AFS

- 1 3

- 550

- E Exemption No. 1 1061

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, DC 20591

In the matter of the petition of

ELITE SIMULATION SOLUTIONS Regulatory Docket No. FAA

- 2013

- 0818

for an exemption from § 61. 65(i) and part 141 a ppendix C , section 4. (b) (3) of Title 14,

Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)

GRANT OF EXEMPTION

By letter dated Se ptember 20 , 201 3 , Mr. John Dixon of E LITE Simulation Solutions (E LITE ), 5700 Dot Com Court, Suite 1010, Oviedo, FL 32765, petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) on behalf of ELITE for an exemption from § 61.65(i) of

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). The proposed exemption, if granted, would

allow E LITE s imulation d evices

, approved as Advanced Aviation Training Devices (AATDs)

, up to 2 0 hours of creditable time toward s the total instrument aeronautical experience requirements for the instrument rating certification under part 61.

As part of our response we will consider relief from applicable requirements of part 141, Appendix C for any training in Aviation Training Devices ( ATD’s ) that would lead to an instrument rating.

Th e petitioner requests relief from the following regulation:

Section § 61.65 (i) prescribes requirements for u se of an aviation training device. Specifically, a maximum of 10 hours of instrument time received in an aviation training device may be credited fo r the instrument time requirements of this section if

—

(1) The device is approved and authorized by the FAA;

(2) An authorized instructor provides the instrument time in the device;2

(3) No more than 10 hours of instrument time in a flight simulator or f light training device was credited for the instrument time requirements of this section;

(4) A view

- limiting device was worn by the applicant when logging instrument time in the device; and

(5) The FAA approved the instrument training and instrument task s performed in the

device.

The petitioner also requires relief from the following regulation:

Part 141, Appendix C , section 4. (b) (3) prescribes that c redit for training in a flight training device that meets the requirements of § 141.41(b) cannot exceed 40 percent of the total flight training hour requirements of the course or of this section, whichever is

less.

The petitioner supports its request with the following information:

The petitioner states s ince 2003, E LITE has received nine Letters of Approva l (LOA) for nine

AATDs. Three of these nine LOAs were issued since 2009. Each LOA authorized 20 hours

of instrument time credit under §§ 61.65(e)(2) and 61.65(h)(2). ATDs, since established in 2003, are the defacto replacement for discontinued level 3 f light training device s

.

ELITE notes t he latest three LOAs issued in August and September 2013 reference § 61.65(i)

for the amount of instrument experience th at can be credited toward the aeronautical experience requirements for an instrument rating. The petitioner states these LOAs reduce

authorized instrument flight flying credits of all “ATDs” to 10 hours.

ELITE also points out that § 61.65(i) makes a general reference of ATDs and does not make

the distinction between a Basic ATD and Advanced ATD as defined in Advisory Circular ( AC ) 61

- 136. Th is AC indicate s a greater allowance for time acquired in an AATD that can be credited toward an instrument rating

.

ELITE states a grant of exemption is in the public interest as it will r educ e the cost of aviat ion training. The reduction in the maximum creditable time that can be obtained in an AATD makes training for an instrument rating more expensive without improving the quality of the training. ELITE states t he public as a whole benefits when the efficien cy of pilot training is improved through cost reductions. The cost differential between use of an AATD and a flight training device ( FTD ) or an air craft is substantial due to the more stringent certification requirements of the FTD and the high cost of op erating an airplane. ELITE explains that

r educing the creditable use of the AATD from 20 hours to 10 hours is inconsistent with lowering training costs and improved safety, proficiency, efficiency and effectiveness.3

ELITE contends that “ t he aviation indu stry is facing significant challenges related to training

due to the 1500 hour rule, impending pilot retirements, overall shortage of well

- trained pilots

and crews. ” Further, ELITE states t he economy overall has been struggling for several years

with the small business aviation training industry bearing a disproportionate share. Aviation training is expensive and the reduction in creditable AATD hours will make business viability more difficult for manufacturers and training organizations using the AATD.

ELITE states t h at its AATD s ha ve been in use at the ‘ 20 creditable hour level ’ for many years (since first approved by AFS

- 800) with positive results, and the associated cost savings to the public through the pilots who have trained using the AATD. ELIT E states t he decade of

AATD use represents thousands of credit hours for thousands of students and that many of

these students are now professional pilots.

ELITE states that t raining completed in an AATD using the 20 hour criteri a has inherently

less ris k than the same 20 hours training completed in an aircraft , and that the AATD has shown to be safe when used within the confines of approval by AFS

- 800. Conversely

, the use

of the AATD with the 20 creditable hour allowance has not shown to have any unsafe effect on the issuance of the instrument rating.

S ince 2003

, the AATD has been authorized up to 20 hours maximum of creditable time toward the instrument training requirements

. There have been no documented incidents or

accidents attributed to the use of the AATD for 20 hours during training for the instrument rating. ELITE states that t raining toward an instrument rating completed in an AATD

p rovides a level of task challenge and learning equal to or better than the same training provided in an aircraft

, yet the training environment is a lower risk than the same training provided in an aircraft.

ELITE explains that t he technology embedded in the AATD has improved continuously since

the AATD was first approved. The currently manufactured AATD exhibits h ighly advanced capability and a high degree of fidelity between the AATD and a similar training aircraft.

Transfer of learning for t asks learned in an AATD is very high and for most instrument tasks

can be applied directly to flying an airplane under inst rument conditions.

A summary of the petition was published in the Federal Register on November 4 , 2013 ( 78 FR 66099 ) and received no comments.

The FAA’ s analysis is as follows:

The FAA has fully considered the petitioner’s supporting information a nd determined the relief requested is in the public interest and provides an equivalent level of safety

.

The FAA finds it in the public interest to extend the maximum credit for time allowed in the

ELITE AATD Models PI

- 1000, RC

- 1000, & MH

- 350 towards the minimum pilot certification requirements for the instrument rating. LOAs issued prior to August 22, 2013 to ELITE and4

other manufacturers allowed for up to 20 hours of time obtained in an A A TD to be credited toward the aeronautical experience requirements of an instrument rating. ELITE’s LOA s dated August 22 , 2013 (PI

- 1000, RC

- 1000) and August 27 , 2013 (MH

- 350) reflected a change in the policy on the maximum time allowed to be credited toward an instrument rating.

ELITE initially submitted authorization requests for these devices on March 21, 2013.

During the review of the ELITE AATD Models P1

- 1000, RC

- 1000, & MH

- 350 , t he FAA

determined that the FAA may not use LOAs as a means to exceed express limits that have been placed in the regulations through no tice and comment rulemaking. At that time, the

FAA determined that any LOAs for devices not previously evaluated by the FAA and issued

after August 22, 2013 should reflect the express regulatory limits

. Prior the issuance of the

LOA s on August 22, 2013, ELITE would not have been aware of the change in policy. Therefore, the FAA finds it reasonable that ELITE would expect the same credit allowances for pilot certification for the PI

- 1000, RC

- 1000 & MH

- 350 AATD Models provided in previous LOAs for the inst rument rating.

On January 2, 2014 the FAA published in the Federal Register a Notice of Policy Change for

the U se of FAA Approved Training Devices ( 79 FR 2 0 , January 2, 2014 ), which explained the reason for the change in policy

. The policy notice state s that in 2009 the FAA issued a

final rule ( 74 FR 42500

, August 21, 2009) that placed express limits on the amount of instrument training in an ATD that could be credited toward the aeronautical experience requirements for an instrument rating. Per § 61.6 5(i), no more than 10 hours of instrument time received in an ATD may be credited toward instrument time requirements of that section. In parallel

, p art 141 A ppendix C states that credit for instrument training in an ATD cannot

exceed 10 percent of the to tal flight training hour requirements of an approved instrument

course.

M anufacturers and operators that were issued LOAs prior to August 22, 201 3 have acted in

reliance on FAA statements contained in those LOAs that were inconsistent with the regulations . Therefore, through the Notice issued January 2, 2014 , the FAA has grant ed a limited exemption from § 61.65(i) and part 141 A ppendix C. This relief provided manufacturers, operators, and pilots ( currently training for an instrument rating ) time to adjus t
to the reduction in hours that can be credited toward the instrument rating

.

The FAA notes that a designated pilot examiner or other certifying official will evaluate minimum proficiency standards during the practical test. The practical test, which i s standardized through the practical test standards, will ensure the instrument rating applicant can operate at the same level of safety in the national airspace system as compared to an applicant that is not utilizing relief provided by this exemption.

T his relief from the maximum time allowed under § 61.65(i) that can be credited toward an instrument rating is granted only to those aviation training devices that were submitted for evaluation or approval prior to the policy notice published January 2

, 201 4. This is reflected5

in condition/limitation #1. The duration of this exemption will be the same as provided in the

notice and will terminate on December 31, 2014

.

A copy of this exemption must be kept near the ATD and a copy made available to any pers on using the device for credit. This is reflected in condition/limitation # 2. This document must

also be presented to a designated pilot examiner or aviation safety inspector during a practical

test when using the provisions of this exemption for pilot certification. This is reflected in

condition/limitation #3.

The FAA’s Decision:

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of exemption meets an equivalent level of safety and is in the public interest. Therefore, pursuant to the authority contained in

49 U.S.C. §§ 106(f), 40113

, 44701 , and 44703 , delegated to me by the Administrator, ELITE

Simulation Solutions (ELITE) is granted an exemption from 14 CFR § 61.65(i) to the extent
necessary to allow instrument rating applicants to credit up to 20 hours of experience, acquired in the specified ELITE devices, toward the aeronautical experience requirements of the instrument rating. In addition, r elief from 14 CFR part 141 A ppendix C , section 4. (b) (3)

is granted to the extent necessary to allow instrument rating applicants to credit up to

40 percent of the approved training course, acquired in the specified ELITE devices, toward the aeronautical experience requirements of the instrument rating. This is subject to the

conditions and l imitations listed below :

Conditions and Limitations

1. This only applies to ELITE Simulation Solutions PI

- 1000, RC

- 1000 &

MH

- 350 Model devices that were FAA approved as Advanced Aviation Training Devices (AATD

. )

2. A copy of this exemption must be readil y available in a location near the

ELITE PI

- 1000, RC

- 1000 & MH

- 350 Model AATD s when in use

.
3. ELITE or the operator of the device must make a copy of this exemption

available to any person using the device to obtain time to be credited toward

the aeronautica l experience requirements for an instrument rating.

This exemption terminates on December 31, 2014 , unless sooner superseded or rescinded.

Issued in Washin gton, D.C., on September 23, 2014.

/s/

John Barbagallo Acting Deputy Director, Flight Standards Serv ice