In order to satisfy the FCL requirements, of Opinion 6, CS-FSTD(A) Issue 2 is applicable. For updated devices this can be done either through a special evaluation or at the recurrent evaluation (requires application for the Issue 2 elements to be evaluated and credited).
Please refer to CS-FSTD(A) Issue 2 AMC11 FSTD(A).300 Guidance on high angle of attack/stall model evaluation, and approach to stall for previously qualified FSTDs.
When considering the additional requirements under Issue 2 as well for the UPRT requirements please refer to the Explanatory Note to Decision 2018/006/R (reference section 2.5. What are the benefits and drawbacks “Safety improvement by further mitigating/preventing loss of control in-flight (LOC-I). Safety would improve due to the objective testing provisions which would validate not only the cruising configuration, but also the approach and landing configurations. Current FSTDs would be qualified to accurately reproduce the approach to stall in certain conditions and the behaviour of the aeroplane when affected by ice.”
AMC11 applies to previously qualified devices and in some cases where the aeroplane being represented may not have the required validation data – this AMC allows an acceptable means of providing such test data by using a footprint method (when no validation data is available).
If any of the elements of Issue 2 are missing, then this will be shown in the Qualification Certificate as “Restrictions or limitations” to show the users the capabilities of the FSTD.
In conclusion, current qualified FSTD will not need to be fully compliant with CS-FSTD(A) issue 2 but only with the elements related to UPRT and icing. The qualification certificate of the FSTD will therefore show references to two PRDs (Primary Reference Document):
- The PRD used during the initial evaluation of the FSTD;
- CS-FSTD(A) issue 2 for UPRT and icing.