How FSTD Capability Signatures (FCS) and Task-to-Tool are Changing Our Industry

Why the Old Era is Ending

For many decades, the aviation training industry has been defined by rigid boxes: Level D, Level C, FTD 2, FTD 6. While these standards provided genuine value, they have increasingly become a bottleneck. The traditional approach, exemplified by previous FAA guidance, has been criticised for its prescriptive nature. It often forced operators to ask, “Which training tasks can be conducted on an FFS?” rather than the more logical question: “What capabilities does this specific task actually require?”

This "all-or-nothing" model often limited the use of emerging technologies and forced expensive hardware solutions for training tasks that didn't strictly require them.

We are now standing at the start of a fundamental paradigm shift. Driven by EASA, the FAA’s ACT ARC recommendations, and ICAO, the FSTD Capability Signature (FCS) is replacing the old system with a flexible, capability-based model.

The Blueprint for Modern FSTD Training

At its core, the FCS provides a "common language" for regulators, operators, and manufacturers. Instead of a single label, an FSTD qualification certificate will now list a detailed breakdown of its performance across specific areas.

Defining Features and Fidelity

Rooted in the architecture of ICAO Doc 9625, the FCS breaks down a simulator into distinct simulation features (such as Flight Deck Layout, Aeroplane Systems, Visual Cues, and Motion Cues).

For each of these features, the regulator assigns a specific fidelity level, creating the device's recognised "Signature":

• S (Specific): The highest fidelity. Simulates a specific aircraft type and variant (e.g., a specific A320 tail number). Comparable to current Level D.

• R (Representative): Intermediate fidelity. Represents a type but may use data from different variants.

• G (Generic): Represents a class of aircraft (e.g., generic multi-engine piston).

• N (None): The feature is not simulated or required.

This granular approach ensures that if a training task requires "Specific" visuals but "None" for motion, the device can be qualified exactly for that purpose.

Task-to-Tool vs. Tool-to-Task

The most significant operational change is the philosophy behind the regulation.

The Legacy Model: Tool-to-Task

Previously, regulations used a Tool-to-Task approach. The rules dictated that a specific device (the Tool) was required for a manoeuvre (the Task). For example, a type rating might mandate a Level D simulator for cockpit procedures, even if the motion platform (a huge cost driver) wasn't used for that specific lesson.

The New Model: Task-to-Tool

The FCS introduces a Task-to-Tool premise.

1. Define the Training Objective: What specific skills need to be trained?

2. Determine Fidelity Needs: What is the minimum fidelity required for that specific task?

3. Match the Device: Any device with a Signature (FCS) that meets those needs can be used.

This ensures the Full Flight Simulator (FFS) is used where it adds the most value, while other tasks can be moved to an FTD or other lower-cost device that meet the specific fidelity requirements. This optimises "rate-of-effort" and reduces wear on high-end and expensive devices.

How It Works in Practice

For Training Centre Operators, two documents will become essential to your daily operations.

The Training Matrix

Regulators will publish matrices for training courses (like Type Ratings). These lists specify the minimum FCS required to Train (T) and to Test/Check (T&C) every single task in the syllabus.

Example: A "rejected takeoff" might require Specific (S) ground handling and visuals but might only require Representative (R) motion for the training phase.

The Equipment Specification List (ESL)

Operators must declare their device's configuration in the Equipment Specification List (ESL). This document acts as the technical proof that your device meets the fidelity levels claimed in its signature. It demands transparent data management to verify capability.

Challenges and Considerations

While the flexibility is welcome, the transition brings complexity. Based on industry consultation, including feedback from the French DGAC, operators should be aware of a few hurdles:

• The "Specific" Standard: The requirements for the "Specific" (S) level are high. Many existing FTDs may struggle to qualify as "Specific" without OEM data packages, potentially limiting their use for high-level checking.

• The Motion Debate: While the FCS allows for "No Motion" configurations, many Training Matrices may still default to requiring motion for checking tasks. This could limit the ability to offload exams to fixed-base devices.

• Configuration Management: With 14 parameters, the theoretical number of device configurations is massive. Managing the match between your device's ESL and the regulator's Training Matrix will require careful attention.

What This Means for Your Training Centre

The industry is currently in a preparatory phase, with EASA expected to finalise rules around 2026 and full applicability by 2027.

• Legacy Devices: Existing devices are "grandfathered." You do not need to upgrade immediately (or at all). However, you can voluntarily transition to an assigned FCS to gain better training credits.

• New Procurements: For future devices, you must define your target Capability Signature early. The ESL will be a key part of your acceptance testing.

Global Regulatory Alignment

This is not only a European initiative; it is a coordinated international effort toward harmonisation.

• ICAO Doc 9625: The methodological basis for the FCS. It established the international standard for defining simulation fidelity based on training objectives.

• EASA (NPA 2020-15): EASA is leading the implementation with proposed amendments to Part-FCL and CS-FSTD, introducing the "Training Matrix" and "Equipment Specifications List" (ESL).

• FAA (ACT ARC Recommendation 21-10): In the U.S., the Air Carrier Training Aviation Rulemaking Committee (ACT ARC) has urged the FAA to differentiate training requirements from device requirements. Crucially, they recommend removing the mandatory prescription of qualified FSTDs for certain differences training, allowing for alternatives that possess the required FCS fidelity.

Impact Across the Industry

The shift to FCS has wide-ranging implications for every stakeholder in the training loop.

Training Providers and Cost Efficiency

ATOs will likely need to start strategically rethinking their simulator portfolios. By identifying the necessary FCS for each objective, operators can distribute tasks across different device types.

• Example: Level C differences training may only require a "system" training device to teach independent skills.

• Example: Level D training items might use a "manoeuvre" training device, ranging from a flat panel trainer up to a qualified FTD Level 6 or 7.

Instructors as Strategists

The role of the instructor is expanding. No longer just content deliverers, instructors must become strategists who understand which device is best suited for a specific objective. They will need proficiency across multiple platforms and stronger debriefing skills to ensure lessons learned on a each specific device transfers effectively to the aircraft.

Manufacturers and New Tech

For manufacturers, the FCS opens the door to innovation. Because the regulations are now "technologically agnostic" (i.e. focusing on the result of the simulation rather than the hardware) technologies like Virtual Reality (VR) and Mixed Reality (MR) can be integrated into qualified training courses where they meet the fidelity criteria.

Where to From Here?

The FSTD Capability Signature is like moving from a toolbox where you only have one universally expensive tool (the FFS) to a smart toolbox where you select the exact, right-sized instrument for every specific job.

This change reinforces our commitment to helping manage training assets. Whether you're navigating the new EASA regulations or looking to optimise your "rate-of-effort" across a mixed fleet, the future is about matching the right tool to the right task.