TTI Online Private File Repository

NOTE: All of the files in this repository are proprietary and must not be copied or used for commercial reasons.  By downloading any of the files you are agreeing to respect their ownership.  Should you wish to use any of the files for any commercial purpose please request such from info@tti-online.com 

Title
A review of ICAO Document 9625
August 12, 2020– ICAO Document 9625 iss. 3 & 4 
Manual of Criteria for the Qualification of FSTD  (MCQFSTD) is an extremely valuable document yet one of the most misunderstood in the world of FSTDs. Issues 3 & 4 of this Document are the latest of a series that was first introduced in 1992. If there is one thing that readers of this handout should remember and understand, is that 9625 is not a Regulatory Document nor a Rule.  It is, instead, a set of criteria that has been agreed by International Working Groups (IWG- A & IWG-H) and which are expected to be adopted by National Aviation Authorities (NAA) in their Regulations and Rules.  These, latter, will take the Document’s criteria and add to them the administrative requirements peculiar to that Nation or State.
Course notes, Regulatory References
Preliminary Notes on EASA CS-FSTD(A) issue 2 changes
April 13, 2020This document is an overview of the changes to CS-FSTD (A)  with the release of issue 2.
Regulatory References
The Content of the QTG
April 15, 2020In the 20+ years of conducting our FSTD Evaluators course which includes hands-on exercises running validation tests, the TTI team has yet to see a perfect QTG/MQTG, which is strange as it is not a complicated document and all of the requirements are listed in the rules.  Maybe it is because so many Operators do not understand the QTG is a legal requirement and their responsibility.  They think that the FSTD supplier will magically produce it and the regulatory authority will review and correct it.  They do not realize it is a requirement and the Operators responsibility to submit the QTG to the authority, complete and with acceptable results, when applying for a FSTD Qualification .  What’s more, it is the Operators responsibility to use and maintain the MQTG throughout the life of the FSTD, which is an impossible task if the Operator does not have control of access to the document, something we also find regularly. This paper is an introduction to the contents of a QTG/MQTG and describes some of the more common misunderstandings.
General files, Regulatory References
JAR-FSTD H
April 11, 2020There are still many FSTDs qualified to older standards as a primary source document and we have had a number of requests for them.  Here’s JAR-FSTD H which was issued 1st May 2008 but had an effectivity date of 1st August 2008. Some national authorities have used this document as a great template to create their own rules using up to date standards as it is a single and much simpler document that what is found in EASA ORA/ARA/CS-FSTD H, but still contains the majority of content.
Regulatory References
JAR-FSTD A
April 11, 2020There are still many FSTDs qualified to older standards as a primary source document and we have had a number of requests for them.  Here’s JAR-FSTD A which was issued 1st May 2008 but had an effectivity date of 1st August 2008. Some national authorities have used this document as a great template to create their own rules using up to date standards as it is a single and much simpler document that what is found in EASA ORA/ARA/CS-FSTD A but still contains the majority of content.
Regulatory References
JAR STD1A Amendment 3
April 11, 2020There are still many FSTDs qualified to older standards as a primary source document and we have had a number of requests for them.  Here’s JAR STD1A Amendment 3 which was released 1st July 2003
Regulatory References
JAR STD1A Amendment 2
April 11, 2020There are still many FSTDs qualified to older standards as a primary source document and we have had a number of requests for them.  Here’s JAR STD1A Amendment 2 which was released 1st April 2001.
Regulatory References
FSI to JAR/EASA/FAA Validation Test Number Cross Reference
April 11, 2020The rules state that there must be a test numbering system used in a QTG, but national authorities do not stipulate any other requirements apart from the QTG requiring to be easily understood.  For validation test numbering in QTGs, most FSTD Operators use some form based on the regulatory document numbering, but FlightSafety use their own based on a more simple system.  Here is a cross reference between the FSI numbering of validation tests and that used by most other Operators which follow the numbering of JAR-FSTD A/H, CS-FSTD A/H, or FAA Part 60. This document was kindly included courtesy of Gary Horne at FSI Farnborough.
Regulatory References
Recommendations for Implementing ICAO 9625 iss. 3
April 17, 2020The introduction of ICAO document 9625 issue 3 resulted in several National Regulatory Authorities (NAA) wanting to apply the new criteria in order to take advantage, not only of new technology, but also to ensure that the devices they are to qualify, meet the training need.  What some of these NAA have not appreciated is that Document 9625 is not intended to be a Regulatory Document or Rule as-is.  It is meant as guidance for the criteria to be incorporated into a Regulatory Document issued by a NAA.  This has presented some NAA’s with a problem because they wish to use Document 9625 criteria and take advantage of the new types of FSTD, but they do not have a readily available National Rule to facilitate this. What is described in the attached document is a simplified method of truly adopting ICAO 9625/3. Prior to reading this you may wish to review the ICAO doc 9625 iss. 3 Implementation FAQ’s.pdf document also contained in our File Repository.  In addition, we have published a matrix for the tolerance and technical differences between 9625/3 and JAR FSTD A & H.
Reference material, Regulatory References
ICAO doc. 9625 iss. 3 Implementation FAQ’s
April 17, 2020This document is a list of the more frequently asked questions we receive on the subject of ICAO document 9625 issue 3, along with answers and explanations.  Unfortunately the document continues to be misunderstood by a lot of people, erroneously thinking it is a new set of rules or regulations that can directly replace established rules such as JAR FSTD, FAR Part 60, or CS-FSTD.  These FAQ’a are intended to clarify the situation. You may also like to review two other documents in our File Repository on the same subject; – Recommendations for Implementing 9625 issue 3 – Tolerance & Technical Requirement differences between Doc 9625 issue 3 and JAR FSTD We are always interested in your comments, suggestions or additional questions, so if you have any please send them to us by clicking here…
Reference material, Regulatory References
The QTG – Some Perspectives (past, present, future)
April 17, 2020This paper, by Malcolm Blackwood, provides an overview of the purpose and use of the Qualification Test Guide (QTG) that is used by all authorities to benchmark the configuration and performance of a FSTD when it is first qualified, and subsequently as a tool  to recurrently ensure the FSTD is maintained to that same standard. The paper supports a presentation made by Malcolm at a FSEMC Simulator Data Validation Exploratory Meeting in Crawley, United Kingdom, March 26 – 27. 2015.
Reference material, Regulatory References