Outline:

Introduction

Understanding how Flight Simulation Training Devices (FSTDs) fit within the regulatory framework of 14 CFR is essential knowledge for every flight instructor and pilot seeking to maximize training efficiency while maintaining compliance. From Full Flight Simulators used for type ratings to Basic Aviation Training Devices found at local flight schools, each category of device carries specific credit limits, documentation requirements, and logging rules that directly affect a pilot's path to certification, currency, and proficiency. This outline breaks down the FSTD landscape — what each device is, how it is regulated, what time counts toward which certificate or rating, and what practical limitations instructors must understand to use these tools effectively in pilot development.

1. Overview of Flight Simulation Training Devices (FSTDs)

Summary

FSTDs serve as the umbrella category for all FAA-approved simulation hardware used in aviation training, governed primarily by 14 CFR Part 60. Additional regulatory parts including Part 61, 121, 135, 141, and 142 further define how and when FSTD time may be credited toward ratings and experience requirements.

Supporting Points

• FSTD is the broad regulatory category encompassing all approved simulation devices, from desktop trainers to full-motion simulators

• 14 CFR Part 60 establishes the qualification and approval standards for all FSTDs

• Part 61 governs how FSTD time counts toward aeronautical experience for certificates and ratings

• Parts 121, 135, 141, and 142 each contain additional rules for FSTD use in their respective training environments

Conclusion

A solid grasp of the FSTD regulatory framework allows flight instructors to guide students toward the most efficient and compliant use of simulation time in their aeronautical experience.

2. Full Flight Simulators (FFS)

Summary

Full Flight Simulators represent the highest level of simulation fidelity, offering full motion platforms capable of replicating a specific aircraft's systems, aerodynamics, and environment with maximum accuracy. Because of their realism, FFS devices carry the greatest amount of allowable credit toward certificates, ratings, and currency requirements under 14 CFR.

Supporting Points

• Full Flight Simulators provide the most allowable credit of any FSTD category under 14 CFR

• FFS platforms include full motion systems that replicate the physical sensations of flight

• These devices are the most realistic simulation option available and are validated against actual aircraft performance data

• An FFS can be used toward type ratings, making it an essential tool in airline and advanced pilot training

Conclusion

For pilots pursuing advanced ratings or type certificates, the Full Flight Simulator remains the gold standard in simulation training and regulatory credit.

3. Flight Training Devices (FTD)

Summary

Flight Training Devices represent a specific aircraft configuration and typically operate without a full motion platform, offering a mid-tier option between full simulators and desktop aviation training devices. Some older FRASCA models approved under Part 141 were classified as FTDs, reflecting this device category's long history in structured aviation training programs.

Supporting Points

• FTDs are designed to represent a specific aircraft configuration, making them more operationally accurate than generic ATDs

• Unlike Full Flight Simulators, FTDs typically do not incorporate motion systems

• Some legacy FRASCA units used in Part 141 schools were approved as FTDs under earlier regulatory standards

• FTDs carry significant credit allowances for instrument training, IPC completion, and aeronautical experience under Part 61 and Part 141

Conclusion

FTDs bridge the gap between high-fidelity full simulators and lower-tier desktop devices, offering meaningful regulatory credit while remaining more accessible than full motion platforms.

4. Basic Aviation Training Devices (BATD)

Summary

Basic Aviation Training Devices must meet specific FAA criteria outlined in Advisory Circular AC 61-136B Appendix B and offer the most limited credit of any approved simulation category. Despite their constraints, BATDs remain a cost-effective and accessible tool for introductory instrument training and procedural practice.

Supporting Points

• BATDs must satisfy defined criteria established in AC 61-136B Appendix B to receive FAA approval

• The allowable credit for BATDs is more limited compared to AATDs, FTDs, and Full Flight Simulators

• Under Part 61, a BATD may be used for up to 2.5 hours toward the Private Pilot Certificate and up to 10 hours toward the Instrument Rating

• Under Part 141, BATD credit expands slightly, with up to 5.25 hours applicable toward Private Pilot and 8.75 hours toward the Instrument Rating

Conclusion

While BATDs offer the least regulatory credit of the approved FSTD categories, they provide an accessible entry point for procedural learning and instrument familiarization during early pilot training.

5. Advanced Aviation Training Devices (AATD)

Summary

Advanced Aviation Training Devices are the most commonly available FAA-approved simulation devices found at flight schools and training centers, defined in AC 61-136B Appendix C, and must accurately model aerodynamic changes corresponding to flight control inputs. AATDs carry substantially more credit than BATDs and are approved for use toward Private, Instrument, Commercial, ATP certificates, and Instrument Proficiency Checks.

Supporting Points

• AATDs must model aerodynamic responses to flight control inputs, making them more capable than basic devices for attitude instrument flying practice

• These devices are defined and approved under AC 61-136B Appendix C, with FAA validation required before credit is authorized

• AATDs carry up to 2.5 hours of credit toward the Private Pilot Certificate, up to 20 hours toward the Instrument Rating, up to 50 hours toward the Commercial Pilot Certificate, and up to 25 hours toward the ATP Certificate under Part 61

• AATDs are approved for use during Instrument Proficiency Checks and can satisfy instrument experience requirements per 14 CFR 61.57(c)

Conclusion

The AATD is the practical workhorse of modern flight training simulation, offering broad regulatory credit that instructors can leverage across multiple certificate and rating pathways.

6. Advisory Circular AC 61-136B

Summary

AC 61-136B is the governing advisory circular that defines the FAA approval process for Aviation Training Devices and specifies how FSTD time may be logged for credit under 14 CFR Parts 61 and 141. It also establishes what documents must be available to both the student and instructor during any AATD or BATD training session.

Supporting Points

• AC 61-136B specifies the criteria and process for FAA approval of both BATDs and AATDs, including the Qualification and Approval Guide (QAG) requirements

• The circular defines how training time should be logged to receive credit under Parts 61 and 141, providing clear guidance on column entries and time categories

• Instructors and students must have access to the device's Letter of Authorization, the FAA-approved QAG, and performance information for the aircraft configuration being simulated

• Electronic retrieval of these documents is acceptable, allowing for digital logbook and documentation management during simulator sessions

Conclusion

Familiarity with AC 61-136B is a non-negotiable requirement for any flight instructor using simulation devices, as it governs both the validity of credit claimed and the documentation required to support it.

7. The Letter of Authorization (LOA)

Summary

The Letter of Authorization is the FAA-issued document that officially approves a specific simulation device for use under Parts 61 and 141 and defines exactly which regulatory sections and experience credits apply to that device. The LOA is valid for five years, after which the device must be revalidated and a new LOA issued before credit may continue to be claimed.

Supporting Points

• The LOA specifies which sections of 14 CFR Parts 61 and 141 the device is approved to satisfy, including logbook entries, instrument experience, IPC completion, and aeronautical experience credits

• LOAs are issued to the device manufacturer and are valid for five years, requiring revalidation and reissuance to maintain approved status

• Both the device type and its LOA together determine the full scope of allowable training credit and experience obtainable from a given session

• A sample LOA from Precision Flight Controls demonstrates approval references including sections 61.51, 61.57, 61.65, 61.109, 61.129, 61.159, and 141.41 appendices

Conclusion

Instructors must verify that any FSTD they use carries a current, valid LOA, as an expired or missing LOA invalidates all training credit claimed from sessions conducted on that device.

8. Part 61 References and Logging Simulator Time Correctly

Summary

Part 61 contains multiple specific sections governing how FSTD time is defined, logged, and applied toward aeronautical experience, and proper logbook entry practices are essential to ensure that credit is legally recognized during practical tests and certificate applications. When logging simulator time, all standard flight time columns must remain blank, with entries made only for total time, instruction received, and simulated instrument time.

Supporting Points

• 14 CFR 61.51(b) addresses logbook entries, 61.51(g)(4-5) covers logging instrument time in an FSTD, and 61.51(h) governs how training time is recorded

• All standard flight time columns such as solo, cross-country, and night must remain blank when logging FSTD sessions, as simulator time is not flight time

• The three valid logbook entries for an approved FSTD session are total time, instruction received, and simulated instrument time

• Additional Part 61 references include 61.4 for device qualification, 61.64 for simulator use during practical tests, and 61.65 for instrument rating training and FFS/FTD/ATD time allowances

Conclusion

Correct logbook entries from FSTD sessions are critical to a pilot's aeronautical record and must be verified by the flight instructor to prevent certificate application complications.

9. AATD Time Allowances by Certificate and Rating

Summary

The amount of FSTD time creditable toward each certificate or rating varies significantly by device type and regulatory part, and instructors must understand these limits to build training plans that maximize simulator efficiency without exceeding allowed credit. A reference chart comparing BATD, AATD, FTD, and FFS credit across Private, Instrument, Commercial, CFI, CFII, and ATP certificates provides a clear framework for curriculum planning.

Supporting Points

• For the Instrument Rating under Part 61, a BATD allows up to 10 hours, an AATD allows up to 20 hours, and an FTD or FFS allows up to 20 hours of the required instrument time

• The Commercial Pilot Certificate under Part 61 allows up to 50 hours on an AATD, FTD, or FFS, but BATDs carry no approved credit for commercial training

• ATP candidates under Part 61 may use up to 25 hours on an AATD, FTD, or FFS toward the 75-hour instrument experience requirement, per 61.159(4)(i)

• Under Part 141, allowances generally differ from Part 61 — for example, the Instrument Rating permits 14 hours on an AATD or FTD versus 17.5 hours on an FFS

Conclusion

Mastering FSTD time allowances by certificate and part empowers flight instructors to design cost-effective, regulation-compliant training curricula that accelerate student progress toward each pilot certificate.

10. Notes on Fidelity and Practical Use of AATDs

Summary

Despite their regulatory approval and broad credit potential, AATDs and BATDs were originally designed as procedural trainers and carry important fidelity limitations that instructors must account for when structuring training sessions. Aerodynamic model accuracy degrades at slow airspeeds and near the ground, visual fidelity varies with monitor size and placement, and the technology is evolving rapidly in ways that continue to improve simulator training value.

Supporting Points

• AATDs were originally designed as procedural trainers, making them most effective for instrument procedures, systems management, and cockpit resource management practice

• Aerodynamic modeling in most ATDs is less accurate at slow airspeeds and in ground effect, which limits their usefulness for practicing VFR maneuvers such as slow flight, stalls, and takeoff and landing technique

• Visual fidelity — a key factor in attitude instrument flying and spatial orientation training — varies considerably based on monitor size, placement, and display resolution

• Simulator technology is advancing rapidly, with newer platforms offering significantly improved aerodynamic modeling and visual systems that expand their practical training value

Conclusion

Understanding the fidelity boundaries of available simulation devices allows flight instructors to use AATDs where they excel — instrument procedures, systems familiarity, and aeronautical decision-making — while reserving actual flight time for maneuvers that demand high-fidelity aerodynamic replication.