2013 FSEMC Program - Aviation Committees - AEEC - AMC

Flight Simulator Engineering & Maintenance Conference2013 FSEMCProgramSeptember 30 – October 3Tróia, PortugalAN ARINC DOCUMENTPublished byAeronautical Radio, Inc.2551 Riva RoadAnnapolis, Maryland 21401-7435 USAReference 13-105/FSG-193August 1, 2013Please Print and Bring a Copy of this Program to the Meeting!

2013 FSEMC ProgramWelcome to the 2013 FSEMC in Tróia, Portugal. The 2013 FSEMC is organized byARINC Industry Activities and hosted by TAP Portugal. We are certain that yourattendance at the FSEMC will prove enlightening and beneficial.The FSEMC Program is organized into two major sections. The general sectioncontains the information that you need to get the most benefit from this unique aviationmeeting. It includes the schedule of events and titles of the technical presentations thatare planned. The FSEMC Questions by Topic—the most important part of theprogram—presents 95 questions submitted by the simulator users and suppliers thatwill be discussed at the FSEMC.FSEMC RemindersThe 2013 FSEMC officially begins with the Opening Session at 0900 on Tuesday,October 1, 2013.Please bring an up-to-date business card when you register. This information will beused in the attendance list in the FSEMC Report.The FSEMC Program, including an updated list of attendees, is available at:http://www.aviation-ia.com/fsemc/upcoming/index.htmlThe FSEMC Steering Committee has decided that Business Casual (e.g., no ties orjackets for gentlemen) is the appropriate dress for all FSEMC events.Table of ContentsWELCOME TO THE 2013 FSEMC P-3FSEMC SCHEDULE OF EVENTS P-5FSEMC TECHNOLOGY WORKSHOP P-6FSEMC OPENING SESSION P-7FSEMC INDUSTRY SESSION P-8FSEMC AWARDS P-10FSEMC ELECTIONS P-13FSEMC GUIDELINES P-142013 FSEMC FOLLOW-UP ITEMS P-192013 FSEMC QUESTIONS BY TOPIC See Next PageP-1

2013 FSEMC Questions by TopicPAGEDATA AND SIMULATION 1STANDARDS AND TRAINING 4REGULATORY/QTG 5PRODUCT SUPPORT 12TOOLS AND TEST EQUIPMENT 17HOST COMPUTER AND PERIPHERALS 20INSTRUCTOR STATION 24SUPPORT INFRASTRUCTURE 27OTHER TRAINING DEVICES 30MISCELLANEOUS 31MOTION AND CONTROL LOADING 34AVIONICS 46VISUAL 50INTERFACE 62OPERATOR CODESAirport/Hotel TransportationEndBack CoverP-2

WELCOME TO THE 2013 FSEMCOn behalf of your FSEMC Steering Committee and this year’shost, TAP Portugal, I would like to extend my invitation to allthe professionals involved in the Flight Simulation andTraining industry. Many of you know me, and some of youmay not. Allow me to introduce myself: I am Bob Doucettefrom Opinicus Corporation. I have recently assumed theChairman role in the FSEMC.As a short introduction, I have been involved in aviation forover 32 years; 30 of those in flight simulation. I started mysimulator career at Republic Airlines as a simulator technician.When Northwest Airlines acquired Republic, I became a simulator engineer. Moving throughthe ranks at Northwest, I have been a Manufacturing Liaison, Project Engineer, EngineeringManager, and acquisition Manager. I retired from the airline side of the business in 2003, andbegan my simulator manufacturing career working at Opinicus shortly thereafter.I have been involved with the FSEMC since its inception in 1994. Over the past 18 years, Ihave served on the steering committee for 11, both as the Northwest and OPINICUSrepresentative.As Chairman of the FSEMC, I plan to continue the course the steering committee hasplanned for the next few years. The benefits of the conferences, the working groups, and theFSEMC developed ARINC Standards will continue to be delivered with the sameprofessionalism that has existed for the past 19 years. I do plan on improving those benefitswherever necessary.This industry has been good to me and my family. The challenges and accomplishments Ihave had through the years have given so much to me. The places I have been and thefriends I have met along the way will be with me for my entire life. I welcome the opportunityto guide the FSEMC through new challenges and refining our approaches to existing ones.Our industry is a relatively small piece of the aviation industry. We have all worked for variouscompanies and have had working relationships with many of the same people. The people inthis industry are also a small dedicated group. In fact, I have observed through the years thatpeople never seem to leave the simulation industry; they just change their business cards.Even the training devices sometimes seem like family members that you have known foryears. But that seemingly same small pool of people has common goals: safety, efficiency,and prosperity for our respective organizations.The FSEMC has those same goals. Its resources are those same people, all thinkingtogether, working together, and solving tough problems that we face every day. Together wecan change the future by refining our knowledge and skills, passing information to our peersand to the new generation of technicians and engineers that our industry needs to continueour success.P-3

That is the intangible value of the FSEMC: information. The conferences and working groupsprovide a remarkable opportunity to meet and exchange information with colleagues fromaround the world. We collaborate on developing solutions, even if only for one week a year.As we make new friends, we strengthen the bonds of the industry. It takes a lot of energy foran organization to keep itself responsive and relevant to the constantly changingrequirements that face us all. The FSEMC is no different.The tangible value of the FSEMC is the standards we develop that help us meet the goals ofsafety, efficiency, and lowering costs. Using our collective efforts, we document theprocesses and provide guidance on a variety of industry topics. This is value that one canhold in their hand and pass on to future generations of simulator engineers and maintenancetechnicians. These ARINC reports are the legacies that will survive us and be utilized longafter we have retired and moved to some nice warm place (I am already in Florida…).I thank you in advance for your support as I assume the chairmanship. If there is anything theFSEMC or I can do for you, please give me a call.Thank you and see you in Portugal!Bob DoucetteBob DoucetteFSEMC ChairmanP-4

2013 FSEMC Schedule of Events1100 - 1900 Early Registration1300 - 1600 Technology Workshop1830 - 2030 AAI ReceptionMonday – September 30Tuesday – October 10745 Registration Opens0900 Opening Session1020 FSEMC Discussion1145 Presentation – Training Product Evolution1215 Lunch1345 Presentation – Industry Session1445 FSEMC Discussion1530 Presentation – Motion Performance Requirements1600 FSEMC Discussion1715 RecessWednesday – October 20745 Registration Opens0900 Presentation – The Challenges of Simulating Software Driven Aircraft0930 FSEMC Discussion1050 Presentation – Significance of QTGs, the Tests, and Their Future1120 FSEMC Discussion1215 Lunch1345 Presentation – eQTG: Practical Experiences at Lufthansa Flight Training1415 Regulatory SessionRegulatory Authorities Presentation(s)1715 RecessThursday – October 30745 Registration Opens0900 Presentation – Visual Systems: What is Really Required?0930 FSEMC Discussion1120 Presentation – Source Code for Flight Simulators1140 FSEMC Discussion1215 Lunch1345 FSEMC Discussion1530 Open Q&A Session *1600 Adjourn*Open Q&A Session – Time permitting, on Thursday afternoon FSEMC will include an Open Q&ASession for 30 minutes prior to adjourning the meeting. This is intended to provide an openexchange of information. Since there is no question pre-notification, manufacturers may elect tosimply accept an action to respond following the meeting.Coffee BreaksCoffee Breaks will be provided daily at approximately 1030 and 1515.P-5

2013 FSEMC Technology WorkshopMonday, September 30, 2013 – 1300-1600In response to constituents’ requests at past conferences, the FSEMC SteeringCommittee will provide an open forum setting to discuss hot topics in the flightsimulation industry.TopicsPlaceReliability Data Feedback – Should a User Submit Operational ReliabilityData to their TDM?- TDMs uses of Customer Supplied Reliability Data- How does it benefit the User to Supply the Data?Configuration and Control of Aircraft Loadable Software in FSTDs- LSAP Intensive Aircraft Driving Change in SimulatorsBallroomPros and Cons of Rehosted and Retargeted Avionics in Training Device- Challenges, Rewards, and Life Cycle ConsiderationsAll participants are welcome to exchange a free flow of ideas, concerns, and to discussimplications of technology facing the industry today and in the near future.P-6

Welcome/IntroductionsBob DoucetteFSEMC ChairmanOpinicus CorporationKeynote SpeakersTBDFSEMC Awards IntroductionStefan NowackFSEMC Vice ChairmanLufthansa Flight TrainingEdwin A. Link Award2013 FSEMC Opening SessionTuesday, October 1, 2013 - 0900FSEMC Vice Chairman to presentRoger S. Goldberg AwardFSEMC Vice Chairman to presentConference AnnouncementsFSEMC ChairmanP-7

2013 FSEMC Industry SessionTuesday, October 1, 2013 - 1345Session OverviewFSEMC Chairman Bob Doucette Opinicus CorporationFuture Concepts for Simulators SubcommitteeFSEMC Call for Presentations Scott Smith ARINC IAFSEMC Completed Working Groups Scott Smith ARINC IASimulated ATC Environment Ted Chapman FlightSafety Int’lOther Industry Activities OverviewInternational Pilot Training Consortium Peter Tharp RAeSICATEE Briefing Sunjoo Advani IDT Eng.FSEMC Steering Committee and Elections OverviewFSEMC Executive Secretary Sam Buckwalter ARINC IAP-8

Edwin A. Link Award"Ed" Link was born in 1904 in Huntington, Indiana, but moved in 1910 toBinghamton, New York, where his father purchased a bankrupt music firm. It washere Ed would begin and develop his career as (to quote his friend Harvey Roehl)a "backyard inventor in the finest American sense."In his early twenties, at considerable expense and some risk, he obtained hispilot's license. While struggling to become a pilot, he began tinkering with parts oforgans at his father's factory, trying to develop a training device so that pilotscould start learning to fly safely and inexpensively without leaving the ground.Initially his trainer, although successful, was seen as a toy and relegated to thestatus of fairground ride.In the mid-1930's, after a series of air accidents, the Army AirCorps ordered six of Link's instrument trainers to enhance itspilot training program. Once public attention had been drawnto this practical device, orders for more came from all over theworld. Ultimately Link's invention led to the development of thewhole field of flight simulation. With the help of his wife,Marion Clayton Link, whom he had married in 1931, Ed ran ahighly successful enterprise, Link Aviation, Inc., throughoutWorld War II and until he sold the company in 1954.Thereafter Ed's skills and attention focused on underwaterarchaeology and exploration. In this, his wife Marion became his partner in research, and, with their twosons William Martin and Edwin Clayton, they undertook a number of voyages. During these years Edworked constantly to improve diving equipment in order to allow divers to go deeper, stay longerunderwater, explore more safely and efficiently, and return to the surface with less risk. On one of thesea voyages in 1973, during a routine dive in a submersible, the Links' younger son Clayton and hisfriend Albert Stover were killed. In a very moving statement to the press, Ed expressed his convictionthat their death had not been in vain, but had identified problems that must be solved in order to meet thechallenge of safer underwater exploration.Mr. Link continued actively exploring, tinkering, writing and generally enjoying his many interests untilvery shortly before his death in 1981. His was an unusually generous spirit: not only did he give tirelesslyof his time and energy; he also donated financially to many foundations, scholarships and charitablecauses.FSEMC is pleased to honor Edwin A. Link by selecting one individual each year for significantcontribution in flight simulator support. On behalf of ARINC and FSEMC, we gratefully acknowledge andoffer our thanks to the following individuals and organizations for their support of this award:• Marilyn Link, Special Advisor, The Link Foundation• The Link Foundation Board of Trustees• L3 Communications’ Link Simulation & Training• Binghamton University• Roberson Museum and Science CenterP-10

Edwin A. Link Award – Recipients2012 – Dallas, TexasJeff EverettRSI Visual Systems2011 – Orlando, FloridaJoe Mays and Richard HolmesBarco (Retired)2010 – Brighton, EnglandDr. David WhiteThales2009 – Cairo, EgyptCraig PhillipsRSI Visual Systems2008 – Salt Lake City, UtahAndy RamsdenRockwell Collins2007 – Montreal, CanadaJoe BillerLink Simulation2005 – Seattle, WashingtonJim GuvernatorSouthwest Airlines2004 – Tulsa, OklahomaStuart N. WilmottCAE SimuFlite2003 – Prague, Czech RepDr. John HuntGeneral Precision2002 – Tampa, FloridaKendall W. NevilleThe Boeing Company2001 – Atlanta, GeorgiaStuart AndersonEvan and Sutherland2000 – Toulouse, FranceJoe DepaolaAmerican Airlines1999 – Denver, ColoradoWolf Dieter-HassLufthansa Flight TrainingP-11

Roger S. Goldberg AwardThe FSEMC Steering Committee gives an award each year to a specialindividual. It is an award for a person that has been extraordinaryinfluence in the flight simulation industry, and has contributedsignificantly to the FSEMC. The award acknowledges thesecontributions with special recognition.The first award was called the FSEMC Service Award. This first awardwas given to Roger S. Goldberg, posthumously, in recognition of theExtraordinary ideas, Outstanding service, and Endless passion hegave to our organization.In his honor, the award is now named theRoger S. Goldberg AwardRoger was a unique person in the way he had contact with other people. Always positive and happy,he made everyone feel good after being in his presence.Roger was one of the cornerstones in the FSEMC Steering Committee. He was a founding memberand an expert mediator, always searching for a better way or solution to move forward. He knewwhat he wanted and how he wanted the proceedings to go. Sometimes without the FSEMC SteeringCommittee even knowing, he was usually able to steer them positively in that direction. He was agreat facilitator, fostering much discussion. He always stated, It is your conference, and it is what youmake of it. He was an expert on encouraging people to work together, given their differentbackgrounds and experiences.Roger S. Goldberg Award - Recipients2012 – Dallas, TexasSam BuckwalterARINC Industry Activities2010 – Brighton, EnglandDieter BungeLufthansa Flight Training2009 – Cairo, EgyptTed WeissThe Boeing Company2008 – Salt Lake City, UtahLars GranOxford Aviation Academy2007 – Montreal, CanadaBob GlennThe Boeing Company2006 – FSEMC Service AwardRoger S. GoldbergARINC Industry ActivitiesP-12

2013 FSEMC ElectionsFSEMC STEERING COMMITTEE ROSTERBob Doucette, ChairmanOpinicus CorporationStefan Nowack, Vice ChairmanLufthansa Flight TrainingSam Buckwalter, Executive Secretary Aeronautical Radio, Inc.Howard GallingerAir CanadaEric Fuilla-WeishauptAirbusHiromitsu KoyanoAll Nippon AirwaysAsok GhoshalAmerican AirlinesBrandon MazzacavalloThe Boeing CompanySylvain RousseauCAENeil CothranCathay PacificRick HelmsDelta Air LinesAdel SowedanEgyptAirMike JacksonFedExSteve KrullFlightSafety InternationalJeremy Wise L-3Marc CronanRockwell CollinsJorge CruzTAP PortugalThe FSEMC Steering Committee is comprised of 18 voting representatives ofFSEMC Member Organizations (FMOs) distributed as follows:• Representatives of 10 commercial air carrier FMOs• Representatives of two other users of flight simulators FMOs• One representative of a commercial aircraft manufacturer FMO• One representative of a full-flight simulator manufacturer FMO• Four representatives from any FMO category, including simulator suppliersTo ensure global air carrier representation, the ten commercial air carrier FMOselected to the Steering Committee shall include at least one FMO from each of thefollowing regions:• North America• Caribbean, Central, and South America• Europe• Africa and Middle East• Asia and PacificP-13

2013 FSEMC GuidelinesScopeFSEMC should include users of flight and cabin simulators (dynamic and static). Usersshould include airlines, commuter airlines, training centers, and other simulation users.Participants should include airframe manufacturers, aircraft equipment suppliers, andsimulator equipment suppliers.BackgroundThe FSEMC is organized by ARINC Industry Activities to assist aviation interests incooperating to develop shared technical solutions and to establish technical standards.FSEMC seeks to reduce life-cycle costs, as well as to improve the operation of flightsimulators and training devices by promoting reliability, better maintenance; supporttechniques through the exchange of engineering, maintenance, and associated technicalinformation; and the development of voluntary technical standards related to simulation andtraining. FSEMC also seeks to promote and advance the state of the art of the flightsimulation and training industry to the mutual benefit of its members.Attended by more than 300 flight simulator experts from around the world, the annualconference identifies technical solutions to engineering and maintenance issues and, as aresult of this synergy, the airline industry benefits immensely.AgendaThis program is the main document for the FSEMC. It is published several weeks in advanceof the meeting and disseminated to all interested parties.Paper Copies - The program will no longer be available at registration.FSEMC Report and PresentationsAn FSEMC Report will be prepared following the meeting. The FSEMC Report andPresentations will be available at no cost to FSEMC Member Organizations and ARINCIndustry Activities Corporate Sponsors. For non-supporting organizations, a nominal fee willbe charged to download the report and presentations from the FSEMC web site at:www.aviation-ia.com/fsemc.P-14

2013 FSEMC GuidelinesSeatingAirlines and other simulator users are seated in the center section of the meeting room.Manufacturers, suppliers, and others who are involved in responding to discussion items areseated in the wings of the meeting room.Delegates seated at the 2010 FSEMC in Brighton, EnglandThe 2012 FSEMC hostedby RSI Visuals was heldSeptember 17-20, 2013,in Dallas, Texas. The 18 thannual meeting wasattended by 45 simulatoruser organizations, 49supplier companies, 4airframe manufacturers, 7simulator manufacturers,and 2 differentRegulatory Authorities.The total registeredattendance was 292attendees from 27countries.FSEMC Conference Room LayoutP-15

2013 FSEMC GuidelinesThe FSEMC Hospitality SuitesSeveral suites are blocked and assigned on a first come - first serve basis to any supplier.Persons desiring a suite should contact:Patricia GeraldesBusiness Development ManagerTróia Design Hotel7570-789 Carvahal - GrandolaTroia, PortugalEmail: patricia.geraldes@blueandgreen.comTel: +35 121 356 83 10Fax: +35 121 356 83 13P-18

FSEMC Follow-Up Items from 2012The following list is a summary of OPEN items resulting from the 2012 FSEMC. The discussion itemscontain references to proposed corrective measures.To close an item, please work with the submitter and request them to provide written notification whenthe item can be considered closed. The notification should include a brief summary of the solution. Thisshould be submitted to Sam Buckwalter at ARINC Industry Activities, sbuckwal@arinc.com.Item Section Submitter Respondent Follow-up09-074 Motion Control AFR L-3L-3 to collect responses from usersand research possible fixes12-006 Data and Simulation LFT AllIntegrate and release data packagesand update within a similar time frameas aircraft updates12-045 Product Support ASA L-3 Resolve C2000X Erratic heart beat12-056 Instructor Station KAL CAE/L-3 Resolve wiring issues at IOS seats12-057 Support Infrastructure EVA CAE Resolve debrief computer freezing12-063Motion and ControlAAL CAE/MoogResolve Return-to-Home Switch12-067LoadingMotion and ControlLoadingAALCAE/Moog12-073 Avionics KAL CAE12-080 Avionics AAL AllissuesResolve the electric motion systemresetting issuesResolve Display Unit failures and nofault found issuesOperator requests information aboutARINC 610C functionality in aircraftavionics used in simulationP-19

DATA AND SIMULATIONReference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 1******12-006******ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUserData Provision All All All LFTAircraft development has its own pace, especially for new aircraft programs. Data package delivery as well.How can OEMs, data/sim package provider, and simulator manufacturer together guarantee/achieve that aircraftsystems and simulator solutions are made available and are integrated within a similar time scale?This is not a new problem but worsened considerably by complex data packages without offering an incrementalor modular approach.For example, it is envisaged that new A380 software called batch 4 will be installed 1st Quarter 2013. No similardata package (STD1.4?) is available or announced at the moment. We are guessing that a new data package canbe delivered in summer 2013 and integrated until spring 2014. Normally a gap of 12 month is not favorable foritems with an obvious training impactVendor comments, please.Value of Resolution: Improve PerformanceItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser1 Engine Model A320 NEO AirbusAirbus Data Group will produce a very limited data package (e.g., QTG tests) for the new engines A320 NEO (PW1100 and CFM-LEAP X) due to the Export Control constraints, but will deliver engine models as SimulationSoftware Packages (SSP) with a specific architecture (binary code).The format of these SSP is not defined yet, but it should be similar to that of the EFCS SSP.These SSP will only take into account the Airbus Training Malfunction list, making it difficult for the manufacturerto simulate specific failures claimed by their customer.Operators, TDMs, please comment.Do other Aircraft manufacturers have the same issue?Value of Resolution: Provide Information

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 2DATA AND SIMULATIONItemNo.SubsystemNameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser2 Data RetentionComplianceAll ALKWhat problems have other users experienced with regard to data retention for operation or regulatory purposes?Other user and manufacturer comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce Workload (Maintenance or Operation)ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser3 Sound System Sound Data CAE CAE 2012 B747-8F CLXThe sound data package provided by Boeing for our new B747-8F simulator is lacking test cases and is of verypoor recording quality with lots of non-aircraft background noise. This complicates data extraction and in somecases made the test case data unusable. The ambient noise in the data also does not seem to reflect the aircraftas delivered.What can be done to obtain a good and complete sound data package? Have other operators experienced thisissue with prototype simulators?Users and Air Craft Manufactures comments, please.Value of Resolution: Improve Performance, Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser4 Export ControlLicensesAll AirbusAirbus US Export Control licenses for GE/CFM engines and PW/IAE engines have expired, and that implies tofind an alternative solution for providing Engine Simulation solutions, leading to an increased complexity ofTraining Device Simulators.How are other aircraft manufacturers dealing with this issue?How many individuals are being affected by Export Control?Operators comment, please?

DATA AND SIMULATIONReference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 3ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser5 Data Package All AirbusData Package and QVSD (Qualification Validation Source Data) for aircraft that are no longer producedWhen we upgrade the Data Package and QVSD for aircraft that are no longer produced, we try to achieve thebest representativeness of the aircraft in terms of models (Aerodynamics, ground, etc.), in addition to aircraftsystems evolutions (EFCS, FWS, etc.). We therefore provide the corresponding fully updated QVSD.Operators, TDMs, Authorities, please comment.Would some specific support be required in order to ease these updates?

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 4STANDARDS/TRAININGItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser6 ARINC 433-2 All All All All JALRecently JAL discussed FFS reliability with some operators, and they maintain more than 98%. This value is veryclose to 100% (Perfect value). Someone told me that they would not require a perfect reliability and 90-95%would be enough, and how much cost reduction could be estimated if a current maintenance level degraded to alevel which maintains 90% reliability. This person is neither a simulator engineer nor a simulator mechanic. He isan account manager.A definition of SIM reliability is shown in ARINC 433-2 and based on it, if we maintain our FFS to keep 90%reliability we lose 10% training sessions. From the point of a SIM engineer’s view, 90% seems to be a hazardousthing, but from other point of views, 90% is enough.Is there any index which can be observed SIM condition more intuitively?Other user and vendor comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser7 Malfunctions BoeingThe FSEMC sponsored malfunction working group does not appear to have met its goals. The numbers ofmalfunctions being integrated into FSTD is again growing and become a discriminator between suppliers. It issuggested the malfunction working group be reformed or continue with the goals of reducing the number ofmalfunctions, to ensure that those selected have training value, have common titles and, where feasible, commoneffects.Other user and vendor comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser8 Online Training BoeingA question to be asked is whether the OEMs (SIM and Visual) are likely to provide better online training availablefor purchase that covers the basic fundamentals of their equipment, be it in some form of web based training. Thiswould allow new (and old) technicians basic (or refresher) exposure to simulator equipment similar to the CBTtraining for aircraft.Other user and vendor comments, please.

REGULATORY/QTGReference 13-105/FSG-193 - Page 5ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser9 Regulations All All All AATCAs an industry, are we over/under regulated or is the level of regulation correct?Other users, manufacturers, and Regulatory comments, please.Value of Resolution: Provide InformationItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser10 QMS ANAThe Japanese authorities (JCAB) have a plan to set up the Quality Management System Standard for FSTDwhich is internationally harmonized. For this purpose, we would like to have comments from each users andauthorities.1) We recognize that QMS is mandatory in USA and each user already set their QMS standard/procedure.Do you have any problems or difficulties?2) The EEI is to be beneficial the user and authority; is the EEI operating as expected or are there anyproblems?3) EASA is also operating the QMS, are there any problems?4) How about the other countries?5) The SQMS working group of FSEMC is suspending now. We would like to request to resume theactivities.Other users and Regulatory comments, please.Value of Resolution: Provide InformationItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser11 RegulatoryComplianceQMS/CMSRegulatoryAuthoritiesL-3Current regulations have a requirement for an FSTD operator to institute and maintain a Quality ManagementSystem (QMS), which in the EASA regulations has now evolved into a Compliance Management System (CMS).Defects or Discrepancies and Regulators Comments from evaluations on an FSTD are seen as non-complianceitems. The QMS/CMS should record and track these non-compliances with a view to rectifying the problems.Resolving some non-compliances can be an expensive and protracted business. Can the regulators pleaseprovide guidance as to how these non-compliances are viewed as part of recurrent evaluations and what actionthey could be expected to take for long standing non-compliances where no corrective action has taken place andno evidence exists of a plan of action to rectify these items?Regulatory comments, please.Value of Resolution: Determine the Focus of Effort for the Resolution of these Issues

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 - Page 6REGULATORY/QTGItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser12 Ambient Light Ambient Light Box Any Any Ex-Phase IIIGenerationsAnyJALIn the past, regulation AC120-40 required an ambient light function should be equipped on Phase III FFS. Lookingback at past FSEMC discussion items, a reliability of an ambient light source box remains bad and JAL and otheroperators have raised this problem a couple of times. One operator suggested an ambient light box could beremoved because FAA part 60 did not request to equip it anymore.Regarding Phase III FFS which is Grand Father’s Rule applied and remains certified based on FAA FAR Part 60:1. Do any operators remove an ambient light box from Phase III FFS?2. Does FAA or other authorities agree to remove an ambient light box from Phase III FFS?Other users and Regulatory comments, please.Value of Resolution: Provide InformationItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser13 RegulatoryComplianceICAO 9625 Edition 3 CAAS L-3ICAO 9625 Edition 3 was published in September 2009. Since that date it has been available for adoption anduse. However, there are certain specific areas of the document that are either incomplete (e.g., Motion OMCT),or are not being mandated as the standard needs to mature to industry needs (e.g., ATC) or where the publishedstandard is under review (e.g., Transport Delay test tolerances).ICAO 9625 Edition 3 has not been formally adopted by EASA or FAA and many other National AviationAuthorities have been holding back waiting for these leading authorities to adopt the new standard.However, ICAO 9625 Edition 3 has been adopted by at least one National Aviation Authority, CAAS (Singapore).Can the CAAS please provide guidance as to how they have conducted their evaluations, with particular focus onhow they have dealt with the areas of: Motion (OMCT), ATC Environment and Transport Delay?CAAS comments, please.Value of Resolution: Determine how these issues should be handled during the interim state of ICAO 9625 Edition3, pending the resolution of the incomplete sections of the document.

REGULATORY/QTGReference 13-105/FSG-193 - Page 7ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser14 9625 Ed. 3 BoeingThe adoption of 9625 Edition 3 by one country has resulted in significant costs to affected training providers.Compliance to known errors in Edition 3 and lack of guidance to NAAs regarding older FSTD that are not eligiblefor Grandfather Rights, are particularly problematic.Can FSEMC assist Simulator Manufacturers and Training Providers in obtaining State Letters (or equivalent)?User and Regulatory comments, please.ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser15 Flight Controls ICAO 9625 Edition 3 RegulatoryAuthoritiesL-3ICAO 9625 Edition 3 Manual of Criteria for the Qualification of Flight Simulation Training Devices — Volume I II-App B-36, 4. TABLE OF FSTD VALIDATION TESTS, Section 2, Handling Qualities:Note 2 - FSTD testing from the second set of pilot controls is only required if both sets of controlsare not mechanically interconnected on the FSTD. A rationale is required from the data provider ifa single set of data is applicable to both sides. If controls are mechanically interconnected in theFSTD, a single set of tests is sufficient.The positioning of Note 2 in the table and the wording in its current form implies that this note is applicable to thewhole of section 2. That is, from Section 2.a Flight Controls - Static Controls checks, through to Section 2.h -Flight and maneuver envelope protection functions.It is suggested that this may not be the intent of this note, as applying this note to all tests in Section 2 involvingflight controls would create a massive overhead in additional objective tests and the requirement for thesupporting reference data.Guidance on the interpretation of this note is requested. The scope of Note 2 needs to be validated and clarified.Perhaps Note 2 should be re-located to sit under section 2.a where it only applies to the primary static controlchecks.Regulatory comments, please.Value of Resolution: Clarity of the intent of Note 2 as identified. Misinterpretation of this note could lead toexpensive and possibly unnecessary additional effort in initial and recurrent qualification of FSTDs using the ICAO9625 Edition 3 standards.

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 - Page 8REGULATORY/QTGItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser16 RegulatoryComplianceICATEE & FAAGuidance MaterialRegulatoryAuthoritiesL-3Resulting from the FAA published Guidance material on stalling; Unusual Attitudes and Upset Recovery Trainingand the work being conducted by ICATEE in parallel, can the Regulatory Authority community define theirpositions as to whether they intend to introduce these new regulatory requirements and a timetable detailing theirintended introduction.Regulatory comments, please.Value of Resolution: Preparing industry to know how to deal with these issues when they are introduced.ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser17 Full Stall Training All BoeingFull Stall Training on all aircraft types has been mandated by the US government. What are SimulatorManufacturers and Training Providers planning to do to meet this requirement?User and Regulatory comments, please.ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser18 QTG Any Any LFTThe LBA expects the QTG re-runs to be checked and signed by LFT within a reasonable time frame after theirgeneration. LFT has defined 30 days or this interval.What is the experience from other operations with regard to this issue?What are the requirements from other authorities?Other users and Regulatory comments, please.Value of Resolution: Provide Information

REGULATORY/QTGReference 13-105/FSG-193 - Page 9ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser19 eQTG All AirbusThere is a strong need from Airbus, as an ATO (Approved Training Organization), to have a QTG tool dealing withmultiple approvals and different requirements.Examples:- Test numbering- Reference to regulatory documents- Tolerances appliedOperators, TDMs, please advise.Other users, TDMs, and Regulatory comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce workload (Maintenance or Operation), Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser20 eQTG DigitalSignatureAll AirbusWhat are the latest news concerning the digital signature of the eQTG?Question addressed to TDMs and Authorities.Other TDMs and Regulatory comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce Workload (Maintenance or Operation), Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser21 SQMS BoeingFAA SQMS, EASA CMS and most recently CAAC CAS are significantly different and become a majoradministrative burden with no impact on Training value. What can be done to standardize these programs andsimplify the content to achieve the basic goal of ensuring FSTD are maintained at the highest level withoutencroaching on the internal business of the Training Provider?Regulatory comments, please.

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 - Page 10REGULATORY/QTGItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser22 Qualification LFTEASA regulation VO (EU) 1178/2011 and 290/2012 incorporate new authority (ARA – Authority Requirements forAircrew) and operator (ORA – Organisation Requirements for Aircrew) requirements. Guidance material (GM3ORA.FSTD.100) defines the content of a “dossier” which shall be prepared by the FSTD operator for initial andrecurrent evaluation. The list of information to be prepared is quite comprehensive, as it requires for example a listof all FSTD users (including the number of training hours per user) and all visual databases listed (see attachmentfor more details). This adds significantly more workload to the operator preparing the evaluation.Questions:• How far did other operators in Europe adapt their evaluation preparation processes already to fulfil thenew requirement?• What kind of experience and feedback from the authority has been collected so far?• Do other operators see this requirement in a more flexible way, due to the fact that this is GuidanceMaterial only, or do the operators fulfil this requirement word by word?GM3 ORA.FSTD.100 GeneralCOMPLIANCE MONITORING SYSTEM – GUIDANCE FOR ORGANISATIONS OPERATING FSTDS TOPREPARE FOR A COMPETENT AUTHORITY EVALUATION(a) IntroductionThe following material provides guidance on what is expected by the competent authorities to support thediscussion during the preliminary briefing, which is a first step of any initial or recurrent evaluation of an FSTDcarried out by a competent authority.This document has been developed as well to standardise working methods throughout Member States andto develop effective CM spot checks to satisfy the applicable requirements and therefore to ensure thehighest standards of training are attained.(b) Document formDifferent document forms can be considered. Nevertheless, it appears that the best solution is a dossier,which includes all the information required by the competent authority to perform an evaluation.(c) Contents of the dossier for an initial evaluation:(1) type of FSTD and qualification level requested;(2) evaluation agenda: including date of evaluation, name of people involved for the competent authority,contact details for the FSTD operator, schedules for the subjective flight profile, QTG rerun;(3) FSTD identification and detailed technical specification including, type of FSTD, manufacturer, registrationnumber, date of entry into service, host computer, visual system, motion system, type of IOS, simulatedversion(s), standards of all the aircraft computers, if applicable. Manuals needed for an evaluation (e.g. flightmanuals, system manuals, acceptance test manual, IOS user manual etc. – if applicable) could already beprovided as part of the dossier in an electronic format;(4) planned modifications;(5) subjective open defect(s);(6) airport visual databases including for each visual scene, name of the airport, IATA and ICAO codes, typeof visual scene (specific or generic), additional capabilities (e.g. snow model, WGS 84 compliance, enhancedground proximity warning system (EGPWS)); and(7) QTG status: the list should include for each QTG test available the status of the tests following the FSTDoperator and competent authority reviews.(d) Contents of the dossier for a recurrent evaluation:(1) type of FSTD and qualification level requested;(2) evaluation agenda, including date of evaluation, name of people involved for the competent authority,contact details for the operator, schedules for the subjective flight profile, QTG rerun and QTG review;

REGULATORY/QTGReference 13-105/FSG-193 - Page 11(3) FSTD identification, including type of FSTD, manufacturer, registration number, date of entry into service, hostcomputer, visual system, motion system, type of IOS, simulated version(s), standards of all the aircraft computers,if applicable;(4) status of items raised during the last evaluation and date of closure;(5) reliability data: training hours month by month during the past year, numbers of complaints mentioned in thetechnical log, training hours lost, availability rate;(6) operational data: a list of FSTD users over the previous 12 months should be provided, with number of traininghours;(7) failure tabulation including categorisation of failures (by ATA chapter and Pareto diagram, ARINCclassification);(8) details of main failures leading to training interruption or multiple occurrences of some failures;(9) hardware and/or software updates or changes since last evaluation and planned hardware and/or softwareupdates or changes;(10) subjective open defect(s);(11) airport visual databases including for each visual scene, name of the airport, ATA and ICAO codes, type ofvisual scene (specific or generic), additional capabilities (snow model, WGS 84 compliance, EGPWS);(12) QTG status: the list should include for each QTG test available, the date of run during the past year, anycomment, and the status of the tests; and(13) results of scheduled internal audits and additional quality inspections (if any) since last evaluation and asummary of actions taken.Other operators and Regulatory, please comment.Value of Resolution: Provide Information, Reduce Workload (Maintenance or Operation)

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 12******12-045******PRODUCT SUPPORTItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUserTTSL C2000X Erratic HeartBeatL3/Thales ASABased on the show of hands at the last FSEMC, it is obvious that the Erratic Heart beat problem that ASAexperiences is not an isolated issue and is not common to an aircraft type, but rather to some of the C2000Xproducts/devices.Does L3 (TTSL) intend to work with the customers that have this problem to allow it to be resolved at a customercost neutral position?L3/Thales comments, please.ItemNo.SubsystemNameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser23 OverheadPanelLamp 387 All B737 All CSATrainingCenterHas anybody practical experience with replacement of Lamp 387 with LED based bulbs, especially with the respectof color difference and bright/dim mode?Other user and CAE comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)

PRODUCT SUPPORTReference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 13ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser24 SimulationDocumentationAll FDXSimulator Documentation- Impact on Maintainability in the Long Term,- Cost of Documentation, and- Issues related to the device manufacturer, and the aircraft manufacturer.Description:1. Requirement for adequate documentation to maintain the simulator device over a 20 year period.Hardware documents may include:- Equipment schematics electrical, mechanical, firmware, software,- Equipment wiring drawings, from the high level schematics.Software and Firmware documents may include Software design schematic information,- Descriptions of the algorithms based on the high level diagrams.- Traceability from the High level diagrams, to algorithms, to actual implemented code.Completeness of Documentation.- What is adequate or necessary documentation?- What is complete documentation?2. Cost of the Documentation as related to the Acquisition price, versus ongoing costs of not havingadequate documentation.Cost of not having adequate information (documentation) to maintain this very expensive device over along period while specific components become obsolete, etc.- Typically the cost of simulator device documentation is built into the acquisition cost.- Is it an issue of cost?- What are the real costs (amortized over a number of devices) for a/c type, or class of devices inthe case of simulator specific components – such as I/O, IOS, Control Loading, Motion system,etc.- Is the cost of complete documentation worthwhile?3. Deliverable Documentation.Manufacturer apparent unwillingness or inability to provide complete documentation;- Typical provision of a certain level of documentation tends to be marginal or not adequate.- Is this a function of a need for security of IP? or- Is this a deficiency in design preparations, and or neglect to adequately document what is beingprovided to the customer?- How can we obtain necessary documentation, and protect manufacturer I/P.?Users and manufactures comments please.

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 14PRODUCT SUPPORTItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser25 Last Time Buys All All All All JALA simulator manufacture sometimes informs a “Last Buy” parts, but we have never heard any alternate solutions.For example, one manufacture informed us “Last Buy” for a power supply unit of image generator. JAL purchased10 units at that time, and now we have no spares. We are waiting for any alternate parts information from amanufacture, but nothing heard. We have to find out solutions by ourselves. (We have found it already!)A recent designed IG or Host computer is composed of piece of PC parts. Its production life is usually very shortperiod. Ethernet card may be replaced with any other products, but we may choose a graphic card carefully.“Last Buy” problem may relate with how manufacture designs their products considering short production life andconsidering PC standard design.Manufacturers comment, please.Value of Resolution: Resolve Obsolescence ProblemsItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser26 Turn-Around-Time All All All All JALA Turn-Around-Time (TAT) for SIM parts repair seems to take a longer time compared with TAT for real aircraftparts.In our experience, TAT for A/C parts is around 2-3 weeks and SIM parts TAT is more than 6 months in the worstcase.For example, there is a part whose failure rate is 4 times/year. If repair TAT is less than 3 months, we may haveonly 1 unit as our spare part. But if TAT is more than 6 months, we have to have 2 units. This means if TAT islonger, we need more spare parts.Recommended Spare Parts List (RSPL) provides only quantity information which an operator should have. SIMmanufacture may calculate how many quantities should operator have based on TAT and MTBF, etc. Can SIMmanufacture show average of TAT in your RSPL?Can SIM manufacturers reduce TAT more?Other user and manufacturer comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)

PRODUCT SUPPORTReference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 15ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser27 Reliability Al All 2008 B747-400 NCAThe reliability of the serviceable part is sometimes very low. In the case of PC work station (P/N 39939001) it tookabout 18 months to fix the problem. And for this period this work station was transported 4 times to and from CAE.The failure was found very quickly at the each receiving test. We strongly request that CAE should check theOEM units in detail before shipping. Otherwise, we consume unnecessary transport costs.In another case, when we use repaired EMA, we found that the oil in actuator was very dirty, so we had to replacethe oil before starting the training use.Did CAE send us this actuator as serviceable unit?CAE comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce Workload (Maintenance or Operation)ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser28 IDS JCC 13” High SpeedX Window Terminal277177-07-2-330 CAE 1996 CRJ-200 LFTJCC – JapanComputerCorporation2002In our CRJ simulators there are movable 13” touch-screen LCD units installed. This third IOS improves theoperation in the cockpit.The CAE replacement is a 17” touch screen LCD, but the size of this display is too large.We are looking for a replacement on the commercial market or for repair facility for this unit.If someone has the same problem and has found a solution for a replacement, please let us know.Other user, CAE, and JCC comments, please.Value of Resolution: Resolve Obsolescence Problems

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 16PRODUCT SUPPORTItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser29 Power Cabinet Programmable LogicController, FullyProgrammedTHPCY003RB L3 2004 B747-400LFTThe PLC (Programmable Logic Controller) controls the electrical power of the Multipulse power cabinet. Aninoperative controller has been sent to L3 for repair. According to L3 this unit is uneconomical to repair. Analternative solution has not been offered.Other User and L3 comments, please.Value of Resolution: Resolve Obsolescence Problems

TOOLS AND TEST EQUIPMENTReference 13-105/FSG-193 - Page 17ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser30 Simulator DFDR All AirbusWhen supporting TDMs on some issues, we often need information recorded in the FSTD at the moment whenthe issue occurred, leading to specific recording requests. It causes iterations, delay, or sometimes data is notavailable from FSTD.Would it be possible to implement a kind of “Simulation Flight Data Recorder” that would record relevantparameters during Simulations? The duration of the record may be limited to a few minutes, enough totroubleshoot any issue.End users and TDMs comment, please.Value of Resolution: Improve Performance, Provide InformationItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser31 FSGC Rehost FFS CAE 2007 A320 SATIPT 2013 A330A340Loading and validation of the FMS navigation data (ARINC 424) to the FMGC Rehost on CAE devices (FFS andIPT) is over complicated and extremely long, especially for multiple configurations – FMGC suppliers, enginetypes, aircraft and customers. Descriptions of experiences from other operators and suggestions for optimizationfrom the manufacturers would be welcome.Other manufacturer and CAE comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce Workload (Maintenance or Operation)

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 - Page 18TOOLS AND TEST EQUIPMENTItemNo.Subsystem Name Component Part No.(Sim Mfr & Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser32 ODL File 35181-MA002RTF.01 CAE 2005 A330 AirbusA340General remark about ODL file:When several snags are raised (mainly after a standard update), some of them require to change options in theODL file that are not visible to the user. When a snag is on offer we have no possibility to know where the rightODL file is, which requires that we accept one snag on offer, and that we attach the new ODL file to other snagsand reopen these snags.The version of file should be displayed when the option tool is launched in order to be able to check if release(and customer) is correct.All the flags that were changed due to a snag correction should be set to visible. The tool should also allow theuser to compare two ODL files, even the labels that are not visibleDoes this tool exist at CAE?CAE comments, please.Value of Resolution: Improve Performance, Reduce Workload (Maintenance or Operation)ItemNo.Subsystem Name Component Part No.(Sim Mfr & Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser33 DB Manager 35181-MA002RTF.01 CAE 2005 A330 AirbusA340DB manager should be able to update DMC and ATSU software by downloading menu. The menu is present butnot functioning. It is therefore not possible for training center to update real box without sending it to factory, whichincreases the cost and delay of standard update.Is this possibility used by other companies?Is CAE tool now corrected?Other user and CAE comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/Downtime, Reduce Workload (Maintenance or Operation)

TOOLS AND TEST EQUIPMENTReference 13-105/FSG-193 - Page 19ItemNo.Subsystem Name Component Part No.(Sim Mfr & Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser34 DB Manager 35181-MA002RTF.01 CAE 2005 A330 AirbusA340When multiple configurations are present on site, monthly update of the FM Nav database takes a long time.In Airbus’s case: 33 configurations (16 Honeywell and 17 Thales), using possibility when FM configuration file(AMI, OPC…) present into different version, packages have been created permitting to reduce the number ofvalidations on IOS to 6 for Honeywell and 14 for Thales.The FM Nav database is common for all configurations, so only one validation per FM should be necessary.We would like to reduce risk of rehost DB configuration’s corruption following drag and drop error, requiringchanging disk to back up disk and recover normal operation.Are other companies having the same problem?Is CAE having project to improve this tool?Other user and CAE comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce Workload (Maintenance or Operation), Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 20HOST COMPUTER AND PERIPHERALSItemNo.Subsystem Name Component Part No.(Sim Mfr & Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser35 Field Bus Support FIBICU 91787481 L3 2003 B737NG ASA(PCI Version)In an effort to build its own C2000X Host to cover obsoletes of the present industrial P.C ASA has discovered thefollowing issues. If an early version of the TTSL (L3) PCI FIBUCU (Sn13) is fitted with the later assy (Sn400) itfails to work. It causes the host to constantly reboot. If a later board is fitted all functions correctly. This problemonly occurs when more than 1 FIBICU is placed on the same buss at a time (We have 3 with the host).

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 21HOST COMPUTER AND PERIPHERALSHave any other users experienced the same issues?Other user and L3 comments, please.Value of Resolution: Provide Information

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 22HOST COMPUTER AND PERIPHERALSItemNo.Subsystem Name Component Part No.(Sim Mfr & Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser36 Host Computer Spare Time L3 ANAWe occasionally experience the overrun of task processing for lack of spare time. At the time of simulatorintroduction, we secure 40% of spare real-time processing capacity, but this problem occurs while we repeatupdate.At the time of introduction, how much should we secure the spare real-time processing capacity?By changing the task schedule management, is there experience to avoid the overrun?Is there any experience that you have added the additional processors such as RACE card for load balancing onL-3 device?How much is the cost?Is it possible by user?Other operator and vendor comments, please.Value of Resolution: Provide InformationItemNo.Subsystem Name Component Part No.(Sim Mfr & Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser37 Operating System Diagnostics All LFTDiagnostic on Windows based computers.We like to see improved diagnostics for Windows based platform: at the moment there is no efficient way totroubleshoot industrial components or communication protocols like Ethernet, 1394, USB…This is definitely required to reduce downtime during troubleshooting.Other user and vendor comments, please.Value of Resolution: Resolve Obsolescence Problems

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 23HOST COMPUTER AND PERIPHERALSItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser38 Flat Panel Trainer(IPT)IOS Touch ProblemSimulated TouchScreen PanelsCAE 2011 A320 LFTEMBOn our IPTs (Integrated Procedure Trainer) we are facing the problem that quite frequently the touch function ofthe monitors does not work/is lost/freezes.A reset of the USB connection is necessary to solve the problem. We already checked or exchanged the Powermanagement of the USB Ports, the USB Hub and the screens itself.This is an intermittent problem and is not reproducible.Other user and CAE comments, please.Value of Resolution: Resolve Obsolescence Problems.

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 24******12-056******INSTRUCTOR STATIONItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUserIOS Electric wire CAE 1998 B747-400 KALL3 1999 A330CAE 2003 B737-900The electric wires connected to seats are easily damaged (chafing, cut) while moving the seats. These wires are foran instructor monitor or electrical seat controls. The seats are equipped with Instructor monitor on its arm rest, andthe wires are laid around the seat rail. When we move the seat, the wires can be stuck in rail. Not only instructorseats but also pilot seats also have wires around its rail that have the same problem. These wires are for theelectrical seat control.Do other operators have similar experience?Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/DowntimeItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser39 Instructor Seat R7 L3-com 2010 A320 AirbusDue to recurrent failures on the seat locking system and possible consequence on safety for our users, we haveblocked the IOS seats in a middle position in all Airbus training centers.Other operators’ experiences?Value of Resolution: Improve Performance, Provide InformationItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser40 ConfigurationPreparationR7 L3 2010 A320 AirbusIOS use during simulator configuration preparation:As per simulator procedures, Instructor Operating Station inside the simulator has to be used to produce newconfigurations or to alter an existing one for specific customer requirement. Simulator time slots availability is nowdramatically reduced for such technical use. Thus customer requests are often issued as a “last minute request”when taking into account the current training scheduling. Is there a way to perform all the required actions off-lineduring a training session?• Do other companies have the same problem?• Does L3 have projects to improve this?Other user, L3 comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/Downtime, Possibly Prevent Downtime, Improve Performance,Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)

INSTRUCTOR STATIONReference 13-105/FSG-193 - Page 25ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser41 IOS All JALIf the page composition (layout) of IOS screen is standardized, the work load of the instructor might be reducedmore.IOS page composition varies depending on the difference in the vendor or generation of simulator, and it influenceswork load of the instructor. By standardizing the frequently-used IOS page composition (e.g., ENV, A/C Set, Vis Set,etc.) it is expected to become easy to use.In late years, opportunities using the simulator in the vendor training school or the other companies are increasing.With this, opportunities to operate an unspecified IOS are also increasing. Use of Lesson Plan is considered asmeasures, but it is not so realistic to incorporate own Lesson profile in other companies’ simulators.Other user and vendor comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce Workload (Maintenance or Operation)ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser42 IOS Limit SW MA425270.01.2.845 CAE 2008 B747-400 NCAAbout the risk of the IOS cover falling, CAE has issued a FSB, 2011 31 October FSB SIM-474-HWE.The later measure has not been sent.CAE comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/DowntimeItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser43 IOS Touch Screen CAE 2012 B777-300 AAL2013 A320Are other users experiencing frequent drift of touch screen calibration has anyone found a permanent solution?Other user and CAE comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/Downtime

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 26INSTRUCTOR STATIONItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser44 IOS NEC multisync LCD 175 M CAE 2012 B737 AAL2013 B777A320Are other users’ facing IOS monitor power switch breaking prematurely?Other user and CAE comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)

SUPPORT INFRASTRUCTUREReference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 27******12-057******ItemNo.SubsystemNameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr & Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUserBDS Computer IBM IntelliStation Z CAE 2003 A330 EVAPro and ATI 9800 VGACARD MD-11B747B777The Brief/Debrief (BDS) system frozen and model empty display all the time. Is there any way to fix this problem?Other Operator and CAE comments, please.Value of Resolution: Improve PerformanceItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser45 NetworkAdministrationR7 L3 2010 A320 AirbusL3-com maintenance/service network on simulator:L3-com is using perfectly functional protocols on LAN within one plant, but which appear very difficult to setup anduse with geographically distributed simulators. File system sharing over network, trust domains, etc. as used on LANappear not efficient and more than difficult to use over private company WAN. In our case, the company network ispresent between some identical simulators and our main central development station. All this in two training centersdistributed over two continents on two independent LANs linked with private company WAN. The “link” cannot beeasily established due to WAN routers, security constraints, etc. as we have no way to adjust those WAN settingswhich are tightly controlled by IT department and by the company security department. The company policy alsoexcludes the use of external data link, modem, etc. We are not able to properly maintain identical softwareconfiguration except by performing all patches manually on each simulators group and maintaining two separate andidentical configuration management databases.• Do other companies have the same problem?• Does L3 have projects to improve remote synchronization function of the simulators?Other user and L3 comments, please.Value of Resolution: Improve Performance, Reduce Workload (Maintenance or Operation), Reduce Costs(Acquisition or Operation)

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 28SUPPORT INFRASTRUCTUREItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr& Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFrom User46 Motion Design Motion Actuators EMM60 All 2013 B737NG ASAAs the design of the motion systems changes, they move away from hydraulics towards electric or hybridhydraulic systems. These fundamental design changes are made with no option to keep the original hydraulicsystem. Do the manufactures take into account what the cost is to the customer in modifying its building toaccommodate this type of new configuration?Can we not come up with a design standard for the motion foot print and stroke length based on a 6 axis system(Electric/Hydraulic)? This would keep the installation costs and design changes far lower than they are at presentwhen changing from one manufacture to another or from one vintage to another.

SUPPORT INFRASTRUCTUREReference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 29Users, TDM, and Motion Manufacturers comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 30OTHER TRAINING DEVICESItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser47 Computers/HostComputerComputer Any FDXHave any other users used Virtual Machines as part of their training device or equipment? What has been yourexperience in using this type of architecture?Other user comments, please.Value of Resolution: Resolve Obsolescence ProblemsItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser48 Flat Panel Trainer FMC-OPS Simfinity CAE 2008 B747-400 NCAEIU-OPSB747-8FIDU-OPSWhen the FMC-OPS (EIU-OPS, IDU-OPS) update in actual aircraft, we have to update FMC-OPS (EIU-OPS,IDU-OPS) in our flat panel trainer. But CAE only can update the FMC-OPS (EIU-OPS, IDU-OPS) in our flat paneltrainer.We would like the capability to do the update ourselves.Users and CAE comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 31MISCELLANEOUS - FLIGHT SIMULATOR SYSTEMSItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser49 Simulator Parts Any Any Any Any Any JALDoes anyone use 3D printer to make any simulator parts?When JAL quoted some small piece of parts, a supplier usually showed us a minimum order quantity. Thequantity JAL needed was just one or two, but to buy it, JAL had to order 50 or more. Nowadays, we can buy a 3Dprinter for a reasonable price. Instead of purchasing each part from the supplier, we can fabricate them byourselves quickly.Other user and vendor comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser50 FSEMC WebsiteParts WantedJALDoes someone have experiences of purchasing or selling any SIM parts through “Simulator PartsAvailable/Simulator Parts Wanted” on the FSEMC website?Can FSEMC steering committee show us how many trades have been done?How many operators know this page?Other operator and vendor comments, please.Value of Resolution: Resolve Obsolescence ProblemsItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser51 Minimum Order All All JALCan we purchase a small quantity of parts? Usually a supplier sets up minimum order quantity or minimum ordercharge. Since there is such restriction, we have to order 100 pieces even if we need just one piece of part whichprice is 1 dollar. If its consumption rate is 100 pieces per a year, maybe we can agree to purchase 100 pieces.But usually its consumption rate is 10 pieces per a year, so that we will keep many of them for couple of years asour dead stock.Supplier comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 - Page 32MISCELLANEOUS - FLIGHT SIMULATOR SYSTEMSItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser52 Maintaining FSTDs All All JALJAL would ask all attendants the following questions.1. Who maintains your FFS?A. You have your own maintenance section.B. You use any other maintenance company.2. How many hours do you spend as a maintenance time per day?A. Below 1 hourB. 1 hour or more and less than 3 hoursC. 3 hours or more and less than 5 hoursD. More than 5 hours3. If you have your experiences of outsourcing your training, do you have any difficulties of using otheroperators’ FSTD?- Bad maintenance condition (Training interruption happened so many times).- Requested time slots are usually occupied, etc. Any comments, please.4. Do you have a standard which makes a judgment whether you buy your own SIM or you borrow it fromsomewhere.If you have your standard, could you share the information with us?Other operator and vendor comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser53 Simulator Structure Entrance Door ALL KLMIn our opinion, the entrance door of the simulator has to be redesigned. We had some colleagues who are tall andinjured/hurt their head. Also, when you have to change seats it would be nice if the door dimensions are a little bitwider. KLM would prefer a minimum height of 2.10M or 6.9ft.TDMs comments, please.Value of Resolution: Provide Information

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 33MISCELLANEOUS - FLIGHT SIMULATOR SYSTEMSItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser54 Cleaning OxygenMaskOXY Mask MXM 23 EROS B737 All CSATrainingCenterWhat detergent do you use for cleaning OXY masks in Boeing type simulator after being used?When the mask is cleaned with ethyl alcohol, degradation and softening of rubber part occurs during a few weeks.Due to degradation this part has to be changed.Other user comments, please.Value of Resolution: Provide InformationItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser55 Lack of AsianParticipationBoeingWith the increasing sales of aircraft in the Asian and India area, can the FSEMC Committee consider methods ofattracting active members from theses regionsFSEMC Steering Committee Comments please.

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 34******09-074******MOTION AND CONTROL LOADINGItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUserMotion Control MODU L3 2001-2007B777AFRSometimes it is not possible to engage the motion system. We have the following message on the MODU:« Erratic or missing heartbeat: CoSMoS AP 2 ( CAMIO 0 ) ».We refresh the error message on the MODU and afterwards it’s possible to start and engage the motion. Theproblem is present on our three simulators.Do others operators have the same problem?Vendor comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/DowntimeItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser56 Motion Control MODU L3 2002 B777-200 MSRSometimes we receive a message on the MODU "Erratic or missing heartbeat: CoSMoS AP 2 (CAMIO 0)"indicating that the motion is not possible to be engaged unless pressing on the refresh icon associated with themessage on the MODU. In some cases, the host computer needs to be shut down and restarted, which takesaround 40 minutes every time.This issue was negotiated and repeated during the last 3 FSEMCs with no significant action taken.L3 comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/Downtime

MOTION AND CONTROL LOADINGReference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 35ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser57 Moog EMM Moog EMM Moog Since2010CAELFTCAE/Moog: Time required for the repair for items under warranty:LFT’s recent experience with two defective Return to Home Controller or defective actuator is not satisfactory forus. The supply, repair, and replenishment of an AOG item should be done within a few days (Moog and/or CAEcould also hold spares for replenishment for their customers).In our case after 5 weeks we are still waiting for the repaired part. This is risky because it is an item still underwarranty and we have not received a spare part yet.Does CAE/Moog differentiate AOG (and other) repairs depending if the items are under warranty or not?Is there any solution which Moog can provide?CAE/Moog comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/Downtime, Possibly Prevent Downtime, Reduce Workload(Maintenance or Operation), Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)******12-063******ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUserElectric Motion Return to Home Switch CA11092-003 CAE 2009 B737NG AALZZCA11092-003 MOOGAmerican Airlines would like to know if other operators have had trouble with the Return to Home switch units.Other Operator comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/Downtime******12-067******ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUserElectric Motion Motion Cabinet EMM Model 127-320A CAE 2009 B737NG AALMOOGAmerican Airlines would like to know if other operators of the Moog Electrical Motion systems have to reset themotion system several times a week.Other operator comments?Value Resolution: Possibly Prevent Downtime

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 36MOTION AND CONTROL LOADINGItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser58 Motion Design Motion Actuators EMM60 CAE 2013 N737NG ASAMoogAre CAE/Moog conducting any further investigations to determine the source of the oil discoloration within theEMM60 actuators?Is there a chemical reaction between the oil additive package and the bearing?A reaction with a corrosion inhibitor used inside the bearing housing?A reaction with the sealing paint used inside the bearing housing?Are there cleanliness issues with the bearing housing during manufacturer or during operation?Would varying the oil level help? Would small changes in viscosity help? Are there bearing rings or othercomponents that should be nonmetallic?1. Comments so far have been to change the oil every 6000 – 8000hrs(CAE)2. It is just an oil bath system(Moog)Have any end users or CAE/Moog conducted any oil analysis on the EMM60 actuator oil?Other user and CAE/Moog comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/Downtime, Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)

MOTION AND CONTROL LOADINGReference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 37ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser59 Flight Motion Effects Motion Cues C2000 L3 1999 N737NG ASAC2000X 2003ASA has building a new ESIG-3800 Seattle visual model based on non-flat earth which utilizing a sloped runways.During testing and integration it exposed a “double” touchdown thump upon landing on our C2000X device. Thisdouble touchdown thump was not readily discernible on our other device (C2000) even though running the sameSeattle visual model on ESIG-3800’s. Upon investigation we discovered:• This “double” touchdown thump was not unique to the recently modified Seattle visual model. Any airportwith a sloped runway appears to have the same issue.• The problem can be seen by plotting main gear strut deflection. Reference the C2000X plots. The firstshows GHRSDEFL(2) while landing on a flat runway, the next while landing on a downward slopingrunway, and the third while landing on a upward sloping runway.• While the problem is not really discernible to the crews on our C2000 device, it is evident using parameterplot. Reference the C2000 plots. This suggests the C2000X machine may have a motion system tunedrelatively taut or firm, while the C2000 machine’s motion system is more yielding or relaxed, yet bothdevices motion system QTG’s meet requirements.• The problem remains with the visual system completely unloaded, indicating this is a slopedrunway/motion issue and not a visual issue.Early indications (yet to be proven as of this writing) suggest the plots of main gear strut deflection GHRSDEFL(2)may be reflecting the fact that the total strut and tire compression rate term RAYSRATE(K) does not appear totake into consideration runway slope.Our question is:How can we see the effects of this “double” touchdown thump in main gear strut deflection on parameter plot onboth devices, have motion system QTGs that are passing, yet have such a remarkable difference in the motioncue’s presented to the pilot?L3 comments, please.

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 38MOTION AND CONTROL LOADINGValue of Resolution: Provide Information

MOTION AND CONTROL LOADINGReference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 39ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser60 Motion Actuator EMA 880-020 CAE KLMMoogIn cooperation with FSC and KLM we modified our electric motion actuators. Every year or 8760 hours we changeour motor oil, when you follow the Electric motion actuator (EMA) motor oil replacement procedure it couldpossible that when you remove the oil fill plug that oil blows out of the EMA. This can result in serious incidentsand long-term health problems. After several oil changes we decided to replace the oil drain plug for drain plugswith an inside check valve. This results in a safer and faster (up to 50%) oil replacement.CAE/Moog comments, please.Value of Resolution: Provide InformationItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser61 Control Loading Electrical Load Unit 61221169AA00 L3 2008 A330-200 KLMIn the past we had a lot of different problems with our Digital Servo Amplifiers p/n 61221169AA00 s/n 77XX. Thiswas independent of the position (Rudder, Toe Brake L/R). Since we have exchange the Digital Servo Amplifiersp/n 61221169AA00 by s/n 8XXX, no problems observed untill now.Are there other users who have/had problems with this type of Digital Servo Amplifiers especially with s/n 77XX?Other user and L3 comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/DowntimeItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser62 Hydraulic System Filters All L3 KLMCAEOn all our simulators with hydraulic motion and control loading we use PALL filter elements. These PALL filtersare recommended by our simulator vendors (L3 and CAE). Our supplier of these PALL filter elements advised usto use their own generic brand filters. We expect a cost reduction of 50%, on yearly basis.Are there users that replace the original pall filters for other unbranded or cheaper filter elements?Other user and L3/CAE comments, please.Value of Resolution: Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 40MOTION AND CONTROL LOADINGItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser63 Motion Motion Actuator CAE 2008 B747-400 NCAMoogMotion shutdown occurred 3 times by Feedback error. This problem occurred on EMA S/N 700, 751 and 286. S/N286 the encoder position reading was 0. CAE recommended that encoder cable disconnect and connect while thecontrol head is still powered.This recommendation has been done for 3 times then the encoder data reading became normal. S/N 700 encoderposition reading was unstable (ex., Encoder Offset: 99950840, 99987944, 100078463 and more); S/N 751 hadsimilar unstable tendency. This actuator was bought as a spare and worked only for one day.Other operators had same experience?CAE and MOOG comment please why did the encoder became normal by CAE recommendation and what ishappening with the unstable encoder.Other operator and CAE/Moog comments, please.Value of Resolution: Provide InformationItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser64 Motion Hydraulic Pump L-3 L-3 2000 A320 CSATrainingCenterPVV14220R2M30 ParkerHPU of L-3, A320 FFS uses hydraulic pump Parker type PVV142, which is obsolete. Does anybody knowcompatible replacement?L3 and Parker comments, please.Value of Resolution: Resolve Obsolescence Problems

MOTION AND CONTROL LOADINGReference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 41ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser65 Motion Motion Jacks EMM 60 CAE 2009 LFTMoogWe suffer from mechanical abrasion marks at motion jacks – see photo. We are told this issue was unique to us.Do other operators make the same observations?What do you do? Do you have concerns?Other operators and CAE/Moog comments, please.Value of Resolution: Possibly Prevent Downtime

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 42MOTION AND CONTROL LOADINGItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser66 Motion EM2K L3 2010 A380 LFTMotion Grumbling L3 EM2K MotionOn one of our EM2K motion systems we have the problem that when reengaging the motion after a longer break(more than 10h), the motion system starts grumbling.It cannot be observed on other EM2K systems on other FFS.This grumbling disappears by itself after a few minutes or movements by the motion platform. This happens veryinfrequently and is not reproducible.Has anybody noticed the same behavior?Other user and L3 comments, please.Value of Resolution: Provide InformationItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser67 Motion Mechanical Parts Any Any All All JALSimulator motion system sustains static and dynamic heavy loads. Especially, some of the parts (e.g., clevis pins)are subjected to cyclic loadings for a long time.Is there any user performing the non-destructive inspection (NDI) of these parts?Does any user have experience of finding the defect by NDI?User and vendor comments, please.Value of Resolution: Provide Information

MOTION AND CONTROL LOADINGReference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 43ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser68 Moog EMM & CAE DBUControl LoadingMoog Control PC CAE Since2010CAE MCLPC MoogLFTTechnical Interface between CAE-System and MOOG-EMM:LFT observes a potential for design improvement with respect to indications and analysis of failures of MOOGEMMs on CAE FFS:2 examples:1. After emergency power off (EPO) or loss of power (without any defective hardware) no clear failureindication of the location of the problem exists, but the system fails and several resets/reboots/powercycles of the whole system might “solve” the problem for this time through this reset.2. Breakdowns of communication with Fire-Wire-Network (IEE 1394) between CAE-MCLPC and MOOG-PC?Are there plans to improve the capabilities of the tools to better assist the end users?CAE/Moog comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/Downtime, Possibly Prevent Downtime, Reduce Workload(Maintenance or Operation), Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser69 Moog EMM Moog EMM Moog Since2010CAELFTThe working together of CAE and Moog in the cause analysis, rework, or clarification of AOG cases in EMMrelated items needs improvement.Moog response to our technical queries always suggests contacting CAE.Example: In AOG cases, without any defective part found, LFT observes, that random resets/reboots/powercycles/cycles of PC driver with hardware manager might “solve” the AOG just for this moment. Then the AOG atCAE and Moog is closed and no further analysis from Moog/CAE is started.We are missing final feedback from the problem analysis to prevent such problems in the future in our opinion.Who has similar experience on EMM-System with CAE and/or Moog?Other user and CAE/Moog comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/Downtime, Possibly Prevent Downtime, Reduce Workload(Maintenance or Operation), Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 44MOTION AND CONTROL LOADINGItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser70 Motion System Service Loop Fault CAE 2009-2013MoogVariousAALDo other operators experience disruption in Training when crews inadvertently open cab door before motion isfully settled? This presently causes SM1 fault which has to be reset by Technician. We request CAE/MOOG tochange it to SM2 fault which is resettable by Instructor.Other operators and CAE/Moog comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/DowntimeItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser71 Motion Guard Lock Safety DoorSwitchPS325847085241 CAE 2011 B737 AALD4NL-4GDA-B4S 2012Have other operators of CAE 7000 series simulators experiencing failure of the gate locking mechanism?Other operator and CAE comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/DowntimeItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser72 Stab Trim ActuatorBugCAE PS301824015626 CAE 1998-2001MFG 20/44-B. 125-DCGB737-800 AALAre other operators of CAE 737, Super C-bus vintage, simulators experiencing failure of the Stab Trim Bugactuator? AA has had failures of this device. It has long lead time to repair.Other operator and CAE comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/Downtime

MOTION AND CONTROL LOADINGReference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 45ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser73 Encoder Moog Leg Model #880 CAE 2012 B777-300 AALMoogWhat is the MTBF of the motion encoder used in the MOOG motion leg? If and when this encoder fails the wholeleg has to be sent to MOOG for encoder replacement.CAE/Moog comments, please.Value of Resolution: Provide Information

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 46AVIONICS******12-073******ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUserFlight Display Display Unit CAE 1998 B747-400 KALWe have been operating B747-400 FFS since 1998. The last few years, we have sent Display Units to berepaired for several times. But after we received the DU repaired from CAE, then we installed it on the simulator.The DU still had the defect like blinking, discolored, blank out. Sometimes it showed the problem that is exactlythe same as it had before sending it for repair. So, the reliability of the DU has been decreasing.If other operators have the similar experience, have other operators updated the DU from CRT to LCD orcontacted another repair center?Other operators and manufacturer and repair center comment, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/DowntimeItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser74 Mag Var Honeywell FSEMCA 2011 LFT question referred to updating the Magnetic variation data file.Once the Magnetic Variation data file was updated further magvar issues were noted that were derived from theFMC.The 2001 Pegasus has an old magvar table embedded. Is there a way to update or correlate the table?Other operator and vendor comments, please.The below text is background informationPeg09 v Peg01It appears that the 2009 Pegasus has a 2005 magvar table built in. We find that a customer navdb has magvardata that is current. This shows up on the pilots displays as a small error. On the older Peg01 the error issufficient to cause headings to be out of tolerance for RNAV routes.It won’t be long before the PEG09 data will be out of tolerance for airports with large magvar. Is there a solutionfor Pegasus 2009?Operators NavDBSome operators have the magvar data for airport facilities encoded in different ways (some airport data has magvar associated with it and some do not). This means that some operators see errors and others do not. Thisseems to depend upon the supplier of navDB.Similarly some beacons can be in different places depending upon supplier. Have others noted this and is there asolution (is the format of the data ‘standard’)?

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 47AVIONICS******12-080******ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUserARINC 610FunctionalityAll B737Max AALWill Boeing confirm that FMCs for 737 MAX categories of aircraft will have ARINC 610 functionality?Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/DowntimeItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(SimMfr & Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor Name Year of Mfr Aircraft Type FromUser75 EFB Various Any Any Any LFTWhich approaches have been found by operators to support multi-customer configuration loads for EFB?Which type of EFB supports multi loads?Other operator and vendor comments, please.ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(SimMfr & Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear ofMfrAircraft TypeFromUser76 Nav Data Honeywell CAE 2005 Embraer ERJ-145 SATLoading of the FMS navigation data (ARINC 424) onto original aircraft hardware using traditional media (floppydiscs) is time consuming and prone to failure. Third party solutions are restricted by proprietary data formats andprotocols. Are there any cost effective alternatives to improve overall reliability and increase data transfer speed?Example: Embraer 145 simulator with Honeywell FMS.Other user, vendor, and Honeywell, please comment.Value of Resolution: Reduce Workload (Maintenance or Operation)

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 48AVIONICSItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(SimMfr & Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear ofMfrAircraft TypeFromUser77 TCAS 7.1 FDXOur aircraft will be updated to TCAS 7.1 in the near future. We have started exploring how we will update thecurrent TCAS 7.0 simulation to the 7.1 standard. We contacted our aircraft TCAS supplier and requested the dataneeded to update the simulation. Their response was firstly, they only intended to deal with the simulatormanufacturers and suggested that we contact our sim manufacturers and request quotes from them. Secondly,the license fees they quoted to us were pretty hefty, especially when added up for each device in our fleet. TCAS7.0 and 7.1 are both based on public available requirements documents.The FAA has produced a TCAS II V7.1 Intro booklet that is a very good source of information. The pdf copy of thisis publicly available. The bibliography lists the various standards and reference material available for TCAS 7.1.Many simulator manufacturers do not code TCAS according to data provided by a vendor. It is coded to therequirements listed in the reference documents.Have any other users or operators coded TCAS 7.1 using only the publicly available documents yet? Have theyrun into any particular issues? Would they be willing to share their TCAS 7.1 coding?http://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/TCAS%20II%20V7.1%20Intro%20booklet.pdfhttp://www.eurocontrol.int/sites/default/files/content/documents/nm/safety/ACAS/safety-booklet-introduction-tcasversion-7.1-20110228.pdfOther user and vendor comments, please.ItemNo.SubsystemNameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser78 FMS NGFMS Any B474-400 LFTWhat are Honeywell’s plans to support the simulator users and manufacturers with respect to the new NGFMSdevelopment for the 747-400 on FSTDs?Honeywell comments, please.Value of Resolution: Provide Information, Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 49AVIONICSItemNo.Subsystem Name Component Part No.(Sim Mfr & Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser79 ATA 34-61 FMC FMC Std 1.3 L2 CAE A380 FFS 2007 A380 QFAQantas has experienced instability with the FMC in its CAE manufactured A380 Simulator since it was originallycommissioned at Std 1.1 in December 2007. In February 2013 the Simulator was upgraded to Std 1.3 (L2) andalthough the FMC performance has improved we continue to experience disruptions due to this issue. “FMCInstability” can be best described as multiple resynchronisations occurring and loss of Map data on the ND, or theFMC’s freezing completely. This then requires resetting the FMC by selecting FMC 2 on the FMS Source Selector cycling all three FMC reset switches on the Overhead panel. If these actions are unsuccessful, an FMC reloadfrom the Host is required. Previously fixes were promised in both Stds 1.1 & 1.3.Will vendors provide a fix at Std 1.3 and in what time frame will this fix be available?Vendor comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/Downtime

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 50VISUALItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser80 Enhanced Generic Tropos 6000 CAE SATDAFIF data ceased to be published in the public domain in 2006. Since that time, no reliable and comparablesource of aeronautical data has become available as a suitable replacement. However, for the efficient generationof accurate generic visual databases, up-to-date source data is crucial. What progress is being made in theindustry to address this data void?Other user and vendor comments, please.Value of Resolution: Improve Performance.ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser81 LCoS Projectors Operation VS2000 / VW50 Any LFTSuppliers promised LCoS lifetime of 5 years. The lifetime operators experienced is about 2 ½ to 3 years.Storing LCoS Projectors decreases LCoS Panel Lifetime. LFT experienced with a VS2000 Projector that wasstored for 3 years and which is now running with new lamps for 6 Month (1700 hrs) that is only had 6, 8 ftLambert. After about another 400 hrs run time it drops down below 6 ft.Do other operators have same experience?Do suppliers think about new technology?Other operator and supplier comments, please.Value of Resolution: Provide Information, Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser82 LCoS Projector EP8000 Rockwell Collins 2010 A320 AirbusAs per manufacturers, LCoS projectors need to be refurbished every 20000 hours. The cost of bulbs andrefurbish make the maintenance cost nearly equivalent to that of CRT projectors.Other operators experience on these projectors or other types of projectors.Other operator and Rockwell Collins comments, please.Value of Resolution: Provide Information

Reference 13-105FSG-193 – Page 51VISUALItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser83 Visual IG 230113-163XX ESIG 3800 Rockwell Collins 2003 B737NG ASAMacro Polly Bin (MPB)ASA has experienced a high volume of MPB card failures in its ESIG 3800 Image Generators (IGs) over the last 2years. These boards when failed cause GP and DP timeouts within the channel. They have been hard to trackdown as the diagnostics have not highlighted any failures. We have sent back 3 boards to Rockwell Collins. Onehas been fixed by replacing a memory chip; the other two, however, are NFF, although they still cause timeoutswithin the IG.Have any other users had the same issues?Other user and Rockwell Collins/E&S comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/Downtime

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 52VISUALItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser84 Projector Chafing Deflection Amp ESCP 2000 Rockwell Collins 1999 B737NG ASAAs the ESCP projectors age and the deflection amps are moved based on previous maintenance and repair. Wehave noticed that the Deflection Amp wiring loom is prone to chafing. This has caused in some cases preampsignal issues.Have any other users experienced the same issues?Other user and Rockwell Collins/E&S comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/Downtime

Reference 13-105FSG-193 – Page 53VISUALItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser85 LCoS Projector EP8000 Rockwell Collins 2010 A320 AirbusSince entry into service of VS2200, the visual intensity was always found slightly out of tolerance with a new bulb.After 300 to 400 hours of use, the intensity does not comply with regulation requirements even if we have nocomplaints from users.Additional comment: The requirements for brightness higher than 2 Foot-Lambert are even more important whenusing a HUD.Other operators experience on these projectors or other types of projectors.Other Users and Rockwell Collins comments please.Value of Resolution: Improve Performance, Provide InformationItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser86 Visual LCoSProjectorBulb Hours Counter CAE Tropos 6000 CAE 2011 All AirbusOn the LCoS VPL-GH10 Sony visual projectors used on Tropos 6000 visual, before 1000 hours of life time of abulb, the hours counter must be reset. If not a maintenance message can appear during the training session.Any comment or action to avoid this?CAE comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/Downtime, Possibly Prevent Downtime, Provide InformationItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser87 Visual LCoSProjectorBulbs CAE Tropos 6000 CAE 2011 All AirbusOn the LCoS VPL-GH10 Sony visual projectors used on Tropos 6000 visual, the announced life time of the bulb is1500 hours. Waiting 1500 hours of operation is taking the risk to have a degraded display during the trainingsession.To avoid this, by experience, the bulbs are changed after around 1200 hours of use.Any comments or experiences from users/TDM to improve this?Other user, TDM, and CAE comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/Downtime, Possibly Prevent Downtime, Provide Information

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 54VISUALItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser88 Projector CRT EIS SCN 680Model5042CAE 1998 B777 JALWe have many troubles that center of the CRT phosphor is damaged (burned like a point) in MAXVUE system. Ithappens while we are paying attention not to burn the phosphor at CRT power on/off. It may be caused by failureof the CRT/G2 socket board (turning on the G2 power without deflection signal). However, the board is verysimple (just like an amplifier) so that it might be difficult to think it has any potential to control G2 power withoutthe command from outside.The board is returned from repair as NFF (No Fault Found).Does any other MAXVUE user have this same issue?User or vendor comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/DowntimeItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser89 Image Generator PSU, Boards TROPOS II CAE 1998-2008 B777 JALB737-800We have troubles regarding the Tropos II Visual System.Typical issues are as follows:• Image Generator PSU failure (PSU becomes “Obsolete Parts” and it is unable to find out the same partsin the market).• Visual scene whiteout/stepping due to the Image Generator failure (Hard Disk Drive or Board).We are trying to resolve these issues with cooperation of CAE now.Is there any user experiencing the similar issue? If so, please let us know your Tropos Visual System generationand the rate of failure.We would like to know the other user's situation.Other user and vendor comments, please.Value of Resolution: Prevent Simulator Interruptions/Downtime, Reduce Workload (Maintenance or Operation),Reduce Costs (Acquisition or Operation)

Reference 13-105FSG-193 – Page 55VISUALItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser90 EP-1000CT Operation LFTQuestion to other EP1000 operators: Do you plan to replace with newer EP-8000 IG?If there are technical reasons, what are they?Value of Resolution: Provide Information, Resolve Obsolescence ProblemsItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser91 EP800 vrs EP1000 FDXIs anyone using the EP8000? In what ways is it better than the EP1000?What kind of problems have they seen?Other user and vendor comments, please.ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser92 EP-1000CT Operation LFTAfter RE Power Supply rework we notice more often timeouts and then stops like:• Visual IG timeout BC Node 3 (RE3)• Vertical stripes in all channel (RE3)After a complete reload, the system is running ok.Do other operators have the same experience?Other operator comments, please.Value of Resolution: Improve Performance, Reduce Workload (Maintenance or Operation)ItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/Vendor NameYear of MfrAircraftTypeFromUser93 Refurbished JVC LCOS Projectors FDXWe have refurbished JVC LCOS projectors. We have a problem with the color balancing in the soft edges. Thetechnicians believe that the refurbished units are a downgrade from the originals.What are other users’ experiences with refurbished projectors?Other user comments, please.

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 56VISUALItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser94 Lighting ViewingAnglesRUNWAY LIGHTING VIEW ANGLES IN AIRPORT MODELSAllFDXIssue: Currently produced models have view angles of runway lighting that are narrower than that seen by crews inline ops. Vendor states that some other customers prefer existing, narrow view angles. FedEx modelers have tocorrect those models received by vendor, adding considerable labor costs to new models.In the above example (Cologne, GE), the approach lights are readily visible for both runways, which is correct. Therunway lighting is mostly not visible. In actual experience, both runways would be well-defined by their lighting fromthis angle.Training Effects: Besides being unrealistic, training of circling approaches and non-precision approaches would beaffected. Aircraft alignment is more difficult to determine, and depth perception is lost.

Reference 13-105FSG-193 – Page 57VISUALTypical Surface View of runway in Simulator Model as Received:Note that Threshold Lights (THLs), Runway Edge Lights (RELs), Runway Center Line Lights (CLs) and TouchdownZone Lights (TDZLs) are only partially visible.

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 58VISUALActual Surface View as seen from cockpit of aircraft:Note that all lighting is visible from this angle.In-Pavement Runway Edge Light Fixture L-850 Series

Reference 13-105FSG-193 – Page 59VISUAL• Inside the Yellow angle, at least ½ of the prism is visible, and would appear bright.• Inside the Tan angle, at least some prism is visible, and would be easily visible.• Inside the Grey angle, at least some of the lens is visible, and would appear visible but dimmer than if theprism is visible.The fixture should be visible to an aircraft, at least to some extent, from a wide angle. While the main beam isnarrow, the light should be at least dimly visible until almost abeam the fixture.L850 Series fixtures are all similar, and provide REL, CL, TDZL, and THL lighting.Note: The minimum acceptable beam dimensions are set forth in FAA Advisory Circular AC150/5345-46D (SeeAppendix A). These beam dimensions are not the limits at which the lights are visible to pilots, as seen by thegeometrics of the fixtures themselves.Recommendation: Provide adequate brightness of the fixture at wider angles. The intensity can be reduced fromthe main beam dimensions, but they should be visible. If pixel convergence is an issue, add a range factor thatfurther reduces intensity when necessary.Other users comments, please.

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 60VISUAL

VISUALReference 13-105FSG-193 – Page 61

Reference 13-105/FSG-193 – Page 62INTERFACEItemNo.Subsystem NameComponentPart No.(Sim Mfr &Vendor)Sim Mfr/ VendorNameYear ofMfrAircraftTypeFromUser95 Simulator Modification EGPWS CAE 1988 B747-400 KLMBoeingAt the KLM B747-400 we are installing the EGPWS Peak and Obstacle modification Boeing SB 34-1768. We areaware the pin programming is changed to activate the Peak and also the Obstacle functionality of the EGPWScomputer. We do observe the terrain sweep with obstacle information on the navigation display. However, we aremissing the upper and elevation values on the lower left corner of the navigation display. In more detail theHoneywell Mark V ICD mentions the information is transmitted as ARINC 429 label 011 and 012.We requested Boeing for SCD and ICD data of the ND display and EIU to provide info. The simulators are CAEbuild (1988-1991) and have three EIU’s and six IDU’s all real aircraft hardware.Has any other airline or training center successfully updated a B747-400 with peak and obstacle, including upperand lower elevation on the ND?Any suggestion is appreciated.Other user and CAE/Boeing comments, please.Value of Resolution: Improve Performance

OPERATOR CODESDECODEAAH ALOHA AIR CARGOAAL AMERICAN AIRLINESAAR ASIANA AIRLINESABD AIR ATLANTA ICELANDICABX AIRBORNE EXPRESSACA AIR CANADAADR ADRIA AIRWAYSAEL AIR EUROPEAFR AIR FRANCEAIC AIR INDIAAJM AIR JAMAICAALK AIR LANKAALM ANTILLEAN AIRLINESAMC AIR MALTAAMT ATA AIRLINESAMW AIR MIDWESTAMX AEROVIAS DE MEXICOANA ALL NIPPON AIRWAYSANG AIR NUIGINIANZ AIR NEW ZEALANDAPI AIR PANAMAARG AEROLINEAS ARGENTINASASA ALASKA AIRLINESAUA AUSTRIAN AIRLINESAUH AMIRI FLIGHTAUZ AUSTRALIAN AIRLINESAVA AVIANCAAVE AVENSAAWA AWA, LTDAWI AIR WISCONSINAYC AVIACIONAZA ALITALIABAG DEUTSCHE BABAW BRITISH AIRWAYSBBC BANGLADESH BIMANBHS BAHAMAS AIRBLB AIR BVI, LTDBLC TAM LINHAS AEREASBMA BRITISH MIDLANDSBTA EXPRESSJETBWA BRITISH WEST INDIANBXS SPANTAXCAA ATLANTIC SOUTHEASTCAL CHINA AIRLINESCAY CAYMAN AIRWAYSCCA AIR CHINACDN CANADIAN AIRLINES INT'LCFG CONDOR/CARGOCFP FAUCETT AIRLINESCKT CALEDONIAN AIRWAYS LTD.CLX CARGOLUXCMD COMMAND AIRWAYSCOM COMAIRCPA CATHAY PACIFICCRT CALEDONIANCRZ CRUIZEIRO DO SULCSA CZECH AIRLINESDAL DELTA AIR LINESDLH LUFTHANSADMA MAERSK AIRDOA DOMINICANADTA ANGOLA AIRLINESEEZ EUROFLYEIA EVERGREEN INTL AIRLINESEIN AER LINGUSELY EL AL ISRAEL AIRLINESEME METROETH ETHIOPIAN AIRLINESEVA EVA AIRWAYSEWW EMERY AIRFDXFINFLGGAAGFAGHAGLAGLOGROGUGGYAHALHJAHLFHNAIAAIACIBEICEIRAISSITFIYEJALJASJATJBUJIAJJAJTAJZAKACKALKQAKLMLAALAMLANLAPLAVLCOLDALGLLIALINLLBLOTLRCLTUMAHMASMEAMEPMESMONMPHMRKMSOMSRMSSMXANCANIGNOSNOVOALONEPALPCEPIAFEDERAL EXPRESSFINNAIRPINNACLE AIRLINESBUSINESS EXPRESSGULF AIRGHANA AIRWAYSGREAT LAKES AVIATIONGOL TRANSPORTALLEGRO LINEAS AREASAVIATECA/GUAT.GUYANA AIRWAYSHAWAIIAN AIRLINESAIR HAITIHAPAG LLOYD FLUG GMBHHENSONADRIA AIRWAYSINDIAN AIRLINESIBERIAICELANDAIRIRAN AIRALISDA AIRLINESAIR INTERYEMEN AIRWAYSJAPAN AIRLINESJAPAN AIR SYSTEMYUGOSLAV AIRLINESJETBLUEPSA AIRLINESJEJU AIRJAPAN TRANSOCEAN AIRAIR CANADA JAZZKUWAIT AIRWAYSKOREAN AIRKENYA AIRWAYSKLM-ROYAL DUTCHLIBYAN ARABLINHAS AEREAS DE MOCAMBIQUELAN CHILELINEAS AEREAS PARAGUAYASAEROPOSTAL VENEZUELALINEA AEREA DEL COBRELAUDA AIRLUXAIRLIAT LTDLINJEFLYGLLOYD AERO BOLIVIANOLOT POLISH AIRLINESLACSALTU INTL AIRWAYSMALEV HUNGARIANMALAYSIAN AIRLINESMIDDLE EAST AIRLINESMIDWEST EXPRESSMESABAMONARCH AIRLINESMARTINAIRMARK AIRALMA DE MEXICOEGYPTAIRMORRIS AIRMEXICANA AIRLINESNIPPON CARGOAERO CONTRACTORS NIGERIANEOSALITALIA TEAMOLYMPIC AIRWAYSOCEANAIRPHILIPPINEPACE AIRLINESPAKISTAN INTL AIRLINESPLI AERO PERUQFA QANTAS AIRWAYSQXE HORIZONRAM ROYAL AIR MAROCRBA ROYAL BRUNEI AIRLINESRJA ROYAL JORDANIANRKA AIR AFRIQUERVV REEVE ALUETIANRYR RYANAIRSAA SOUTH AFRICANSAB SABENASAM SAM/COLUMBIASAS SCANDINAVIAN AIRLINES SYSSAW STERLING AIRWAYSSCA SOUTH CENTRAL AIRSIA SINGAPORESKW SKYWESTSNB STERLING AIRWAYSSUD SUDANSVA SAUDI ARABIAN AIRLINESSWA SOUTHWEST AIRLINESSWR SWISSSYM SIMMONSSYR SYRIAN ARAB AIRLINESTAA AUSTRALIAN AIRLINESTAI TACA INTLTAM TAM LINEAS AEREASTAP TAP AIR PORTUGALTAR TUNIS AIRTBA TRANSBRASILTHA THAI AIRWAYSTHY TURKISH AIRLINESTOW TOWER AIRTRA TRANSAVIA HOLLANDTSC AIR TRANSATTSO TRANSAERO AIRLINESUAE EMIRATESUAL UNITED AIRLINESUKA AIR U.K.UPS UNITED PARCEL SERVICEUSA US AIRWAYSUSAF U.S. AIR FORCEUSAR U.S. ARMYVEX VIRGIN EXPRESS BELGIUMVIA VIASAVIR VIRGIN ATLANTIC AIRWAYSVKG SCANAIRVLE VOLARES AIRLINESVSP VASPWCA WESTAIRWJA WESTJETWOA WORLD AIRWAYSWWC WORLDWAYS CANADAWWM WINGS WESTZAC ZAMBIA AIRWAYS

OPERATOR CODESENCODEADRIA AIRWAYSAER LINGUSAERO CONTRACTORS-NIGERIAAERO PERUAEROLINEAS ARGENTINASAEROMEXICOAEROPOSTAL VENEZUELAAEROVIAS VENEZOLANASAIR AFRIQUEAIR ATLANTA ICELANDICAIR BVIAIR CANADA JAZZAIR CANADAAIR EUROPEAIR FRANCEAIR HAITIAIR INDIAAIR INTERAIR JAMAICAAIR LANKAAIR LIBANAIR MALTAAIR MIDWESTAIR NEW ZEALANDAIR NIUGINIAIR PANAMAAIR TRANSATAIR UKAIR WISCONSINAIR ZAIREAIRBORNE EXPRESSALASKA AIRLINESALISARDA AIRLINESALITALIAALL NIPPON AIRWAYSALLEGRO LINEAS AREASALM-ANTILLEAN AIRLINESALMA DE MEXICOALOHA AIR CARGOAMERICAN AIRLINESAMERICAN TRANS AIRAMIRI FLIGHTANGOLA AIRLINESASIANA AIRLINESATA AIRLINESATLANTIC SOUTHEAST AIRLINESAUSTRALIAN AIRLINESAUSTRIANAVENSAAVIACOAVIANCAAVIATECA/GUAT.AWA, LTDBAHAMAS AIRBANGLADESH BIMANBRITISH AIRWAYSBRITISH MIDLANDSBRITISH WEST INDIANBUSINESS EXPRESSCALEDONIAN AIRWAYS LTDCANADIAN AIRLINES INT'LCARGOLUXCATHAY PACIFICCAYMAN AIRWAYSCHINA AIRLINESCIVIL AVIATION ADM CHINACOMAIRCOMMAND AIRWAYSCONAIR (DENMARK)CONDOR/CARGOIAAEINNIGPLIARGAMXLAVARVRKAABDBLBJZAACAAELAFRHJAAICITFAJMALKLAAAMCAMWANZANGAPITSCUKAAWIQCABXASAISSAZAANAGROALMMSOAAHAALAMTAUHDTAAARAMTCAAAUZAUAAVEAYCAVAGUGAWABHSBBCBAWBMABWAGAACKTCDNCLXCPACAYCALCCACOMCMDOYCCFGCRUIZEIRO DO SULCZECH AIRLINESDELTA AIR LINESDEUTSCHE BADOMINICANAEGYPTAIREL AL ISRAEL AIRLINESEMERY AIREMIRATESETHIOPIAN AIRLINESEUROFLYEVA AIRWAYSEVERGREEN INTL AIRLINESEXPRESSJETFAUCETT/PERUFEDERAL EXPRESSFINNAIRFORTUNE AIRGHANA AIRWAYSGOL TRANSPORTGREAT LAKES AVIATIONGULF AIRGUYANA AIRWAYSHAPAG LLOYD FLUG GMBHHAWAIIAN AIRLINESHENSONHORIZONIBERIAICELANDAIRINDIAN AIRLINESIRAN AIRISLANDSFLUGJAPAN AIRLINESJAPAN TRANSOCEAN AIRJEJU AIRJETBLUE AIRWAYSKENYA AIRWAYSKLM ROYAL DUTCH AIRLINESKOREAN AIRKUWAIT AIRWAYSLACSALAN CHILELAUDA AIRLIAT LTDLINEA AEREA DEL COBRELINEAS AEREAS PARAGUAYASLINHAS AEREAS DE MOCAMBIQUELINJEFLYG-DENMARKLLOYD AERO BOLIVIANOLOT POLISH AIRLINESLTU INTL AIRWAYSLUFTHANSA GERMAN AIRLINESLUXAIRMAERSK AIRMALAYSIAN AIRLINESMALEV HUNGARIAN AIRLINESMARK AIRMARTINAIRMESABAMETROMEXICANA AIRLINESMIDDLE-EASTMIDWEST EXPRESSMONARCH AIRLINESMORRIS AIRNATIONAL JET SYSTEMSNEOSNEW ZEALAND NATIONALNIPPON CARGOOCEANAIRCDZCSADALBAGDOAMSRELYEMYUAEETHEEUEVAEIABTACFPFDXFINFOAGHAGOLGLAGFAYAHLFHALHNAQXEIBEICEIACIRAICBJALJTAJJAJBUKQAKLMKALKACLRCLANLDALIALCOLAPLAMLINLLBLOTLTUDLHLGLDMAMASMAHMRKMPHMESEMEMXAMEAMEPMOMMSSNJSNOSANZNCAONEOLYMPIC AIRLINESPACE AIRLINESPAKISTAN INTL AIRLINESPHILIPPINE AIRLINESPINNACLE AIRLINESPSA AIRLINESQANTAS AIRWAYSREEVE ALEUTIANROYAL AIR MAROCROYAL BRUNEI AIRLINESROYAL JORDANIANRYANAIRSABENASAHSASAM/COLUMBIASAUDI ARABIAN AIRLINESSCANAIRSCANDINAVIAN AIRLINE SYSTEMSIMMONSSINGAPORE AIRLINESSKYWESTSOUTH AFRICAN AIRWAYSSOUTH CENTRAL AIRSOUTHWEST AIRLINESSPANTAXSPIRIT OF AMERICASTERLING/DENMARKSUDANSUN COUNTRY AIRLINESSWISSSYRIAN ARAB AIRLINESTACA INT'LTAM LINHAS AEREASTAP AIR PORTUGALTHAI AIRWAYSTOWER AIRTRANSAERO AIRLINESTRANSAVIA HOLLANDTRANSBRASILTUNIS AIRTURKISH AIRLINESTYROLEAN AIRWAYSU.S. AIR FORCEU.S. ARMYUNITED AIRLINESUNITED PARCEL SERVICEUS AIRWAYSUSA 3000VASPVIASAVIRGIN ATLANTIC AIRWAYSVIRGIN EXPRESS BELGIUMVOLARE AIRLINESWESTAIRWESTJETWINGS WESTWORLD AIRWAYSWORLDWAYS CANADAYEMEN AIRWAYSYUGOSLAV AIRLINESZAMBIA AIRWAYSOALPCEPIAPALFLGJIAQFARVVRAMRBARJARYRSABSHASAMSVAVKGSASSYMSIASKWSAASCASWABXSIASSNBSUDSCXSWRSYRTAIBLCTAPTHATOWTSOTRHTBATARTHYTYRUSAFUSARUALUPSUSAGWYVSPVIAVIRVEXVLEWCAWJAWWMWOAWWCIYEJATZAC

2013 FSEMCGroundTransportation Guide(Do it Yourself)

Now that I am in Portugal – How do I get to the FSEMC?Welcome to the 2013 FSEMC! TAP Portugal is hosting our conference in one of the mostbeautiful locales on the planet – the Tróia Peninsula. Lisbon (Lisboa) is the largest city and thecapital of Portugal and the Lisbon Portela Airport is a major European hub that most conferenceattendees will fly into. Regardless, there are some logistics to attend to in order to get to theconference.Tróia is also at least 60-120 minutes from the airport, depending on your choice and mode oftravel. From the map below, you can see that the Tróia peninsula is south of Lisbon. Tróia isaccessible by driving on the mainland farther south and then coming up the peninsula.Alternately, a ferry crossing from the town of Setubal will cut the travel time and distance.These instructions hopefully will help you envision your trip to the conference and assist you inmaking your travel plans and logistics.

Ground TransportationFrom Lisbon Portela Airport there are two basic methods of getting to the FSEMC:• Taxi Voucher – Simplest (Highly Recommended)• Taxi to Bus Station, Bus to Ferry Station, Ferry to hotel – For the AdventurousThe Taxi Voucher is recommended for ease of use. The other choices are presented as analternative for the more adventurous travelers.Setubal FerryIf you choose to take the ferry from Setubal to Tróia, there are two options:• Vehicle and Passenger Ferry – This ferry does NOT dock directly at the hotel and willrequire an extra taxi ride to the hotel.• Passenger Ferry – This ferry docks within 75 meters of theTróia Blue and Green Design Hotel.o Look for a green catamaranPrices are roughly € 6 Euros each way.More information can be found here: Atlantic Ferries

Taxi VouchersYou can purchase taxi vouchers online or at the Tourist Office Balcony in the Lisbon Airport.The office is open from 0700-2400 daily. If you purchase online, you will still need to pick up thevoucher at the Tourist Office.The online web links depend on when you will arrive at the airport and expect to be ready totravel by taxi:Taxi Voucher – Daytime (0600-2100)Taxi Voucher – Night, Weekends, and Holidays(Night time is if you arrive before 0600 or after 2100 hours)Each of the weblinks will take you to a dropdown menu choice. There are two choices for a taxivoucher to Tróia:Choice from the Webpage: Description Price (1 way)Daytime SelectionsTaxi Voucher – (Dia): Taxi Voucher Tróia por Barco Taxi to Ferry ~ € 76 EurosTaxi Voucher – (Dia): Taxi Voucher Tróia por Alcacer Taxi all the way to the hotel ~ € 140 EurosNights, Weekends, Holidays SelectionsTaxi Voucher – (Noite): Taxi Voucher Tróia por Barco Taxi to Ferry ~ € 125 EurosTaxi Voucher – (Noite): Taxi Voucher Tróia por Alcacer Taxi all the way to the hotel ~ € 205 Euros

Do It Yourself for the MoreAdventurous TravelerTaxi from Airport to the Oriente Bus Station/Ferry RideThis process involves a taxi to the Oriente Bus Station, a Bus to Setubal Bus Station, a shortwalk to the Ferry Station, and a Ferry ride to the hotel.Step 1: Take a taxi to the Oriente Bus Station (estimate: €25 Euro)Step 2: Go to Bus Stand C21 and board the Setubal bus (estimate: €35 Euro)Step 3: From the Setubal Bus station, walk to the ferry station (appx. 0.10 mile)Step 4: Take the passenger only ferry (not the vehicle ferry) to Tróia (estimate €5 Euro)Step 5: Walk from Tróia ferry station to the hotel (appx. 100 meters)

The HotelFirst things first:• You are going to the Tróia Design Hotel on the Tróia Penninsula.o 7570-798 Casrvalhal – Grandola, Tróia, Portugal• Check in time is 1400.• If you hire a rental car, there is on-site self-parking for a fee.Hotel Highlights• Five Restaurants and Lounges• Relax at Blue and Green Spa• Rooftop infinity edge swimming pool• Complimentary wireless Internetaccess• Dry cleaning and laundry service• Safe deposit boxes at front desk• Twice daily housekeeping• 24 Hour guest room diningWEB InformationThere is tons of information on the web about Lisbon, Tróia, and Portugal. So test your Googleskills and plan a wonderful trip.Lisbon Portela AirportTróia Design HotelTaxi Vouchers – Days (0600-2100 hours)Visit LisboaAsk Me LisboaTaxi Vouchers – Nights, weekends, holidays

The FSEMC Has Concluded – How Do I Get Home?After the conclusion of the FSEMC on Thursday, October 3, attendees maywish to stay in Portugal for a couple days, but most will be heading home.Here are a couple notes of advice to make your journey home a littleeasier.Now that you know that Tróia is a substantial distance from Lisbon, it maybe advisable to move to a hotel closer to the airport. This should make yourlast taxi ride to the airport more predictable, and allow you to manage yourpre-departure time a little better.While there are a lot of hotels to choose from in Lisbon, the area near theOriente train/bus depot is 10 minutes from the airport and has many touristattractions and shopping nearby.

2013 FSEMCGroundTransportation Guide(AIM Group Car Service)

Now that I am in Portugal – How do I get to the FSEMC?The AirportLisbon Portela International Airport is a major European hub, and served by most of the largeairlines. While the summer is the busiest season for Lisbon, September can also see a greatnumber of travelers. Following the conference, planning ahead for your departure after theFSEMC is wise, as airline ticketing and the security lines can be lengthy regardless of the timeof day.Lisbon airport has 2 terminals, each with their own baggage claim. After retrieving yourbaggage, head to the ground transportation areas outside of each terminal.Ground TransportationFrom Lisbon Portela Airport, AIM Group can provide personaltransportation services to get you to the FSEMC. This service includes:• Driver will meet and greet you (with name sign) at the arrivals hall• Comfortable late model sedan or mini-bus• A choice of:o Door to door service to the hotelo Airport to Ferry Station (ferry tickets included)See the next pages for information on selecting and arranging this servicewith the AIM Group.Note: Fill out the form legibly and return directly to the AIM Group via fax oremail (preferred method) to:FAX: +351 21 324 50 51Email: p.pereira@aimgroup.eu

TRANSFERS BOOKING FORMGENERAL INFORMATIONAll reservations must be processed throughAIM Group International Agency.Please fill in and return this form to theTransportation Agency:AIM Group International – Lisbon OfficeAv. Liberdade, 258 – 6°1250-149 Lisboa – PortugalPhone:+351 21 324 50 63Fax:+351 21 324 50 51e-mail:p.pereira@aimgroup.euFaxed forms are considered originals; doNOT mail a duplicate copy.PAYMENT POLICYRates are quoted in EUROS, per transferper day.Transfers can only be guaranteed when apayment has been received by AIM GroupLisbon Office.PERSONAL DETAILS/ APPLICANT PERSON (Please use CAPITAL letters)Last Name / Family NameFirst Name / Given NameAddressCity / State Home Work Zip Code CountryTelephone / MobileINVOICE DETAILS (mandatory please)Company / Individual NameAddressVAT number / Tax ID numbere-mailCity / State Zip Code CountryCANCELLATION POLICYAny change or cancellation of the transferreservation must be sent in writing to AIMGroup International. Refunds forcancellation will be as follows:Until 05 days prior the service: full refundAfter 05 days prior the service: 100%cancellation fee is appliedAll approved refunds will be processed andissued within 60 days after the Event.PRIVACY LAWIn compliance with the Portuguese Law67/98 regarding personal data protection,AIM Group International hereby informsthat the information here given will solelybe managed internally and used exclusivelyfor the purpose of communication withinthe scope of the event activities such asscientific and social. By filling in this formyou authorize AIM Group International touse the given personal data for the abovementioned purpose. You have the right tomodify or cancel the data here given.Should you wish to do so please contactthe transportation secretariat:AIM PORTUGAL Lda,Av. Liberdade, 258 – 6°1250-149 Lisboa – PortugalI authorize the treatment andcommunication of my personal data asdescribed above.Date___________________________________Signature___________________________________TRANSFER ARRIVALArrival Date (Lisbon):/ /Arrival Time (Lisbon):h minFlight Nº:TRANSFER DEPARTUREDeparture Date (Lisbon):Departure Time (Lisbon):Flight Nº:/ /h minPick Up Time at Tróia Design Hotel:h minWe suggest 04h00 before the flight time.Should we need to ajust the timetable, we will contact you before the trip.TRANSPORTATION OPTIONSOption 1 – Car Service (up to 03 pax)Price Lisbon / Setubal (50Km.) + Ferryboat to TróiaPrice Lisbon / Tróia directly (140Km.)Option 2 – MiniVan Service (up to 07 pax)Price Lisbon / Setubal (50Km.) + Ferryboat to TróiaPrice Lisbon / Tróia directly (140Km.)One way€ 160,00€ 220,00For more information regarding the two possible itineraries, please see the form “Transfer Options” attachedThe itinerary is subject to change due to the Flights Vs. Ferryboat timetablesNAME(S) OF PASSANGER(S):One way€ 200,00€ 260,00Round Trip€ 310,00€ 430,00Round Trip€ 390,00€ 510,00________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________PAYMENTFull payment is required with the booking request. Bank transfer are allowed until 06 weekdays prior the service.Payment by credit card will be accepted until 03 weekdays prior the serviceBy filling this form you authorize AIM Portugal Lda to charge from your credit card the total amount of the services requested.Credit Card VISA® MasterCard®/ EuroCard® American Express®Credit Card Number: |__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|__|Expiry Date: MONTH/YEAR |__|__|/|__|__| SECURITY CODE (CW2/CVC2*) |__|__|__|__|*Security code: last three figures appearing on the back of the card, in the signature spaceCardholder’s Name ____________________________________ Cardholder’s Contacts ______________________________________Authorized CC Signature ________________________________Bank Transfer Please transfer the payment to AIM Portugal Lda.Account number: 0006 5528 8545Bank Name: BANCO ESPIRITO SANTOBank Adress: B0007 SALDANHASWIFT /BIC Code: BESCPTPLIBAN: PT50 0007 0022 0036 2460 0017 2Note. This payment form should clearly state the names(s) of the delegate(s) and should clearly state “FSEMC2013”.Please enclose herewith copy of bank receipt.Total pax: _______Date _________________Signature _________________________________________________________________

Option 1 Option 2Lisbon Airport – Tróia140KmLisbon – Tróia directly by highway around 1h20 minutesLisbon Airport – Setubal (+ Ferry)Lisbon – Setubal by highway around 35 minutesFerryboat trip around 25 minutesFerryboat service each (between) 35 and 75 minutesFor Ferryboat timetables, please check next page.50Km

Ferryboat TimetablesFerryboat - Setúbal / TroiaValid until 30 September 2013Ferryboat - Troia / SetúbalValid after 01 October 2013