AC 120-40A

P S Advisory Circular # 120-40A Page: 1 03/25/04 07:38 AYSO@G2 AYOPB32 Doc #: 120-40A AIRPLANE SIMULATOR AND VISUAL SYSTEM EVALUATION Effective: 07/31/1986 Cancelled: 07/29/1991 Status: Inactive Originator: ASO-205 ============================ Text Page 1 of 36 ================================

ADVISORY CIRCULAR AC No.: 120-40A Date: 7/31/86 Initiated by: ASO-205 Change:

Subject: AIRPLANE SIMULATOR AND VISUAL SYSTEM EVALUATION

1. PURPOSE. This advisory circular sets forth one means that would be acceptable to the Administrator for the evaluation of airplane simulators to be used in training programs or for airmen checking under Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR). The reader is cautioned that this is not an all encompassing document and that applicable regulations should be referenced to assure compliance with the provisions therein. It should also be noted that this Advisory Circular applies to the evaluation of airplane simulators only. Criteria for the evaluation of helicopter simulators are currently being developed and will be set forth in a similar document.

2. CANCELLATION. Advisory Circular 120-40, Airplane Simulator and Visual System Evaluation and Approval, dated January 31, 1983, is canceled. Operators having simulator improvement or acquisition projects in process, under contract or started under an interim simulator upgrade plan which was approved in accordance with FAR Part 121, Appendix H, have 90 days from the effective date of this advisory circular to notify the National Simulation Program Manager (NSPM) of those projects which the operator desires to complete under the provisions of AC 120-40.

3. BACKGROUND. As the state-of-the-art in simulator technology has advanced, more effective use has been made of the aircraft simulator in both training and checking of flight crewmembers.

The increasing complexity and operating costs of the modern turbojet and its operating environment point to greater use of the advanced technology now available in airplane simulators.

Simulators can provide more in-depth training than can be accomplished in the airplane. There is also a very high percentage of transfer of learning from the simulator to the airplane. The additional use of simulators, in lieu of the airplane, results in safer flight training, cost reductions for the operators, and achieves the benefit of fuel conservation and a decrease in noise pollution. As simulator technology has improved, changes to the FAR were made to permit the increased

P S Advisory Circular # 120-40A Page: 2 03/25/04 07:38 AYSO@G2 AYOPB32 Doc #: 120-40A AIRPLANE SIMULATOR AND VISUAL SYSTEM EVALUATION Effective: 07/31/1986 ============================ Text Page 2 of 36 ================================ use of simulators in approved training programs. In the late 1960's, visual attachments appeared on the market. Since that time, a breakthrough in computerization has permitted the development of computer-generated image visual systems. In December 1973, FAR Amendments 61-61 and 121-108 permitted additional use of visual simulators. Amendments to Section

121.439 of the FAR permitted a simulator 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 contain the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Advanced Simulation Plan. To support this plan, the National Simulator Evaluation Program was established by the FAA in October 1980. FAA Southern Region Headquarters is responsible for oversight of this program. This program is administered and directed by the National Simulator Program Manager.

4. DISCUSSION.

a. The procedures and criteria for simulator evaluations under the National Simulator Evaluation Program are contained in this advisory circular. A simulator is qualified to the standards herein by the NSPM and recommended for approval, for use within an operator's training program, to the operator's principal operations inspector (POI) or certificate holding district office, as appropriate.

b. 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 advisory circular 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 61.58 or the issuance of an airline transport pilot certificate or type rating in accordance with the provisions of FAR 61.157. FAA evaluation of simulators owned and operated by foreign operators will be performed if such simulators are being used by a U.S. operator to train or certificate U.S. airmen. Evaluations may also be conducted in accordance with bilateral agreements between countries or as deemed appropriate by the Administrator on a case-by-case basis.

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 then certify that the simulator meets

P S Advisory Circular # 120-40A Page: 3 03/25/04 07:38 AYSO@G2 AYOPB32 Doc #: 120-40A AIRPLANE SIMULATOR AND VISUAL SYSTEM EVALUATION Effective: 07/31/1986 ============================ Text Page 3 of 36 ================================ the criteria of a specific level. Upon certification by the NSPM that the simulator meets the standards specified in this advisory circular, simulator approval for a particular training program will then be determined by the POI in the case of FAR Parts 63, 121, 125, or 135 certificate holders or by the district office responsible for oversight of a training center when the training center is using the simulator to conduct portions of the checks required by FAR Sections 61.58 or 61.157. Simulators used for purposes other than those stated in paragraph 4b, above, should also meet the standards of this Advisory Circular, but may be evaluated by the local FAA Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) as deemed appropriate by the NSPM.

d. Operators contracting to lease simulators already evaluated and approved at a particular level for an aircraft type are not subject to the simulator evaluation process. However, they are required to obtain FAA approval to use the simulator in their approved training program.

5. DEFINITIONS.

a. An Airplane Simulator is a device which duplicates a specific airplane's cockpit and is capable of closely representing the actual aircraft through various ground and flight regimes. The evaluation of simulators should be conducted in accordance with this advisory circular. Any device which does not meet the simulator provisions set forth herein should be considered a training device.

b. Simulator Data includes 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 provide airplane data to the simulator manufacturer, which in the case of airplane not yet certificated will be predicted data.

c. Flight Test Data for the purpose of this advisory circular are performance tests electronically recorded in the aircraft and verified as accurate by the company performing the test. Other data, such as photographic data, may be considered flight test data after evaluation by the NSPM. For new generation airplane issued an original type certificate, or in a supplemental type certificate which would result in handling quality changes in the airplane's performance, only manufacturer's flight test data will be accepted for initial approval. Exceptions to this policy must be submitted to the NSPM for review and consideration. For a new type of airplane, predicted data validated by actual airplane flight test data,

P S Advisory Circular # 120-40A Page: 4 03/25/04 07:38 AYSO@G2 AYOPB32 Doc #: 120-40A AIRPLANE SIMULATOR AND VISUAL SYSTEM EVALUATION Effective: 07/31/1986 ============================ Text Page 4 of 36 ================================ which has not received final approval by the manufacturer, can be used for an interim period as determined by the FAA. In the event predicted data are used in programming the simulator, it should be updated as soon as practicable when actual airplane flight test data becomes available. Unless specific conditions warrant otherwise, simulator programming should be updated within six months after release of the final flight test data package by the aircraft manufacturer.

d. Approval Test Guide (ATG) is a document containing a group of tests required for FAA evaluation of the simulator.

ATG's are designed to verify that the performance characteristics of the simulator agree with those of the airplane and that all applicable regulatory requirements have been met. This test guide is presented to the FAA, along with the evaluation application.

e. National Simulator Program Manager (NSPM) is responsible for the overall administration and direction of the National Simulator Evaluation Program.

f. Simulator Evaluation Specialist is an FAA technical specialist especially trained to evaluate simulators and to provide expertise on matters concerning aircraft simulation within that person's assigned region.

g. Visual System Response Time is the completion of the visual display scan of the first video field containing different information from an abrupt control input.

h. Upgrading for the purpose of this advisory circular means the improvement or enhancement of a simulator or a simulator's motion or visual system for the purpose of achieving more training or certification credit for that simulator.

i. 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 host computer added to the respective time delays of the motion system, visual system or instruments.

6. SIMULATOR EVALUATION POLICY.

a. In order to ensure adequate transfer of learning from the simulator to the airplane, the simulator must be evaluated in each of the areas critical to the accomplishment of the airman training and airman evaluation process. This includes evaluating the simulator's fidelity in directional, longitudinal, and

P S Advisory Circular # 120-40A Page: 5 03/25/04 07:38 AYSO@G2 AYOPB32 Doc #: 120-40A AIRPLANE SIMULATOR AND VISUAL SYSTEM EVALUATION Effective: 07/31/1986 ============================ Text Page 5 of 36 ================================ lateral control and capabilities in the areas of preflight, control checks, taxi, takeoff, climb, cruise, descent, approach, landing, and certain additional requirements depending on the sophistication of the simulator. The simulator's motion system, visual system, and if applicable, flight engineer's station will also need to be evaluated to ensure their proper operation.

Instructor controls must be operational to the extent necessary to assure completion of the tests required for initial approval.

b. It is desirable to evaluate the simulator as objectively as possible. However, pilot acceptance is also an important consideration in the evaluation process. Therefore, evaluation of a simulator involves two types of tests designed to show that the simulator can simulate the airplane with sufficient fidelity to conduct the amount of training or checking requested. These tests include functional tests from Appendix 6 of this advisory circular which allow a qualitative assessment of the simulator by an FAA pilot type rated in the aircraft, and performance tests from Appendix 5 of this advisory circular. Functional tests are designed to provide a basis for evaluating a simulator's capability to perform over a typical training period and to verify the operational fidelity of the simulator's controls, instruments and systems. Performance tests are designed to provide a quantitative validation of the simulator's fidelity.

They objectively compare simulator and airplane performance within a specified performance tolerance. Each of the two types of tests is designed to complement the other and be supportive of required training objectives.

c. If a problem with the simulator is detected by the FAA Simulator Evaluation Specialist in a performance test, the test may be repeated. If the simulator still does not meet the tolerance of Appendix 5, the operator may verify simulator fidelity by showing that the simulator test results match other airplane data which relates to the performance test in question.

In the event a performance test(s) does not meet specified criteria but is not considered critical to the level of evaluation being conducted, the NSPM may conditionally certify the simulator at that level and the operator will be given a specific 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 performance test would have a detrimental effect on the level of evaluation being conducted, the NSPM may certify the simulator to a lesser level based upon the evaluation completed. For example, if a Phase I evaluation is requested and the simulator fails to meet the dutch roll test tolerances throughout a time history, the evaluation could continue at the visual simulator level because of a dynamic check

P S Advisory Circular # 120-40A Page: 6 03/25/04 07:38 AYSO@G2 AYOPB32 Doc #: 120-40A AIRPLANE SIMULATOR AND VISUAL SYSTEM EVALUATION Effective: 07/31/1986 ============================ Text Page 6 of 36 ================================ in this area is not required for visual simulator evaluation.

d. If a problem is suspected in the handling qualities of a simulator during a functional test and performance testing does not support that finding, the NSPM may conditionally certify the simulator. In this case, the questionable area will be observed by the FAA in training/checking operations to determine if correction is necessary. If it is determined that a problem in handling qualities exists, resulting in a need for a hardware or software change, a special evaluation may be scheduled in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 9. The affected area will receive the primary emphasis and related areas will be reviewed to ensure that they have not been affected.

e. Performance tolerances listed in Appendix 5 should not be confused with design tolerances specified for simulator manufacture. Performance tolerances are maximum tolerances to ensure satisfactory transfer of learning.

f. Tentative evaluation dates will not be established until the ATG has been reviewed by the NSPM and determined to be acceptable. Within 10 working days of receiving an acceptable ATG, the NSPM will coordinate with the operator 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.

7. INITIAL OR UPGRADE EVALUATIONS.

a. The correct sequence of events for an initial or upgrade evaluation is diagramed in Appendix 7 of this advisory circular.

An operator desiring initial or upgrade evaluation for a simulator must submit its request in writing to the NSPM through the POI or responsible FAA FSDO. This request should contain a statement certifying that the operator has successfully completed each test in the operator's ATG, that the simulator meets all of the specifications of this advisory circular, that specified 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 functional test areas. The request should also show the current modification level of the operator's airplane fleet and of the simulator to be evaluated.

b. The operator should also submit an ATG which includes the following:

(1) The performance tests and procedures for conducting

P S Advisory Circular # 120-40A Page: 7 03/25/04 07:38 AYSO@G2 AYOPB32 Doc #: 120-40A AIRPLANE SIMULATOR AND VISUAL SYSTEM EVALUATION Effective: 07/31/1986 ============================ Text Page 7 of 36 ================================ the tests described in appendix 5 of this advisory circular. The ATG should include a statement of compliance for each Phase II or III requirement and, in some cases designated in Appendix 5, a performance test which will serve to validate simulator performance.

(2) Airplane data specified in Appendix 5 to support each test. 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 interpretation. Incremental scales on graphical presentations should provide the resolution necessary for evaluation of the appropriate parameters shown in Appendix 5.

(3) Operator's simulator test results recorded on a multichannel recorder, line printer, or other computer generated "hard copy" results acceptable to the NSPM. Simulator results should be labeled using the tolerances listed in Appendix 5.

These results should be easily compared to the supporting data by employing cross plotting, overlays or transparencies, or other acceptable means. The test guide will then show the documented proof of compliance with the simulator performance tests in Appendix 5. In the case of a simulator upgrade, an operator should run the performance tests for the current evaluation level. Performance test results offered in a test guide for a previous initial or upgrade evaluation should not be offered to validate simulator performance as part of the test guide offered for a succeeding phase. For tests involving time histories, flight test data sheets, or transparencies thereof and simulator test results should be clearly marked with 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 sheet for cross-plotting on the airplane data. The original recordings of simulator test results should be inserted into a separate volume as a reference document of the ATG. The cross-plotting of the operator's simulator data to airplane data is essential to verify 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 will therefore serve to validate the operator's simulator tests.

(4) Following the initial or upgrade evaluation, a completed master ATG containing the following format should be submitted to the NSPM: table of contents; reference page listing all verification data used; glossary of terms and symbols used in the test guide; and for each test included in the test guide, the

P S Advisory Circular # 120-40A Page: 8 03/25/04 07:38 AYSO@G2 AYOPB32 Doc #: 120-40A AIRPLANE SIMULATOR AND VISUAL SYSTEM EVALUATION Effective: 07/31/1986 ============================ Text Page 8 of 36 ================================ name of the test, the test objective, the test conditions, and the test procedures, the recording procedure, the tolerances allowed, and the airplane flight test data or other approved data with the operator and FAA evaluation results cross-plotted on that data or compared in a manner acceptable to the NSPM.

c. The purchasing operator may elect to accomplish the ATG performance tests while the simulator is located at the manufacturer's facility or the prior owner's facility in the event of the sale of the simulator to another operator. If the ATG is accomplished in this manner, the operator must validate simulator performance by repeating at least 1/3 of the performance tests in the ATG and submit those tests to the NSPM after the simulator has been installed and prior to FAA initial evaluation at the operator's facility. The ATG must be clearly annotated to indicate when and where each test was accomplished.

d. Initial and upgrade evaluations will be conducted in the same sequence as the ATG's and evaluation requests are received by the NSPM.

e. The original simulator test results of the operator's evaluation and the FAA's evaluation should be submitted with the master ATG under separate cover. The simulator test results should be presented in a manner that is easily cross-referenced to the data in the test guide.

f. A copy of the master ATG should accompany the master ATG submittal. The NSPM will then return the master ATG and the simulator test results to the POI for approval. The master ATG will remain on file at the FAA certificate holding FSDO for use in recurrent simulator evaluations. Source documentation for the master ATG (flight test results, simulator results, etc.) may be retained by the operator subject to full accessibility upon request by the Administrator. The master ATG should be reviewed by the NSPM and approved by the POI prior to the first recurrent evaluation of the simulator.

g. All simulator initial evaluations and subsequent recurrent evaluations after the date of this advisory circular will be conducted according to the guidance herein except as provided for in paragraph 2 and paragraph 11. However, operators are encouraged to make every effort to amend previously approved test guides to be consistent with the guidelines herein.

h. During initial and recurrent evaluations, the operator's pilots may assist in the accomplishment of the functional and performance tests at the discretion of the FAA Simulator

P S Advisory Circular # 120-40A Page: 9 03/25/04 07:38 AYSO@G2 AYOPB32 Doc #: 120-40A AIRPLANE SIMULATOR AND VISUAL SYSTEM EVALUATION Effective: 07/31/1986 ============================ Text Page 9 of 36 ================================ Evaluation Specialist.

i. Only FAA personnel should manipulate the pilot controls during the functional check point of an FAA evaluation.

8. RECURRENT EVALUATIONS.

a. For a simulator to retain its current status, it will be evaluated on a recurring basis using the currently approved ATG.

Unless otherwise determined by the NSPM, recurring evaluations will be accomplished every four months by a Simulator Evaluation Specialist. Each recurrent evaluation, normally scheduled for eight hours, will consist of functional tests and approximately 1/3 of the performance tests in the ATG. The goal is to accomplish each ATG annually.

b. In the interest of conserving simulator time, the following alternative to the 8-hour recurrent evaluation procedure is available:

(1) Operators of simulators having the appropriate automatic recording and plotting capabilities may apply for evaluation under the following Optional Test Program (OTP).

Experience has shown that without auto-initialization and autodriver capability, it is extremely difficult to accomplish the recurrent evaluation in the required four hours of simulator time.

(2) Operators must notify the NSPM in writing of their intent to enter the OTP. The test procedures above will then be exercised at the next recurrent evaluation. If these OTP procedures can be accomplished with four hours or less of simulator time, subsequent recurrent evaluations for that simulator will be planned for four hours, a reduction of 50% from the current eight normally required. The four hours includes unprogrammed downtime such as correction of malfunctions. If the operator cannot extend the period, then the evaluation will be terminated and rescheduled at a later date.

(3) Under the OTP, at least 1/3 of all the performance 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 1/3 of performance tests executed for each recurrent evaluation should be accomplished within the 30 days prior to the scheduled evaluation or accomplished on an evenly distributed basis during

P S Advisory Circular # 120-40A Page: 10 03/25/04 07:38 AYSO@G2 AYOPB32 Doc #: 120-40A AIRPLANE SIMULATOR AND VISUAL SYSTEM EVALUATION Effective: 07/31/1986 ============================ Text Page 10 of 36 =============================== the four-month period prior to the scheduled evaluation.

(4) Twenty percent of those tests conducted by the operator for each recurrent evaluation will then be selected and repeated by the Simulator Evaluation Specialist.

(5) Ten percent of those tests not performed by the operator will also be selected by the FAA for execution during each recurrent evaluation.

9. SPECIAL EVALUATIONS.

a. Between recurring evaluations, if deficiencies are discovered or it becomes apparent that the simulator is not being maintained to initial evaluation tolerances, a special evaluation of the simulator may be scheduled by the NSPM to confirm its performance.

b. The simulator will lose its eligibility for approval when the NSPM can no longer certify original simulator performance criteria to the POI based on a recurrent or special evaluation.

Additionally, the POI shall advise operators if a deficiency is jeopardizing training requirements, and arrangements shall be made to resolve the deficiency in the most effective manner, including withdrawal of approval by the POI, if necessary.

10. CHANGES TO SIMULATOR PROGRAMMING. In accordance with FAR 121, operators must notify the POI and NSPM at least 21 days prior to making software program 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, must be provided in writing, including any necessary updates to ATG results.

11. UPGRADING OF SIMULATORS, MOTION SYSTEMS, AND VISUAL SYSTEMS.

a. Operators should notify the POI of simulator hardware and programming changes which are necessary for the upgrading of a simulator to the next succeeding level and of new motion or visual systems.

b. Changes to simulator hardware and programming, which are required for simulator upgrade, will not affect the current status of the simulator unless an evaluation by an FAA Simulator Evaluation Specialist shows that the change has had a detrimental effect on the simulator. However, new motion or visual system upgrade modifications will require evaluation of that system under this advisory circular as a part of the next scheduled

P S Advisory Circular # 120-40A Page: 11 03/25/04 07:38 AYSO@G2 AYOPB32 Doc #: 120-40A AIRPLANE SIMULATOR AND VISUAL SYSTEM EVALUATION Effective: 07/31/1986 ============================ Text Page 11 of 36 =============================== recurrent evaluation of the simulator.

12. SIMULATOR QUALIFICATION BASIS. Section 121.407 of the FAR requires that simulators must maintain the performance, functional, and other characteristics that are required for approval. Except as provided for in paragraph 2 of this advisory circular, all initial and recurrent evaluations of those simulators, visual systems and motion systems approved after the effective date of this advisory circular will be conducted in accordance with the provisions herein. Simulators, visual systems and motion systems approved prior to this advisory circular will continue to maintain their current approval as long as they meet the standards under which they were originally approved regardless of operator. Any simulator upgraded to Phase I, II, or III standards or any visual system or motion system upgrade requires an initial evaluation of that simulator, visual system or motion system. A simulator having Phase I status resulting from a landing maneuver approval under Advisory Circular 121-14B should meet the Phase I requirements in Appendix H of Part 121 in the event of the sale or transfer of the simulator from one operator to another prior to its use by the new operator.

/s/ Garland P. Castleberry Director Southern Region APPENDIX 1. BASIC SIMULATOR STANDARDS (VISUAL SIMULATOR)

1. DISCUSSION. The simulator, motion and visual system requirements of this appendix are the minimum standards for a Basic visual simulator. An operator desiring evaluation of an aircraft simulator which does not possess a visual system (nonvisual simulator) should meet the standards of a Basic Simulator with the exception of paragraph 4 (Visual Systems) of this appendix. Additional requirements for Phase I, II, or III simulators are included in the appropriate appendices of this advisory circular. FAR Part 121, Appendix H, and related material ¢See, for example, U.S. Federal Register, Vol. 45, No.

127; Monday, June 30, 1980.| should also be consulted when considering particular simulator requirements. The performance and functional tests listed in Appendices 5 and 6 of this advisory circular should also be consulted when determining the requirements of a specific level simulator.

P S Advisory Circular # 120-40A Page: 12 03/25/04 07:38 AYSO@G2 AYOPB32 Doc #: 120-40A AIRPLANE SIMULATOR AND VISUAL SYSTEM EVALUATION Effective: 07/31/1986 ============================ Text Page 12 of 36 ===============================

2. SIMULATOR - GENERAL.

a. The cockpit should represent a full-scale mockup of the airplane simulated. Where movement of controls and switches is involved, the direction of movement should be identical to that in the applicant's airplane.

b. Circuit breakers that affect procedures and/or result in observable cockpit indications should be functionally accurate.

c. The effect of aerodynamic changes for various combinations of drag and thrust normally encountered in flight should correspond to actual flight conditions. The effect of change in aircraft attitude, thrust, drag, altitude, temperature, gross weight, center of gravity location, and configuration should be included.

d. All relevant instrument indications involved in the simulation of the applicable airplane should be entirely automatic in response to control movement by a crewmember.

e. Communications and navigation equipment should correspond to that installed in the applicant's airplane and should operate within the tolerances prescribed for the actual airborne equipment. See Appendix 6, paragraph 1, for further information regarding long-range navigation equipment.

f. In addition to the flight crewmember stations, there should be two suitable seats for the Instructor/Check Airman and FAA Inspector. Operators who have the Check Airman/Instructor occupy a flightcrew position seat need only provide one additional observer seat. The NSPM will consider options to this standard based on unique cockpit configurations. These seats should provide adequate vision to the pilot's panel and forward windows in visual system models. Observer seats need not represent those found in the airplane but should possess similar positive restraint devices.

g. Simulator systems should simulate the applicable airplane system operation, both on the ground and in flight. Systems should be operative to the extent that normal operating procedures, and abnormal and emergency procedures included in the operator's programs can be accomplished.

h. Instructor controls should be installed to enable the operator to control all required visual system variables and insert abnormal or emergency conditions into the airplane