Arnab Lahiri

Aerospace Engineer, National Simulator Program, FAA

Arnab has been associated with the simulation industry for over thirty years. He holds a B.S. in Aeronautical Engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology and an M.S. in Aerospace Engineering from the University of Texas at Arlington.

He has worked for several major simulator training companies both as an engineer and in managerial positions prior to joining the NSP in 1998. He has also led his own consulting company.

He has been instrumental in promoting simulation fidelity and his contributions range from weather simulation, motion requirements, harmonization, eQTGs to international working groups. He has published a number of related papers through various industry organizations and is keenly interested in the technical evolution and evaluation matters regarding simulation.


ABSTRACT
Insights into the Implementation of New Directives in Flight Simulator Training

Changes to the regulatory Qualification Performance Standards (QPS) in 14 CFR Part 60 has led to the training industry to embrace new requirements in the form of FSTD Directives to be implemented in high-level simulators (Level C and D) that are used to conduct UPRT tasks. The requirements, as usual, come with caveats and implementations and understanding of these directives have not always gone smoothly. 

This presentation addresses some preconceived notions surrounding how these directives are either introduced as add-ons on existing simulators or integrated in newer ones. Also addressed are the limitations and capabilities from a technological standpoint and their applications to the training requirements. 

Each task in the directives involves separate updates to the simulation model – and some of them require additional extended data. Due to the nature of retroactive implications, the results can often be far from ideal. The qualification, equally, may also have caused its share of issues, in spite of whole-hearted attempts to evaluate these new changes. Since the technicalities involved do not have a history of evolution, misconceptions on their use and evaluation process have generated questionable aspects. Even with the general consensus of the utility of the implementations, there are lingering issues that are and, in some cases, will have to be addressed.

This presentation is an attempt to clarify aspects of evaluation of these directives and their utility in training.