using the 

simulator to conduct checks required by FAR Part 61. 

d FAA evaluations of simulators located outside the United States will 

be performed if such simulators are being used by a U.S. operator to train or 

certificate U.S. airmen. Evaluations may be conducted otherwise as deemed 

appropriate by the Administrator on a case-by-case basis. 

e. Operators who contract to use simulators alreadyqualifiedand approved 

at a particular level for an airplane type are not subject to the qualification 

process. However, they are required to obtain FAA approval to use the simulator 

in their approved training programs. 

8 . EVALUATION POLICY. 

a. The methods, procedures, and standards defined in this AC provide one 

means 9 acceptable to the Administrator, to evaluate and qualify a simulator. 

If an applicant desires to use another means, a proposal must be submitted to 

the NSPM for review and approval prior to the submittal of a detailed ATG. If 

an applicant chooses to utilize the approach described in this AC, the applicant 

must adhere to all of the methods, procedures, and standards herein. 

b l The simulator must be assessed in those areas which are essential to 

completing the airman training and checking process. This includes the 

simulator’s longitudinal and lateral-directional responses; performance in 

takeoff, climb, cruise, descent, approach, and landing; control checks; cockpit, 

flight engineer, and instructor station functions checks; and certain additional 

requirements depending upon the complexity or qualification level of the 

simulator. The motion system and visual system will be evaluated to ensure their 

proper operation. 

c. The intent is to evaluate the simulator as objectively as possible. 

Pilot acceptance, however, is also an important. consideration. Therefore, the 

simulator will be subjected to validation tests listed in appendix 2 of this AC 

and the functions and subjective tests from appendix 3. These tests include a 

qualitative assessment of the simulator by an FAA pilot who is qualified in the 

respective airplane. Validation tests are used to compare objectively simulator 

and airplane data to assure that they agree within specified tolerances. 

Functions tests provide a basis for evaluating simulator capability to perform 

over a typical training period and to verify corr:ct operation of the simulator 

controls, instruments, and systems. \ 

Par 7 
7/29/91 AC 120-40B 

d l Tolerances, listed for parameters inappendix 2, should not be confused 

with design tolerances specified for simulator manufacture. Tolerances for the 

parameters listed in appendix 2 are the maximum acceptable to the Administrator 

for simulator validation. 

e. A 

each model 

sought. An 

an operator 

convertible 

required. 

convertible simulator will be addreSsed as a separate simulator for 

and series to which it will be converted and FAA qualification 

FAA evaluation is required for each configuration. For example, if 

seeks qualification for two models of an airplane type using a 

simulator, two ATG’s or a supplemented ATG, and two evaluations are 

f For airplanes issued an original type certificate after June 1980 or 

for significant amendments to an original type certificate, or for a supplemental 

type certificate whichwould result in handling qualities or performance changes, 

only manufacturer’s flight test data will be accepted for initial qualification. 

Exceptions to this policy must be submitted to the NSPM for review and 

consideration. It is the intent of the FAA that all tests listed in this AC be 

applied to simulator qualification. However, for airplanes which were type 

certificated, their flight tests completed and data released before the issuance 

of this AC, the NSPM will consider the use of alternative data from the airplane 

manufacturer. For older airplanes, particularly those certificated before June 

1980, additional flight testing may be necessary. For a new type or model of 

airplane, predicted data validated by flight test data, which has not received 

final approval by the manufacturer, can be used for an interim period as 

determined by the FAA. In the event that predicted data are used in programming 

the simulator, it should be updated as soon as practicable when actual airplane 

flight test data become available. Unless specific conditions warrant otherwise, 

simulator programming should be updated within 6 months after release of the 

final flight test data package by the airplane manufacturer. 

g. If a problem with a validation test result is detected by the FAA 

Simulator Evaluation Specialist, the test may be repeated. If it still does not 

meet the test tolerance, the operator may demonstrate alternative test results 

which relate to the test in question. In the event a validation test(s) does 

not meet specified criteria, but the criteria is not considered critical to the 

level of evaluation being conducted, the NSPM may conditionally qualify the 

simulator at that level. The operator will be given a specified period of time 

to correct the problem and submit the ATG changes to the NSPM for evaluation. 

Alternatively, if it is determined that the results of a validation test would 

have a detrimental effect on the level of qualification being sought or is a firm 

regulatory requirement, the NSPM may qualify the simulator to a lesser level or 

restrict maneuvers based upon the evaluation completed. For example, if a 

Level D evaluation is requested and the simulator fails to meet landing test 

tolerances, it could be qualified at Level A. 

h Evaluation dates will not be established until the ATG has been 

reviewdd by the NSPM and determined to be acceptable. Within 10 working days 

of receiving an acceptable ATG, the NSPM will coordinate with the operator and 

Par 8 7 
AC 120040B 7129191 

- - 

PO1 to set a mutually acceptable date for the evaluation. To avoid unnecessary 

delays, operators are encouraged to work closely with the NSPM during the ATG 

development process prior to making formal application. 

i. At the discretion of the FAA Simulator Evaluation Specialist, the 

operator’s pilots may assist in completing the functions and validation tests 

during evaluations. However, only FAA personnel should manipulate the pilot 

controls during the functions check portion of an FAA evaluation. 

9 . INITIAL OR UPGRADE EVALUATIONS. 

a. Anoperator seeking simulator initial or upgrade evaluationmust submit 

a request in writing to the NSPM through the PO1 or responsible FAA FSDO. This 

request should containa compliance statement certifying that the simulator meets 

all of the provisions of this AC, that the cockpit configuration conforms to that 

of the airplane, ‘that specific hardware and software configuration control 

procedures have been established, and that the pilot(s) designated by the 

operator confirm that it is representative of the airplane in all functions test 

areas. A sample letter of request is included in appendix 4. 

b . The operator should submit an ATG which includes: 

(1) A title page with the operator and FAA approval signature blocks. 

(2) A simulator information page, for each configuration in the case 

of convertible simulators, providing: 

(i) The operator’s simulator identification number or code. 

(ii) Airplane model and series being simulated. 

(iii) Aerodynamic data revision. 

(iv) Engine model and its data revision. 

(v) Flight control data revision. 

(vi) Flight Management System identification and revision level. 

(vii) Simulator model and manufacturer. 

(viii) Date of simulator manufacture. 

(ix) Simulator computer identification. 

(x) Visual system model and manufacturer. 

(xi) Motion system type and manufacturer. 

(3) Table of contents. 

(4) Log of revision and/or list of effective pages. 

(5) Listing of all reference source data. 

(6) Glossary of terms and symbols used. 

Par 8 
7129191 AC 120-40B 

. 

(7) SOC with certain requirements. SOC’s must provide references to 

sources of information for showing compliance, rationale to explain how the 

referenced material is used, mathematical equations and parameter values used, 

and conclusions reached. Refer to appendix 1, “Simulator Standards ,” comments 

column, for SOC requirements. 

(8) Recording procedures or required equipment for the validation 

tests. 

(9) The following for each validation test designated in appendix 2 

of this AC: 

(i) Name of the test. 

(ii) Objective of the test. 

(iii) Initial conditions. 

(iv) Manual test procedures. 

(v) Automatic test procedures (if applicable). 

(vi) Method for evaluating simulator validation test results. 

(vii) Tolerances for relevant parameters. 

(viii) Source of Airplane Test Data (document and page number). 

(ix) Copy of Airplane Test Data. 

(x) Simulator Validation Test Results as obtained by the 

operator. 

(xi) A means, acceptable to the NSPM, of easily comparing the 

simulator test results to airplane test data. 

c. The operator’s simulator test results must be recorded on a 

multichannel recorder, line printer, or other appropriate recording media 

acceptable to the NSPM. Simulator results should be labeled using terminology 

common to airplane parameters as opposed to computer software identifications. 

These results should be easily compared with the supporting data by employing 

cross-plotting, overlays, transparencies, or other acceptable means. Airplane 

data documents included in an ATG may be photographically reduced only if such 

reduction will not alter the graphic scaling or cause difficulties in scale 

interpretationor resolution. Incremental scales ongraphical presentations must 

provide the resolution necessary for evaluation of the parameters shown in 

appendix 2. The test guide will provide the documented proof of compliance with 

the simulator validation tests in appendix 2. In the case of a simulator 

upgrade, an operator should run all validation tests for the requested 

qualification level. Validation test results offered in a test guide for a 

previous initial or upgrade evaluation should not be used to validate simulator 

performance in a test guide offered for a current upgrade. For tests involving 

time histories, flight test data sheets, or transparencies thereof, and simulator 

test results should be clearly markedwith appropriate reference points to ensure 

an accurate comparison between simulator and airplane with respect to time. 

Operators using line printers to record time histories should clearly mark that 

information taken from the line printer data output for cross-plotting on the 

airplane data. The cross-plotting of the operator’s simulator data to airplane 

Par 9 
AC 120940B 7/29/91 

data is essential to verify simulator performance in each test. During an 

evaluation, the FAA will devote its time to detailed checking of selected tests 

from the ATG. The FAA evaluation serves to validate the operator’s simulator 

test results. 

d The completed ATG and the operator’s compliance letter and request for 

the evaluation will be submitted through the operator’s POI. The PO1 will then 

submit the total package with a letter or memorandum of endorsement to the NSPM. 

The ATG will be reviewed and determined to be acceptable prior to scheduling an 

evaluation of the simulator. 

e. A copy of an ATG for each type simulator by each simulator manufacturer 

will be required for the NSPM’s file. The NSPM may elect not to retain copies 

of the ATG for subsequent simulators of the same type by a particular 

manufacturer, but will determine the need for copies on a case-by-case basis. 

Data updates to an original ATG should be provided to the NSPM in order to keep 

FAA file copies current. 

f The operator may elect to accomplish the ATG validation tests while 

the simulator is at the manufacturer’s facility. Tests at the manufacturer’s 

facility should be accomplishedat the latest practical time prior to disassembly 

and shipment. The operator must thenvalidate simulator performance at the final 

location by repeating at least one-third of the validation tests in the ATG and 

submitting those tests to the NSPM. After review of these tests, the FAA will 

schedule an initial evaluation. The ATG must be clearly annotated to indicate 

when and where each test was accomplished. 

& In the event an operator moves a simulator to a new location and its 

level of qualification is not changed, the following procedures shall apply: 

(1) Advise the PO1 and NSPM of the move. 

(2) Prior to returning the simulator to service at the new location, 

the operator should perform a typical recurrent validation and functions test. 

The results of such tests will be retained by the operator and be available for 

inspection by the FAA at the next evaluation or as requested. 

(3) The NSPM may schedule an evaluation prior to return to service. 

h When there is a change of operator, the new operator must accomplish 

all requiredadministrative procedures including the submission of the currently 

approved Master Approval Test Guide (MATG) through the PO1 to the NSPM. The ATG 

must be identified with the new operator by displaying the operator’s name or 

logo. The PO1 will then submit the package as described in paragraph 8d above. 

The simulator may, at the discretion of the NSPM, be subject to an evaluation 

in accordance with the original qualification criteria. However, a simulator 

having Phase I status resulting from a landing maneuver approval under AC 121014B 

must meet the Phase I requirements in FAR Part 121, Appendix H, in the event of 

the sale or transfer of the simulator from one operator to another. 

IO Par 9 
7/29/91 AC 120040B 

i. The scheduling priority for initial and upgrade evaluations will be 

based on the sequence in which acceptable ATG's and evaluation requests are 

received by the NSPM. 

j. The ATG will be approved after the completion of the initial or upgrade 

evaluation and all discrepancies in the ATG have been corrected. This document, 

after inclusion of the FAA witnessed test results, becomes the MATG. The MATG 

will then remain in the custody of the operator for use in future recurrent 

evaluations. 

10 . RECURRENT EVALUATIONS. 

a. For a simulator to retain its qualification, it will be evaluated on 

a recurrent basis using the approved MATG. Unless otherwise determined by the 

NSPM, recurring evaluations will be accomplished every 4 months by a Simulator 

EvaluationSpecialist. Each recurrent evaluation, normally scheduled for 8 hours 

of simulator time, will consist of functions tests and approximately one-third 

of the validation tests in the MATG. The MATG is to be completed annually. 

b Dates of recurrent evaluations will normally not be scheduled beyond 

30 days of the date due. Exceptions to this policy will be considered by the 

NSPM on a case-by-case basis to address extenuating circumstances. 

c. In the interest of conserving simulator time, the following Optional 

Test Program (OTP) is an alternative to the 8-hour recurrent evaluation 

procedure: 

(1) Operators 0 f simula tors having the app ropria teautomatic recording 

and plotting capabilities may aPP ly for eval uation under the OTP. 

(2) Operators must notify the NSPM in writing of their intent to enter 

the OTP. If the FAA determines that the evaluation can be accommodated with 

4 hours or less of simulator time, recurrent evaluations for that simulator will 

be planned for 4 hours. If the 4-hour period is or will be exceeded and the 

operator cannot extend the period, then the evaluation will be terminated and 

must be completed within 30 days to maintain qualification status. The FAA will 

then reassess the appropriateness of the OTP. 

(3) Under the OTP, at least one-third of all the validation tests will 

be performed and certified by operator personnel between FAA recurrent 

evaluations. Complete coverage will be required through any three consecutive 

recurrent evaluations. These tests and results will be reviewed by the FAA 

Simulator Evaluation Specialist at the outset of each evaluation. The onethird of validation tests executed for each recurrent evaluation should be 

accomplishedwithin the 30 days prior to the scheduled evaluation or accomplished 

on an evenly distributed basis during the 4-month period preceding the scheduled 

evaluation. Twenty percent of those tests conducted by the operator for each 

recurrent evaluation will then be selected and repeated by the Simulator 

Evaluation Specialist along with 10 percent of those tests not performed by the 

operator. 

Par 9 11 
AC 120040B 7129191 

d . With appropriate arrangement and understanding between the operator 

and FAA, an extended interval recurrent evaluation schedule based on semiannual 

FAA inspections can be arranged. The extended interval evaluation schedule 

relies on quarterly checks by the operator. 

e. Prior to arrival for an on-site evaluation, the FAA inspector will 

notify the operator if any tests are planned to be run that may require special 

equipmentor technicians. These tests would includelatencies, control dynamics, 

sounds and vibrations, or motion system tests. 

f In instances where 

status’for prolonged periods, 

an operator plans to remove a simulator from active 

the following procedures shall apply to requalify 

the simulator pursuant to this AC: 

(1) The NSPM and PO1 shall be advised in writing. The notice shall 

contain an estimate of the period that the simulator will be inactive. 

(2) Recurrent evaluations will not be scheduled during the inactive 

period. The NSPM will remove the simulator from qualified status on a mutually 

established date not later than the date on which the first missed recurrent 

evaluation would have been scheduled. 

(3) Before a simulator can be restored to FAA qualified status, it 

will require an evaluation by the NSPM. The evaluation content and time required 

for accomplishment will be based on the number of recurrent evaluations missed 

during the inactive period. For example, if the simulator were out of service 

for 1 year, it would be necessary to complete the entire test guide since under 

the recurrent evaluation program, the MATG is to be completed annually. 

(4) The operator will notify the NSPM of any changes to the original 

scheduled time out of service. 

(5) The simulator will normally be requalified using the FAA-approved 

MATG and criteria that was in effect prior to its removal from 

qualification; however, inactive periods exceeding 1 year will require a review 

of the qualification basis and, if conditions warrant, may require the 

establishment of a new qualification basis. 

11 l SPECIAL EVALUATIONS. 

a. Between recurring evaluations, if deficiencies are discovered or it 

becomes apparent that the simulator is not being maintained to initial 

qualification standards, a special evaluation of the simulator may be conducted 

by the NSPM to verify its status. 

b . The simulator will lose its qualification when the NSPM can no longer 

ascertain maintenance of the original simulator validation criteria based on a 

recurrent or special evaluation. Additionally, the PO1 shall advise the operator 

and the NSPM if a deficiency is jeopardizing training requirements, and 

arrangements shall be made to resolve the deficiency in the must effective 

manner) including the withdrawal of approval by the POI. 

12 Par 10 
7129191 AC IZO-40B 

12 . MODIFICATION OF SIMULATORS, MOTION SYSTEMS, AND VISUAL SYSTEMS. 

a. In accordance with FAR Part 121, Appendix H, operators must notify the 

PO1 and NSPM at least 21 days prior to making software program or hardware 

changes which might impact flight or ground dynamics of a simulator. A complete 

list of these planned changes, including dynamics related to the motion and 

visual systems and any necessary updates to the MATG, must be provided in 

writing. Operators should maintain a configuration control system to ensure the 

continued integrity of the simulator as qualified. The configuration control 

system may be examined by the FAA on request. 

b 

functions, 

Modifications which impact flight or ground dynamics, systems 

and significant ATG revisions may require an FAA evaluation of the 

simulator. 

13 . SIMULATOR QUALIFICATION BASIS. The FAR require that simulators must 

maintain their approved performance, functions, and other characteristics. 

Except as provided in paragraph 2, all initial upgrade and recurrent evaluations 

of those simulators initially qualified according to the acceptable methods of 

compliance described herein will be conducted in accordance with the provisions 

of this AC. Simulators approved prior to this AC will continue to maintain their 

current qualification as long as they meet the standards under which they were 

originally approved, regardless of operator, except as noted in paragraph 9h. 

Any simulator upgraded to Level B, C, or D standards or any visual system or 

motion system upgrade requires an initial evaluation of that simulator, visual 

system, or motion system in accordance with the provisions herein. 

William J. Whitq 

Acting Director, Flight Standards Service 

Par 12 13 (and 14) 
APPENDIX 1. SIMULATOR STANDARDS 

1 DISCUSSION. 

Live1 B, Level C, 

This appendix describes the minimum simulator requirements for qualifying Level A, 

and Level D airplane simulators. An operator desiring evaluation of an airplane 

simulator not equipped with a visual system (nonvisual simulator) must comply with Level A simulator 

requirements except those pertaining to visual systems. Appropriate FAR as indicated in paragraph 3 of 

this AC must be consulted when considering particular simulator requirements. The validation and 

functions tests listed in appendices 2 and 3 must also be consulted when determining the requirements 

of a specific level simulator. For Levels C and D qualification, certain simulator and visual system 

requirements included in this appendix must be supported with a statement of compliance and, in some 

designated cases, an objective test. Compliance statements will describe how the requirement is met, 

such as gear modeling approach, coefficient of friction sources, etc. The test should show that the 

requirement has been attained. In the following tabular listing of simulator standards, required 

statements of compliance are indicated in the comment column. 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

2. GENERAL A B C 

a. Cockpit, a full-scale replica of the 

airplane simulated. Direction of movement of 

controls and switches identical to that in the 

airplane. The cockpit, for simulator purposes, 

consists of all that space forward of a crosssection of the fuselage at the most extreme aft 

setting of the pilots’ seats. Additional 

required crewmember duty stations and those 

required bulkheads aft of the pilot seats are 

also considered part of the cockpit and must 

replicate the airplane. 

b . Circuit breakers that affect procedures 

and/or result in observable cockpit indications 

properly located and functionally accurate. 

X 

X 

x 

X 

D 

X 

X 
SIMULATOR STANDARDS (Cont’d) SIMULATOR LEVEL 

A 

c. Effect of aerodynamic changes for 

various combinations of drag and thrust normally 

encountered in flight corresponding to actual 

flight conditions, including the effect of change 

in airplane attitude, thrust, drag, altitude, 

temperature, gross weight, center of gravity 

location, and configuration. 

d l Ground operations generically 

represented to the extent that allows turns 

within the confines of the runway and adequate 

control on the landing and roll-out from a 

crosswind approach to a running landing. 

e. All relevant instrument indications 

involved in the simulation of the applicable 

airplane automatically responded to control 

movement by a crewmember or external disturbances 

to the simulated airplane; i.e., turbulence 

or windshear. 

f Communications and navigation equipment 

corresponding to that installed in the 

applicant’s airplane with operation within the 

tolerances prescribed for the applicable airborne 

equipment. 

g* In addition to the flight crewmember 

stations’, two suitable seats for the instructor/ 

check airman and FAA inspector. The NSPM will 

consider options to this standard based on 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

B 

X 

X 

X 

X 

C 

X 

X Numerical values must be 

presented in the 

appropriate units for 

U.S. operations, for 

example, fuel in pounds, 

speeds in knots, altitudes 

in feet, etc. 

See appendix 3, par. 1, for 

further information 

regarding long-range 

navigation equipment. 
, 

SIMULATOR STANDARDS (Cont’d) 

unique cockpit configurations. These seats 

must provide adequate vision to the pilot’s 

panel and forward windows in visual system models. 

Observer seatsneed not represent those found in 

the airplane b&,must be equipped with similar 

positive restraint devices. 

h . Simulator systems must simulate the 

applicable airplane system operation, both on 

the ground and in flight. Systems must be 

operative to the extent that normal, abnormal, 

and emergency operating procedures appropriate 

to the simulator application can be accomplished. 

i. Instructor controls to enable the 

operator to control all required system 

variable&and insert abnormal or emergency 

conditions into the airplane systems. 

L Control forces and control travel 

which correspond to that of the replicated 

airplane. Control forces should react 

in the same manner as in the airplane 

under the same flight conditions. 

k Significant cockpit sounds which 

result’from pilot actions corresponding to 

those of the airplane. 

A 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

X 

X 

X 

X 

B 

X 

X 

C 

. 

X 

X 

X 

D 

X 

X 

X 

COMMENTS 

s: 

\o )--r 
ST% 

SIMULATOR STANDARDS (Cont’d) COMMENTS L 

A 

1 l Sound of precipitation, windshield 

wipers, and other significant airplane noises 

perceptible to the pilot during normal operation 

and the sound of a crash when the simulator is 

landed in excess of landing gear limitations. 

m. Realistic amplitude and frequency of 

cockpit noises and sounds, including precipitation, windshield wipers, precipitation static, a 

engine and airframe sounds. The sounds shall be 

coordinated with the weather representations 

required in FAR Part 121, Appendix H, Phase III 

(Level D), Visual Requirement No. 3. 

~- 

n. Ground handling and aerodynamic 

programming to include: 

(1) Ground effect--for example: 

roundout, flare, and touchdown. This requires 

data on lift, drag, pitching moment, trim, and 

power in ground effect. 

(2) Ground reaction--reaction of the 

airplane upon contact with the runway during 

landing to include strut deflections, tire 

friction, side forces, and other appropriate 

data, such as weight and speed, necessary to 

identify the flight condition and configuration. 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

B 

X 

C 

X 

X 

D 

X 

X 

X 

Statement of Compliance. 

Tests required for noises 

and sounds that originate 

from the airplane or 

airplane systems. 

Statement of Compliance. 

Tests required. 
SIMULATOR STANDARDS (Cont’d) 

A 

(3) Ground handling characteristicssteering inputs to include crosswind, braking, 

thrust reversing, deceleration, and turning 

radius. 

0. Windshear models which provide training 

in the specific skills required for recognition 

of windshear phenomena and execution of recovery 

maneuvers. Such models must be representative 

of measured .or accident derived winds, but may 

include simplifications which ensure repeatable 

encounters. For example, models may consist 

of independent variable winds in multiple 

simultaneous components. Wind models should 

be available for the following critical phases 

of flight: 

(1) Prior to takeoff rotation. 

(2) At liftoff. 

(3) During initial climb. 

(4) Short final approach. 

The FAA Windshear Training Aid presents one 

acceptable means of compliance with simulator 

wind model requirements. The ATG should either 

reference the FAA Windshear Training Aid or 

present ariplane related data on alternate 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

B C 

X X 

COMMENTS 

Tests required. 
SIMULATOR STANDARDS (Cont’d) SIMULATOR LEVEL 

methods implemented. .Wind models from the Royal 

Aerospace Establishment (RAE), the Joint Airport 

Weather Studies (JAWS) Project and other 

recognized sources may be implemented, but 

must be supported or properly referenced in the 

ATG l 

P* Representative crosswinds and 

instructor controls for wind speed and direction. 

Q* Representative stopping and directional 

control forces for at least the following runway 

conditions based on airplane related data. 

Zone 

(1) Dry 

(2) Wet 

(3) ICY 

(4) Patchy Wet 

(5) Patchy Icy 

(6) Wet on Rubber Residue in Touchdown 

r. Representative brake and tire failure 

dynamics (including antiskid) and decreased brake 

efficient due to brake temperatures based on 

airplane related data. 

A 

X 

B 

X 

C 

X 

X 

X 

D 

X 

X 

X 

Statement of Compliance. 

Objective tests required 

for (I), (2), (3), 

Subjective check for 

(4L 0, (6). 

Statement of Compliance. 

Tests required for decreased braking efficiency 

due to brake temperature. 
SIMULATOR STANDARDS (Cont’d) SIMULATOR LEVEL COMMENTS 

A 

s. A means for quickly and effectively 

testing simulator programming and hardware. 

This may include an automated system which 

could be used for conducting at least a portion 

of the tests in the ATG. 

t. Simulator computer capacity, accuracy, 

resolution, and dynamic response sufficient for 

the qualification level sought. 

u. Control feel dynamics which replicate 

the airplane simulated. Free response of the 

controls shall match that of the airplane 

within the tolerance given in appendix 2. Initial 

and upgrade evaluation will include control free 

response (column, wheel, and pedal) 

measurements recorded at the controls. The 

measured responses must correspond to those of 

the airplane in takeoff, cruise, and landing 

configurations. 

(1) For airplanes with irreversible 

control systems, measurements may be obtained . 

on the ground if proper Pitot static inputs are 

provided to represent conditions typical of 

those encountered in flight. Engineering 

validation or airplane manufacturer rationale 

will be submitted as justification to ground 

test or omit a configuration. 

X 

B 

X 

C 

X 

X 

X 

D 

X 

X 

X 

Statement of Compliance. 

Statement of Compliance. 

FAR 121, Appendix H, 

specifies computer 

standard for Phases II 

& III (Levels C and D). 

Tests required. See 

appendix 2, par. 3. 
SIMULATOR STANDARDS (Cont’d) SIMULATOR LEVEL 

A B C 

(2) For simulators requiring static 

and dynamic tests at the controls, special test 

fixtures will not be required during initial 

evaluations if the operator’s ATG shows both 

test fixture results and alternate test method 

results, such as computer data plots, which were 

obtained concurrently. Repeat of the alternate 

method during the initial evaluation may then 

satisfy this test requirement. 

v. Relative responses of the motion system, 

visual system, and cockpit instruments shall be 

coupled closely to provide integrated sensory 

cues 6 These systems shall respond to abrupt 

pitch, roll and yaw inputs at the pilot’s position 

within MO/300 milliseconds of the time, but not 

before the time, when the airplane would respond 

under the same conditions. Visual scene changes 

from steady state disturbance shall occur within 

the system dynamic response limit of 

150/300 milliseconds but not before the resultant 

motion onset. The test to determine compliance 

with these requirements should include 

simultaneously recording the analog output from 

the pilot’s control column, wheel, and pedals, 

the output from an accelerometer attached to the 

motion system platform located at an acceptable 

location near the pilots’ seats, the output signal 

to the pilots’ seats, the output signal to the 

visual system display (including visual system 

X X 

X 

D 

X 

COMMENTS 

Tests required. 

For Levels A and B, 

response must be within 

300 milliseconds. 

For Levels C and D, 

response must be within 

150 milliseconds. 
SIMULATOR STANDARDS (Cont’d) SIMULATOR LEVEL COMMENTS 

analog delays), and the output signal to the 

pilot’s attitude indicator or an equivalent test 

approved by the Administrator. The test results 

in a comparison of a recording of the simulator’s 

response to actual airplane response data in the 

takeoff, cruise, and landing configuration. 

The intent is to verify that the simulator system 

transport delays or time lags are less than 

150/300 milliseconds and that the motion and 

visual cues relate to actual airplane 

responses. For airplane response, acceleration 

in the appropriate rotational axis is preferred. 

As an alternative, a transport delay test may 

be used to demonstrate that the simulator system 

does not exceed the specified limit of 

150/300 milliseconds. 

This test shall measure all the delay encountered 

by a step signal migrating from the pilots’ 

control through the control loading electronics 

and interfacing through all the simulation 

software modules in the correct order, using a 

handshaking protocol, finally through the normal 

output interfaces to the motion system, to the 

visual system and instrument displays. A 

recordable start time for the test should be 

provided by a pilot flight control input. The 

A B C D 
SIMULATOR STANDARDS (Cont’d) 

test mode shall permit normal computation time 

to be consumed and shall not alter the flow of 

information through the hardware/software system. 

The transport delay of the system is then the 

time between the control input and the individual 

hardware responses. It need only be measured 

once in each axis, being independent of flight 

conditions. 

w. Aerodynamic modeling which, for 

airplanes issued an original type certificate 

after June 1980, includes low-altitude levelflight ground effect, Mach effect at high 

altitude, effects of airframe icing, normal and 

reverse dynamic thrust effect on control surfaces, 

aeroelastic representations, and representations 

of nonlinearities due to sideslip based on 

airplane flight test data provided by the 

manufacturer. 

A 

SIMULATOR LEVEL COMMENTS 

B C D 

X Statement of Compliance. 

Tests required. See 

appendix 2, par. 4, for 

further information on 

ground effect. Mach 

effect, aeroelastic 

representations, and 

nonlinearities due to 

sideslip are normally 

included in the simulator 

aerodynamic model, but 

the Statement of 

Compliance must address 

each of them. Separate 

tests for thrust effects 

and a Statement of 

Compliance and demonstration of icing 

effects are required. 
SIMULATOR STANDARDS (Cont’d) SIMULATOR LEVEL COMMENTS 

A B C D 

X Statement of Compliance. 

Tests required. 

X. Aerodynamic and ground reaction 

modeling for the effects of reverse thrust on 

directional control. 

X X 

Y* Self-testing for simulator hardware 

and programming to determine compliance with 

simulator performance tests as prescribed in 

appendix 2. Evidence of testing must include 

simulator number, date, time, conditions, 

tolerances, and appropriate dependent variables 

portrayed in comparison to the airplane 

standard. Automatic flagging of “out-oftolerance” situations is encouraged. 

Statement of Compliance. 

Tests required. 

X 

2. Diagnostic analysis printouts of X Statement of Compliance. 

simulator malfunctions sufficient to determine 

compliance with the Simulator Component 

Inoperative Guide (SCIG). - These printouts shall 

be retained by the operator between recurring 

FAA simulator evaluations as part of the daily 

discrepancy log required under FAR Section 

121.407(a)(5). 

aa. Timely permanent update of simulator X 

hardware and programming subsequent to airplane 

modification. 

X X 

bb Daily preflight documentation either X X X 

in the daily log or in a location easily 

accessible for review. 
SIMULATOR STANDARDS (Cont’d) 

A 

3 . MOTION SYSTEM. 

a. Motion (force) cues perceived by the 

pilot representative of the airplane motions, 

i.e. 9 touchdown cues, should be a function of the 

simulated rate of descent. 

b A motion system having a minimum of 

three degrees of freedom. 

C. A motion system which produces cues 

at least equivalent to those of a six-degrees-offreedom synergistic platform motion system. 

d A means for recording the motion 

response time for comparison with airplane data. 

e. Special effects programming to include: 

(1) Runway rumble, oleo deflections, 

effects of groundspeed and uneven runway 

characteristics. 

(2) Buffets on the ground due to 

spoiler/speedbrake extension and thrust reversal. 

(3) Bumps after lift-off of nose and 

main gear. 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

X 

X 

X 

B 

X 

X 

X 

X 

C 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

Statement of Compliance. 

Tests required. 

See 2.~. of this appendix. 
SIMULATOR STANDARDS (Cont’d) SIMULATOR LEVEL COMMENTS 

(4) Buffet during extension and 

retraction of landing gear. 

(5) Buffet in the air due to flap and 

spoiler/speedbrake extension. 

(6) Stall buffet to, but not 

necessarily beyond, the FAA certificated stall 

speed, Vs. 

(7) Representative touchdown cues for 

main and nose gear. 

(8) Nosewheel scuffing. 

(9) Thrust effect with brakes set. 

f Characteristic buffet motions that result 

from operation of the airplane (for example, 

high-speed buffet, extended landing gear, 

flaps, nosewheel scuffing, stall) which can 

be sensed at the flight deck. The simulator 

must be programmed and instrumented in such a 

manner that the characteristic buffet modes can 

be measured and compared to airplane data. 

Airplane data are also required to define 

flight deck motions when the airplane is 

subjected to atmospheric disturbances. General 

B C D 

X Statement of Compliance. 

Tests required. 
SIMULATOR STANDARDS (Cont’d) SIMULATOR LEVEL 

purpose disturbance models that approximate 

demonstrable flight test data are acceptable. 

Tests with recorded results which allow the 

comparison of relative amplitudes versus 

frequency are required. 

1 

4 . VISUAL -SYSTEMS. 

a. Visual system capable of meeting all X 

the standards of this appendix and appendices 

2 and 3 (Validation and Functions and Subjective 

Tests Appendices) as applicable to the level 

of qualification requested by the applicant. 

I 

b . Optical system capable of providing X 

at least a 45 degrees horizontal and 30 degrees 

vertical field of view simultaneously for each 

pilot. 

c. Continuous minimum collimated visual 

field of view of 75 degrees horizontal and 

30 degrees vertical per pilot seat. Both pilot 

seat visual systems shall be able to be operated 

simultaneously. 

d b A means for recording the visual X 

response time for visual systems qualified under 

AC 121~14C and subsequent. 

B 

X 

X 

X 

C 

X 

X 

X 

D 

X 

X 

X 

COMMENTS 

Wide angle systems 

providing cross cockpit 

viewing must provide a 

minimum of 150 degrees 

horizontal field of view; 

75 degrees per pilot seat 

operated simultaneously. 
SIMULATOR STANDARDS (Cont’d) 

e. Verification of visual ground segment 

and visual scene content at a decision height on 

landing approach. The ATG should contain 

appropriate calculations and a drawing showing 

the pertinent data used to establish the airplane 

location and visual ground segment. Such data 

should include, but is not limited to: 

(1) Airport and runway used. 

(2) Glide slope transmitter location 

for the specified runway. 

(3) Position of the glide slope 

receiver antenna relative to the airplane 

main landing wheels. 

(4) Approach and runway light 

intensity setting. 

(5) Airplane pitch angle. 

The above parameters should be presented for 

the airplane in landing configuration and a 

main wheel height of 100 feet (30 meters) above 

the touchdown zone. The visual ground 

segment and scene content should be determined 

for a runway visual range of 1,200 feet or 

350 meters. 

f . For the NSPM to qualify precision 

weather minimum accuracy on simulators 

qualified under previous advisory circulars, 

operators must provide the information 

required in e. above. 

A 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

X 

X 

B 

X 

X 

C 

X 

X 

D 

X 

COMMENTS s: 

u) P 
SIMULATOR STANDARDS (Cont’d) 

A 

& Visual cues to assess sink rate and 

depth perception during takeoff and landing. 

h Test procedures to quickly confirm 

visual’system color, RVR, focus, intensity, level 

horizon, and attitude as compared to the 

simulator attitude indicator. 

i. Dusk scene to enable identification of 

a visible horizon and typical terrain 

characteristics such as fields, roads, bodies 

of water. 

j. A minimum of ten levels of occulting. 

This capability must be demonstrated by a 

visual model through each channel. 

k Daylight, dusk, and night visual scenes 

w/sufficient scene content to recognize airport, 

the terrain, and major landmarks around the 

airport and to successfully accomplish a visual 

landing. The daylight visual scene must 

be part of a total daylight cockpit environment 

which at least represents the amount of light 

in the cockpit on an overcast day. Daylight 

visual system is defined as a visual system 

capable of producing, as a minimum, full 

color presentations, scene content comparable 

in detail to that produced by 4,000 edges 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

B 

X 

C 

X 

X 

X 

X 

D 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

Statement of Compliance. 

Tests required. 

Statement of Compliance. 

Tests required. 

Statement of Compliance. 

Tests required. 

Statement of Compliance. 

Tests required. 
F 

- 

* SIMULATOR STANDARDS (Co&d) 

A 

or 1,000 surfaces for daylight and 4,000 

light points for night and dusk scenes, 6 footlamberts of light measured at the pilot’s 

eye position (highlight brightness), 3 arcminutes resolution for the field of view 

at the pilot’s eye, and a display which is 

free of apparent quantization and other 

distracting visual effects while the simulator 

is in motion. The simulator cockpit ambient 

lighting shall be dynamically consistent with 

the visual scene displayed. For daylight 

scenes, such ambient lighting shall neither 

“washout” the displayed visual scene nor fall 

below 5 foot-lamberts of light as reflected from 

an approach plate at knee height at the pilot’s 

station and/or 2 foot-lamberts of light as 

reflected from the pilot’s face. All brightness 

and resolution requirements must be validated 

by an objective test and will be retested at 

least yearly by the NSPM. Testing may be 

accomplished more frequently if there are 

indications that the performance is degrading 

on an accelerated basis. Compliance of the 

brightness capability may be demonstrated with 

a test pattern of white light using a spot 

photometer. 

(1) Contrast Ratio. A raster drawn 

test pattern filling the entire visual scene 

(three or more channels) shall consist of a 

matrix of black and white squares no larger 

3 

SIMULATOR LEVEL COMMENTS s: 

B C 
SIMULATOR STANDARDS (Cont’d) 

A 

than 10 degrees and no smaller than 5 degrees 

per square with a white square in the center of 

each channel. 

Measurement shall be made on the center bright 

square for each channel using a 1 degree spot 

photometer. This value shall have a minimum 

brightness of 2 foot-lamberts. Measure any 

adjacent dark squares. The contrast ratio is 

the bright square value divided by dark square 

value l 

Minimum test contrast ratio result is 5:l. 

Note: Cockpit ambient light levels should be 

maintained at Level D (Phase III) requirements. 

(2) Highlight Brightness Test. 

Maintaining the full test pattern described 

above, superimpose a highlight area completely 

covering the center white square of each 

channel and measure the brightness using the 

3 degree spot photometer. Light points or light 

point arrays are not acceptable. Use of 

calligraphic capabilities to enhance raster 

brightness is acceptable. 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

B c 
F 4 

c‘ SIMULATOR STANDARDS fcont’d) 

A 

(3) Resolution will be demonstrated 

by a test pattern of objects shown to occupy 

a visual angle of 3 arc-minutes in the visual 

scene from the pilot’s eyepoint. This should 

be confirmed by calculations in the statement 

of compliance. 

(4) Light point size - not greater than 

6 arc-minutes measured in a test pattern 

consisting of a single row of light; points 

reduced in length until modulation is just 

discernible, a row of 40 lights will form 

a 4 degree angle or less. 

(5) Light point contrast ratio - not 

less than 25:l when a square of at least 

1 degree filled (i.e., light point modulation is 

just discernible) with light points is compared 

to the adjacent background. 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

B C 

APPENDIX 2. SIMULATOR VALIDATION TESTS 

1 DISCUSSION. Simulator performance and 

system operation must be objectively evaluated by 

comparing the results of tests conducted in the 

simulator to airplane data unless specifically 

noted otherwise. To facilitate the validation of 

the simulator, a multichannel recorder, line 

printer, or other appropriate recording device 

acceptable to the NSPM should be used to record 

each validation test result. These recordings 

should then be compared to the airplane source 

data. 

The ATG provided by the operator must describe 

clearly and distinctly how the simulator will be 

set up and operated for each test. Use of a 

driver program designed to automatically 

accomplish the tests is encouraged for all 

simulators. Self testing of simulator hardware 

and programming to determine compliance with all 

simulator requirements is specified by FAR 

Part 121, Appendix H, for Phase III (Level D) 

simulators. It is not the intent and it is not 

acceptable to the FAA to test each simulator 

subsystem independently. Overall integrated 

testing of the simulator must be accomplished to 

assure that the total simulator system meets the 

prescribed standards. A manual test procedure 

with explicit and detailed steps for completion 

of each test must also be provided. 

The tests and tolerances contained in this 

appendix must be included in the operator’s ATG. 

Levels B, C, and D simulators must be compared to 

flight test data except as otherwise specified. 

For airplanes certificated prior to June 1980, an 

operator may 9 after reasonable attempts have 

failed to obtain suitable flight test data, 

indicate in the ATG where flight test data are 

unavailable or unsuitable for a specific test, 

For such a test, alternative data should be 

submitted to the NSPM for approval. Submittals 

for approval of data other than flight test must 

include an explanation of validity with respect 

to available flight test information. 

The Table of Validation Tests of this appendix 

generally indicates the test results required. 

Unless noted otherwise, simulator tests should 

represent airplane performance and handling 

qualities at operating weights and centers of 

gravity (CG) typical of normal operation. If a 

test is supported by airplane data at one extreme 

weight or CG, another test supported by airplane 

data at midconditions or as close as possible to 

the other extreme should be included. Certain 

tests which are relevant only at one extreme CG 

or weight condition need not be repeated at the 

other extreme. Tests of handling qualities must 

include validation of augmentation devices. 

Simulators for highly augmented airplanes will be 

validated both in the unaugmented configuration 

(or failure state with the maximum permitted 

degradation in handling qualities) and the 

augmented configuration. Where various levels of 

handling qualities result from failure states, 

validation of the effect of the failure is 

necessary. Requirements for testing will be 

mutually agreed to between the operator and the 

NSPM on a case-by-case basis. 
SIMULATOR VALIDATION TESTS (Cont'd) 

In the case of simulators approved under previous 

advisory circular) the tolerances of this 

appendix may be used in subsequent. recurrent 

evaluations for any given test providing the 

operator has submitted a proposed ATG revision to 

the NSPM and has received FAA approval. 

2 TEST REQUIREMENTS. The ground and flight 

tests required for qualification are listed in 

the Table of Validation Tests. Computer 

generated simulator test results should be 

provided for each test. The results should be 

produced on a multichannel recorder, line 

printer, or other appropriate recording device 

acceptable to the NSPM. Time histories are 

required unless otherwise indicated in the Table 

of Validation Tests. 

Flight test data which exhibit rapid variations 

of the measured parameters may require 

engineering judgment when making assessments of 

simulator validity. Such judgment must not be 

limited to a single parameter. All relevant 

parameters related to a given maneuver or flight 

condition must be provided to allow overall 

interpretation. When it is difficult or 

impossible to match simulator to airplane data 

throughout a time history, differences must be 

justified by providing a comparison of other 

related variables for the condition being 

assessed. 

a. Parameters, Tolerances, and Flight 

Conditions. The Table of Validation Tests of 

this appendix describes the parameters, 

tolerances, and flight conditions for simulator 

validation. When two tolerance values are given 

for a parameter, the less restrictive may be used 

unless otherwise indicated. 

If a flight condition or operating condition is 

shown which does not apply to the qualification 

level sought, it should be disregarded. 

Simulator results must be labeled using the 

tolerances and units given. 

b Flight Conditions Verification. When 

comparing the parameters listed to those of the 

airplane, sufficient data must also be provided 

to verify the correct flight condition. For 

example, to show that control force is within +5 

pound (2.225 daN) in a static stability test, 

data to show the correct airspeed, power, thrust 

or torque, airplane configuration, altitude, and 

other appropriate datum identification parameters 

should also be given. If comparing short period 

dynamics, normal acceleration may be used to 

establish a match to the airplane, but airspeed, 

altitude, control input, airplane configuration, 

and other appropriate data must also be given. 

All airspeed values should be clearly annotated 

as to indicated, calibrated, etc., and like 

values used for comparison. 

NOTE: The application of this appendix to 

simulator validation requires reference to FAR 

Part 121, Appendix H, to acquire full knowledge 

of simulator criteria for approval. 
TABLE OF VALIDATION TESTS 

n, Test 

1. PERFORMANCE 

a. TAXI 

(1) Minimum Radius Turn 

Tolerance Flight Condition Requirement 

I= Initial Evaluation 

R= Recurrent Evaluation 

Qualification 

+3 Feet (0,9m) or 

20% of Airplane 

Turn Radius 

Ground/Takeoff 

(2) Rate of Turn vs. 

Nosewheel Steering 

Angle 

210% or +2'/s*c. 

Turn Rate 

Ground/Takeoff 

b. TAKEOFF 

(1) Ground Acceleration 55% Time and Distance Ground/Takeoff 

Time and Distance or 25% Time and 2200 

Feet (61 Meters) of 

Distance 

(2) Minimum Control Speed Maximum Airplane Ground/Takeoff 

Ground (Vmc 

dynamic Con t rols 

) Aero- Lateral Deviation 

Only ~25% or 25 Feet 

per Applicable Air- (1.5 Meters) 

worthiness Standard 

or 

Low Speed, Engine 

Inoperative Ground 

Control Characteristics 

(3) Minimum Unstick Speed 

or equivalent as 

provided by the 

airplane manufacturer 

23 K$s Airspeed 

+1.5 Fitch 

Ground/Takeoff 

IR 

IR 

3R 

Comments 

I IR 

IR 

Wnfactored aircraft certification data may be used. 

Acceleration Time and Distance 

should be recorded for a 

minimum of 80% of total 

segment. (Brake release to 

Vr)* 

Engine failure speed must be 

within +l knot of airplane 

engine failure speed. 

V is defined as that speed 

a F uwhich the last main 

landing gear leaves the 

ground. Main 1andWg Gear 

Strut Compression or equivalent air/ground signal should 

be recorded. Record as a 

minimum from 10 Kts before 

start of rotation, 
Test olerance Flight Condition 

1. PERFORMANCE (TAKEOFF conIt). 

(4) Normal Takeoff +3 K$s Airspeed Ground/Takeoff 

21.5* Pitch and First Segment 

21.5 Angle of Attack Climb 

220 Feet (6 Meters) 

Altitude 

25.0 lb (2.224 dN) or 210% 

Column Force* 

A 

t IR IR Record Takeoff prc Ifile from 

brake release to at least 

200 ft. (61 Meters) Above 

Ground Level (AGL). 

*Applies only to reversible 

control systems. 

(5) Critical Engine 

Failure on Takeoff 

(6) Crosswind Takeoff 

(7) Rejected Takeoff 

I I I 

23 K$s Airspeed Ground/Takeoff 'IR IR IR IR Record Takeoff profile at 

21.5 o Pitch, and First Segment maximum takeoff weight to at 

+1.5 Angle of Attack Climb least 200 ft. (61 Meters) AGL. 

220 Feet (6 Meters) 

Altitude I Engine failure speed must be within +3 Kts of airplane 

rf2 Bank and data. *Applies only to 

Sideslip Angle reversible control systems. 

~5.0 lb (2.224 dN) or +lOI 

Column Force* 1 

~5.0 lb (2.224 dN) or 210% 

Rudder Pedal Force* 

t3.0 lb (1.334 dN) or 105 

Aileron Wheel Force* 1 

+3 K+ Airspeed Ground/Takeoff IR IR IR IR Record Takeoff profile to 

~1.5~ Pitch, and First Segment I at least 200 ft. (61 Meters) I 21.5 Angle of Attack Climb 

220 Feet (6 Meters} t 

AGL with same relative wind 

profile as airplane test. 

Alsitude *Applies only to reversible 

+2 Bank and control systems. 

Sideslip Angle 

55.0 lb (2.224 dN) or 210% I 

Column Force* 

+5.0 lb (2.224 dN) or 210% 1 

Rudder Pedal Force* 

23.0 lb (1,334 dN) or 10% 

Aileron wheel Force* I I 1 

Overall Distance 2 ? Ground IR IR IR 'IR Auto brakes will be used 

Braking Effort f. ? where applicable, Maximum I (To Be Determined) braking effort, Auto or 

Manual. 

I = Initial Evaluation 

R= Recurrent Evaluation 

Qualification 

rement 
TABLE OF VALIDATION TESTS (Cont'd) 

I = Initial Evaluation 

R= Recurrent Evaluation 

Qualification 

Test Tolerance Flight Condition Reauirement 

A B C D 

IR IR 

1. PERFORMANCE (Con71 

c. CLIMB 

(1) Normal Climb +3 Kts Airspeed Climb With All 

All Engines Operating &5% or +lOO FPM Engines Operating 

(0.5 Meters/See.) 

Climb Rate 

IR May be a Snapshot Test. 

Manufacturer's gross climb 

gradient may be used for 

flight test data. 

May be a Snapshot Test. 

Manufacturer's gross climb 

gradient may be used for 

flight test data. Test at 

weight altitude, temperature 

limited conditions. 

(2) One Engine Inoperative 

Second Segment Climb 

+3 Kts Airspeed Second Segment 

25% or 2100 FPM Climb With One 

(0.5 Meters/Set.) Engine Inoperative 

Climb Rate, but not 

less than the FAA 

Approved Flight Manual 

Rate of Climb 

IR IR IR IR 

IR IR IR IR May be a Snapshot Test. 

Manufacturer% gross climb 

gradient may be used for 

flight test data. Use near 

maximum landing weight. 

(3) One Engine Inoperative 

Approach Climb for 

Airplanes With Icing 

Accountability per 

Approved AFM 

+3 Kts Airspeed Approach Climb 

25% or 2100 FPM With One Engine 

(0.5 Meters/Set.) Inoperative 

Climb Rate, but not 

less than the FAA 

Approved Flight Manual 

Rate of Climb 

IR IR 

d. STOPPING 

IR IR Time and Distance should 

be recorded for at least 

80% of the total segment 

(TD to Full Stop). Brake 

system pressure should be 

available. 

(1) Deceleration Time and 

Distance, Wheel 

Brakes Using Manual 

Braking, Dry Runway 

(No Reverse Thrust) 

25% of Time. For Landing 

distance up to 

4000 Feet (1220 m.) 

~200 Feet (61 m.) 

or 210% whichever is 

smaller, For ‘distance 

greater than 4000 

Feet (1220 m.) 

t5k of distance. 

Time and Distance should 

be recorded for at least 

80% of the total 

demonstrated reverse thrust 

segment. 

(2) Deceleration Time and 25% Time and the 

Distance, Reverse Smaller of 210% or 

Thrust, Dry Runway 200 Feet (61 Meters) 

(No Wheel Braking) of Distance 

Landing IR IR IR IR 
I = Initial Evaluation 

R= Recurrent Evaluation 

Test Tolerance Flight Condition 

Qualification 

Requirement 

1, PERFORMANCE (STOPPING ConW 

(3) Stopping Time and 

Distance, Wheel 

Brakes, Wet Runway 

(No Reverse Thrust) 

Representative 

Stopping Time and 

Distance 

Landing 

I 

I 

(4) Stopping Time and Representative Landing I I 

Distance, wheel Stopping Time and 

Brakes, Icy Runway Distance f 

(No Reverse Thrust) 

8. ENGINES 

(1) Acceleration Ti ~10~ Approach or IR IR IR IR 

Tt 210% Landing I 

(2) Deceleration Ti 210% 

Tt &lo% 

Ground/Takeoff 

FAA approved Airplane Flight 

Manual (AFM) data is 

acceptable. 

FAA approved AFM data is 

acceptable. 

T- = Total time from initial 

tbottle movement until a 

10% response of a critical 

engine parameter. 

T = Total time from T. to 

98% go-around power. critical 

engine parameter should be a 

measurement of power (N 

EPR, Torque, etc.) Plo 4 

, N2 

fro& 

flight idle to go-around 

power for a rapid (slam) 

throttle movement. 

Test from maximum takeoff power 

to 10% of maximUm takeoff power 

(90% decay in power). Time 

history should be provided. 
Tgst Tolerance Flisht Condition 

TABLE OF VALIDATION TKSTS (Contld) 

2. HANDLING QWALITIES 

a, STATIC CONTROL CHECKS** 

(1) Column Position vs. 

Force and Surface 

Position Calibration 

+2 lbs (0.89 daN) 

fireakout 

+5 Pbs (2.224 daN) 

or+10% Force 

+2 Elevator 

Ground 

(2) Wheel Position vs. 

Force and Surface 

Position Calibration 

+2 lbs (0.89 daN) 

breakout 

k3 lbs (1.334 daN) 

or&lo% Force 

+10 Aileron 

+3 Spoiler 

Ground 

(3) Pedal Position vs. 

Force and Surface 

Position Calibration 

+5 lbs (2.224 daN) 

Breakout 

+5 lbs (2.224 daN) 

or+10% Force 

,Z Rudder 

Ground 

(4) Nosewheel Steering 

Force & Position 

+z lbs (0.89 daN) 

Breakout 

fr3 lbs (1.334 daN) 

or_+10% Force 

22 Nosewheel Angle 

Ground 

(5) Rudder Pedal Steering 

Calibration 

+2' Nosewheel Angle Ground 

I = Initial Evaluation 

R= Recurrent Evaluation 

Qualification 

Resuiremnt Comments 

. 

A B C D 

IR IR IR IR Uninterrupted control sweep, 

6tOp t0 Stop. 

IR IR IR IR 'Uninterrupted control sweep, 

6tOp t0 Stop. 

IR IR IR IR Uninterrupted control sweep, 

stop to stop. 

IR IR IR XR Uninterrupted control swe8p, 

6tOp t0 Stop. 

IR IR IR IR 

I 1 

**Column, wheel, and pedal position v6. force shall be measured at the control. An alternate method acceptable to the NSPM in lieu of 

the test fixture at the controls is to instrument the simulator in an equivalent manner to the flight test airplane. The force and 

position data from this instrumentation can be directly recorded and matched to the airplane data. Such a permanent installation would 

eliminate the need for installation of external devices. iFsi 

z a;3 

E 7 

"Z NW 
TABLE OF VALIDATION TESTS (Cont'd) 

I = Initial Evaluation 

R = Recurrent Evaluation 

Qualification 

Go 

Comments 4 Test Tolerance Flisht Condition Reguirement 

I 

. 

D -I A B c 

2. HANDLING QUALITIES (STATIC CONTROL CHECKS ConW 

Measure trim rate for goaround. Trim rate input and 

surface rate time history is 

appropriate. 

(6) Pitch Trim Calibration IR 

Indicator vs. Computed 

+0.5' of Computer 

Trim Angle 

210% Trim Rate 

Ground and 

Go-Around 

IR IR l[R 

LR IS imultaneous qecording for all 

engines. A 5. tolerance 

applies against airplane data 

and between engines. May be 

Snapshot Test. 

(7) Alignment of Power 

Lever Angle vs. 

Selected Engine 

Parameter (EPR, N1, 

Torque, etc.) 

+5* of Power Lever 

Angle 

Ground IR IR 

IR Simulator computer output 

results may be used to show 

compliance. Relate hydraulic 

system pressure to pedal 

position in a ground static 

test. 

(8) Brake Pedal Position 

Vs. Force 

k5 lb (2.224 daN) 

or 10% 

~10% or 150 psi (1033 kPa) 

brake hydraulic 

pressure 

IR IR 1R 

IR 

b. DYNAMIC CONTROL CHECKS** 

(1) Pitch Control +lOS of time for Takeoff, Cruise, 

first zero crossing, Landing 

and *lO(n+l)% of 

period thereafter. 

jrlOS amplitude of 

first overshoot. 

220% of amplitude of . 

2nd and subsequent 

OVerShOOts greater 

than 5% of initial 

displacement, 

+l overshoot. 

IR Data should be normal control 

displacement in both 

directions. Approximately 25% 

to 50% of full throw. 

n is the sequential period of 

a full cycle of oscillation. 

Refer to paragraph'3 this 

appendix. 

**Column, wheel, and pedal position vs. force or time shall be measured at the control. An alternate method acceptable to the NSPM in 

lieu of the test fixture at the controls is to instrument the simulator in an equivalent manner to the flight test airplane. The force 

and position data from this instrumentation can be directly recorded and matched to the airplane data. Such a pernanent installation 

would eliminate the need for installation of external devices. 

F 4 
TABLE OF VALIDATION TESTS (Cont'd) 

I= Initial Evaluation 

R= Recurrent Evaluation 

Test Tolerance 

Qualification 

Flicrht Condition Requirement Comments 

2. HANDLING QUALITIES (DYNAMIC CONTROL CHECKS** ConW 

(2) Roll Control Same as (1) above. Takeoff, Cruise, 

Landing 

I I 

~---~ ~~ 

(3) Yaw Control Same as (1) above. Takeoff, Cruise, 

Landing I 

C, LONGITUDINAL I 

(1) Power Change Dynamics +3 Kts Airspeed Approach to IR IR 

5100 Feet (30 Meters) Go-Around 

Altitude 

220% or ~1.5' Pitch I 

1 

(2) Flap/Slat Change 

DyrraraiCS 

1 

+3 Kts Airspeed Retraction, After 'IR IR 

2100 Feet (30 Meters) Takeoff. Extension, 

Altitude 

220% or 51.5' Pitch 

Approach to Landing IR IR 

(3) Spoiler/Speedbrake 

Change Dynamics 

23 Kts Airspeed Cruise and IR IR 

~100 Feet (30 Meters) Approach 

Altitude 

220% or 21.5' Pitch 

C D 

IR IR 

IR IR 

IR IR 

IR IR 

IR 'IR 

IR IR 

Data should be normal control 

displacement. Approximately 

25% to 50% of full throw. 

Data should be normal control 

displacement. Approximately 

25% to 50% of full throw. 

Wing flaps should remain in 

the approach position, Time 

history of uncontrolled free 

response for time increment 

from 5 seconds before 

the initiation of the 

configuration change to 

15 seconds after completion 

of the configuration change. 

Time history of uncontrolled 

free response for time 

increment from 5 seconds 

before the initiation of the 

configuration change to 15 

seconds after completion 

of the configuration change. 

Time history of uncontrolled 

free response for time 

increment from 5 seconds 

before the initiation of the 

configuration change to 

15 seconds after the 

completion of the configuration change. 
TABLE OF VALIDATION TESTS (Cont@d) 

I = Initial Evaluation 

R= Recurrent Evaluation 

.ifi 

iire 

zati 

Teat Tolerance Fliuht Condition lent 

A B D 

2. HANDLING QUALITIES (LONGITUDINAL Can't) 

(4) Gear Change Dynamics +3 Kts Airspeed Takeoff to Second 

+I00 Feet (30 Heters) Segment Climb, 

Altitude 

220% or +1.5* Pitch 

Approach to Landing 

IR IR IR IR Time history of uncontrolled 

free respon663 for a time 

increment of 5 seconds before 

the initiation of the 

configuration change to 15 

seconds after the completion 

of the configuration change. 

(5) Gear and Flap/Slat 

Operating Times 

+l second or 

10% of Time 

Takeoff, Approach IR IR IR IR Normal and alternate flaps, 

extension and retraction. 

Normal gear, extension and 

retraction. Alternate gear, 

extension only. 

+l" Pitch Control 

(Stab and Elev) 

+l Pitch Angle 

55% Net Thrust 

or Equivalent 

(6) Longitudinal Trim Cruise, Approach, 'IR IR IR 'IR May be Snapshot Tests. 

Landing 

(7) Longitudinal Maneuvering +5 lbs (22.224 daN) Cruise, Approach, 'IR IR 

Stability (Stick or tlO% Column Landing 

Force/g) Force or Equivalent 

Surface 

'IR 'IR May be series of Snapshot 

Tests. Force or surface 

deflection must be in correcs 

dixection. oApproximately 20 , 

30 I and 45 banJc angle should 

be presented 

(8) Longitudinal Static 

Stability 

+5 lbs (22.224 daN) Approach 

or +lOt Column Force 

or Equivalent Surface 

Data for at least 2 speeds 

above and 2 speeds below trim 

speed. May be a series of 

Snapshot Tests. 
TABLE OF VALIDATION TESTS (Cont'd) 

x = Initial Evaluation 

R= Recurrent Evaluation 

Test Tolerance 

Qualification 

Flight Condition Reauirement 

2. HANDLING QUALITIES (LONGITUDINAL ConW 

(9) Stick Shaker, Airframe 

Buffet, Stall Speeds 

+3 oKts Airspeed 

+2 Bank for speeds 

higher than stick 

shaker or initial 

buffet 

Second Segment 

Climb and Approach 

or Landing 

(10) Phugoid Dynamics &lO% of Period 

210% of Time to 112 

or Double Amplitude 

or fi.02 of Damping 

Ratio 

Cruise 

(11) Short Period Dynamics 

e 

+1%5* Pitch or 

+2 /sec. Pitch Rate 

+.lOg Normal 

Acceleration 

Cruise 

d, IlATERAL DIRECTIONAL 

(1) Minimum Control Speed, 

Air (Vm 

Applic ais 

), per 

e Airworthiness Standard 

or 

Low Speed Engine 

Inoperative Handling 

Characteristics in Air 

+3 Kts Airspeed Takeoff or Landing 

(Whichever is most 

critical in 

airplane) 

(2) Roll Response (Rate) 210% or +2*/set. 

Roll Rate 

Cruise and Approach 

or Landing 

Stall Warning Signal should 

be recorded and must occur 

in the proper relation to 

stall. 

Test should include 3 full 

cycles (6 overshoots after 

input completed) or that 

sufficient to determine time 

to l/2 amplitude whichever 

is less. 

V may be defined by a 

p:g f ormance or control limit 

which prevents demonstration 

Of VRca in the conventional 

manner. 

Test with normal wheel 

deflection (about 30%). 
TABLE OF VALIDATION TESTS (Cont'd) 

I = Initial Evaluation 

R= Recurrent Evaluation 

Test Tolerance 

walification 

Flisht Condition Resuirentent Comments 

(3) Roll Response to 

Roll Controller 

Step Input 

210% or +2*/set. 

Roll Rate 

Approach or Landing 

(4) Spiral Stability Correct Trend, 22' 

Bank or 210% in 

20 Seconds 

Cruise 

(5) Engine Inoperative 

Trim 

+l* Rgdder Angle 

or +l Tab Angle 

oreEquivalent Pedal 

+2 Sideslip Angle 

Second Segment and 

Approach or Landing 

(6) Rudder Response +2*Jsec. or 210% 

Yaw Rate 

Approach or Landing 

(7) Dutch Roll, Yaw 

Damper OFF 

50.5 sec. or ,105 Cruise and 

of Period. Approach or Landing 

+10% of Tine to 

l/2 or Double 

Amplitude or 

2.02 of Damping Ratio. 

520% or 21 88~. 

of Time Difference 

Between Peaks of 

Bank and Sideslip. 

(8) Steady State Sideslip For a given*rudder 

poqition ~2 Bank, 

+l Sideslap, 

+lO% or +2. Aileron, 

tlO# or +5 Spoiler 

or Equivalent wheel 

Position 

Approach or Landing 

'A B 

r : c 

'IR IR 'IA 

'IR IR IR 

IR IR IR 

IR IR / IR 

IR IR 

L 

I 

IR IR 1 IR 

D 

-i 

IR Roll rate response. 

I 

IR ,Airplane data averaged from 

multiple tests may be used. 

Test for both directions. 

IR May be Snapshot Tests. 

I 

IR ITest with stability augmentation ON and OFF, Rudder 

step input of approximately 

25% rudder pedal throw. 

IR Test for at least 6 cycles 

I with stability augmentation 

OFF. 

IR May be a series of Snapshot 

I 

Tests. 
WLE OF VALIDATION a (Cont'd) 

I = Initial Evaluation 

R= Recurrent Evaluation 

Qualification 

Tolerance Recruirement 

B 

2, HANDLING QUALITIES (Con91 

0. LANDINGS 

(1) Normal Landing +3 K@ Airspeed Landing 

+1.5o Pitch 

9.5 Angle of Attack 

klO% Altitude or 

+lO Feet (3 Meters) 

IR IR IR Test from a minimum of 200 ft. 

(61 Meters) AGL to Nosewheel 

Touchdown. Derotation may 

be shown as a separate segment 

from the time of main gear 

touchdown. 

(2) Crosswind Landing +3 K$s Airspeed Landing IR IR IR 

21.5, Pitch 

21.5 Angle of Attack 

210% Altitude or 

+lQ Feet (3 Meters) 

lf2* Bank Angle 

+2 Sideslip Angle 

or Yaw Angle 

Test from a minimm of 200 ft. 

(61 Meters) AGL to Nosewheel 

Touchdown and rollout to 

60 Kts, Use near maximm 

landing weight with same 

Relative Wind Profile as 

aircraft test, 

(3) One Engine Inoperative 

Landing 

+3 Kss Airspeed Landing 

+1.50 Pitch 

21.5 Angle of Attack 

210% Altitude or 

218 Feet (3 Meters) 

+2* Bank Angle 

+2 Sideslip Angle 

or Yaw Angle 

IR IR IR Test from a minimum of 200 ft. 

(61 Meters) AGL to Nosewheel 

Touchdown. 

(4) Directional Control +5 Kts Airspeed Landing 

(Rudder Effectiveness) 

With Reverse Thrust, 

Symmetric and Asymmetric 

IR IR IR Airplane test data required, 

however, airplane manufacturer's engineering 

simulator data may be used for 

reference data as last resort. 

Airplanes with demonstrated 

minimum speed for rudder 

effectiveness +5 Kts. Others, 

test to verify simulator meets 

conditions demonstrated by 

airplane manufacturer. 
Test 

2. HANDLING QUALITIES Kon't) 

f. GROUND EFFECT 

(1) A Test to Demonstrate 

Longitudinal Ground 

Effect 

TABLE OF VALIDATION TESTS (Cont'd) 

Tolerance Flight Condition 

+I0 Elevator or 

Stabilizer Angle 

25% Net Thrust or 

Equivalent 

+l Angle of Attack 

tlO% Height/Altitude 

or +5 Feet (1.5 m.) 

t3 Jnots Airspeed 

+l Fitch Attitude 

Landing 

I= Initial Evaluation 

R= Recurrent Evaluation 

Qualification 

Requirement 

b. Leg Balance As specified by IR IR IR IR 

operator for 

simulator acceptance. I I I I 

c. Turn Around Check As specified by IR IR IR IR 

operator for 

simulator acceptance. I I I I 

d. Characteristic Buffet See Appendix 1, IXR 

Hotions para 3.f. 

Comments 

See paragraph 4, this 

appendix. A rationale must 

be provided with justification 

of results. 

Appropriate test to 

demonstrate Frequency 

Response required. 

Appropriate test to 

demonstrate Leg Balance 

required. 

Appropriate test to 

demonstrate Smooth Turn 

Around required. 

Compliance statement required. 

Test required. 
TABLE OF VALIDATION TESTS (Cont'd) 

I= Initial Evaluation 

R= Recurrent Evaluation 

Tolerance 

Qualification 

Fliuht Condition Requirement 

4. VISdAL SYSTa - (Note: Refer to Appendix 3 for additional visual tests.) 

.a. Visual Ground Segment 520% Landing. Static at 

(VW Threshold lights must 100 ft. (30 Meters) 

be visible if they wheel Height Above 

are in the visual Touchdown Zone 

segment. on Glide Slope. 

(See example in Runway Visual 

Comments.) Range = 1200 Ft. or 

350 Meters. 

A B c 

IR IR IR 

I I 

b. Visual System Color Demonstration Model I I 

c. Visual RVR Calibration Demonstration Hodel 

I I 

d. Visual Display Focus Demonstration Model 

and Intensity I I 

8. Visual Attitude vs. Demonstration Model 

Simulator Attitude 

Indicator (Pitch and 

Roll of Horizon) I 

f. 'Demonstrate 10 Levels Demonstration Model 

of Occulting Through 

Each Channel of System I I 

IR 

IR 

IR 

IR 

IR 

D 

IR 

JR 

IR 

IR 

IR 

- 

The ATG should indicate the 

source of data, i.e., ILS 

G/S antenna location, pilot 

eye reference point, cockpit 

cutoff angle, etc., used to 

make visual ground segment 

scene content calculations. 

Tolerance Example: 

If the calculated VGS for the 

airplane is 840 ft., the 20% 

tolerance of 168 ft. may be 

applied at the near or far 

end of the simulator VGS 

or may be split between both 

as long as the total of 

168 ft. is not exceeded. 

May be requested for recurrent 

evaluation. 
Tolerancg 

TABLE OF VALIDATION TESTS (Cont'd) 

I = Initial Evaluation 

R = Recurrent Evaluation 

Qualification 

Flight Conditior) Reauirement 

5. SIMULATOR SYSTEMS 

a. VISUAL, MOTION, AND COCKPIT INSTRUMENT RESPONSE 

Visual, Motion, and 

Instrument Systems 

response to an abrupt 

pilot controller input, 

compared to airplane 

response for a similar 

input. 

150 milliseconds or 

less after airplane 

response. 

300 milliseconds or 

less after airplane 

response. 

or 

Transport Delay 

Takeoff, Cruise 

Approach or Landing 

Takeoff, Cruise, 

Approach or Landing 

150 Railliseconds or 

less after control 

movement. 

Pitch, Roll, Yaw 

300 milliseconds or 

less after control 

movement. 

Pitch, Roll, Yaw 

b. SOUND 

Realistic araplitude and frequency of cockpit noises and sounds, 

including precipitation static, and engine and airframe sounds. 

The sounds shall be coordinated with the weather representations 

required in FAR Part 121, Appendix H, Phase III (Level D), Visual 

Requirement No. 3. 

A B C D 

IR 

IR IR 

One test is required in each 

axis (pitch, roll, and yaw) 

for each of the 3 conditions 

compared to airplane data 

for a similar input. (Total 

9 tests.) 

Visual change may start 

before motion response, but 

motion acceleration must 

occur before completion of 

visual scan of first video 

field containing different 

information. 

IR IR One test is required in each 

axis. (Total 3 tests.) 

IR IR See Appendix 1, Item 2.~. 

IR Test results must show a 

comparison of the amplitude 

and frequency content of 

the sounds that originate from 

the airplane or airplane 

systems. 
TABLE OF VALIDATION TESTS (Cont'd) 

Test Tolerance 

c. DIAGNOSTIC TESTING 

(1) A means for quickly and effectively testing simulator 

programming and hardware. This could include an 

automated system which could be used for conducting 

at least a portion of the tests in the ATG. 

(2) Self testing of simulator hardware and programming to 

determine compliance with Levels B, C, and D Simulator 

Requirements. 

(3) Diagnostic analysis as prescribed in FAR Part 121, 

Appendix H, Phase III (Level D) Simulator Requirement 

No. 5. 

Flight Condition 

I= Initial Evaluation 

R = Recurrent Evaluation 

Qualification 

Requirement Comments 

A B 
SIMULATOR VALIDATION TESTS (Cont’d) 

W 

3 CONTROL DYNAMICS. The characteristics of an 

airplane flight control system have a major 

effect on the handling qualities. A significant 

consideration in pilot acceptability of an 

airplane is the “feel” provided through the 

cockpit controls. Considerable effort is 

expended on airplane feel system design in order 

to deliver a system with which pilots will be 

comfortable and consider the airplane desirable 

to fly. In order for a simulator to be 

representative, it too must present the pilot 

with the proper feel; that of the respective 

airplane. This fact is recognized in FAR 

Part 121, Appendix H, Phase II (Level C) 

Simulator Requirement IO, which states: 

“Aircraft control feel dynamics shall duplicate 

the airplane simulated. This shall be determined 

by comparing a recording of the control feel 

dynamics of the simulator to airplane 

measurements in the takeoff, cruise, and landing 

configuration.” 

Recordings such as free response to an impulse or 

step function are classically used to estimate 

the dynamic properties of electromechanical 

systems. In any case, it is only possible to 

estimate the dynamic properties as a result of. 

only being able to estimate true inputs and 

responses. Therefore, it is imperative that the 

best possible data be collected since close 

matching of the simulator control loading system 

to the airplane systems is essential. The 

required control feel dynamic tests dictated by 

FAR Part 121, Appendix H, are described in 2.b. 

of the Table of Validation Tests of this section. 

For initial and upgrade evaluations, it is 

required that control dynamic characteristics be 

measured at and recorded directly from the 

cockpit controls. This procedure is usually 

accomplished by measuring the free response of 

the controls using a step or pulse input to 

excite the system. The procedure must be 

accomplished in takeoff, cruise, and landing 

flight conditions and configurations. 

For airplanes with irreversible control systems9 

measurements may be obtained on the ground if 

proper Pitot-static inputs are provided to 

represent airspeeds typical of those encountered 

in flight Likewise o it may be shown that for 

some airplanes, takeoff, cruise, and landing 

configurations have like effects. Thus, one may 

suffice for another, If either or both 

considerations apply, engineering validation or 

airplane manufacturer rationale must be submitted 

as justif ication for ground tests or for 

eliminating a configuration. For simulators 

requiring static and dynamic tests at the 

controls, special test fixtures will not be 

required during initial and upgrade evaluations 

if the operator’s ATG shows both test fixture 

results and the results of an alternative 

approach, such as computer plots which were 

produced concurrently and show satisfactory 

agreement. Repeat of the alternative method 

during the initial evaluation would then satisfy 

this test requirement. 

a. Control Dynamics Evaluations. The 

dynamic properties of control systems are often 

stated in terms of frequency, damping, and a 

number of other classical measurements which can 

be found in texts on control systems. In order to 

establish a consistent means of validating test 

results for simulator control loading, criteria 
SIMULATOR VALIDATION TESTS (Co&d) 

are needed that will clearly define the 

interpretation of the measurements and the 

tolerances to be applied. Criteria are needed 

for both the underdamped system and the 

overdamped system, including the critically 

damped case l In case of an underdamped system 

with very light damping, the system may be 

quantified in terms of frequency and damping. In 

critically damped or overdamped systems, the 

frequency and damping is not readily measured 

from a response time history. Therefore, some 

other measurement must be used. 

b For Levels C and D Simulators. Tests to 

verify that control feel dynamics represent the 

airplane must show that the dynamic damping 

cycles (free response of the control) match that 

of the airplane within specified tolerances. The 

method of evaluating the response and the 

tolerance to be applied are described below for 

the underdamped and critically damped cases. 

(1) Underdamped Response. Two measurements are required for the period, the time to 

first zero crossing (in case a rate limit is 

present) and the subsequent frequency of 

oscillation. It is necessary to measure cycles 

on an individual basis in case there are 

nonuniform periods in the response, Each period 

will be independently compared to the respective 

period of the airplane control system and, 

consequently, will enjoy the full tolerance 

specified for that period. 

The damping tolerance should be applied to 

overshoots on an individual basis. Care should 

be taken when applying the tolerance to small 

overshoots since the significance of such 

overshoots becomes questionable. Only those 

overshoots larger than 5 percent of the total 

initial displacement should be considered 

significant. The residual band, labelled T(A ) on 

Figure 1 is +5 percent of the initial disp P acement amplitude A, from the steady state value of 

the oscillation. Oscillations within the 

residual band are considered insignificant. When 

comparing simulator data to airplane data, the 

process should begin by overlaying or aligning 

the simulator and airplane steady state values 

and then comparing amplitudes of oscillation 

peaks, the time of the first zero crossing, and 

individual periods of oscillation. The simulator 

should show the same number of significant 

overshoots to within one when compared against 

the airplane data. This procedure for evaluating 

the response is illustrated in Figure 1. 

(2) Critically Damped and Overdamped 

Response. Due to the nature of critically damped 

responses (no overshoots), the time to reach 

90 percent of the steady state (neutral point) 

value should be the same as the airplane within 

+I 0 percent. The simulator response should be 

critically damped also. Figure 2 illustrates the 

procedure. 

Tolerances 

The following table summarizes the tolerances, T. 

See Figures 1 and 2 for an illustration of the 

referenced measurements. 

T&J. 

T(P,) 

910% of P, 

T(P,) 

+20!% of P, 

+30% of P 

T(P,) 710(n+l)%*of P 

T(A,) 910% of A,, +28% of Subsequent Peaks 

T&j) 75% of A = Residual Band 

&ershoo& - +I 
SIMULATOR VALIDATION TESTS (Cont’d) 

c. Alternative Method for Control Dynamics. 

One airplane manufacturer has proposed, and the 

FAA accepts, an alternative means for dealing 

with control dynamics. The method applies to 

airplanes with hydraulically powered flight 

controls and artificial feel systems. Instead of 

free response measurements, the system would be 

validated by measurements of control force and 

rate of movement. 

For each axis of pitch, roll, and yaw, the 

control shall be forced to its maximum extreme 

position for the following distinct rates. These 

tests shall be conducted at typical taxi 9 

takeoff, cruise, and landing conditions. 

(1) Static Test - Slowly move the control 

such that approximately 100 seconds are required 

to achieve a full sweep. A full sweep is defined 

as movement of the controller from neutral to the 

stop, usually aft or right stop, then to the 

opposite stop, then to the neutral position. 

(2) Slow Dynamic Test - Achieve a full 

sweep in approximately 10 seconds. 

(3) Fast Dynamic Test - Achieve a full 

sweep in approximately 4 seconds. 

NOTE : Dynamic sweeps may be limited to forces 

not exceeding 100 lb. 

Tolerances 

(1) Static Test - Items 2.a. 

(3) of this appendix. 

(2) Dynamic Test - 2 lb. or 10 

dynamic increment above static test. 

(l)(2) and 

percent on 

The FAA is open to alternative means such as the 

one described above. Such alternatives must, 

however, be justified and appropriate to the 

application. For example, the method described 

here may not apply to all manufacturers’ systems 

and certainly not to airplanes with reversible 

control systems. Hence, each case must be 

considered on its own merit on an ad hoc basis. 

Should the FAA find that alternative methods do 

not result in satisfactory simulator performance, 

then more conventionally accepted methods must be 

used + 

4 . GROUND EFFECT. During landing and takeoff, 

airplanes operate for brief time intervals close 

to the ground. The presence of the ground 

significantly modifies the air flow past the 

airplane and, there fore 

characteristics. The 

9 cha 

clos 

.nges the aerodynamic 

e proxim ity of the 

ground imposes a barrier which inhibits the 

downward flow normally associated with the 

production of lift. The downwash is a function 

of height with the effects usually considered to 

be negligible.above a height of approximately one 

wingspan. There are three main effects of the 

reduced downwash: 

a. A reduction in downwash angle at the tail 

for a conventional configuration. 
SIMULATOR VALIDATION TESTS (Cont’d) 

b An increase in both wing and tail lift 

because of changes in the relationship of lift 

coefficient to angle of attack (increase in lift 

curve slope). 

c. A reduction in the induced drag. 

Relative to out-of-ground effect flight (at a 

given angle of attack), these effects result in 

higher lift in ground effect and less power 

required for level flight. Because of the 

associated effects on stability, they also cause 

significant changes in elevator (or stabilizer) 

angle to trim and stick (column) forces required 

to maintain a given lift coefficient in level 

flight near the ground. 

For a simulator to be used for takeoff and in 

particularly landing credit, it must faithfully 

reproduce the aerodynamic changes which occur in 

ground effect. The parameters chosen for 

simulator validation must obviously be indicative 

of these changes l The primary validation 

parameters for longitudinal characteristics in 

ground effect are: 

a. Elevator or stabilizer angle to trim. 

b 

(PLF)’ 

Power (thrust) required for level flight 

l 

c. Angle of attack for a given lift 

coefficient. 

d 0 Height/altitude. 

e. Airspeed. 

This listing of parameters assumes that ground 

effect data is acquired by tests during “flybYS ” at several altitudes in and out of ground 

effect. The test altitudes should, as a minimum, 

be at 10 percent, 30 percent, and 70 percent of 

the airplane wingspan and one altitude out of 

ground effect; e.g., 150 percent of wingspan. 

Level fly-bys are required for Level D, but not 

for Level C and Level B. They are, however, 

acceptable for all levels. 

If, in lieu of the level fly-by method for Levels 

B and C, other methods such as shallow glidepath 

approaches to the ground maintaining a chosen 

parameter constant are proposed, then additional 

validation parameters are important. For 

example, if constant attitude shallow approaches 

are chosen as the test maneuver, pitch attitude, 

and flight path angle are additional necessary 

validation parameters. The selection of the test 

methods and procedures to validate ground effect 

is at the option of the organization performing 

the flight tests; however, rationale -must be 

provided to conclude that the tests performed do 

indeed validate the ground effect model. 

The allowable longitudinal parameter tolerances 

for validation of ground effect characteristics 

are: 

Elevator or Stabilator Angle 21" 

Power for Level Flight (PLF)+5% - 
SIMULATOR VALIDATION TESTS (Cont’d) 

Angle of Attack +1* 

Altitude/Height +lO% 

or 25' (1.5 m.) 

Airspeed +3 Knots 

Pitch Attitude 21' 

The lateral-directional characteristics are also 

altered by ground effect. Because of the abovementioned changes in lift curve slope, roll 

damping 9 as an example, is affected. The change 

in roll damping will affect other dynamic modes 

usually evaluated for simulator validation. In 

fact, Dutch-roll dynamics, spiral stability, and 

roll-rate for a given lateral control input are 

altered by ground effect. Steady heading 

sideslips will also be affected. These effects 

must be accounted for in the simulator modeling. 

Several tests such as “crosswind landing,” “one 

engine inoperative landing,’ and ‘engine failure 

on takeoff” serve to validate lateraldirectional ground effect since portions of them 

are accomplished while transiting altitudes at 

which ground effect is an important factor. 
SIMULATOR VALIDATION TESTS (Cont'd) 

P=Period 

A=Amplitude 

T(P)=Tolerance applied 

. to Period 

T(A)=Tolerance applied 

to Amplitude 

Displacement 

vs 

Time 

Figure 1. Under-damped Step Response 
SIMULATOR VALIDATION TESTS (Cont'd) 

rO.lA&. I 

I- 4 Pg 

Displacement 

vs 

Time 

Figure 2. Critically-damped Step Response 
7/29/91 AC 120-40B 

Appendix 3 

APPENDIX 3. FUNCTIONS AND SUBJECTIVE TESTS 

1 l DISCUSSION. Accurate replication of airplane systems functions will be 

checked at each flight crewmember position by an FAA Simulator Evaluation 

Specialist. This includes procedures using the operator’s approved manuals and 

checklists. Handling qualities, performance, and simulator systems operation 

will be subjectively assessed by an FAASimulator EvaluationSpecialist qualified 

in the respective airplane. 

At the request of a POI, the Simulator Evaluation Specialist may assess the 

simulator for a special aspect of an operator’s training program during the 

functions and subjective portion of a recurrent evaluation. Such an assessment 

may include a portion of a LOFT scenario or special emphasis items in the 

operator’s training program. Unless directly related to a requirement for the 

current qualification level, the results of such an evaluation would not affect 

the simulator’s current status. 

Operational principal navigation systems including inertial navigation systems, 

OMEGA, or other long-range systems, and the associated electronic display systems 

will be evaluated if installed. The Simulator Evaluation Specialist will include 

in his report to the PO1 the effect of the system operation and system 

limitations. 

2 TEST REQUIREMENTS. The ground and flight tests and other checks required 

f;r qualification are listed in the Table of Functions and Subjective Tests. 

The table includes maneuvers and procedures to assure that the simulator 

functions and performs appropriately for use in pilot training and checking in 

the maneuvers and procedures 

Appendices E and F. It also 

Part 121, Appendix H, and other 

are included to address some 

innovative training programs. 

delineated in FAR Part 61 and FAR Part 121, 

contains tests to assure compliance with FAR 

regulatory provisions. Maneuvers and procedures 

features of advanced technology airplanes and 

For example, “high angle of attack maneuvering” 

is included to provide an alternative to “approach to stalls.” Such _ an 

alternative is necessary for airplanes employing flight envelope limiting 

technology. The portion of the table addressing pilot functions and maneuvers 

is divided by flight phases. Visual systems testsare listed separately as are 

special effects. 

All systems functions will be assessed for normal and, where appropriate, 

alternate operations. Normal, abnormal, and emergency procedures associated with 

a flight phase will be assessed during the evaluation of maneuvers or events 

within that flight phase. Systems are listed separately under “Any Flight Phase” 

to assure appropriate attention to systems checks. 

Par 1 
0 

. 

0 

z zi 

: 

$ k--J 

. 

c 

r* 

r* 

0 

c-t 

5 

2: 

. 

x x x X 

X x x X X 

- ~ - _ ~-~ _~ _ _ -_- - - 

X x x X X 

X x x X x 
7/29/91- AC 120040B 

Appendix 3 

TABLE OF FUNCTIONS AND SUBJECTIVE TESTS (Cont'd) SIMULATOR LEVEL 

A 

(i) Engine parameter relationships. 

(ii) Acceleration characteristics. 

(iii) Nosewheel and rudder steering. 

(iv) Crosswind (maximum demonstrated). 

(v) Special performance. 

(vi) Instrument takeoff. 

(vii) Landing gear, wing flap, leading 

edge device operation. 

(viii) Other. 

(2) Abnormal/Emergency. 

(i) Rejected. 

(ii) Rejected special performance. 

(iii) With failure of most critical 

engine at most critical point along takeoff path 

(continued takeoff). 

(iv) With windshear. 

(v) Flight control system failure 

modes. 

(vi) Other. 

d . INFLIGHT OPERATION 

(1) Climb. 

(i) Normal. 

(ii) One engine inoperative. 

(iii) Other. 

B D 

Par 1 3 
AC 120040B 

Appendix 3 

TABLE OF FUNCTIONS AND SUBJECTIVE TESTS (Cont'd) 

(2) Cruise. 

(i) Performance characteristics (speed 

vs. power). 

(ii) Turns with/without spoilers (speed 

brake) deployed. 

(iii) High altitude handling. 

(iv) High speed handling. 

(v) Mach tuck and trim, overspeed 

warning. 

(vi) Normal and steep turns. 

(vii) Performance turns. 

(viii) Approach to stalls (stall warning, 

buffet, and g-break) cruise, takeoff, approach, and 

landing configuration. 

(ix) High angle of attack maneuvers 

( cruise, takeoff, approach, and landing). 

(x) Inflight engine shutdown and 

restart. 

(xi) Maneuvering with one engine 

inoperative. 

(xii) Specific flight characteristics. 

(xiii) Manual flight control reversion. 

(xiv) Flight control system failure 

modes. 

(xv) Other. 

(3) Descent. 

(i) Normal. 

A 

7/29/91 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

B C D 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

Par 1 
7/29/91 _ 

TABLE OF FUNCTIONS AND SUBJECTIVE TESTS (Cont'd) 

modes. 

(ii) Maximum rate. 

(iii) Manual flight control reversion. 

(iv) Flight control system failure 

(v) - Other. 

e. APPROACHES 

(1) Nonprecision. 

(i) Approach procedure(s), one or 

more of the following. 

-- NDB 

-- VOR, RNAV, TACAN 

-- DME ARC 

-- LOC/BC 

-- AZI, LDA, LOC, SDF 

-- ASR 

(ii) Missed approach. 

(iii) All engines operating. 

(iv) One or more engines inoperative. 

(2) Precision. 

(i) PAR. 

(ii) ILS. 

(A) Normal. 

(B) Engine(s) inoperative. 

(C) Category I published approach. 

1 Manually controlled with 

and without flight director to 100 ft. (30 m.) below 

CAT I minima. 

A 

AC 120-40B 

Appendix 3 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

B D 

Par 1 
AC IZO-40B 

Appendix 3 

7/29/91 

TABLE OF FUNCTIONS AND SUBJECTIVE TESTS (Cont'd) 

demonstrated). 

2 With crosswind (maximum 

3 With windshear. 

(D) Category II published approach. 

1 

throttle, autoland. - 

Autocoupled, auto2 All engines operating 

missed approach. 

(E) Category III published 

approach. 

1 With generator failure. 

2 With 10 knot tailwind. 

3 With 10 knot crosswind. 

5 One engine inoperative. 

(iii) Missed approach. 

(A) All engines operating. 

(B) One or more engines inoperative, 

(3) Visual. 

(i) Abnormal wing flaps/slats. 

(ii) Without glide slope guidance. 

f . VISUAL SEGMENT AND LANDING 

(1) Normal. 

(i) Crosswind (maximum demonstrated). X 

(ii) From VFR traffic pattern. 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

X X 

6 Par 1 
7129191 AC 120040B 

Appendix 3 

TABLE OF FUNCTIONS AND SUBJECTIVE TESTS (Cont’d) 

A 

(iii) From nonprecision approach. 

(iv) From precision approach. 

(v) From circling approach. 

NOTE : Simulators with visual systems which permit 

completing a circling approach without violating 

FAR Section 91.175(e) may be approved for that 

particular circling approach procedure. 

(2) Abnormal/emergency. 

(i) Engine(s) inoperative. 

(ii) Rejected. 

(iii) With windshear. 

(iv) With standby (minimum electrical/ 

hydraulic) power. 

(v) With longitudinal trim malfunction. 

(vi) With lateral-directional trim 

malfunction. 

(vii) With loss of flight control 

power (manual reversion). 

(viii) With worst case failure of flight 

control system (most significant degradation of 

fly-by-wire system which is not extremely improbable). 

(ix) Other flight control system 

failure modes as dictated by training program. 

(x) Other. 

go SURFACE OPERATIONS (POST LANDING1 

(1) Landing roll and taxi. 

(i) Spoiler operation. 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

B 

Par I 
AC 120-40BAppendix 3 

7129191 

TABLE OF FUNCTIONS AND SUBJECTIVE TESTS (Cont’d) 

(ii) Reverse thrust operation. 

(iii) Directional control and ground 

handling, both with and without reverse thrust. 

(iv) Reduction of rudder effectiveness 

with increased reverse thrust (rear pod-mounted 

engines). 

(v) Brake and anti-skid operation 

with dry, wet, and icy conditions. 

(vi) Brake operation. 

(vii) Other. 

h . ANY FLIGHT PHASE 

(1) Airplane and powerplant systems 

operation. 

(i) Air conditioning. 

(ii) Antiicing/deicing. 

(iii) Auxiliary powerplant. 

(iv) Communications. 

(v) Electrical. 

(vi) Fire detection and suppression. 

(vii) Flaps/slats/speed brakes 

(viii) Flight controls. 

(ix) Fuel and oil. 

(x) Hydraulic. 

(xi) Landing gear. 

(xii) Oxygen. 

A 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

X 

B 

X 

C 

X 

D 

X 

Par 1 
T/29/91 . AC 1 ZO-40B 

Appendix 3 

TABLE OF FUNCTIONS AND SUBJECTIVE TESTS (Cont'd) 

(xiii) Pneumatic. 

(xiv) Powerplant. 

(xv) Pressurization. 

(2) Flight management and guidance systems. 

(i) Airborne radar. 

(ii) Automatic landing aids. 

(iii) Autopilot. 

(iv) Collision avoidance system. 

(v) Flight control computers. 

(vi) Flight data displays. 

(vii) Flight management computers. 

(viii) Head-up displays. 

(ix) Navigation systems. 

(x) Stall warning/avoidance. 

(xi) Stability and control augmentation. 

(xii) Windshear avoidance equipment. 

(3) Airborne procedures. 

(i) Holding. 

(ii) Air hazard avoidance. 

(iii) Windshear. 

(4) Engine shutdown and parking. 

(i) Engine and systems operation. 

(ii) Parking brake operation. 

A 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

X 

X 

X 

B 

X 

X 

X 

C 

X 

D 

X 

Par 1 
AC IZO-40B 

Appendix 3 

TASLE OF FUNCTIONS AND SUBJECTIVE TESTS (Cont'd) SIMULATOR LEVEL 

B 

(5) Other. 

2 l VISUAL SYSTEM 

a. Accurate portrayal of environment relating 

to simulator attitudes. 

b The distances at which runway features 

are viiible should not be less than those listed 

below. Distances are measured from runway threshold 

to an airplane aligned with the runway on an 

extended 3 degree glide slope. 

(1) Runway definition, strobe lights, 

approach lights, runway edge white lights and VAST 

lights from 5 statute miles (8 kilometers) of.the 

runway threshold. 

(2) Runway centerline lights and taxiway 

definition from 3 statute miles (4.8 kilometers). 

(3) Threshold lights and touchdown zone 

lights from 2 statute miles (3.2 kilometers). 

(4) Runway markings within range of 

landing lights for night scenes; as required by 3 arcminutes resolution on day scenes. 

c. Representative airport scene content 

including: 

(1) Airport runways and taxiways. 

(2) Runway definition. 

(i) Runway surface and markings. 

7129191 

10 Par I 
7129191 AC IZO-40B 

Appendix 3 

TABLE OF FUNCTIONS AND SUBJECTIVE TESTS (Cont'd) 

(ii) Lighting for the runway in use 

including runway edge and centerline lighting, 

touchdown zone, VASI, and approach lighting of 

appropriate colors. 

(iii) Taxiway lights. 

d . Operational landing lights. 

e. Instructor controls of: 

(1) Cloudbase. 

(2) Visibility in statute miles (km) and 

RVR in feet (meters). 

(3) Airport selection. 

(4) Airport lighting. 

f Visual system compatibility with aerodynamic programming. 

& Visual cues to assess sink rates and depth 

perception during landings. 

(1) Surface on taxiways and ramps. 

(2) Terrain features. 

h . Dusk and night visual scene capability. 

i. Minimum of three specific airport scenes. 

(1) Surfaces on runways, taxiways, and 

ramps. 

(2) Lighting of appropriate color for all 

runways including runway edge, centerline, VASI, and 

approach lighting for the runway in use. 

(3) Airport taxiway lighting. 

(4) Ramps and terminal buildings which 

correspond to an operator's Line-Oriented Flight 

Training and Line Oriented Simulator scenarios. 

Par 2 

A 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

X 

X 

X 

B 

X 

X 

X 

X 

C 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

D 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

11 
AC 120-408 

Appendix 3 

TABLE OF FUNCTIONS AND SUBJECTIVE TESTS (Cont’d) 

j. General terrain characteristics and 

significant landmarks. 

k At and below an altitude of 2,000 feet 

(610 m:) height above the airport and within a radius 

of 10 miles (16 kilometers) from the airport, 

weather representations, including the following: 

(1) Variable cloud density. 

(2) Partial obscuration of ground scenes; 

the effect of a scattered to broken cloud deck. 

(3) Gradual break out. 

(4) Patchy fog. 

(5) The effect of fog on airport lighting. 

1 A capability to present ground and air 

hazards such as another airplane crossing the active 

runway or converging airborne traffic. 

m. Operational visual scenes which portray 

representative physical relationships known to 

cause landing illusions such as short runways, 

landing approaches over water, uphill or downhill 

runways, rising terrain on the approach path, and 

unique topographic features. 

n. Special weather representations of light, 

medium, and heavy precipitation near a thunderstorm 

on takeoff, approach, and landings at and below an 

altitude of 2,000 feet (610 m.) above the airport 

surface and within a radius of 10 miles (16 kilometers) 

from the airport. 

0. Wet and snow-covered runways including 

runway lighting reflections for wet, partially 

obscured lights for snow, or suitable alternative 

effects. 

P* Realistic color and directionality of 

airport lighting. 

A 

7129191 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

B D 

12 Par 2 
7129191 AC IZO-40B 

Appendix 3 

TABLE OF FUNCTIONS AND SUBJECTIVE TESTS (Cont’d) SIMULATOR LEVEL 

Q* Weather radar presentations in airplanes 

where radar information is presented on the pilot’s 

navigation instruments. Radar returns should 

correlate to the visual scene. 

r. Freedom from apparent quantization (aliasing). 

3 l SPECIAL EFFECTS 

a. Runway rumble, oleo deflections, effects of 

groundspeed and uneven runway characteristics. 

b Buffets on the ground due to spoiler/ 

speedbrake extension and thrust reversal. 

c. Bumps after lift-off of nose and main gear. 

d Buffet during extension and retraction of 

landing gear. 

e. Buffet in the air due to flap and spoiler/ 

speedbrake extension and approach-to-stall buffet. 

f l Touchdown cues for main and nose gear. 

g* Nosewheel scuffing. 

h l Thrust effect with brakes set. 

i. Representative brake and tire failure 

dynamics (including antiskid) and decreased brake 

efficiency due to high brake temperatures based on 

airplane related data. These representations should 

be realistic enough to cause pilot identification of 

the problem and implementation of appropriate 

procedures. Simulator pitch, side loading, and 

directional control characteristics should be 

representative of the airplane. 

j. Sound of precipitation and significant 

airplane noises perceptible to the pilot during 

normal operations and the sound of a crash when the 

simulator is landed in excess of landing gear 

limitations. Significant airplane noises should 

include noises such as engine, flap, gear, and 

spoiler extension and retraction and thrust 

reversal to a comparable level as that found in the 

A B C 

X 

X 

D 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

Par 2 
AC 120-40B 

Appendix 3 

TABLE OF FUNCTIONS AND SUBJECTIVE TESTS (Co&d) 

A 

airplane. The sound of a crash should be related 

in some logical manner to landing in an unusual 

attitude or in excess of the structural gear 

limitations of the airplane. 

k 0 Effects of airframe icing. 

14 

7/29/ 91 

SIMULATOR LEVEL 

B C 

X X 

Par 3 


7129191 . 

APPENDIX 4. EXAMPLES (Cont’d) 

AC 1 zo-40B 

Appendix 4 

Name, POI, 

FAA FSDO 

(Operator) 

Address 

City, State, Zip 

Dear Mr. 0 

. 

(Name) Airlines requests evaluation of our (Type) 

airplane simulator for Level qualification. The (Name) 

simulator with (Name) visual system is fully defined on page 

of the accompanying approval test guide (ATG). We have completed tests 

of the simulator and certify that it meets all applicable requirements of FAR 

Section 121.407 (or FAR Sections 135,335 or 125.297), FAR Part 1% Appendix H, 

and the guidance of AC 120040B. Appropriate hardware and software configuration 

control procedures have been established. Our pilots have assessed the simulator 

and found that it conforms to the (Name) Airlines 

(Type) airplane cockpit configuration and that the simulated 

systems and subsystems function equivalently to those in the airplane. Our 

pilots have also assessed the performance and flying qualities of the simulator 

and find that it represents the respective airplane. 

(Added comments as desired.) 

Sincerely, 

FIGURE la Application Letter 

I 

W 

r: 

0 

\I 

7/29/91 - 

APPENDIX 5, WINDSHEAR QUALIFICATION f-RESERVED1 

*U.S. Government Printing OfFice: 1996 - 405-571155748 

AC 120-40B 

Appendix 5 

'I (and 2)