Commonwealth Numbered Regulations - Explanatory Statements Commonwealth Numbered Regulations - Explanatory Statements[Index] [Search] [Download] [Related Items] [Help]
CIVIL AVIATION AMENDMENT REGULATIONS 2003 (NO. 7) 2003 NO. 240
Issued under the authority of the Minister for Transport and Regional Services
Civil Aviation Act 1988
Section 98 of the Civil Aviation Act 1988 (the Act) provides that the Governor-General may make regulations prescribing matters required or permitted by the Act to be prescribed or necessary or convenient to be prescribed for carrying out or giving effect to the Act, and regulations in relation to safety of air navigation, being regulations with respect to matters with respect to which the Parliament has power to make laws.
The regulations amend the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 (CASR) by inserting a new Part 60, entitled "Synthetic training devices", into those regulations. The regulations also make consequential changes to the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 (CAR) to reflect the new Part 60.
CASR Part 60 is a completely new regulation, developed as part of CASA's Regulatory Reform Programme, which provides a regulatory regime that covers the qualification, operation and approval of synthetic training devices that may be used by a person to gain aeronautical experience. Synthetic training devices provide an environment for pilots and flight engineers to gain competencies that are essential for safe air navigation. Pilots and flight engineers can satisfy the regulatory requirements for renewal of ratings, and currency of licences, by undertaking training in synthetic training devices, as opposed to real aircraft.
CASR Part 60 is being introduced in two stages. The first stage, which is the subject of these regulations, addresses the qualification, operation and approval of synthetic training devices (flight simulators and flight training devices) typically used by Air Transport Operators for pilots' aircraft type licence ratings and maintaining operational recency. The second stage of CASR Part 60 will address synthetic training devices (basic instrument flight trainers) typically used for basic pilot licence and instrument rating purposes.
In addition to addressing the qualification, operation and approval of synthetic training devices used by Air Transport Operators, these regulations also specify the requirements for maintaining, modifying, relocating and upgrading synthetic training devices, and the procedures for the issue, cancellation and suspension of certificates and approvals.
The regulations:
• Update the flight simulator standards and practices that are currently contained in Civil Aviation Order 45.0 - Flight Crew Standards - Synthetic Flight Trainers - General and CASA Manual, FSD-1 - Operational Standards and Requirements - Approved Flight Simulators. (Note the CAO 45.0 will be amended by separate CASA action and the standards contained in the manual FSD-1 will now be incorporated in the Part 60 - Manual of Standards [MOS]);
• Align the technical requirements for aeroplane flight simulators with the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) standards, the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Joint Aviation Authorities of Europe (JAA);
• Allow either FAA or JAA standards for helicopter flight simulators;
• Allow aircraft type specific Flight Training Devices (FTDs);
• Allow either FAA or JAA standards for FTDs;
• Remove the restriction on operation of flight simulators to Air Operator Certificate holders, and enable current international practices of third-party flight training centres;
• Recognises flight simulator qualification certificates issued by 12 ICAO states;
• Provide transition of existing flight simulator accreditations; and
• Introduce the requirement for flight simulator or FTD operators to have a quality system.
The regulations require the synthetic training device to meet technical specifications and standards necessary for the particular simulator or training device to qualify for use. These specifications and standards are contained in a Manual of Standards (MOS), which is published by CASA. The MOS is expected to be subject to revision in line with technological advances, and as such, will be reviewed and amended in conjunction with the affected stakeholders.
A Regulation Impact Statement (RIS), CASA #0301, has been prepared by CASA and approved by the Office of Regulation Review (ORR) in support of the regulations.
Details of the regulations are attached.
The regulations commenced on gazettal.
ATTACHMENT
DETAILS OF THE AMENDING REGULATIONS
Regulation 1 - Name of Regulations
Regulation 1 names the amending regulations as the Civil Aviation Amendment Regulations 2003 (No. 7)
Regulation 2 - Commencement
Regulation 2 provides that the Regulations commenced on gazettal.
Regulation 3 - Amendment of Civil Aviation Regulations 1988
Regulation 3 provides that Schedule 1 amends the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988.
Regulation 4 - Amendment of Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998
Regulation 4 provides that Schedule 2 amends the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998.
Schedule 1 Amendments of Civil Aviation Regulations 1988
Item 1 - Subregulation 2 (1), after definition of flight service officer licence
Item 1 inserts a Note after the definition of 'flight service officer licence' that refers the reader to the CASR dictionary for the definitions of 'flight simulator' and 'flight training device' which are now only covered in the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations Part 60.
Item 2 - Subregulation 2 (1), definition of synthetic flight trainer
Item 2 amends the definition of synthetic flight trainer to include flight training devices. The definition of synthetic trainer has also been inserted.
Item 3 - Subregulation 5.01 (1), definition of flight simulator
Item 3 omits the definition of flight simulator. This term is now defined and included in the Dictionary contained in CASR 1998.
Item 4 - Part 5, Division 13, note 2
Item 4 omits the words 'flight simulator' to be consistent with the requirements now contained in CASR Part 60.
Item 5 - Part 5, Division 14, note 2
Item 5 omits 'flight simulator' to be consistent with the requirements now contained in CASR Part 60.
Item 6 - Subregulation 5.194 (1)
Item 6 replaces 'flight simulator' with 'approved flight simulator' to be consistent with the requirements now contained in CASR Part 60.
Item 7 - Further amendments - omission of note
Item 7 omits a repeated note relating to where operational standards may be found because the information is now contained in the definitions inserted at Item 2.
Schedule 2 Amendments of Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998
Item 1 - After Part 45
Item 1 inserts the new Part 60, entitled 'Synthetic training devices' in numerical sequence to follow Part 45.
Part 60 Synthetic training devices
Subpart 60.A Preliminary
New regulation 60.000 - Make-up of this Part
This regulation inserts the table of contents for Part 60.
New regulation 60.005 - Applicability
This regulation explains that Part 60 applies to synthetic training devices used by persons (for example: pilots and flight engineers) to gain aeronautical experience.
New regulation 60.010 - Definitions for Part 60
This regulation introduces a number of new definitions specifically for this Part, including 'Manual of Standards (MOS)', 'master qualification test guide (master QTG)', and the meaning of 'user'.
Subpart 60.B Flight simulators and flight training devices
New regulation 60.015 - Definitions for Subpart 60.B
This regulation introduces a number of new definitions specifically for this Subpart, including 'flight simulator qualification', 'flight simulator qualification certificate', 'flight training device qualification', 'flight training device qualification certificate', 'operator', and 'qualification level'.
New regulation 60.020 - Qualification levels
This regulation sets out in Tables 60.020-1 and 60.020-2 the qualification level of a flight simulator and the qualification level of a flight training device that is determined in accordance with the standards in the Manual of Standards.
New regulation 60.025 - Application for flight simulator qualification or flight training device qualification
This regulation specifies the application process to CASA to obtain a flight simulator qualification or flight training device qualification.
New regulation 60.030 - Initial evaluation and qualification
This regulation specifies the initial evaluation and qualification process which is to be conducted by CASA. The initial evaluation can be done by an evaluation team, see regulation 60.090, to ensure the simulator or device meets a qualification level. An evaluation team may consist of both CASA staff and industry representatives. Nevertheless, only CASA can qualify a simulator or device under this regulation.
New regulation 60.035 - Issue of flight simulator qualification certificate or flight training device qualification certificate
This regulation requires CASA to issue a flight simulator qualification certificate or flight training device qualification certificate after CASA has qualified the simulator or device.
New regulation 60.040 - Period of validity of flight simulator qualification or flight training device qualification
This regulation provides for a qualification to remain in force for 12 months unless a shorter period is specified or certain conditions arise. The conditions that cause a qualification to cease are: cancellation by CASA under regulation 60.050, change of operator, or the deactivation or relocation of the simulator or device.
New regulation 60.045 - Recurrent evaluation of qualified flight simulator or flight training device
This regulation specifies the recurrent evaluation of a qualified flight simulator or flight training device process to be conducted by CASA or an appointed evaluation team.
New regulation 60.050 - Variation, cancellation or suspension of flight simulator qualification or flight training device qualification
This regulation provides that CASA may vary, cancel or suspend a qualification if the flight simulator or flight training device no longer meets the specified standard or the operator has failed to comply with a requirement of this part.
New regulation 60.055 - Flight simulator or flight training device approvals
This regulation requires the person who proposes to be the user of a qualified flight simulator to apply to CASA for approval and sets down the matters CASA must consider in granting the approval. The provision also empowers CASA to vary, suspend or cancel the approval where matters it took into account in issuing it have changed.
New regulation 60.060 - Quality system
This regulation provides that an operator of a qualified flight simulator or flight training device must establish and maintain a quality system that includes the policies and procedures to ensure correct operation and maintenance of the flight simulator or flight training device.
New regulation 60.065 - Ongoing fidelity requirements
This regulation specifies the requirement on the operator of a flight simulator or flight training device to ensure that the simulator or device maintains its fidelity. These requirements include progressive testing, configuration management, modification program and user notification.
New regulation 60.070 - Modification of qualified flight simulator or qualified flight training device
This regulation sets out the notification and evaluation processes required if it is intended to modify the simulator device equipment or associated software. The operator must notify CASA in writing if it proposes to modify the equipment.
New regulation 60.075 - Change in qualification level of qualified flight simulator or qualified flight training device
This regulation sets out the process to change the qualification level of a simulator or device and sets out the matters CASA must consider during the evaluation of the request to change the qualification level.
New regulation 60.080 - Deactivation, relocation or reactivation of qualified flight simulator or qualified flight training device
This regulation sets out the notification and evaluation processes required for the deactivation, relocation or reactivation of a simulator or device. The operator must notify CASA in writing if the equipment is deactivated.
New regulation 60.085 - Change of operator of qualified flight simulator or qualified flight training device
This regulation sets out the notification and transfer of records processes required for the change of an operator of a simulator or device. The operator must notify CASA in writing of changes to an operator of the equipment.
New regulation 60.090 - Evaluation Teams
This regulation provides for CASA to arrange an evaluation of a simulator or device and to appoint an authorised representative to be an evaluation team leader.
New regulation 60.095 - Records
This regulation obligates the operator of a qualified flight simulator or flight training device to keep certain records for a period of 3 years after the simulator or device has been decommissioned.
Subpart 60.C Basic instrument flight trainers
This Subpart is reserved for future use.
Item 2 - Part 148
Item 2 omits reference to Part 148, which was originally reserved for Synthetic Training Devices. The part relating to Synthetic Training Devices has been renumbered from Part 148 to Part 60 to be consistent with the USA Federal Aviation Regulation revised numbering scheme.
Item 3 - Regulation 202.000
Item 3 inserts a new Subpart 202.CA into the Table of Contents for Part 202.
Item 4 - Subpart 202.CA
Item 4 inserts the new Subpart 202.CA, entitled 'Transitional provisions for Part 60 (Synthetic training devices)' which will contain the transitional regulations on the commencement of Part 60.
Subpart 202.CA - Transitional provisions for Part 60 (Synthetic training devices)
New regulation 202.240 - Definitions for this Subpart
This regulation introduces a number of new definitions specifically relating to the transitional provisions Subpart.
New regulation 202.241 - Transitional accreditation - flight simulators
This regulation provides the transitional provisions for existing flight simulator accreditations to flight simulator qualifications. Accreditation and qualification levels are set out in Table 202.241.
Item 5 - Dictionary, Part 1
Item 5 amends the Dictionary by introducing the meaning for terms 'flight simulator', 'flight training device', 'qualified flight simulator', 'qualified flight training device' and 'synthetic training device' now used in the new regulations.
CASA #0301
Part 60 of the
Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (CASRs)
Synthetic Training Devices - Flight Simulators and Flight Training Devices
AC Advisory Circular
AOC Air Operator's Certificate
ARN Aviation Reference Number
CAO Civil Aviation Order
CAR Civil Aviation Regulation (1988)
CASA Civil Aviation Safety Authority (the Authority)
CASR Civil Aviation Safety Regulation
DP Discussion Paper
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FAR Federal Aviation Regulation
FTD Flight Training Device
ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization
JAA Joint Aviation Authorities of Europe
JAR Joint Aviation Requirements
MCQFS Manual of Criteria for the Qualification of Flight Simulators ICAO Doc 9625-AN/938
MOS Manual of Standards
NPRM Notice of Proposed Rule Making
OLD Office of Legislative Drafting
QTG Qualification Test Guide
RAeS Royal Aeronautical Society
SCC Standards Consultative Committee
SOR Summary of Responses
STD Synthetic Training Device
Flight simulator, for a specific type (or a specific make, model and series) of aircraft means a simulator that simulates the aircraft in ground and flight operations and that:
(a) comprises:
(i) a full size replica of the flight deck of the aircraft; and
(ii) a visual system providing an out of the flight deck view; and
(iii) a force cuing motion system; and
(b) includes the necessary software and equipment, and the way that the equipment is interconnected; and
(c) meets the standards for a flight simulator set out in the Manual of Standards, within the meaning given in Part 60.
Flight training device, for a specific type (or a specific make, model and series) of aircraft means a device that simulates the aircraft in ground and flight operations to the extent of the systems installed in the device and that:
(a) comprises a full size replica of the instruments, equipment, panels and controls in an open flight deck area, or an enclosed flight deck, of the aircraft; and
(b) includes the necessary software and equipment, and the way that the equipment is interconnected; and
(c) may include a force cuing motion or system or visual system; and
(d) meets the standards for a flight training device set out in the Manual of Standards, within the meaning given in Part 60, but does not meet the standards in that Manual for a flight simulator.
Proposed Civil Aviation Safety Regulation (CASR) Part 60 - Synthetic Training Devices (STDs)
Background
Australia's aviation safety regulations and standards requirements are currently contained in the Civil Aviation Act 1988, Civil Aviation Regulations (CARs 1988) and Civil Aviation Orders (CAOs). The CARs started out as simple common-sense rules, which, as the result of additions and amendments to address a multitude of safety issues over the years, became more complicated and harder to understand.
The current Australian legislation is often seen by the aviation industry as being overly prescriptive, ambiguous, disjointed, difficult to interpret, to comply with and enforce, and too often, reliant on exemptions for their effect. For these reasons, it was decided that the regulations should be rewritten in consultation with the aviation industry, to be internationally harmonised with leading aviation nation's standards and practices and using the widely known USA Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) Parts titles and numbering scheme as a guide to the breakdown of subject matter.
In June 1996, the then Government and the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) jointly initiated the Regulatory Framework Programme (RFP). The objective of this programme was to review and revise, where appropriate, the Australian aviation safety requirements currently contained in the Civil Aviation Regulations (CARs) and Civil Aviation Orders (CAOs). The revised legislation is to be called the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations (CASRs). The subsequent development of the CASRs is a joint aviation industry and CASA initiative.
At the present time in Australia, pilots training to fly can do their practical training in either a suitably equipped aircraft or a synthetic flight trainer approved for the purpose. The use of synthetic flight trainers can have advantages over actual aircraft, including:
• Reducing the risk of an incident or accident triggered by the training environment,
• Simulation of failures which are either impossible or dangerous in an aircraft,
• Minimising an operator's losses from using an aircraft for training instead of revenue-earning flights,
• Reducing training costs, and
• Minimising the effect on the environment from noise and pollution.
Synthetic flight trainers include flight simulators and synthetic trainers.
Australia's current rules on synthetic flight trainers are contained in CAO 45.0 Flight Crew Standards - Synthetic Flight Trainers - General, CASA Manuals FSD-1 Operational Standards and Requirements Approved Flight Simulators and FSD-2 Operational Standards and Requirements Approved Synthetic Trainers. The international standards for flight simulators are contained in the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) Manual of Criteria for Qualification of Flight Simulators Doc 9625 - AN/938 (MCQFS).
The proposed CASR Part 60 regulatory package prescribes the rules for the design, operation and use of Synthetic Training Devices (STDs), a term which is broader than 'synthetic flight trainer' and which covers a range of devices. CASR Part 60 is being introduced in two stages. The first stage, which is the subject of this Regulation Impact Statement (RIS), addresses synthetic training devices typically used by Air Transport Operators: flight simulators and flight training devices. The second stage of CASR Part 60 will address synthetic training devices typically used for basic pilot licence and instrument rating purposes. A separate RIS will be raised for this stage.
The scope of the proposed new regulatory package encompasses synthetic training device standards, processes for qualification and approval, quality systems to ensure correct operation and maintenance, requirements for operators of synthetic training devices, appointment of evaluation teams and record keeping requirements. The regulations also contain a mechanism to retain the validity of accreditations of synthetic flight trainers issued under the previous regulations.
Since there is potential for rapid changes in technology in this area, CASR Part 60 is supported by a Manual of Standards (MOS), which sets out the flight simulator and flight training device technical standards and four Advisory Circulars (ACs). The series of ACs provide guidance information to facilitate compliance with the regulation and MOS.
In line with good regulatory practice, CASR Part 60 contains the regulatory framework within which people to whom the Part applies must operate. The MOS expands on the regulations and comprises mandatory technical standards which are non-legislative in nature, prescribed by CASA and of uniform application, determined to be necessary for safety. Compliance with the MOS ensures compliance with the regulations. As a contracting State and signatory to the Chicago Convention, Australia has an obligation to consider and apply the international standards and recommended practices (SARPs) adopted by ICAO and designated in the Annexes to the Convention. Such standards and recommended practices are mainly located in the MOS accompanying each CASR Part.
ACs are developed by CASA to provide recommendations and guidance to illustrate a means, but not necessarily the only means, of complying with aviation legislation requirements, or they may explain certain regulatory requirements by providing further explanatory or interpretive material in the interest of aviation safety.
1.1 Currently, Australian flight simulator requirements are contained in a Civil Aviation Order, a CASA manual and a number of policy documents. International standards have evolved significantly since these requirements were developed and Australia's existing standards and practices (FSD-1 and CAO 45.0) are outdated. The requirements are not harmonised with ICAO, the United States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Joint Aviation Authorities of Europe (JAA) or accepted industry standards. In addition, the existing CASA procedures do not reflect new terminology and commercial practices, restrict who can operate a flight simulator in Australia, and only recognise a limited number of synthetic training devices.
1.2 Nearly all flight simulators introduced, or planned to be introduced, by the aviation industry are built overseas and comply with international standards.
1.3 In addition, current regulatory requirements for synthetic training devices do not meet the overall objectives of CASA's regulatory reform program, detailed in Section 2 of this RIS.
Australia's existing standards and practices (FSD-1 and CAO 45.0) are outdated
1.4 Continuing to rely on FSD-1 and CAO 45.0 in their current form means that Australia will fall further behind accepted international practice, given that:
• FSD-1 does not contain flight simulator standards and practices that are consistent with international flight simulator standards and practices;
• FSD-1 practices were developed before Quality Systems were widely implemented, and are predominantly based on CASA progressively checking the flight simulator at 120-day intervals. International practices are now based on the Flight Simulator Operator having a Quality System (procedures, records, internal audit, continuous improvement, etc) with the Regulatory Authority selectively auditing the Quality System and the flight simulator on an annual basis;
• FSD-1 uses the generic term 'operator' to describe both Flight Simulator Operator and aircraft operator requirements. This results in a restriction within Australia on the operation of flight simulators to Air Operator Certificate holders, a situation that is out of step with most aviation countries, where it is becoming increasingly common for flight simulator centres to be operated by third party providers; and
• By defining a synthetic flight trainer as either a flight simulator or a synthetic trainer, CAO 45.0 excludes Flight Training Devices (FTDs). CASA proposes to recognise FTDs in response to requests from several Air Transport Operators to use these devices in their aircraft type rating training and checking programs.
1.5 Continued reliance on FSD-1 is untenable given Australia's commitment as a signatory to ICAO to encourage international standards suited to sound aviation safety performance and efficient business practices.
2. Objectives
2.1 The overall objective of the proposed CASR Part 60 is to establish a modern regulatory framework for ensuring the quality of synthetic training devices used in Australia to train pilots and flight engineers.
2.2 The specific objectives of the proposed CASR Part 60 are to:
• Establish an appropriate regulatory structure that implements a common international framework for the standards applicable to STDs and for evaluating STDs against those standards;
• Ensure that STDs that meet those international standards are acceptable under Australian regulatory requirements;
• Enable pilots training in Australia to use a wider range of training aids;
• Enable service providers, other than air operators, to operate STDs;
• Consolidate all relevant rules, procedures and standards, both existing and proposed, into a cohesive regulatory package; and
• Establish supporting technical standards and guidance material in line with international standards.
2.3 In addition to the specific objectives, CASA also seeks to satisfy the general criteria established for the development of the CASRs. CASA's primary objective is to provide standards that are clear, concise and unambiguous, and which are:
• focused on safety, adopting a systems approach where appropriate;
• consistent with Australia's international obligations;
• harmonised with international standards, unless unique Australian circumstances require otherwise;
• cost-effective; and
3. Options considered
3.1 The principle high-level regulatory options that were considered are:
• Option 1 - Retain current synthetic flight trainer regulatory requirements without change;
• Option 2 - Remove existing requirements and allow industry to self-regulate; and
• Option 3 - Revise and update current regulatory requirements in line with CASA's Regulatory Reform Program, harmonising with international standards.
This is CASA's preferred option.
Within Option 3, significant work was done to decide how best to ensure CASR 60 would be aligned with the appropriate international standards. These options were explored in the Discussion Paper and Notice of Proposed Rule Making process. This is explained further below in the discussion of Option 3.
Option 1 - Retain current synthetic flight trainer regulatory requirements without change
3.2 Under this option, no changes would be made to the current regulatory framework.
| Option 1 - Retain
current requirements without change
| |
| Objective
|
Determination
for Option 1
|
| Establish
an appropriate regulatory structure that implements a common international
framework for the standards applicable to STDs and for evaluating STDs against
those standards
|
Not
met by this option. Current framework is not consistent with international STD
standards and evaluation of STDs. Existing flight simulator manual allows use
of the ICAO MCQFS as an alternative.
|
| Recognise
flight training devices meeting international standards
|
Not
possible under existing regulatory framework.
|
| To
enable pilots training in Australia to use a wider range of training aids
|
Current
regulatory framework restricts or limits the use of a wider range of training
aids thus limiting experience of pilots or forcing training to be carried out
in real aircraft.
|
| Enable
service providers, other than air operators, to operate flight simulators
|
Unclear
under existing regulatory framework. Limits the range of devices on the market
and appears to limit 'operators' to only air operator certificate holders.
Historically, operated by the large airlines (Ansett and Qantas) who did not
provide flight simulators for small or specialist aircraft types.
|
| Consolidate
all relevant rules, procedures and standards, into a cohesive regulatory package
|
Not
met by this option. Current regulatory material contains mixture of synthetic
flight trainer rules, standards and guidance material and personnel licensing
rules / guidance material.
|
| Establish
supporting technical standards and guidance material in line with international
standards
|
Current
standards are out of date. Allows use of the ICAO MCQFS as an alternative.
|
3.3 This option continues the restriction on competition resulting from unclear rules for the operation of flight simulators by operators other than holders of Air Operator Certificates. Training opportunities and the range of STDs available on the Australian market would continue to be limited.
Option 2 - Remove existing regulations and allow industry to self-regulate
3.4 The following table examines this option against the objectives of the proposed regulatory change:
| Option
2 - Remove existing regulations and allow industry to self-regulate
| |
| Objective
|
Determination
for Option 2
|
| Establish
an appropriate regulatory structure that implements a common international
framework for the standards applicable to STDs and for evaluating STDs against
those standards
|
Does
not meet this objective. No regulatory structure would be in place. Will
disadvantage Australian industry in that Australian STDs will not be consistent
with the international framework and will not be recognised by National
Aviation Authorities. May reduce foreign use of Australian STDs. May erode
confidence in safety of the Australian airline industry.
|
| Recognise
flight training devices meeting international standards
|
No
legal process for that recognition.
|
| To
enable pilots training in Australia to use a wider range of training aids
|
Possible.
May result in innovation.
|
| Enable
service providers, other than air operators, to operate flight simulators
|
Possible.
May result in safe, managed practices and operation
|
| Consolidate
all relevant rules, procedures and standards, into a cohesive regulatory package
|
No
regulatory structure would be in place, thus no standardisation of procedures,
standards and practices would exist.
|
| Establish
supporting technical standards and guidance material in line with international
standards
|
Not
met. May result in lack of standardisation. Self-regulated standards may not be
consistent with ICAO.
|
3.5 Air transport is an important component of the national transport system and the availability of provision of adequate and safe training facilities is critical to the system. Further, as a contracting State to the Convention on International Civil Aviation (the Chicago Convention), Australia has an obligation to require industry compliance with ICAO standards. The option to self-regulate is not deemed feasible, as industry may fail to meet these standards, without mandatory requirements.
3.6 This option would involve government relinquishing direct regulation and control of the design, provision and use of synthetic training devices. The benefit of this option could be the introduction of initiatives and innovative means of providing training devices. However, there are a number of problems with this approach, as discussed below:
• Provision of International Training Services: Current flight simulator operators derive revenue from selling flight simulator training to international customers. The requirement that the flight simulator meets international standards is essential for this revenue.
• Public perception of safety: Unlike other modes of transport, air transport is still regarded by some as a more dangerous form of transport. So it is important that the travelling public's concern on air safety is allayed as much as possible. The public will perceive a system regulated by the government as more reliable than a system self-regulated by the provider of the service, where commercial interests may be given precedence over other interests, such as safety.
Option 3 - Revise and update current requirements, in line with CASA's regulatory reform program, harmonising with international standards
3.7 The current international flight simulator standards / regulatory documents are:
| International
Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)
|
United
States Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
|
Joint
Aviation Authorities of Europe (JAA)
|
| MCQFS
1st Ed (1995) MCQFS 2nd Ed (Planned 2003)
|
AC
120-40B (1991) AC 120-40C (draft) FAR Part 60 (NPRM published 25 September 2002)
|
JAR-STD
1A
|
3.8 The principal international standard is ICAO's MCQFS. The MCQFS continues to be regarded by National Aviation Authorities as the relevant vehicle to set standards for flight simulator evaluation, given:
• The first edition of MCQFS (1995) has as its core the Royal Aeronautical Society (RAeS) document, International Standards for the Qualification of Airplane Flight Simulators, published in January 1992 following an eminent working group to establish common test criteria for the evaluation of flight simulators that would be recognised internationally.
• The proposed second edition of MCQFS was forwarded to ICAO on 12 October 2001, by a working group jointly chaired by the FAA and JAA to review and modernise the standards contained within the MCQFS. CASA participated in this review process. The proposal was supported by 12 National Aviation Authorities (the FAA, Transport Canada, the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) of Finland, the three CAAs of Scandinavia, the United Kingdom CAA, the French DGAC, the German LBA, the Dutch CAA, Swiss FOCA and CASA).
• Both the FAA and JAA have harmonised evaluation and qualification standards for flight simulators with the first edition of MCQFS and have committed to adopting the proposed second edition of MCQFS.
• JAR-STD 1A Amendment 3, which is consistent with the proposed second edition of MCQFS, will be implemented 1 January 2004.
3.9 CASA's proposal is consistent with the FAA/JAA regulatory system (adapted to the Australian legal environment) and harmonises with ICAO's MCQFS.
3.10 The following table examines this option against the objectives of the proposed regulatory change:
3.11 This option provides a regulatory framework that would facilitate safety oversight by CASA and provides a mechanism for the existing and new industry participants.
3.12 The standards and safety issues from legislation will retain confidence of the travelling public and of aircraft operators in the skills and training of pilots.
3.13 This option minimizes the impact expected on current STD operators and users of approved flight simulators.
3.14 The regulations introduce a new requirement that providers of synthetic training devices have a Quality System (comprising procedures, records, internal audit, continuous improvement, etc) in place. CASA will audit the Quality System and evaluate the synthetic training devices on an annual basis. This reduces the regulatory burden while enabling the operator to manage the operation of their device as they see fit and in compliance with the regulations.
3.15 This option best enables CASA to align the regulatory requirements with the appropriate international standards and allows Australia to meet its obligations under the Chicago Convention. Substantial attention was paid during the consultation process to the best way of ensuring this harmonisation was achieved. The result of CASA and industry deliberations was:
• To harmonise Australian aeroplane flight simulator requirements with those of ICAO, FAA and JAA;
• To allow either FAA or JAA requirements for helicopter flight simulators;
• To recognise Flight Training Devices (FTD); and
• Allow either FAA or JAA standards for FTDs.
Preferred Option
3.16 Comparing the options above to the established objectives and taking into account industry responses to initial public consultation (DP 0104OS, NPRM 0220OS and SOR 0220OS), the project team determined that Option 3 - Revise and update current regulatory requirements in line with the Regulatory Reform Program, harmonising with international standards is the preferred option. This option could best achieve all the stated objectives.
4. Impact Analysis
Synopsis of change proposal
4.1 The key features of the preferred option include:
• Update of the flight simulator standards and practices contained in CAO 45.0 and FSD-1 and incorporation of this material into CASR Part 60;
• Alignment of technical requirements for aeroplane flight simulators with ICAO, FAA and JAA requirements;
• Allow either FAA or JAA standards for helicopter flight simulators;
• Recognition of aircraft type specific FTDs;
• Allow either FAA or JAA standards for FTDs;
• Removal of the restriction of operation of flight simulators to AOC holders, and enable current international practices of third-party flight training centres;
• Recognition of flight simulator qualification certificates issued by 12 ICAO states;
• Transfer of existing flight simulator approvals; and
• Introduction of a requirement for the operator to have a quality system.
Persons affected
4.2 The following table summarises the nature of the impact on industry of these changes:
4.3 The table below summarises the expected impact of the new regulations on current and expected flight simulators in Australia:
| Operator
|
Location
|
Flight
Simulator Type
|
Cost
Impact
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Ansett
Australia
|
Melbourne
|
A320-200
|
See
Notes 2 & 3.
|
| Ansett
Australia
|
Melbourne
|
B737-300
|
See
Notes 2 & 3.
|
| Ansett
Australia
|
Melbourne
|
B767-200
|
See
Notes 2 & 3.
|
| Ansett
Australia
|
Melbourne
|
BAe146-300
|
See
Notes 2 & 3.
|
| Ansett
Australia
|
Melbourne
|
CRJ-200
|
See
Notes 2 & 3.
|
| Ansett
Australia
|
Melbourne
|
Metro
III
|
See
Notes 2 & 3.
|
| Ansett
Australia
|
Melbourne
|
SAAB
340A/B
|
See
Notes 2 & 3.
|
| Flight
Simulators International
|
Melbourne
|
B727-277
|
See
Note 2.
|
| FlightSafety
Boeing
|
Brisbane
|
B737
NG
|
See
Note 4.
|
| FlightSafety
Boeing
|
Brisbane
|
B717
|
See
Note 4.
|
| FlightSafety
Boeing
|
Brisbane
|
TBA
|
See
Note 4.
|
| FlightSafety
Boeing
|
Brisbane
|
TBA
|
See
Note 4.
|
| Qantas
Airways
|
Melbourne
|
A330-200
|
See
Note 1
|
| Qantas
Airways
|
Melbourne
|
B737-300
|
See
Note 1
|
| Qantas
Airways
|
Melbourne
|
B737-400
|
See
Note 1
|
| Qantas
Airways
|
Melbourne
|
B737-800
|
See
Note 1
|
| Qantas
Airways
|
Sydney
|
B747-200
|
See
Note 1
|
| Qantas
Airways
|
Sydney
|
B747-300
|
See
Note 1
|
| Qantas
Airways
|
Sydney
|
B747-400
|
See
Note 1
|
| Qantas
Airways
|
Sydney
|
B747-400
|
See
Note 1
|
| Qantas
Airways
|
Sydney
|
B747-400
|
See
Note 1
|
| Qantas
Airways
|
Sydney
|
B767-200
ER
|
See
Note 1
|
| Qantas
Airways
|
Sydney
|
B767-300
ER
|
See
Note 1
|
| Qantas
Airways
|
Sydney
|
B767-300
ER
|
See
Note 1
|
| Qantas
Airways
|
Sydney
|
DHC-8
|
See
Note 1
|
| Singapore
Flying College
|
Maroochydore
|
Learjet
45
|
See
Note 2.
|
1. Minimal Impact.
2. Require Quality System to be written / updated.
3. Proposed regulation may enable Administrators to sell assets to third parties.
4. Proposed regulation will enable establishment of third party flight simulator centre. Specific details of flight simulator types have not been announced by FlightSafety Boeing.
4.4 Cost savings are expected for both CASA and flight simulator operators as a result of less frequent regulatory checks per annum but these are likely to be balanced by the cost of ongoing fidelity checks and implementing/updating quality systems.
4.5 This proposal directly affects four flight simulator operators: Ansett Australia, Flight Simulators International (FSI), Qantas Airways and Singapore Flying College (SFC). Ansett and Qantas already have quality systems. Ansett's quality system has to be updated whether it is retained or sold by the Administrator. Qantas's quality system will require minor amendments to meet the requirements of the regulations. FSI is developing a quality system - this will be a simplified quality system because the operator only maintains the flight simulator and does not undertake design and development. CASA has no information on the status of the quality system for SFC.
4.6 The costs of implementing quality systems cannot be quantified, as this will be determined by the complexity of the system which the operator sets up. The regulations do not prescribe how the system should be designed. CASA can only provide a qualitative indication of impact in this area and cannot provide detailed costing, as this is commercial information. However, quality systems should be in place for businesses providing these services within the air transport industry.
4.7 Most changes proposed for the CASR Part 60 regulations are thus considered cost neutral or cost beneficial.
Expected impact (Small Business)
4.8 FSI is the only small business affected by the proposed change. The impact of the quality system requirement is described at paragraph 4.5. Proposed changes within the regulation concerning modifying flight simulators will reduce the ongoing costs of maintaining this flight simulator through its life of type.
Expected impact (benefits)
4.9 Adopting the regulations proposed will ensure that Australia operates on a consistent basis with ICAO standards, and with accepted regulatory oversight. This means that it will be easier for Australia to operate within the common international framework for establishing the standards applicable to STDs and for evaluating devices against these standards.
4.10 Being part of a common international standards framework will benefit both CASA and the industry by removing the need for repetitive, costly and time-consuming evaluation of STDs against differing standards and save scarce regulatory and training centre resources.
4.11 Similarly, it is anticipated that the harmonisation of Australian STD requirements with international requirements will enable easier recognition and approval of Australian Qualified STDs by other National Authorities.
4.12 The introduction of more capable STDs should improve safety by:
• improving the standard of pilot and flight engineer training, and
• transferring a significant number of hazardous training manoeuvres (currently done in real aircraft) or offshore training (because of lack of availability of suitable STDs) to a synthetic environment located in Australia.
4.13 The proposed CASR Part 60 may improve competition in the synthetic training device industry by allowing third parties to operate flight simulators, since Flight Simulator Operators will no longer be required to hold an Air Operator's Certificate. The benefits of a safe and secure business environment offered by suitable Australian locations has attracted international organisations such as FlightSafetyBoeing (FSB). FSB has announced plans for a flight training centre, with four flight simulators, in Brisbane to be operational by December 2003. FSB current plans include providing B737 flight simulator training for Virgin Blue Airlines and B717 flight simulator training. These flight simulators will reduce the training costs for Virgin Blue, and other air transport operators who currently train offshore.
4.14 It might enable the use of STDs for training in smaller but still sophisticated aircraft such as smaller jet and turboprop aircraft. A possible increase in the number of flight simulators in Australia could result in additional competition for existing flight simulator operators resulting in better quality training for pilots.
4.15 It could also stimulate growth in aviation training support services and have a positive impact on the provision of flight training for sectors of the industry other than airlines. There is a need for quality instrument and emergency flight training for the commuter, aerial work and private sectors of the industry.
4.16 Any flight simulators introduced would replace hazardous aircraft-based training and expensive offshore training, which is expected to reduce training costs for those operators who currently do not have access to Australian-based flight simulators.
4.17 Pilots will have access to a wider range of training devices allowing them to have more flexibility for training. Currently, CAO 45.0 permits only two types of synthetic flight trainers: flight simulators and synthetic trainers. The proposed regulatory package will introduce FTDs. FTDs have less training capabilities than flight simulators (eg no motion) but enable some of the training currently conducted in flight simulators to be undertaken in a cheaper device. The costs for flight simulators and flight training devices are approximately $20M and $5M respectively. It is expected that the 'hourly' cost to operate these devices would be a similar ratio.
4.18 The regulations introduce a new requirement that providers of synthetic training devices to have a Quality System (comprising procedures, records, internal audit, continuous improvement, etc) in place. CASA will audit the Quality System and evaluate the flight simulator on an annual basis. This reduces the compliance - monitoring and evaluation burden on CASA and the operator, while enabling the operator to manage the operation of their device as they see fit and in compliance with the regulations. The majority of regulatory checks are currently undertaken by delegates within the industry, so this effectively reduces an industry cost.
Effect on existing legislation
4.19 The introduction of CASR Part 60 and supporting material will require:
• Amendment of CAO 45.0 Flight Crew Standards - Synthetic Flight Trainers - General;
• FSD-1 Operational Standards and Requirements Approved Flight Simulators to be superseded; and
• Withdrawal of CASA's Aviation Safety Standards Policy Note 009 Recognition of Flight Simulators Approved by a Foreign State.
5. Consultation
5.1 CASA is committed to working cooperatively with the aviation industry to maintain and enhance aviation safety. In meeting this commitment, the CASA Standards Consultative Committee (SCC) is a joint CASA/industry forum, set up to involve the aviation industry formally during the development phase of regulatory material. The SCC examines proposed regulatory changes to determine if they are worth pursuing and assists CASA in the allocation of priorities for those projects. Aviation industry experts then work together with CASA staff in subordinate groups (SCC Sub-Committees and Project Teams) on the detailed development of regulatory material (both new regulations and amendments).
5.2 The proposed CASR Part 60 falls under the auspices of the SCC's Operational Standards Sub-Committee.
5.3 For CASR Part 60, CASA set up a project team with members nominated by the SCC and key industry stakeholders from the Australian aviation community. The project team included (listed alphabetically):
• Don Irving - representing CASA's Aviation Safety Compliance Division.
• Chris Nesbitt-Hawes - representing CAE Electronics (Australia) and the Simulation Industry Association of Australia.
• Tony Parrish - representing the Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand.
• Brodie Shields - representing BAE Systems.
• Glen Steemson - representing CASA's Part 60 Synthetic Training Devices project (Project Manager).
• Ian Suren - representing CASA's Part 61 Pilot Licensing project.
• Mike Tavcar - representing SimFlight Pty Ltd, the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association and the Helicopter Association of Australia - nominated by the SCC.
• Lex Trotman - representing Thales Training & Simulation and the Simulation Industry Association of Australia.
• Captain Keith Wallace - (previously) representing Ansett Australia Pty Limited and (currently) the Australian Air Transport Association - nominated by the SCC.
• Captain Ian Watkins - representing Qantas Airways Ltd.
• Bryan Wellington - representing Simulinc Pty Ltd.
5.4 CASR Part 60 has been developed in 2 stages - Stage A (the subject of this RIS) which addresses STDs used by Air Transport Operators, and Stage B which addresses STDs typically used for basic pilot licence and instrument rating purposes. Stage A of CASR Part 60 is planned for implementation on gazettal (scheduled for 1 July 2003) and Stage B will be implemented with CASR Part 61. Stage B is linked to Part 61 because of the dependencies involved with determining the pilot licensing credits for these STDs.
5.5 Discussion Paper DP 0104OS - Synthetic Training Devices was distributed for public and aviation community comment on 13 July 2001. CASA distributed some 400+ copies to known interested persons within the aviation industry and notification of the DP issue was made through the Australian press. The DP was also placed on the CASA Website on that date. The DP contained a detailed discussion segment, the proposed technical working draft of CASR Part 60 and the draft MOS. The comment period closed on 10 September 2001.
5.6 CASA received 17 responses to the DP. Six responses indicated that the proposal was acceptable without change. The other 11 responses indicated that the proposal was acceptable but would be improved if (given) changes were made. Comments were received on Part 60 structure, international standards, removal of AOC requirements, terminology, change of flight simulator location, foreign flight simulators, evaluation teams and recognition of prior approvals. These comments were considered and several changes incorporated into the legal draft, MOS and ACs of NPRM0220OS.
5.7 The Project Team met on 6 December 2001 and 7 August 2002 and endorsed the legal draft and supporting material for CASR Part 60. The draft NPRM was circulated to the SCC and SCC Operational Sub-Committee prior to formal release for public comment.
5.8 Notice of Proposed Rule Making NPRM 0220OS Synthetic Training Devices - Flight Simulators and Flight Training Devices was distributed for public and aviation community comment on 13 September 2002. CASA distributed 400+ copies to known interested persons within the aviation industry and notification of the NPRM issue was made through the Australian press. The NPRM was also placed on the CASA Website on that date. The NPRM contained a detailed discussion segment, the proposed technical working draft of CASR Part 60, draft ACs, the draft MOS and proposed amendment to CAO 45.0. The comment period closed on 2 December 2002.
5.9 Eight responses were received to the NPRM. Of these responses, all (who indicated a preference) agreed that the proposal to align Australia's flight simulator requirements with the common international framework and the proposal to introduce flight training devices was acceptable without change. Comments were received on evaluation teams, modification of flight simulators, ongoing fidelity requirements, qualification validity period, alternative standard, initial evaluations, FTD approvals, use of Australian or international MOS and the consultation process. These comments were evaluated and resulted in several minor changes to the legislative draft. (Refer to SOR 0220OS.)
5.10 Revised legal drafting instructions were issued to the Office of Legislative Drafting (OLD) of the Attorney-General's Department as a result of the public consultation.
6. Conclusion and recommended option
6.1 The following table shows the comparison of the objectives and an assessment of each option, and clearly shows the benefits of Option 3.
6.2 If the proposed CASR Part 60 is implemented, minimum impact is expected on this sector of the aviation industry with the benefits flowing from the proposal expected to be:
• Maintenance and improvement in the confidence of the public and the aviation industry in the training and skills of Australian pilots;
• Update of the required standards to the common international (ICAO, FAA, JAA) framework;
• Allow recognition of foreign flight simulators approved to international standards, to reduce costly re-assessment by CASA and the operators of these devices;
• Easier recognition and approval of Australian Qualified STDs by other National Authorities;
• Improvement in competition by allowing providers, other that air operators, to supply synthetic training devices;
• Improved access of pilots to a wider range of STDs, thus improving their skills;
• Enhance the safety of pilots and flight engineers during training;
• Improvement in the ability of the regulatory framework to keep pace with rapidly changing technology in this area by separating procedures and advisory material from regulatory requirements.
7. Implementation and review
7.1 CASR Part 60 will be submitted to the Minister for Transport and Regional Services for approval and is expected that the Governor-General, in Council, will make the Regulation in the third quarter 2003. The Regulations would commence on gazettal.
7.2 An implementation/transition plan for CASR Part 60 will begin on rule making. The implementation/transition phase provides for Australia wide education and training programs, the approval of the MOS and ACs, the adjustment of delegations/authorisations, development and approval of procedures and the application of the new rules.
7.3 The monitoring and review of the new regulations will be conducted on an ongoing basis during the implementation/transition phase. Thereafter, following the commencement of the regulations, monitoring and review will be conducted on an as required basis and (within 5 years) as required by the Government.