basa sip

Views:
 
Category: Entertainment
     
 

Presentation Description

No description available.

Comments

Presentation Transcript

FAA/CAA-UK/FOCA BASA/SIP Industry Briefing: 

FAA/CAA-UK/FOCA BASA/SIP Industry Briefing WAT Conference - Orlando April 2006

Agenda: 

Agenda The BASA/SIP – What is it? The revised BASA/SIP BASA/SIP Special Conditions The European operating/training environment Quality Systems

Slide3: 

A Bilateral Aviation Safety Agreement ---------------- Simulator Implementation Procedures

The BASA/SIP: 

The BASA/SIP What is it? The BASA is a mutual acceptance agreement signed by the Governments of USA, UK and Switzerland. Implementation Procedures (IP’s) are the working practices by which the BASA is implemented. These include MIP’s, IPA’s etc.

The BASA/SIP: 

The BASA/SIP What is it? Allows for the acceptance of simulator qualifications by each National Aviation Authority Several hundred active devices on both sides of the Atlantic eligible for mutual qualification The SIPs are signed at the working level and may be revised, by mutual consent, without legislative change

The BASA/SIP: 

The BASA/SIP What is it? Original FAA/UK CAA BASA/SIP signed in 1997 Original FAA/FOCA BASA/SIP signed in 1999 No recognition of any differences between US and European processes or training needs. Limited application for acceptance of devices under the original agreement

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP The SIP has been substantially revised. Revised SIPs were signed by FAA, CAA-UK and FOCA in October 2005. The SIPs provide the basis for reciprocal acceptance of FFS qualification evaluations.

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP The most significant change to the SIP is the introduction of Special Conditions that define the differences between FAA and JAA Requirements. Any qualification carried out in accordance with the revised SIP must include an evaluation of these Special Conditions.

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP There are significant differences between current FAR and JAR standards. Each Authority developed and submitted a Regulatory Authority Familiarization Statement from which the differences were identified Significant differences were defined as Special Conditions.

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP The JAA Member States do not have a mutual recognition process for simulators qualified under the basis of a SIP. Special Conditions may improve the chances for mutual recognition between JAA Member States.

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP SIP Process Applicable to Level B, C & D Full Flight simulators only. Evaluations conducted to AC 120-40B/JAR-STD Amdt 2 or later. Qualifications issued under BASA/SIP may be equal to or lower than that issued by the evaluating authority.

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP SIP Process Applications for qualification of a FFS will be made to the office responsible for issuing the qualification. Any special instructions or requests to the evaluating Authority for assessment during the evaluation will be issued at least 30 days before the evaluation.

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP SIP Process A normal evaluation is carried out by the home Authority, plus an evaluation of the Special Conditions. A completed evaluation report, including the Special Conditions, will be provided, to the operator, within 30 days of the evaluation.

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP Special Conditions The CAA and FOCA Special Conditions are common. The CAA/FOCA and FAA Special Conditions cover the equivalent areas. We will now concentrate on the CAA/FOCA Special Conditions.

Slide16: 

CAA/FOCA Special Conditions

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP CAA/FOCA Special Conditions There is a supplement to the Instructors operating station manual that includes operation with European standards.

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP CAA/FOCA Special Conditions (1. Contd.) The IOS supplement would cover, for example:- Conversion of the FSTD displays to metric units. Conversion of the FSTD to a European aircraft configuration Appropriate instructions fo use of European airport models.

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP CAA/FOCA Special Conditions 2. There are detailed procedures for the operation of an independent quality monitoring system.

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP CAA/FOCA Special Conditions 3. The FSTD has a valid FAA Statement of Qualification

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP CAA/FOCA Special Conditions The aircraft configuration conforms to a European Standard.

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP CAA/FOCA Special Conditions 4. (Contd.) The differences may include the following: CAA-UK/FOCA/JAA Standard Specific Modifications e.g. stall protection Overspeed warnings Performance standards Instrument layout and units FMS data base configuration, content and units

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP CAA/FOCA Special Conditions The Instructor Operating Station (IOS) indications conform to International Standard(SI) of units of measurement.

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP CAA/FOCA Special Conditions 5. (Contd.) Applicable SI units are as follows:- - Weight in Kilogrammes - Fuel Quantity in Litres/kilogrammes - QFE/QNH in mbs/Hpa - RVR in metres - Visibility in Kilometres - Temperatures in Centigrade

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP CAA/FOCA Special Conditions There is at least one European airfield model available featuring proper modelling and navigation/communication facilities.

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP CAA/FOCA Special Conditions 6. (Contd.) The following should be available and correct for, at least one European airfield:- - Appropriate airfield charts - Lighting - Signage - Layout, taxi routes and off-runway pre-positions. - Low visibility operations including off-runway taxiing

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP CAA/FOCA Special Conditions 6. (Contd.) The following should be available and correct for, at least one European airfield:- - Correct Nav/Comm frequencies - ILS/DME at threshold - NDB’s - ATIS broadcasts in European units, correct European terminology and appropriate local accent. - Category C airfields (Special Use Airports)

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP CAA/FOCA Special Conditions Category I,II or III (as applicable) Instrument Approaches demonstrated at a European Airport.

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP CAA/FOCA Special Conditions 7. (Contd.) - Appropriate European weather minima as follows:- CAT I – 550m RVR, 200ft DH CAT II – 300m RVR, 100ft DH CAT III – as appropriate for aircraft

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP CAA/FOCA Special Conditions 8. Visual Ground Segment Test presented using a European Airport and RVR Standards.

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP CAA/FOCA Special Conditions Additional objective and functional and subjective tests as required by JAR-STD 1A, Amendment 2 that are in excess of those required by the FAA FFS standard level of qualification

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP CAA/FOCA Special Conditions 9. (Contd.) - The QTG should indicate additional objective tests included to provide compliance with JAR-STD 1A - Where Flight Test data is not available the basis of the validation data should be clearly stated Additional QTG tests should include the European Visual Ground Segment, Dynamic engine failure after T/O, OEI en- route climb, additional lever (i.e.propeller) and small control inputs. The QTG should also contain details of the Functional and Subjective testing as defined in JAR-STD 1A. These need to be covered by the operators fly-out programme using appropriately qualified pilots.

Slide33: 

The European Operational/Training Environment

Simulator Differences: 

Simulator Differences TCAS/ACAS European Standard is currently Version 7.0 - Version 6.04 is accepted but gives rise to a limitation to prohibit TCAS training above FL290. - Latest Versions not Mandated on simulators but incorporation strongly encouraged.

Simulator Differences: 

Simulator Differences EGPWS Need to ensure that data base supports training in a European environment. Incorporation on simulators not Mandatory, but strongly encouraged.

Simulator Differences: 

Simulator Differences 8.33 KHz VHF Frequency Spacing Not Mandatory on simulators but non-incorporation may prevent the use of some European airports. Incorporation strongly encouraged

Simulator Differences: 

Simulator Differences Secure Cockpit Door Use of the secure cockpit door control panel and associated procedures is seen as an important training item. Strong recommendation that a representative control panel and representative communication capability (cabin crew voice and chimes) are incorporated.

Simulator Differences: 

Simulator Differences Fifth Seat There are a small number of checking tasks that require five persons to be in the simulator. Inclusion of a fifth seat is strongly recommended. This may be a removable installation that is shared between a number of devices. Requirement is part of JAR-STD 1A, Amendment 3 standard.

Simulator Differences: 

Simulator Differences Secondary Escape Path A number of simulators have been seen where the only exit is through the main entry door. In an emergency this can become jammed. The incorporation of a secondary exit means, normally a kick-out panel in the door, is strongly recommended.

Quality Systems: 

Quality Systems

Quality Systems: 

Quality Systems JAR-STD 1A places requirements on operators of Full Flight Simulators to have an established Quality System, an effective Configuration Management system and a safe installation. Such requirements have been part of JAR-STD 1A since the 1999

Quality Systems: 

Quality Systems Basic requirement is JAR-STD 1A.025(a), (b) & (c). Additional guidance material for Quality Systems is in ACJ-STD 1A.025 JAA has recently published additional guidance in the form of Temporary Guidance Leaflet (TGL) No 9.

Quality Systems: 

Quality Systems An effective Quality System is an essential tool to ensure that devices are maintained in compliance with the requirements at all times and remain an effective training tool. Extended qualifications may be granted under JAR-STD 1A, once an effective Quality System is in place.

Quality Systems: 

Quality Systems A good Quality System defines the aims of the organisation and its structure, and defines clear and simple processes and procedures to which the organisation will operate. The Quality System must be an integral part of the way in which the organisation operates. It cannot just be an add-on. The Quality System must be all-inclusive with buy-in from the top to the bottom of the organisation.

Quality Systems: 

Quality Systems What do CAA/FOCA look for in a QS A Quality Manual applicable to the specific site, not just the wider corporate organisation. Clear statement of the Quality Policy, signed by the Accountable Manager, broken down into measurable Quality Objectives. Clear definition of the roles and responsibilities of those primarily responsible for the effective implementation of the QS. e.g. the Accountable Manager, the Quality Manager and the audit team.

Quality Systems: 

Quality Systems What do CAA/FOCA look for in a QS Clear statement of the Technical Standards with which the organisation seeks to comply, including both FAR/JAR regulations and operator specific requirements. A set of procedures and working practices and the way in which these are maintained and controlled. Quality Assurance programme with details of audit procedures and the management support of the programme. The QA programme is also expected to include regular operator fly-outs and QTG reviews.

Quality Systems: 

Quality Systems What do CAA/FOCA look for in a QS Level of resource, and in the case of those directly involved in implementation of the Quality System, their experience. Training of personnel, both specific training for those directly involved in implementation of the QS and more general training for other personnel. Quality metrics proposed to be monitored to establish the effectiveness of the Quality System, and in the case of existing devices, the current performance.

Quality Systems: 

Quality Systems What do CAA/FOCA look for in a QS An effective Configuration Management System for both hardware and software, including control of training loads, updates to visual models and navigation and IOS data bases. Safety of the installation including the quality of the briefing of safety systems given to users.

Quality Systems: 

Quality Systems Simulator Safety Features Confirmation that Emergency stop operates correctly and is functioned, annually, as a minimum. Escape route properly marked. Secondary exit from device. Appropriate emergency lighting is installed. Fire detection and protection.

Quality Systems: 

Quality Systems Note: The new JAA TGL No 9, on Quality Systems includes as Appendix 1, a Compliance Checklist for an FSTD operator Quality System. This is intended to provide guidance to both operators and regulators on the elements that would be expected to be present in an effective Quality System.

Quality Systems: 

Quality Systems Functions and Subjective Testing Defined Functions and Subjective testing is carried out by the Operator, at appropriate intervals throughout the year, by appropriately qualified pilots. Testing is fully documented and signed off.

Quality Systems: 

Quality Systems QTG Testing A complete set of QTG tests are run annually. Each test has been reviewed by an appropriate and independent person. Documentation is complete with appropriate sign-offs.

Quality Systems: 

Quality Systems Quality Metrics The operator presents quality performance measures for the device being qualified to demonstrate that the device has operated satisfactorily throughout the review period. This is likely to include reliability figures, such as numbers and classification of defects, defect rate and rectification period, impact on training and usually some type of quality rating from the users. Trend analysis is also valuable.

Quality Systems: 

Quality Systems What is expected of FAA on Quality Systems Where the QS has not previously been evaluated by a European NAA, the CAA/FOCA will provide specific assistance for evaluation of the Quality System. For initial evaluations at existing centres, FAA will confirm that the new device is properly integrated into the existing Quality System. Plus check Safety Features. For recurrent evaluations the FAA will review the Quality metrics for the device to confirm its continued satisfactory operation, and confirm proper sign-off of QTG and Functions and Subjective testing. Plus check Safety Features.

The Revised BASA/SIP: 

The Revised BASA/SIP The Impact of EASA on the BASA EASA provides Aviation regulatory oversight on behalf of all European Union (EU) Member States. UK is an EU member but Switzerland is not, however Switzerland is an Associate member of EASA. EASA takes responsibility for operations and Licensing (including simulators) in 2007. EASA Regulation allows existing Bilateral agreements to continue, but does not permit new state to state agreements to be developed. The revised US/UK BASA/SIP was developed with EASA permission to provide a template for the future US/EU BASA/SIP

European Contacts: 

European Contacts David Gibbons Simulator Standards Manager – UK CAA Tel: (44) 1293 573715 E-mail: david.gibbons@srg.caa.co.uk Rolf Baumann Inspector – Synthetic Training Devices FOCA, Switzerland Tel: 41 (0)43 816 70 71 E-mail: rolf.baumann@bazl.admin.ch