Appendix 3 APPENDIX 3. SAMPLE TRAINING SCENARIOS Three scenarios were constructed using the philosophies and concepts described in this AC. They include clean configuration (high altitude), takeoff, and landing configuration impending stalls.
Training providers are encouraged to develop additional scenarios that fit their training needs.
The examples should be easily tailored to any transport category airplane. The examples given are not intended to be limiting in any way. They are provided as a framework for developing a training curriculum.
SCENARIO 1: CLEAN CONFIGURATION STALL PREVENTION (HIGH ALTITUDE) INSTRUCTOR ROLE Implement scenarios that result in an unexpected impending stall near the airplane’s maximum operating altitude.
OBJECTIVE The pilot will recognize the impending stall and immediately perform the stall recovery procedure. The pilot should demonstrate willingness to trade altitude for airspeed to accomplish an expeditious recovery.
EMPHASIS AREAS •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• Recognition and recovery.
Crew coordination.
AOA management.
Out-of-trim control forces at autopilot disconnect (if engaged).
Aural and visual warnings (environment and airplane cuing).
Surprise.
Reduced roll stability and increased buffeting.
Climbing at a slower than normal airspeed and higher than normal vertical speed may result in leveling off at a speed below that which can be maintained at the thrust available.
The role of increasing temperature and turbulence on high altitude performance.
Effects of multiple levels of automation.
Effects of altitude on recovery.
Knowledge of the aircraft’s high- and low-speed buffet boundaries.
Thrust available versus thrust required to maintain altitude.
There is no predetermined value for altitude loss, maintaining altitude during recovery is not required, and the recovery will likely take several thousand feet.
Situational awareness while returning to desired flightpath after the stall recovery, including such items as heading, altitude, other aircraft, and flight deck automation.
FFS SETUP
CONSIDERATIONS This scenario will be conducted near maximum operating altitude for the specific airplane weight and temperature. Crew distractions
(e.g., minor malfunctions, air traffic control (ATC) instructions, weather) and simulator capabilities may be used to induce
Appendix 3 impending stalls. Scenarios from actual events, such as climbing in vertical speed mode, which will result in the airplane leveling off at an airspeed behind the power curve can also be used.
SCENARIO
ELEMENTS
• At level flight with the autopilot on, introduce an event or reduce thrust to less than adequate for maneuvering flight.
• Upon recognizing the impending stall, perform the stall recovery procedure.
• The necessity for smooth, deliberate, and positive control inputs to avoid excessive load factors and secondary stalls.
COMPLETION
STANDARDS
• The pilot will perform a deliberate and smooth reduction of AOA.
• Positive recovery from the stall event is paramount. There is no predetermined value for altitude loss and maintaining altitude during recovery is not required.
• Appropriate application of thrust to accelerate and enable a positive recovery.
• Establishing the appropriate AOA takes precedence over roll control (attempting to maintain wings level) for positive recovery from the stall event.
• Intermittent secondary stall warnings, but not secondary stalls, may be acceptable due to the associated recovery challenges at altitude because of the lack of aerodynamic damping.
• The maneuver is considered complete once a safe speed is achieved and the airplane stabilized.
• Satisfactory crew coordination must be demonstrated.
COMMON PILOT ERRORS
• Recovery is attempted with thrust instead of reducing AOA.
• Not maintaining a nose-down input until the impending stall cues are eliminated.
• Insufficient pitch down to allow desired energy conversion of altitude to airspeed.
• Pilot fails to promptly recover from a secondary stall.
• Reluctance to sacrifice significant altitude.
• Pilot fails to distinguish between high-speed buffet and low-speed stall.
• Pilot increases the load factor too quickly and gets multiple impending stalls or a stick pusher activation.
• Inappropriate use of rudder.
• Pilot prioritizes roll control (attempting to level the wings) before reducing AOA.
• Not disconnecting the autopilot and/or autothrottle/autothrust prior to reducing AOA.
Appendix 3 SCENARIO 2: TAKEOFF CONFIGURATION STALL PREVENTION
INSTRUCTOR ROLE Implement scenarios that result in an unexpected impending stall on departure prior to flaps being fully retracted.
OBJECTIVE The pilot will recognize the impending stall and immediately perform the stall recovery procedure, then resume the assigned departure.
EMPHASIS AREAS •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• Recognition and recovery.
Crew coordination.
AOA management.
Out-of-trim control forces at autopilot disconnect (if engaged).
Aural and visual warnings (environment and airplane cueing).
Surprise.
Reduced roll stability and increased buffeting.
Effects of multiple levels of automation.
Effects of altitude on recovery.
Situational awareness while returning to desired flightpath after the stall recovery, including such items as heading, terrain, altitude, other aircraft, and flight deck automation.
There is no predetermined value for altitude loss, and maintaining altitude during recovery is not required.
FFS SETUP
CONSIDERATIONS The scenario will be conducted during takeoff and/or departure, at an altitude that will allow for a recovery. Crew distractions (e.g., minor malfunctions, ATC instructions, weather) and simulator capabilities may be used to induce impending stalls.
SCENARIO
ELEMENTS
•
•
• During departure, reduce thrust to less than adequate to maintain airspeed and climb rate.
Upon recognizing the impending stall, perform the stall recovery procedure.
When recovery is assured, adjust the pitch attitude to initiate a climb to the assigned departure altitude.
COMPLETION
STANDARDS
•
•
•
•
•
• The pilot will perform a deliberate and smooth reduction of AOA.
Positive recovery from the stall event takes precedence over minimizing altitude loss or roll control (attempting to maintain wings level before appropriate AOA is established).
Appropriate application of thrust to accelerate and enable an expeditious recovery.
The return of the airplane to safe flight without encountering secondary stall warnings.
The maneuver is considered complete once the flight reaches and stabilizes at the assigned departure altitude.
Satisfactory crew coordination must be demonstrated.
Appendix 3
COMMON PILOT ERRORS
•
• Recovery is attempted with no loss of altitude.
Recovery is attempted without recognizing the importance of pitch control and AOA.
• Pilot prioritizes roll control (attempting to level the wings) before reducing AOA.
• Inappropriate use of rudder.
• Not disconnecting the autopilot and/or autothrottle/autothrust prior to reducing AOA.
• Not maintaining a nose-down input until the impending stall cues are eliminated.
• Pilot increases the load factor too quickly and gets multiple impending stalls or a stick pusher activation.
• Rolling wings level prior to AOA reduction.
• Failure to roll wings level after AOA reduction to improve performance.
• Losing situational awareness and failing to return to assigned flightpath or follow ATC instructions after recovery.
SCENARIO 3: LANDING CONFIGURATION STALL PREVENTION
INSTRUCTOR ROLE Implement scenarios that result in an unexpected impending stall during an approach.
OBJECTIVE The pilot will recognize the impending stall and immediately perform the stall recovery procedure, then commence missed approach.
EMPHASIS AREAS •
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• Recognition and recovery.
Crew coordination.
AOA management.
Out-of-trim control forces at autopilot disconnect (if engaged).
Aural and visual warnings (environment and airplane cueing).
Surprise.
Reduced roll stability and increased buffeting.
Effects of multiple levels of automation.
Effects of altitude on recovery.
Situational awareness while returning to desired flightpath after the stall recovery, including such items as heading, terrain, altitude, other aircraft, and flight deck automation.
There is no predetermined value for altitude loss. Maintaining altitude is not required.
Appendix 3
FFS SETUP
CONSIDERATIONS The scenario will be conducted during approach to landing in the landing configuration, at an altitude that will allow for a recovery.
Crew distractions (e.g., minor malfunctions, ATC instructions, weather) and simulator capabilities may be used to induce impending stalls.
SCENARIO
ELEMENTS
•
•
• At 1,000 feet above ground level (AGL), reduce thrust to be inadequate to maintain a safe speed or descent angle, and results in an increase in AOA to maintain glidepath.
Upon recognizing the impending stall, perform the stall recovery procedure.
When recovery is assured, adjust the pitch attitude to initiate a climb to comply with missed approach instructions.
COMPLETION
STANDARDS
•
•
•
•
•
• The pilot will perform a deliberate and smooth reduction of AOA.
Positive recovery from the stall event takes precedence over minimizing altitude loss or roll control (attempting to maintain wings level before appropriate AOA is established).
Appropriate application of thrust to accelerate and enable an expeditious recovery.
The return of the airplane to safe flight without encountering secondary stall warnings.
The maneuver is considered complete when safe speed has been achieved and the pilot initiates the missed approach.
Satisfactory crew coordination must be demonstrated.
COMMON PILOT ERRORS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• Recovery is attempted with no loss of altitude.
Recovery is attempted without recognizing the importance of pitch control and AOA.
Inappropriate use of rudder.
Pilot prioritizes roll control (attempting to level the wings) before reducing AOA.
Not disconnecting the autopilot and/or autothrottle/autothrust prior to reducing AOA.
Not maintaining a nose-down input until the impending stall cues are eliminated.
Pilot increases the load factor too quickly and gets multiple impending stalls or a stick pusher activation.
Rolling wings level prior AOA reduction.
Failure to roll wings level after AOA reduction to improve performance.
Losing situational awareness and failing to return to assigned flightpath and complete a missed approach, or follow ATC instructions after recovery.
Appendix 3 Other suggested scenarios include:
1. After level-off from a descent with idle thrust, the pilot either forgets to increase thrust or on airplanes equipped with autothrottle/autothrust, the autothrottle/autothrust does not increase thrust.
2. While at low altitude and maneuvering, banking at slow speeds.
3. During approach, while slowing to approach speed, the pilot does not add flaps soon enough or does not closely watch the energy trend.
4. The flight crew is instructed to climb to an altitude within the airplane’s certified flight envelope, but is not possible to maintain given the weight and temperature conditions.
Appendix 4 APPENDIX 4. SAMPLE FULL STALL TRAINING MANEUVER NOTE: Considerable evaluation of the FFS must occur before conducting full stall training in simulation. Reference Appendix 5 for all FFS evaluation considerations.
Training to full stall must be instructor led with a discussion of the learning objectives. Particular emphasis must be placed on the potential negative effects of training that traverses impending stall conditions to reach a full stall.
The goals of the training are (a) to provide the pilots the experience of the handling characteristics and dynamic cues (e.g., buffet, roll off) near and at full stall and (b) to reinforce the proper application of the stall recovery procedures.
Future full stall FFS models may contain a randomness feature that will allow a pilot to experience the in-flight variations in full stall characteristics. That is, no two real stalls are alike.
Performing this maneuver more than once, with perhaps instructor selection of stall response severity, could show a pilot both average and extreme response of a full stall.
This example is not intended to be limiting in any way, it is provided as a framework for developing a training curriculum.
NOTE: Reduction of AOA must be paramount in all stall prevention and recovery procedures. Operators should consult with their airplane manufacturer(s) to ensure they have the proper stall prevention and recovery procedure. Outdated procedures should be updated in accordance with this guidance.
SCENARIO: FULL STALL EXPERIENCE TRAINING INSTRUCTOR Instructor-guided, pilot hands-on maneuver training.
ROLE OBJECTIVE Provide pilot(s) the experience of the airplane’s handling characteristics near and at full stall, the related cues, and full stall recovery.
EMPHASIS AREAS • Recognition and recovery.
• Crew coordination.
• AOA management.
• Out-of-trim control forces at autopilot disconnect (if engaged).
• Aural and visual warnings (environment and airplane cueing).
• Reduction of roll stability and increased buffeting.
• Effects of multiple levels of automation.
• Effects of altitude on recovery.
Appendix 4
•
• Situational awareness while returning to desired flightpath after the stall, including such items as heading, terrain, altitude, other aircraft, and flight deck automation.
There is no predetermined value for altitude loss. Maintaining altitude is not required.
FFS SETUP
CONSIDERATIONS
•
• This maneuver based training exercise must be conducted at an altitude that will allow for a recovery.
Setup may be conducted on autoflight to allow for instructor-led discussion of expected cues and cautions (if feasible).
SCENARIO
ELEMENTS
•
• Create a situation which will result in a stall, such as reducing thrust to less than adequate to maintain airspeed and climb rate or adjusting flightpath by varied means including changes to vertical rates, entering turn, etc., to yield an adverse energy trend.
Upon pilot recognition of the impending stall, the instructor will encourage the further increase of AOA in order to reach full stall while highlighting the impending stall cues.
COMPLETION
STANDARDS
•
•
•
•
•
• The pilot will perform a deliberate and smooth reduction of AOA.
Positive recovery from the full stall takes precedence over minimizing altitude loss.
Appropriate application of thrust to accelerate and enable an expeditious recovery.
The return of the airplane to safe flight without encountering a secondary stall.
The maneuver is considered complete once the flight reaches and stabilizes at the assigned altitude.
Satisfactory crew coordination must be demonstrated.
COMMON PILOT ERRORS
•
•
•
•
•
•
• Recovery is attempted with no loss of altitude.
Recovery is attempted without recognizing the importance of pitch control and AOA.
Rolling wings level prior to AOA reduction.
Failure to roll wings level after AOA reduction to improve performance.
Losing situational awareness and failing to return to assigned flightpath or follow ATC instructions after recovery.
Inappropriate use of rudder.
Not disconnecting the autopilot and/or autothrottle/autothrust prior to reducing AOA.
Appendix 5 APPENDIX 5. FULL FLIGHT SIMULATOR CONSIDERATIONS
1. SUMMARY OF SIMULATOR CAPABILITIES. Full flight simulators (FFS) that are appropriately qualified by the FAA can be used for stall prevention training as described below.
Full stall training and stick pusher demonstrations will require additional FFS evaluation. The current 14 CFR part 60 flight simulation training device (FSTD) qualification standards only include approaches to stall as a minimum qualified task for FSTD Levels A–D (refer to part 60 appendix A, Table A1B, Table of Tasks vs. Simulator Level, section 3.b.1). In March 2016, the FAA published changes to the part 60 rule which added new FSTD evaluation standards for the qualification of full stall training tasks1. This rule change includes requirements for FSTDs that are initially evaluated after the effective date of the rule as well as retroactive requirements for grandfathered FSTDs that will be used to conduct such training tasks. As a result, after March 12, 2019, any FSTD being used to conduct full stall training tasks must be issued additional qualification to conduct these tasks as described in part 60, § 60.16. Training providers desiring to conduct full stall training as part of an FAA-approved flight training program are encouraged to review the National Simulator Program’s (NSP) guidance bulletin on evaluating an FFS for full stall training (FSTD Qualification Guidance Bulletin 14-01, FSTD Evaluation and Qualification for Full Stall Training Tasks) and the contents of this appendix before making a request for additional qualification. NSP guidance bulletins may be found on the FAA’s website at http://www.faa.gov/about/initiatives/nsp/.
a. Stall Prevention Training Maneuvers.
(1) To ensure a high level of FFS fidelity, stall prevention training maneuvers should be conducted in conditions similar to objectively evaluated test conditions where possible
(e.g., airplane weight, environmental conditions, stall entry rates, etc.). Current objective testing requirements for FFS qualification are for second segment climb and approach/landing flight conditions. The FSTD Master Qualification Test Guide (MQTG) should be reviewed to assist in determining maneuvers that are likely to have a high level of fidelity. Since stall prevention training will typically take place well within an angle of attack (AOA) range in which the aerodynamic model has been objectively validated, it is not expected that significant modifications to the FSTDs will be required to conduct this training.
(2) For stall prevention training maneuvers that are not objectively evaluated for FFS qualification (such as cruise/high altitude impending stall and turning flight impending stall), the FSTD sponsor should conduct additional objective and subjective evaluation to determine adequate FFS fidelity. This additional evaluation should include:
(a) Objective evaluation of stall warning and stall buffet speeds against published airplane data (such as Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) stall tables).
(b) An assessment of the FSTD’s stall characteristics by a subject matter expert (SME) pilot with experience in the impending stall characteristics of the represented airplane.
1 Refer to Flight Simulation Training Device Qualification Standards for Extended Envelo pe and Adverse Weather Event Training Tasks (14 CFR part 60, 81 FR 18177).
Appendix 5
b. Stall Recovery Training. For training to full stall, additional testing and validation of the specific FFS is necessary because of the variations among FFSs. While some FFSs may have the fidelity allowing training past impending stall conditions, the potential of negative transfer of training exists if simulated flight in this regime is not properly evaluated (through objective testing and evaluation by an SME pilot with experience in the stall characteristics of the airplane). The FAA has codified FSTD evaluation requirements for full stall training tasks into part 60, FSTD Directive 2, which became effective on May 31, 2016.
c. Stick Pusher Demonstrations. FFSs may be used to demonstrate the activation of a stick pusher system (if installed); however, training providers are cautioned that the airplane dynamics following a stick pusher activation may not accurately represent the airplane unless the FFS is properly modeled and evaluated. To ensure an adequate level of fidelity for stick pusher demonstrations, training providers should conduct additional testing and validation to ensure that the FFS’s stick pusher force complies with the design requirements specified by the manufacturer to ensure that it accurately represents the airplane, to include:
(1) The stick pusher activation speeds (or associated AOAs) should be objectively evaluated against published airplane data (such as the AFM stall tables).
(2) The modeling of the stick pusher system or stall protection system should be based upon airplane Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM)-provided simulation data or other suitable data to ensure correct activation speeds/AOAs and cancellation logic.
(3) The simulated stick pusher control forces and displacements should be validated against airplane-collected or OEM-provided validation data to ensure the FFS provides the correct control loading force cues.
(4) Since a stick pusher demonstration maneuver will typically occur at AOAs beyond the activation of the stall warning system, the FFS should be evaluated for satisfactory performance and handling qualities by an appropriately qualified SME pilot.
(5) As described in part 60, FSTD Directive 2, FFSs that are used to conduct full stall training tasks in an FAA-approved flight training program (including stick pusher demonstrations that exceed the stall warning AOA) must be qualified to do so after March 12, 2019.
2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION. Currently, FSTD qualification standards are defined in part 60. Prior to part 60, FSTD qualification standards were defined in a series of ACs. During the development of this AC, current and historical FSTD qualification standards were examined to determine if adequate evaluation requirements were in place to conduct stall prevention and full stall training tasks in currently qualified FFSs. It was determined that previously qualified FFSs may not be capable of conducting training tasks to a full stall. The primary factors for this determination are as follows:
a. Until recently, flight training requirements were limited to impending stall maneuvers as opposed to full stall maneuvers. As a result, most current FFS stall training does not extend to AOAs much higher than that for an impending stall.
Appendix 5 Page 3 (and 4)
b. While much of the development of an FFS’s aerodynamic model at AOAs below the stall AOAs can assume a certain extent of linearity in extrapolating performance and handling characteristics, this assumption is not valid at, or past, full stall where the airplane dynamics and control characteristics may become nonlinear or unstable.
c. To fully evaluate the nonlinear characteristics of a stall model, more test points in the form of objective or subjective tests are necessary to validate such models.
3. PART 60 CHANGE. Through the collaborative efforts and recommendations from various working groups and international committees, the FAA issued a final rule to update the FSTD qualification standards in part 60. These changes became effective May 31, 2016, and include new evaluation requirements to qualify FSTDs for full stall training and other training tasks.
In order to use an FSTD to conduct full stall training tasks in an FAA approved flight training program, sponsors must apply for the additional FSTD qualification as described in part 60, FSTD Directive 2 (Attachment 6 to appendix A of part 60). FSTDs that are found to meet the requirements of FSTD Directive 2 will have their Statements of Qualification (SOQ) amended to reflect qualification of these additional training tasks. As stated in FSTD Directive 2, the compliance date for the FSTD qualification of full stall training tasks is March 12, 2019. After March 12, 2019, any FSTD used to conduct full stall training must be evaluated and issued additional qualification by the National Simulator Program Manager (NSPM) as defined in part 60, FSTD Directive 2.