AirRabbit:
Additionally, you might be interested to know that, actually, the Advisory Circular 120-40C was never completed and published (although there were some authorizations granted, I understand, for a few organizations to use “Draft -40C” for some applications…
Yes sir, several of the simulators I maintained had 120-40C draft as the approval basis on the FAA NSP approval line. As all of us aircraft maintenance types know, an AC is a means, but not the sole means.
Thanks for some of the history of the NSET/NSP. I was aware of some of it, but not all. The current personnel list shows about 6 inspectors outside of Atlanta, the rest of the team there.
Knowing these obviously diametrical opposed circumstances, it is easy to understand why the NSP is seeking to develop and incorporate a professionally constructed and dependable QMS.
You might want to re-think this one, I authored the 3rd approved SQMS, and I’m pretty sure I’m not necessary a professional writer…
In somewhat line with this thread, the NSP has issued a new Guidance bulletin on full stall training maneuvers, and I have heard that the next FSTD Directive might involve crosswind landing data.
For those outside of the US, it takes about 5 years to update any FAR. The idea around FSTD Directive(s) was to short cut that time span, making simulators more like the aircraft faster. To date, the NSP has only issued one FSTD, on visual models.