Easy Access Rules for Operational Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data (CS-FCD) (Issue 2)

Easy Access Rules for Operational Disclaimer Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data CS - FCD – Issue 2

D ISCLAIMER

This document is issued by the European Union Aviation Safety Agency (referred to as both ‘EASA’ and ‘the Agency’) to provide its stakeholders with an updated, consolidated, and easy - to - read publication. It has been prepared by putting together the officially published EU regulations with the related EASA certification spec ifications (CSs), acceptable means of compliance (AMC) and guidance material (GM) (including their amendments) adopted so far. However, this document is not an official publication, and EASA accepts no liability for damage of any kind resulting from the ri sks inherent in its use.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 3 of 43 | Jun 2023

Easy Access Rules for Operational Note from the editor Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data CS - FCD – Issue 2

N OTE FROM THE EDITOR

The content of this document is arranged as follows: the certification specifications (CS) are followed by the related guidance material ( GM ) paragraph(s).

All elem ents (i.e. CS and GM ) are colour - coded and ca n be identified according to the illustration below. The EASA Executive Director (ED) decision through which the point or paragraph was introduced or last amended is indicated below the paragraph title(s) in italics .

Certification specification

ED decision

Guidance material

ED d ecision The format of this document has been adjusted to make it user - friendly and for reference purposes.

Any comments should be sent to erules@easa.europa.eu .

Powered by EASA eRules Page 4 of 43 | Jun 2023

Easy Access Rules for Operational Incorporated amendments Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data CS - FCD – Issue 2

I NCORPORATED A MENDMENTS

CS/GM ( ED DECISIONS )

CS/AMC Issue No, Incorporated ED Decision Applicability date Amendment No ED Decision 2014/008/R CS - FCD/ Initial i ssue 31/1/2014 ED Decision 2021/012/R CS - FCD/ Issue 2 17/9/2021 Note: To access the official versions , please click on the hyper links provided above.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 5 of 43 | Jun 2023

Easy Access Rules for Operational Table of conte nts Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data CS - FCD – Issue 2

T ABLE OF CONTENTS

SUBPART A — GENERAL ................................ ................................ . 8 CS FCD.200 Determination of a pilot type rating ................................ ... 17 SUBPART C — PILOT TYPE RATING TRAINING AND OPERATIONAL CS FCD.300 Pilot type rating training and operational training GM1 FCD.300 Pilot type rating training and operational training requirements for SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL EVALUATION ................................ .. 23 CS FCD.400 Difference Requirement (DR) tables ................................ ... 23 Powered by EASA eRules Page 6 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational Table of contents Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data CS - FCD – Issue 2 Powered by EASA eRules Page 7 of 43 | Jun 2023

Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART A — GENERAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data CS - FCD – Issue 2

SUBPART A — GENERAL

CS FCD.050 Scope

ED Decision 2021 /012/R (a) These Certification Specifications for Flight Crew Data (CS - FCD) address: (1) the determination of a pilot type rating: (i) to establish whether an aircraft is recognised as a new type or as a variant to an existing type of aircraft , or as a modification to an existing type or variant, including its new systems, new equipment, or new procedures; and (ii) to assign the pilot licence endorsement designation for a n aircraft ; (2) the minimum syllabus for an aircraft type - specific pilot training course, including checking requirements, currency requirements and recent experience requirements; (3) the identification and validation of trai ning areas of special emphasis (TASE); (4) the determination of initial and recurrent training, as well as of checking and credit based on the differences/commonalities between types, variants, aircraft systems, equipment, or procedures; and (5) pilot expe rience and pilot prerequisites for the issuance of a type rating, as provided for in Regulation (EU) No 1178/2011 (‘Aircrew Regulation’).

(b) The following elements are taken into consideration to achieve compliance with CS - FCD: (1) the specific characteri stics of the aircraft; (2) any type - specific training elements related to design changes, equipment, procedures or operations of a n aircraft; (3) the technical requirements and administrative procedures related to the A ircrew R egulation , Regulation (EU) No 965/2012 (‘Air OPS Regulation’), and those of Annex I (Part 21) to Regulation (EU) No 748/2012 (‘Initial Airworthiness Regulation’); (4) the pilot experience and entry prerequisites for the issuance of a type rating ; (5) the commonalities and differences between the candidate aircraft and the base aircraft in accordance with the d ifference r equirement (DR) tables, where applicable.

[Issue No: FCD/2]

GM1 FCD.050 Scope

ED Decision 2021/012/R (a) The scope of CS - FCD includes t he following elements, as appropriate: (1) training elements related to types of operations subject to specific approvals as per Annex III (Part - ORO), Annex V (Part CAT), and Annex VIII (Part - SPO) to the Air OPS Regulation; and (2) the use of optional aircraft equipment.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 8 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART A — GENERAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data CS - FCD – Issue 2 (b) Specific type s of operations include, but are not limited to: (1) LVO; (2) ETOPS; (3) operations dedicated to helicopters such as HHO, HEMS , and offshore operations; and (4) steep approaches .

(c) S pecific airspace includes, but is not limited to , RVSM, MNPS , and BRNAV .

(d) Optional equipment includes, but is not limited to , n ew aircraft technology or specific equipment such as HUD, EFB, NVIS, ECL customisation, E F VS and S F VS equipment .

[Issue No: FCD/2]

CS FCD.100 Applicability

ED Decision 2021/012 /R (a) CS FCD.200(a) is applicable to all aircraft. All other paragraphs are applicable to aircraft for which a pilot type rating is determined.

(b) This CS - FCD specifies o perational s uitability d ata (OSD) base d on data provision which is required from the t ype c ertificate (TC) applicant /holder and data provided at the request of the TC applicant /holder . OSD is presented as mandatory or non - mandatory (recommendations) for the end user in accordance with the A ircrew and A ir OPS R egulations as follows: (1) d ata required from the TC applicant /holder and mandatory for the end users (Box 1): (i) CS FCD.200 ; (ii) CS FCD.300(a);(b);(c);(d);(e)(1) and (e)(2) ; (iii) CS FCD.400 ; ( iv ) CS FCD.405 ; (v) CS FCD.410 ; (v i ) CS FCD.415 ; and (v i i) CS FCD.420 ; (2) d ata required from the TC applicant /holder a nd non - mandatory (recommendations) for the end users (Box 2): (i) CS FCD.300(a);(b);(c);(d);(e)(3) and (f) ; (ii) CS FCD.415 ; and (iii) CS FCD.420 ; (3) d ata at the request of the TC applicant /holder and mandatory for the end users (Box 3): (i) CS FCD.300(a);(b);(c);(d);(e)(1) and (e)(2) ; (ii) CS FCD.310(a) and (b) ; Powered by EASA eRules Page 9 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART A — GENERAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data CS - FCD – Issue 2 (iii) CS FCD.400 ; (iv) CS FCD.405 ; (v) CS FCD.410 ; (vi) CS FCD.415 ; and (vii) CS FCD.420 ; (4) d ata at the request of the TC applicant /holder and non - mandatory (recommendations) for the end users (Box 4): (i) CS FCD.300(a);(b);(c);(d);(e)(2);(e)(3) and (f) ; (ii) CS FCD.305 ; (iii) CS FCD.310(a) and (b) ; (iv) CS FCD.400 ; (v) CS FCD.405 ; (vi) CS FCD.410 ; (vii) CS FCD.415 ; and (viii) CS FCD.420 ; and (5) i tem s ( b )(1) and ( b )(2) combined constitu te the minimum syllabus for pilot type rating training as required by Part 21.

[Issue No: FCD/2]

GM1 FCD.100 Applicability

ED Decision 2021/012/R (a) The technical requirements and administrative procedures related to the Aircrew and Air OPS Regulations contain references to OSD that may be established in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 748 /20 12 .

Th is data may contain mandatory or non - mandatory elements concerning: (1) the type of aircraft categorisation; (2) the period of validity for type ratings; (3) the pilot experience requirements and prerequisites to commence training; (4) theoretical knowledge and flight instruction for the issu ance of type ratings; (5) difference training provisions between different varia nts of one type or between an aircraft and the related systems, equipment, and procedures that are associated with a modification; (6) credit related to reduced type rating training, based on commonalities between two types from the same manufacturer; ( 7 ) recent experience credit for operation s o n more than one type of aircraft; ( 8 ) recurrent training, and checking, as well as alternating proficiency checks, for operation s on more than one type or variant; Powered by EASA eRules Page 10 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART A — GENERAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data CS - FCD – Issue 2 ( 9 ) pilot type - specific training elements ; ( 10 ) credit related to crewing of inexperienced flight crew members; ( 11 ) credit related to the number of take - offs and landings following ZFTT; (1 2 ) type - specific training elements related to the issu ance of a specific approval ; and (13) credit related to spec ific types of operations, when so allowed by the Air OPS Regulation.

(b) M andatory and non - mandatory OSD elements are approved upon satisfactory demonstration of compliance. This data may be required from, or voluntarily provided by, the applicant, based o n data required to be approved , or based on data approved at the request of the applicant.

Therefore, OSD can be grouped in ‘Boxes’ as follows: (1) Box 1: Data required from the applicant and mandatory for the end user; (2) Box 2: Data required from the applicant and non - mandatory (recommendations) for the end user; (3) Box 3: Data at the request of the applicant and mandatory for the end user; and (4) Box 4 : Data at the request of the applicant and non - mandatory (recommendations) for the end user.

Box es 1 and 2 combined constitute the minimum syllabus for pilot type rating training as required by Part 21.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 11 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART A — GENERAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data CS - FCD – Issue 2 Some practical examples are provided in the follo wing table: Box 1 Box 2 Aircraft type designation and pilot licen c e Training footprint for : endorsement — initial type rating and difference training Aircraft variant designations (when applicable) Prerequisites for initial type rating training and checking Training a reas of s pecial e mphasis (TASE) for initial type rating and recurrent training MDR tables between variants DR tables related to systems training, equipment training, and procedures training, based on aircraft modifications Box 3 Box 4 Level of d ifferences d etermination — DR & MDR Training footprint for: Tables — difference training ; TASE for: — type rating training based on credit for — difference training commonalit ies; and — type rating training based on credit for — training for specific operations, commonalit ies; and procedures or equipment (e.g. LVO , RNP — training for specific operations, AR, E F VS/S F VS, EFB, NVIS, etc.)

procedures or equipment (e.g. steep CTLC : credit for recent experience requirements approaches, RNP AR, E F VS/S F VS, EFB, Credits for training, checking , or currency NVIS, etc.)

Prerequisites , credit for training and checking or recent experience requirements for operation s on more than one type or variant [Issue No: FCD/2]

CS FCD.105 Definitions

ED Decision 2021/012/R Within the scope of this CS - FCD, the following definitions apply: (a) Base aircraft means an aircraft used as a reference to compare differences with another aircraft.

(b) Candidate aircraft means an aircraft su bject to the evaluation process.

(c) Checking means skill testing, proficiency checking, and recurrent checking.

( d ) Common t ake - off and l anding c redit (CTLC) means a programme or process that allows credit for recent experience between aircraft types that can be demonstrated to have very similar handling qualities, flight characteristics , operating techniques, and operating procedures during take - off and initial climb, approach and landing ( including the establishment of the final landing configuration ) .

( e ) Currency means the experience and recurrent training necessary for the safe operation of air craft, systems and equipme nt .

Powered by EASA eRules Page 12 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART A — GENERAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data CS - FCD – Issue 2 ( f ) Difference level means a formally designated level of difference between a base and a candidate aircraft for the evaluation of pilot training, checking, or currency.

(g) Difference r equirement (DR) means a description of the differences regarding the level of training and checking, or currency between a base and a candidate aircraft and their impact on flight characteristics and changes of procedures , to be used by ATOs for the development of training courses and by operators for the development of ODR tables and training programmes.

(h) Evaluation subjects means pilots possessing the general and specific prerequisites for taking a training course and/or for conducting the specific test, who are used in T tests for the purpose of determining the compliance of the proposed O SD FC initial or difference training elements, as well as of any credit.

( i ) Flight characteristics means the handling qualities or performance characteristics perceivable by a pilot. Flight characteristics relate to the natural aerodynamic response of an aircraft, particularly as affected by changes in configuration or flight path parameters.

( j ) Handling qualities means the manner in which the aircraft responds with respect to the rate and magnitude of pilot - initiated control inputs to the flight controls based on the aerodynamic response of an aircraft, also as affected by changes in configuration or flight path parameters.

( k ) Line f lying u nder s upervision (LIFUS) means the part of the operator’s conversion course in accordance with the A i r OPS Regulation .

( l ) Master d ifference r equirements (MDR s ) means those requirements that pertain to differences between types of aircraft or variants of the same type of aircraft. MDRs are specified in terms of the minimum difference levels for training, checki ng, and currency, and include the highest difference level identified in the applicable DR tables.

( m ) Minimum syllabus means the training elements and the associated footprint provided by the applicant and approved by EASA for a specific aircraft type.

(n ) Modification means a change to an aircraft type design and to the associated TC, which has an impact on the flight crew data in relation to new systems, new equipment, or new procedures.

( o ) Pilot type rating endorsement means the designation of an aircr aft type endorsed on a pilot licence.

( p ) Recent experience means the recent experience described in point FCL.060 of Annex I (Part - FCL) to the Aircrew Regulation.

( q ) Training a reas of s pecial e mphasis (TASE) means specific knowledge and skills required f or the safe operation of an aircraft type or variant , the use of equipment, the application of procedures , or the performance of operations.

( r ) Training footprint means a summary description of a training programme, usually in short tabular form, showing the training subjects, modules, procedures, manoeuvres , or other programme elements that are planned for completion during each day or phase of training.

(s) Type of aircraft means a category of aircraft that requires a type rating as determined in the OSD established in accordance with Part 21, and which includes all aircraft of the same basic design, including all modifications thereto, except those modifications that result in a change of handling qualities or of flight characteristics.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 13 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART A — GENERAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data CS - FCD – Issue 2 ( t ) Variant means an aircraft or a series of aircraft that share s the same basic design within the same pilot type rating , and that has such differences from the base aircraft that requir e difference training or familiarisation training as per point FCL.710 of Part - FCL.

[Issue No: FCD/2]

GM1 FCD.105 Definitions

ED Decision 2021/012/R List of acronyms used in CS - FCD ACARS Aircraft Communication Addressing and Reporting System ATA Air Trans port Association ATO approved training organisation ATQP Alternative Training and Qualification Programme BRNAV Basic Area Navigation CBT Computer - Based Training CTLC c ommon t ake - off and l anding c redit CS Certification Specifications DR Difference Requirement ECL Electronic Check List EFB Electronic Flight Bag EFIS Electronic Flight Instrument System EFVS enhanced flight vision system ETOPS Extended range operations with two - engine aeroplane FC Flight Crew FCD flight crew data FCL Flight Crew Licensing FCS FSTD capability signature FD Flight Director FFS f ull f light s imulator FGCS Flight Guidance Control System FMS Flight Management System FSTD f light s imulation t raining d evice Powered by EASA eRules Page 14 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART A — GENERAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data CS - FCD – Issue 2 FTD f light t raining d evice GM Guidance Mater ial GPWS Ground Proximity Warning System HEMS Helicopter Emergency Medical Service HHO Helicopter Hoist Operations HUD Head - Up Display INS Inertial Navigation System JOEB Joint Operational Evaluation Board LBS Load & Balance and Servicing LIFUS Line Flying Under Supervision LOF l ine o riented f lying LVO Low - Visibility Operations MDR Master Difference Requirement MNPS Minimum Navigation Performance Specification NVIS Night Vision Imaging System ODR Operator Difference Requirement OEB Operational Evaluation Board OPT Operational Performance Tool OSD Operational Suitability Data OTD Other Training Devices PIC Pilot - In - Command QRH Quick Reference Handbook RNP AR required navigation performance authorisation required RVSM Reduced Vertical Separation Minima Powered by EASA eRules Page 15 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART A — GENERAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data CS - FCD – Issue 2 S F VS s ynthetic flight v ision s ystem TC Type Certificate TCAS Traffic Collision Avoidance System TCH type - certificate holder TRI Type - Rating Instructor V FR Visual Flight Rules WBT web - based training ZFTT zero flight time training [Issue No: FCD/2] Powered by EASA eRules Page 16 of 43 | Jun 2023

Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART B — DETERMINATION OF A Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data PILOT TYPE RATING CS - FCD – Issue 2

SUBPART B — DETERMINATION OF A PILOT TYPE

RATING

CS FCD.200 Determination of a pilot type rating

ED Decision 2021/012/R (a) The determination of whether a certain type of aircraft is subject to a pilot type rating is as follows: (1) The following aircraf t are subject to a pilot type rating: (i) aeroplanes: — with a maximum certified take - off mass (MCTOM) exceeding 5 700 kg, or — certified for a maximum passenger seating configuration of more than 19, or — certified for operation with a minimum crew of at lea st two pilots, or — equipped with one or more turbojet engines or more than one turboprop engine; (ii) helicopters except those certified in accordance with CS - VLR; (iii) tilt rotors; and (iv) gas airships; (2) The following aircraft are not subject to a pilot type rating: (i) sailplanes; (ii) powered sailplanes; (iii) balloons; (iv) aeroplanes that meet the definition of ELA 1 or ELA 2; and (v) hot air airships.

(3) An aircraft not listed in subparagraphs (1) or (2) will be subject to a pilot type rating: (i) either at the request of the applicant; or (ii) if EASA determines that the aircraft's operational experience, data, handling qualities , performance or level of flight deck technology require type rating training for its safe operation.

(b) The determination of whether a certain aircraft is a new type or a variant is made in accordance with Subpart D.

(c) The type rating or variant determination is recorded in the OSD FC.

(d) Changes to a type design are assessed for their impact on the asso ciated FC data and addressed, if necessary, through changes to the OSD FC.

[Issue No: FCD/2] Powered by EASA eRules Page 17 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART B — DETERMINATION OF A Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data PILOT TYPE RATING CS - FCD – Issue 2

GM1 FCD.200 Determination of a pilot type rating and a variant

ED Decision 2021/012/R For aircraft described in CS FC D.200(a)(3)(a)(3) , it may be determined during the type certification process or based on in - service experience, that the aircraft type requires a pilot type rating for safe operations . The TC applicant/holder is then requested to obtain approval of a mini mum syllabus for pilot type rating training by including the OSD FC specifications in the certification basis . This determination is based on the considerations listed in that subparagraph.

With reference to CS FC D.200 (d), when assessing design changes for their impact on the FCD, a new model or a new series, as identified in the TC data sheet, would usually determine a variant or, potentially, a new type.

Modifications that are significant from the FC perspective, performed by the TC holder or via an STC, even though they do not determine a new model or a new series, may require the determination of a new variant (e.g. the installation of a new avionic suite).

Design modifications to an existing type or variant tha t do not determine a new variant are only addressed through changes to the DR tables or supplemental DR tables to support operators in developing their training programmes.

[Issue No: FCD/2] Powered by EASA eRules Page 18 of 43 | Jun 2023

Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART C — PILOT TYPE RATING Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data TRAINING AND OPERATIONAL TRAINING CS - FCD – Issue 2 REQUIREMENTS

SUBPART C — PILOT TYPE RATING TRAINING AND

OPERATIONAL TRAINING R EQUIREMENTS

CS FCD.300 Pilot type rating training and operational training

requirements for a specific aircraft

ED Decision 2021/012/R (a) The specific training requirements to build the necessary theoretical and practical skills to operate a specific aircraft are defined in the OSD FC .

(b) T he d efinition of the specific training requirements has to consider the provisions related to Aircrew and Air OPS Regulations and Part 21 , taking into account the relevant references to the OSD.

(c) The development of the specific training requirements is based on the assumption that the pilot undergoing training has met the prerequisites for the training to be evaluated.

(d) The specific training requirements must be identified and established in accordance with CS FCD.425 .

(e) The specific training requirements depend on the aircraft type, any design changes, sp ecific equipment, procedures , or operations, and contain: (1) TASE related to the particular aircraft type, including identification of all type - specific knowledge and skills; (2) the prerequisite s for the minimum entry - level requirement s to be fulfilled by the pilot , when they are more stringent than those established under the Aircrew Regulation; and (3) the training footprint.

(f) The training footprint indicates which training methods and device(s) are assumed to be used, based on CS FCD.415 .

[Issue No: FCD/2]

GM1 FCD.300 Pilot type rating training and operational training

requirements for a specific aircraft

ED Decision 2021/012/R (a) The following table presents an example of a training footprint for a type rating course. This footprint can be made equally applicable to other training courses by adapting the contents and duration s .

Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5 Table i ntroduction CBT MODULE 2 CBT MODULE 3 CBT MODULE 4 Tutorial 1 OPT CBT M ODULE 1 (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) OTD MODULE 1 (x:xx hrs) Powered by EASA eRules Page 19 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART C — PILOT TYPE RATING Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data TRAINING AND OPERATIONAL TRAINING CS - FCD – Issue 2 REQUIREMENTS Day 6 Day 7 Day 8 Day 9 Day 10 CBT MODULE 5 CBT MODULE 6 CBT MODULE 7 CBT MODULE 8 CBT MODULE 9 (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) OTD MODULE 2 OTD MODULE 3 OTD MODULE 4 OTD MODULE 5 OTD MODULE 6 (x:xx hrs) ( x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) Day 11 Day 12 Day 13 Day 14 Day 15 CBT MODULE 10 CBT MODULE 11 CBT MODULE 12 CBT MODULE 13 Tutorial 2 EFB, (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) QRH OTD MODULE 7 OTD MODULE 8 OTD MODULE 9 OTD MODULE 10 (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) Tutorial 3 LBS (x:xx hrs) Day 16 Day 17 Day 18 Day 19 Day 20 Variances F STD MODULE 1 F STD MODULE 2 F STD MODULE 3 F STD MODULE 4 (if needed) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) Day 21 Day 22 Day 23 Day 24 Day 25 F STD MODULE 5 F STD MODULE 6 F STD MODULE 7 F STD MODULE 8 Skill test (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) (x:xx hrs) Wind shear briefing (x:xx hrs) Note: Times for OTD and FSTD modules include time for briefing and debriefing when appropriate .

(b) Reduced training footprint Type rating training is based on the pilot’s prere quisites.

If there is some commonality between the base and candidate aircraft, a reduced type rating training footprint may be provided by giving credit to the common characteristics between these types.

If the determination is made that the base and the candidate aircraft are considered variants, then difference training or familiarisation training is required.

(c) Training methods For the training methods for pilot type rating training and operational training : (1) knowledge can be adequately addressed through self - instruction and aided instruction; (2) hands - on training can be adequately addressed by part - task trainers , system training devices (for example for FMS and TCAS) , or aircraft on ground ; (3) demonstration can only be adequately addressed in a n FSTD or in an aircraft with the appropriate capability to achieve the training objectives, and enab l e the integration of knowledge, skills and abilities.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 20 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART C — PILOT TYPE RATING Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data TRAINING AND OPERATIONAL TRAINING CS - FCD – Issue 2 REQUIREME NTS (d) Development of training areas of special emphasis (TASE) (1) TASE are identified: (i) to prevent misunderstandings, skill errors, or skill deficiencies that have an impact on the safety of the flight, and may be specified as mandatory items specific to a given aircraft type, variant, or equipment to be in tegrated in the training (type rating training, difference training, familiarisation training, or equipment training, as applicable); or (ii) when the impact on the safety of the flight is considered to be associated with aircraft failure conditions with a severity classified as Major or higher and when there are associated pilot training elements to mitigate the effects; or (iii) when the flight manual emergency and abnormal procedures require specific knowledge or skills to be acquired.

(2) Types of TASE (i) TASE provided in the initial FCD corresponding to the aircraft configuration in the TC (or provided in the aircraft basic specification at the time of the FCD catch up).

These TASE are the only mandatory FCD items for the type rating course content bas ed on the aircraft configuration at TC.

(ii) TASE provided in the update of the FCD for the modified aircraft (TASE for a variant, TASE for equipment). These TASE are mandatory FCD items that are provided in addition to the DR tables for the difference tra ining, familiarisation training, and equipment training.

(3) Initial and recurrent training TASE are applicable to both initial and recurrent training. However, more detailed provisions on the applicability of TASE may be provided as part of the OSD.

(4) R elationship between TASE and difference training levels TASE are typically associated with training items that require at least level B difference training.

(5) Sources for TASE Typical sources of TASE or elements that may generate TASE are: (i) design val idation: validation of an aircraft design (e.g. systems, functions, etc.)

and aircraft procedures (e.g. flight test, human factors (HF) evaluation, safety analysis, etc.); (ii) operational evaluations: FCD evaluations (T testing), or ATO training syllabus evaluations; and (iii) in - service or training feedback/experience.

[Issue No: FCD/2] Powered by EASA eRules Page 21 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART C — PILOT TYPE RATING Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data TRAINING AND OPERATIONAL TRAINING CS - FCD – Issue 2 REQUIREMENTS

CS FCD.305 LIFUS

ED Decision 2021/012/R Requirements for LIFUS are specified in the Air OPS Regulation ; however, credit between aircraft types for the number of take - offs and landings related to LIFUS following a ZFTT is permitted as a result of the evaluation process, and specified in the OSD.

[Issue No: FCD/2]

CS FCD.310 Credit for operation s on more tha n one type or variant

ED Decision 2021/012/R (a) Based on commonalities between aircraft types or variants and based on the provisions of Part - ORO of the Air OPS Regulation, the applicant may propose: (1) credit for training, checking , and currency for operation s on more than one type or variant; (2) credit related to recent - experience requirements when operating more than one type.

(b) For substantiation of the credit that is proposed under (a), the applicant provides DR tables or othe r appropriate documentation for comparison of the relevant aircraft characteristics.

[Issue No: FCD/2]

GM1 FCD.310 Credit for operation s on more than one type or

variant

ED Decision 2021/012/R Credit can be given for common equipment, common procedures, and types of operations that include, but are not limited to: (a) alternating proficiency checks; (b) currency and recent experience; and (c) other credit to be established under the OSD in the relevant subparts of Parts ORO, CAT, and SPO of the Air OPS R egulation.

[Issue No: FCD/2] Powered by EASA eRules Page 22 of 43 | Jun 2023

Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2

SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL EVALUATION

CS FCD.400 Difference Requirement (DR) tables

ED Decision 2021/012/R (a) DR tables are provided for: (1) any evaluation of differences between a base aircraft and a candidate aircraft for type rating and variant assessment; (2) the content of difference training or familiarisation training between variants; (3) new systems or equipment and associated procedur es; and (4) credit based on commonality.

(b) DR tables identify the differences between the base and the candidate aircraft in terms of general characteristics, systems , and manoeuvres, and propose appropriate difference levels.

(c) DR tables can be expand ed to address multiple aircraft comparisons.

(d) DR tables are established in accordance with the Appendix to CS FCD.400 .

[Issue No: FCD/2] Powered by EASA eRules Page 23 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2

Appendix to CS FCD.400 Compilation of DR tables

ED Decision 2021/012/R This A ppendix specifies the compilation of DR tables. The applicant conducts a detailed evaluation of the differences of the aircraft concerned and incorporates it into the DR tables.

(a) DR 1: General The general characteristics of the candid ate aircraft are compared with the base aircraft with regard to: (1) general dimensions and aircraft design (number and type of rotors, wingspan or category); (2) flight deck general design; (3) cabin layout; (4) engines (number, type , and position); (5) l imitations (flight envelope).

(b) DR 2: Systems Consideration is given to differences in design between the candidate aircraft and the base aircraft. For this comparison the Air Transport Association (ATA) 100 index is used. This index establishes a system and subsystem classification and then an analysis performed for each index item with respect to the main architectural, functional and operations elements, including controls and indications on the systems control panel.

(c) DR 3: Manoeuvres Operational d ifferences encompass normal, abnormal and emergency situations and include any change in aircraft handling and flight management. It is necessary to establish a list of operational items for consideration on which an analysis of differences can be made.

Th e operational analysis should take the following into account: (1) flight deck dimensions (size, cut - off angle and pilot eye height); (2) differences in controls (design, shape, location and function); (3) additional or altered function (flight controls) in normal or abnormal conditions; (4) handling qualities (including inertia) in normal and in abnormal configurations; (5) aircraft performance in specific manoeuvres; (6) aircraft status following a failure ; (7) management (such as Electronic Centralised Aircraft Monitoring (ECAM), Engine Indication and Crew Alerting System (EICAS), navaid selection and automatic checklists).

[Issue No: FCD/2] Powered by EASA eRules Page 24 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2

CS FCD.405 Master Difference Requirement (MDR) tables

ED Decision 2021/012/R (a) Based on the DR tables that are established in accordance with CS FCD.400 , MDR tables must be included in the OSD.

(b) MDR tables are specified in terms of the minimum difference levels f or training, checking, and currency, and include the highest difference level identified in the applicable DR tables.

[Issue No: FCD/2]

GM1 FCD.405 Master Difference Requirement (MDR) tables

ED Decision 2014/008/R Proposed MDRs MDR tables are established w hen candidate aircraft is evaluated in comparison to base aircraft.

MDRs example: Aircraft type FROM AIRCRAFT (base) aircraft 1 aircraft 2 aircraft T aircraft 1 n/a A / A / A C / B / B O A I aircraft 2 A / A / A n/a D/B/B R C R A aircraft C / B / B D / B / B n/a F T (candidate)

CS FCD.410 Difference levels — General

ED Decision 2021/012/R (a) Difference levels are used to identify the extent of difference between a base and a candidate aircraft with reference to the elements described in the DR tables. These levels are proportionate to the differences between a base and a candidate aircraft. A range of five difference levels in order of increasing requirements, identified as A through E, are each specified for training, checki ng, and currency.

(b) Difference levels apply when a difference with the potential to affect flight safety exists between a base and a candidate aircraft. Differences may also affect the knowledge, skills, or abilities required from a pilot. If no differen ces exist, or if differences exist but do not affect flight safety, or if differences exist but do not affect knowledge, skills, or abilities, then difference levels are neither assigned nor applicable to pilot qualification. When difference levels apply, each level is based on a scale of differences related to design features, systems, or manoeuvres. In assessing the effects of differences, both flight characteristics and procedures are considered since flight characteristics address handling qualities and performance, while procedures include normal, non - normal and emergency items.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 25 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2 (c) Levels for training, checking, and currency are assigned independently, but are linked depending on the differences between a base and a candidate aircraft. Training at leve l E normally identifies that the candidate aircraft is a different type to the base aircraft.

[Issue No: FCD/2]

CS FCD.415 Difference levels — Training, checking , and currency

ED Decision 2021/012/R (a) Difference levels are summarised in the table below regarding training, checking, and currency: DIFFERENCE TRAINING CHECKING CURRENCY LEVEL Not applicable or Not applicable A — Self - instruction integrated with the next proficiency check B — Aided instruction Task or system check Self - review C — System devices Partial proficiency check Designated systems and that us es a qualified procedures that use device system devices or aircraft D FSTDs or aircraft to Partial proficiency check Designated manoeuvre(s) execute specific that us es a qualified that use FSTDs or aircraft manoeuvres device E FSTDs or aircraft Proficiency check using FSTDs or aircraft Footnote 1: (1) aeroplanes: (i) FFS level D, or (ii) FSTD with an FCS at least equal to FTD level B as defined in CS - FSTD(A) Issue 3 .

(2) helicopters: (i) FTD Levels 2 and 3, or (ii) FFS.

Footnote 2: (1) aeroplanes: FSTDs that meet the training objectives and requirements provided for in the Aircrew Regul ation.

(2) helicopters: FSTDs that have dual qualification: FFS Level B and FTD Level 3, or FFS Level C or D.

The related NPA is under preparation.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 26 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2 Footnote 3: (1) aeroplanes: (i) FFS level D, or (ii) FSTDs that have at least fidelity level S (Specific) for the following features: (A) flight deck layout and structure, (B) flight model, (C) ground reaction and handling qualities, and (D) flight controls and forces.

(2) helicopters: (i) FTD Levels 2 and 3, or (ii) FFS.

(b) Difference level — Training The training differences levels specified represent the minimum requirements. Devices associated with a higher difference level may be used to satisfy a training differences requirement.

(1) Level A training Level A differences training is applicable to aircraft with differences that can adequately be addressed through self - instruction. Level A training represents a knowledge requirement such that once appropriate information is provided, understanding and compliance can be assumed to be demonstrated.

Training needs not covered by level A training may require level B training, or higher, depending on the outcome of the evaluations in the aircraft evaluation process described in CS FCD.420 .

(2) Level B training Level B differences training is appl icable to aircraft with system or procedure differences that can adequately be addressed through aided instruction.

At level B aided instruction is appropriate to ensure pilot understanding, emphasise issues, provide a standardised method of presentation of material, or to aid retention of material following training.

(3) Level C training Level C differences training can only be accomplished through the use of devices capable of systems training.

Level C difference training is applicable when cockpit desig n differences exist, and affect skills or abilities , as well as knowledge. Training objectives focus on mastering individual systems, procedures, or tasks, as opposed to performing highly integrated flight operations and manoeuvres in ‘real time’. Level C may also require self - instruction or aided instruction of a pilot, but cannot be adequately addressed by a knowledge requirement alone. Training devices are required to supplement instruction to ensure attainment or retention of pilot skills and abilities to accomplish the more complex tasks, usually related to operation of particular aircraft systems.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 27 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2 The minimum acceptable training media for level C is interactive computer - based training, cockpit systems simulators, cockpit procedure trainers, part task t rainers or similar devices.

(4) Level D training Level D difference training can only be accomplished with devices capable of performing flight manoeuvres and addressing the full task differences affecting knowledge, skills, and/ or abilities.

FSTDs capable of flight manoeuvres replicate the aircraft in a dynamic ‘real time’ simulation flight environment, enabling the integration of knowledge, skills, and abilities by combining operationally oriented tasks and realistic task workloads for each relevant phase of flight. At level D, the knowledge and skills to complete necessary normal, non - normal, and emergency procedures are fully addressed for each type or variant.

Level D diff erence training requires mastery of interrelated skills that cannot be adequately addressed by separate acquisition of a series of knowledge areas or skills that are interrelated. However, the differences are not so significant that a full type rating trai ning course is required.

Training for level D differences requires an FSTD that has accurate, high fidelity integration of systems and controls and realistic instrument indications. Level D training may also require manoeuvring visual cues, dynamics, contr ol loading or specific environmental conditions. Weather phenomena such as low visibility operations or wind shear may or may not be incorporated.

The applicant needs to propose the features that define the FSTD capability that is required to meet the tra ining objectives among those identified in the table of paragraph (a). Where simplified or generic characteristics of an aircraft type are used in devices to satisfy level D difference training, significant negative training cannot occur as a result of the simplification.

The appropriate devices, as described in CS FCD.415(a) , which satisfy level D difference training , are those which incorporate relevant elements of aircraft flight manoeuvring, performance, and handling qualities (5) Level E training Level E difference training is applicable to a candidate aircraft having such significant differences that a full type rating training course or a type rating training course with credi t for previous experience on similar aircraft types is required to meet the training objectives.

The training requires a ‘high fidelity’ environment to attain or maintain knowledge, skills, and/ or abilities that can only be satisfied by the use of FSTDs or the aircraft itself , as mentioned in CS FCD.415(a) . Level E training, if done in an aircraft, should be modified for safety reasons for manoeuvres with a high degree of risk.

When level E difference training is assigned, as well as for any initial type rating training, the experience requirements and prerequisites for the issuance of the relevant rating may be approved based on the requirements of points FCL.720.A and FCL.720.H of P art - FCL of the Aircrew Regulation. Recurrent training credit for operations on more than one type may be approved based on the requirements of Part - ORO of the Air OPS Regulation.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 28 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2 (c) Difference level — Checking Differences checking addresses any pertinent pilot testing or checking. Initial and recurrent checking levels are the same unless otherwise specified.

It may be possible to satisfactorily accomplish recurrent checking objectives in devices not meeting initial checking requirements. In such instances the applicant may propose for revalidation checks the use of certain devices not meeting the initial check requirements.

(1) Level A checking Level A differences checking indicates that no check related to differences is required at the time of differences training. However, a pilot is responsible for knowledge of each variant flown.

(2) Level B checking Level B differences checking indicates that a ‘task’ or ‘systems’ check is required following initial and recurring training.

(3) Level C check ing Level C difference checking requires a partial check using a suitable FSTD . A partial check is conducted relative to particular manoeuvres or systems and equipment .

(4) Level D checking Level D difference checking indicates that a partial proficiency check is required following both initial and recurrent training. In conducting the partial proficiency check, manoeuvres common to each variant may be credited and need not be repeated. The partial proficiency check covers the specified particular manoeuvr es, systems, or equipment . Level D checking is performed using scenarios that represent a ‘real time’ flight environment , and uses FSTDs capable of level D or higher - level training .

(5) Level E checking Level E difference checking requires that a full skill test be conducted in FSTDs or in an aircraft , as mentioned in CS FCD.415(a) , following both initial and recurrent training. If appropriate, alternating recurrent checking between the relevant aircraft types is possible , and credit may be defined for procedures or manoeuvres based on commonality.

The assignment of level E checking requirements alone, or in conjunction with level E currency, does not necessarily result in the assignment of a separate type rating.

(d) Difference level — Currency Currency differences address any currency and recurrent training difference levels. Initial and recurrent currency levels are the same, unl ess otherwise specified.

(1) Level A currency Level A currency is common to each aircraft and does not require separate tracking.

Maintenance of currency in any aircraft suffices for any other variant within the same type rating.

(2) Level B currency Leve l B currency is ‘knowledge - related’ currency, typically achieved through self - review of material by individual pilots.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 29 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2 (3) Level C currency (i) Level C currency is applicable to one or more designated systems , equipment , or procedures, and relates to both skill and knowledge requirements. When level C currency applies, any pertinent lower - l evel currency is also to be addressed.

(ii) Re - establishing level C currency When currency is lost, it may be re - established by completing the required items using a de vice with capabilities equal to or greater than th ose specified for level C training and checking.

(4) Level D currency (i) Level D currency is related to designated manoeuvres and addresses the knowledge and skills that are required for performing aircra ft control tasks in real time with integrated use of the associated systems , equipment , and procedures.

Level D currency may also address certain differences in flight characteristics , including the performance of any required manoeuvres and the related no rmal, non - normal , and emergency procedures. When level D is necessary, any pertinent lower - level currency is also to be addressed.

(ii) Re - establishing level D currency When currency is lost, currency may be re - established by completing pertinent manoeuvres using a device equal to or higher than that specified for level D differences training and checking.

(5) Level E currency (iii) Level E currency requires that recent e xperience requirements of Part - FCL and operational requirements be complied with in each aircraft separately. Level E currency may also specify other system, procedure, or manoeuvre currency item(s) necessary for safe operations, and requires procedures or manoeuvres to be accomplished in FSTDs or in an aircraft as mentioned in CS FCD.415(a) .

Provisions are applied in a way which addresses the required system or manoeuvre experience.

When level E is assigned between aircraft of common characteristics, credit may be permitted. Assignment of level E currency requirements does not automatically lead to a determination on same or separate type rating. Level E currency is tracked by a mean s that is acceptable to the competent authority.

When CTLC is permitted, any credit or constraints applicable to using FSTDs as mentioned in CS FCD.415(a) are also to be determined.

(ii) Re - establishing level E currency When currency is lost, currency may be re - established by completing pertinent manoeuvres using a device specified for level E differences training and checking.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 30 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2 (e) Competency regarding non - normal and emergency proc edures — Currency Competency for non - normal and emergency manoeuvres or procedures is generally addressed by checking requirements. Particular non - normal and emergency manoeuvres or procedures may not be considered mandatory for checking or training. In th is situation it may be necessary to periodically practice or demonstrate those manoeuvres or procedures specifying currency requirements for those manoeuvres or procedures.

[Issue No: FCD/2]

GM1 FCD.415 Difference levels — Training, checking , and currency

ED Decision 2021/012/R (a) While particular aircraft are often assigned the same level for training, checking , and currency (for example , C/C/C), this is not always the case. Training, checking, and currency levels m ay be assigned independently. As an e xample, a candidate aircraft may be assigned level C for training, level B for checking, and level D for currency (for example , C/B/D).

(b) Difference level — Training As an example , for the use of a training device associated with a higher difference leve l than required, if level C differences have been assessed due to the installation of a different FMS, pilots may be trained using the FMS installed in an FS T D that is used as a system trainer, if a dedicated part task FMS training device is not available.

(1) Level A training Compliance with level A training is typically achieved by methods such as issuance of operating manual page revisions, dissemination of flight crew operating bulletins or difference handouts to describe minor differences between aircraft.

Level A training is normally limited to situations such as the following: (i) the change introduces a different version of a system or equipment for which the flight crew has already demonstrated understanding and the ability to use it safely (for example , an updated versi on of an engine); or (ii) information highlighting a difference that, once brought to the attention of a crew, is self - evident, inherently obvious and easily understood (for example , a communication radio panel installed in a different location, a differen t exhaust gas temperature limit which is placarded, or changes to abnormal ‘read and do’ procedures).

(2) Level B training Level B aided instruction typically employs means such as presentations, tutorials, CBT, stand - up lectures, or vide o s.

(3) Level C training While level C systems or equipment, and procedures, knowledge or skills relate to specific rather than fully integrated tasks, the performance of the steps to accomplish normal, abnormal and emergency procedures or manoeuvres related to particular systems such as INS, FMS, or TCAS trainers, may be necessary.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 31 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2 Examples of devices acceptable for level C training: (i) interactive training to include FMS trainers, and systems trainers; (ii) qualified FSTDs ; (iii) specific systems incorporated in an F S TD ; or (iv) a static aircraft .

(4) Level D training The use of an FSTD for m anoeuvre training or an aircraft , as mentioned in CS FCD.420(a) , may be specified for the conduct of specific manoeuvres or handling dif ferences, such as HUD training or a manoeuvre (for example , no - flap landing, tail - rotor control failure, etc.). In such cases, the number of hours required should normally be limited to an appropriate number of hours within Level D training.

(5) Level E tr aining For safety reasons, if the training is performed in an aircraft, consideration must be given to high - risk situations, such as engine loss, by not shutting down the engine but rather by simulating the engine failure, using safe original - equipment man ufacturer (OEM) - recommended methods, for example such as training mode, or by setting the affected engine to idle or zero thrust.

(c) Difference level — Checking (1) Level A checking Difference items should be included as an integral part of subsequent pro ficiency checks.

(2) Level B checking Level B checking typically applies to particular tasks or systems, or equipment and procedures, such as INS, FMS, TCAS, or other individual systems or related groups of systems.

(3) Level C checking An example of level C checking would be the evaluation of a sequence of manoeuvres demonstrating a pilot’s ability to use a flight guidance control system or flight management system. An acceptable scenario would include each relevant phase of flight , but would not necessarily address manoeuvres that do not relate to the set up or use of the FD or FMS.

(d) Difference level — Currency (1) Level A currency Level A currency consists of a self - review as necessary.

(2) Level B currency Self - review is usually acc omplished by review of material provided by the operator to pilots. Such currency may be undertaken at an individual pilot’s initiative; however, the operator identifies the material and the frequency or other situations in which the material should be rev iewed. Self - review may be based on manual information, bulletins, aircraft placards, memos, class hand - outs, videotapes or DVDs, or other Powered by EASA eRules Page 32 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2 memory aids that describe the differences, procedures, manoeuvres, or limits for the aircraft that pilots are flying.

An example of how compliance with level B currency can be demonstrated would be the issu ance of a bulletin which directs pilots to review specific operating manual information. Level B currency may be regained by review ing the pertinent information , includ ing bulletins, if that variant has not been flown within a specified period (for example , by fly ing that variant or by hav ing completed a review of the differences in limitations and procedures within the past 90 days).

Another method of compliance would be pilot certification on a dispatch release that they have reviewed the pertinent information for a particular variant to be flown on that trip. However, level B currency cannot be achieved solely by review ing the class notes taken by and at the initiative of an individual pilot, unless the adequacy of those notes is verified by the operator.

(3) Level C currency An example of level C currency would be the establishment of INS currency, FMS currency, flight guidance contr ol system currency, or other particular currency that is necessary for safe operation of an aircraft. Establishment of level C currency for an FMS would typically require a pilot to fly the aircraft within a specified period or to re - establish currency. Ty pically, currency constraints for level C are 90 days. However, some systems or procedures may require shorter time limits while others may be longer than the normal interval for proficiency checks, if the pertinent items are not always addressed by these checks.

Examples of methods acceptable for addressing level C currency are: (i) pilot scheduling practices resulting in a pilot being scheduled to fly a variant with the pertinent system , equipment, or procedure within the specified period; (ii) tracking of an individual pilot’s flying to ensure that the particular system , equipment, or procedure has been flown within the specified period; (iii) use of a higher - level method (level D or E currency).

Re - establishing level C currency Means to re - establish cur rency include flights with an appropriately qualified TRI, completion of proficiency training, or a proficiency check. In the case of a non - current co - pilot, a designated PIC may be authorised to accompany a flight crew member to re - establish currency. In some instances, a formal re - familiarisation period in the actual aircraft with the applicable system operating while on ground may be acceptable. Such re - familiarisation periods are completed using an operator - established procedure under the supervision of a pilot designated by the operator.

(4) Level D currency A typical application of level D currency is to specify selected manoeuvres, such as take - off, departure, arrival, approach, or landing, which are to be performed using a particular FGCS and instrum ent display system. A pilot either flies an aircraft equipped with the FGCS and particular display system sufficiently often to retain familiarity and competence within the specified currency period, or re - establishes currency.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 33 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2 Examples of methods accept able for addressing level D currency are: (i) tracking of flights by an individual pilot to assure experience within the specified currency period; (ii) tracking of completion of specific manoeuvres based on logbook entries, ACARS data, or other reliable r ecords to assure experience within the specified currency period; (iii) scheduling of aircraft or crews to permit currency requirements to be met with verification that each pilot has actually accomplished the assigned or an equivalent schedule; (iv) compl etion of pilot certification, proficiency check, proficiency training, ATQP evaluations, or other pertinent events in which designated manoeuvres are performed in a device or simulator acceptable for level D currency; (v) use of a higher level method (lev el E currency).

Re - establishing level D currency Means to re - establish currency include flight with an appropriately qualified TRI during training or in line operations, completion of proficiency training, a proficiency check, or ATQP proficiency evaluatio n.

(5) Level E currency If FGCS, FMS, EFIS, navigation, or other system or manoeuvre experience is the basis for a currency requirement, approval of an operator’s programme at level E includes use of those systems in conjunction with satisfactory take - off and landing requirements. In such an instance making three simulator take - offs and landings in VFR closed traffic without using the FGCS, EFIS, or FMS may not be sufficient to meet level E currency requirements.

When credit is permitted between aircraft of common flight characteristics, pertinent currency requirements for knowledge, skills, procedures, or other manoeuvres not related to take - off and landings may be necessar y.

Re - establishing level E currency Means to re - establish currency include flight with an appropriately qualified TRI during training or in line operations, completion of proficiency training, a proficiency check, or ATQP evaluation.

[Issue No: FCD/2]

CS FCD.420 Evaluation process overview

ED Decision 2021/012/R (a) Six standard evaluations (T1, T2, T3, T4, T5 and T6) are defined under CS FCD.425 . They are used to set MDRs, acceptable training programmes, and ot her provisions, and to define the type rating requirements as shown in the Appendix to CS FCD.420 . One or more of these six evaluations are applied , depending on the objectives of the applicant, on the difference level sought, and on the successful outcome of any previous evaluations used in identifying MDRs.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 34 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATI ONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2 (b) The following evaluations are used: (1) The T1, T2 and T3 evaluations must be carried out t o validate difference training, checking, and currency requir ements between a base and a candidate aircraft that share the same basic design.

The results of these evaluations determine whether the aircraft is a new type or a variant , or a modification of an existing type or variant. The level of differences determin es the minimum required training, checking , and currency requirements applicable to the candidate aircraft.

Additionally, when the applicant requests approval for a reduced initial type rating training course, based on previous experience on similar aircra ft types (different type ratings), as per Part - FCL of the Aircrew Regulation, the T2 and T3 tests must be used for this purpose.

(2) The T4 evaluation is used to establish relief from the approved currency requirements based on the system, equipment, proce dural , and manoeuvr e differences between the aircraft.

(3) The T5 evaluation is used to validate the minimum syllabus for the initial type rating training for a new aircraft TC . The results of a T5 evaluation determine the minimum syllabus for a pilot type rating applicable to that type of aircraft , including the associated TASE, and any additional prerequisites and limitations as provided for in the Aircrew Regulation.

(4) The T6 evaluation is used to evaluate the CTLC between different types of aircraft to allow credit for recent experience requirements as provided for in the Aircrew Regulation.

(c) The flow chart for the evaluation process is available in the Appendix to CS FC D.420 .

[Issue No: FCD/2] Powered by EASA eRules Page 35 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational Suitability Data (OSD) SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL EVALUATION Flight Crew Data CS - FCD – Issue 2

Appendix to CS FCD.420 Evaluation process

ED Decision 2021/012/R [Issue No: FCD/2] Powered by EASA eRules Page 36 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2

GM1 FCD.420 Evaluation process overview

ED Decision 2021/012/R (a) For a new TC, the type of the aircraft must be determined ( CS FCD.200 ) and the minimum syllabus for an initial type rating training course must be approved ( CS FCD.300 ). The means of compliance for the approval of the OSD FC is, in this case, the T5 test.

In addition to the above, the applicant may request the approval of a reduction in the initial type r ating training based on previous experience on similar aircraft types, as well as the approval of credit based on commonality for operations on more than one type. In this case, the T2 and T3 tests are used as means of compliance.

When applying for a chang e to an existing TC that has associated OSD FC, or for the issuance of an STC, the applicant assesses the impact of the design changes to the OSD FC. These changes may or may not determine a new variant, or, if the changes are significant, may determine a new type of aircraft for the purpose of pilot type rating. The applicable tests are, in this case, T1, or T2 and T3.

(b) T tests — General description and purpose (1) T1 evaluation — Functional equivalence and training When the differences between the base and the candidate aircraft are not significant from the pilot’s perspective, and there is no impact on the handling qualities, a T1 test may be proposed. T1 tests the functional equivalence between the base and the candidate aircraft. Satisfactory crew pe rformance during the test establishes that the differences between the base and the candidate aircraft are considered minor, and consequently, training requirements no greater than level B are assigned.

If a T1 test is waived or failed, the T2 and T3 tests may be used.

(2) T2 evaluation — Handling qualities comparison The T2 test compares handling qualities, using predetermined flight manoeuvres to confirm that the candidate aircraft may be considered a variant of the base aircraft. If no major differences are found in the handling qualities, then the T2 test is successful, and a T3 test may be performed from the base to the candidate aircraft, as appropriate, to validate the difference levels up to level D.

T2 manoeuvres are performed in the base aircraft o r in a base aircraft FFS, to establish a baseline, and then in the candidate aircraft for comparison.

The T2 evaluation profile is established via an applicant’s proposal, with EASA agreement, based on the differences that may potentially affect the handli ng qualities between the base and the candidate aircraft. The T2 test consists of a comparison between the selected pilot type rating proficiency check manoeuvres that are performed first in the base aircraft and then in the candidate aircraft. An approved level D FFS may be used in place of the base aircraft, and when safety considerations dictate so, in place of the candidate aircraft.

Although T2 evaluations should always be carried out in the candidate aircraft, some portions that may significantly affe ct crew safety (such as flight control failures) may be conducted in an FSTD suitable for the test. Subject pilots are observed and provide feedback on the degree of difficulty in performing manoeuvres in the candidate aircraft compared to the base aircraf t.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 37 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2 When designing the T6 test, the applicant should also consider the effects on the take - off and landing manoeuvres of the following factors: (i) the aircraft weight; (ii) the aircraft centre of gravity (CG); and (iii) the take - off and landing crosswinds.

(3) T3 evaluation — System and equipment differences and training The test has the purpose of identifying system, equipment, procedural, and manoeuvre differences, and of validating the proposed familiarisation training or difference training, checking, and currency requirements.

A successful T3 test permits to assign A, B, C, or D difference training levels. The same type rating may be assigned if no training differences greater than level D exist, or a different type rating if level E training differences are identified.

Normally, for level A and B differences, a two - way evaluation is not necessary. Typically, a T3 evaluation to validate level C and D differences is valid in one direction only (base to candidate aircraft). However, the applican t may request that a T3 evaluation be conducted in both directions (base to candidate aircraft, and candidate to base aircraft).

The MDR (for variants only) and DR tables should reflect the validated difference levels accordingly.

The T3 test is also used to validate a proposed reduced initial type rating training course based on previous experience on similar aircraft types. In this case, the purpose of the test is to validate and approve the proposed content and duration of the reduced initial type rating training. The result is a reduced initial type rating training course (level E differences or ‘new type’).

(4) T4 evaluation — Currency validation T4 tests are not shown in the evaluation process, since they are only triggered when the applicant seeks rel ief from the system, equipment, procedural, and manoeuvre currency requirements as set in the DR tables.

(5) T5 evaluation — Minimum syllabus validation for a new type rating The T5 test is appropriate and required for a new TC, to establish and approve th e minimum syllabus for pilot type rating training.

Evaluation subjects are pilots who meet the prerequisites established under Part - FCL of the Aircrew Regulation for obtaining a type rating, and who are checked (through a skill test) in accordance with Par t - FCL, after having undergone the proposed full type rating training syllabus.

(6) T6 evaluation — CTLC T6 evaluation subjects are pilots who are type - rated and experienced on the base aircraft. They are evaluated on their ability to manually fly, with no previous training, the candidate aircraft through take - off, initial climb, as well as approach and landing (including the establishment of the final landing configuration). When designing the T6 test, the applicant should consider the effects on the take - o ff and landing manoeuvres of the following factors: Powered by EASA eRules Page 38 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUB PART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2 (i) the aircraft weight; (ii) the aircraft CG; and (iii) the take - off and landing crosswinds.

[Issue No: FCD/2]

CS FCD.425 Evaluation process and evaluation descriptions

ED Decision 2021/012/R Definit ion of the evaluation process and evaluation descriptions: (a) Difference level evaluations Tests T1 to T5 are used to evaluate a candidate aircraft on the pilot type rating, minimum syllabus, operational evaluations, and credit for operations on more than one type or variant.

The T6 evaluation may be used to establish the CTLC between related aircraft when not previously demonstrated in a T2 evaluation.

One or more of these six evaluations are applied depending on the objectives of the applicant, difference level sought, and the successful outcome of any previous evaluations used in identifying MDRs.

(b) Steps of the evaluation process When an evaluation is carried out , the T1 , T2, and T 3 tests compare the candidate aircraft with the base aircraft. DR tables and MDR tables (between variants of aircraft types) are established, which address the differences between the base and the candidate aircraft To establish data for a direction that was not previously a ss essed , an additional evaluation using the above T tests may be carried out based on an application . In general, level A and B differences do not require two - way testing.

(c) Prior to the evaluation: (1) representative training programmes, difference programmes and the necessary supporting training material and information are developed as needed; (2) the proposed MDRs and DRs are identified; (3) the applicant proposes which evaluations and criteria apply; evaluations may be combined; (4) the applicant proposes which aircraft, variants, simulation devices, or analysis is needed to support the evaluation; (5) the aircraft, variants, training aids, FSTDs, or analyses that are needed to support the evaluation are identified; (6) the applicant proposes test procedures, schedules, and specific interpretation of the possible results.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 39 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2 (d) Evaluation purpose and application The e valuatio n purpose and application are summarised in the table below: EVALUATION PURPOSE APPLICATION T1 Establishes functional equivalence Sets levels A/B T2 Compares h andling qualities Pass permits T3, and A/B/C/D; failure sets level E and requires T5 and/or, if required T2 + T3 for commonality credit T3 Evaluates differences and sets training or Pass sets levels A/B/C/D; failure sets level E and checking requirements requires T5 and/ o r , if required T2 + T3 for commonality credit T4 Revises currency requirements T5 Sets training or checking for new or ‘E’ Sets level E aircraft T6 Evaluat es CTLC Sets recent experience requirements A d etailed description of the purpose, process , and application of each of the six difference level evaluations is as follows: (e) Evaluation 1 (T1) — F unctional equivalence Evaluation purpose: to validate: — the functional equivalence between the base and the candidate aircraft; and — the level di fferences.

Evaluation subjects: as established by EASA based on a proposal by the applicant.

Evaluation process: administer appropriate portions of a proficiency check as agreed by EASA based on a proposal by the applicant. This evaluation may be carried o ut in an FSTD with the appropriate capability to achieve the training objectives , or an aircraft , as appropriate. Only those portions of the proficiency check which are affected by the differences from the base aircraft need to be evaluated. For minor leve l A or B differences , this evaluation may be conducted through analysis.

(1) Successful evaluation validates that the base and candidate aircraft are sufficiently alike , to assign level A or B differences.

(2) Failure of an evaluation generally requires co mpletion of the T2 and T3 evaluation s .

Normally, re - evaluation is not appropriate; however, at the request of the applicant , re - evaluation may be accepted by EASA .

(3) EASA may waive the T1 test if a T2 test , or T2 and T3 tests are to be performed.

(f) Evaluation 2 (T2) — H andling qualities comparison Evaluation purpose: to evaluate handling qualities using specific flight manoeuvres , to determine whether level A, B, C, or D training is appropriate to be validated via a T3 test, when required. At the discretion of EASA , the T2 evaluation may be completed through analysis when it is assessed that the nature of the proposed design chang es does not affect the handling qualities of the candidate aircraft.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 40 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2 The test has also the purpose of validating the commonality, in terms of handling qualities, between two different aircraft types, when seeking approval for a reduced type rating traini ng course.

Evaluation subjects: as established by EASA based on a proposal by the applicant.

Evaluation process: compare the handling qualities during a set of agreed manoeuvres. This evaluation is conducted in the base and the candidate aircraft, unless s afety considerations dictate the use of an FFS , as defined in CS FCD.415(a) for Level E. Manoeuvres that are performed in the aircraft require a safety pilot who may only aid in are as not related to the evaluation. Normal crew call - outs and coordination are permitted; however, the safety pilot may not assist in any other manner unless directly related to a safety - of - flight issue, for example , no ‘coaching’ or instructing is permitted .

Successful evaluation: validates that the base and the candidate aircraft are sufficiently alike in handling qualities to permit the applicant to assign A, B, C , or D training levels . A successful T2 evaluation permits a subsequent T3 evaluation to asses s the system differences and equipment differences , the training , or checking to be conducted. If a subsequent T3 test is not requested, level A or B training may be assigned.

When a T2 test is otherwise successfully completed, an FFS or aircraft for manoeuvre training , as mentioned in CS FCD.415(a) , may be proposed within level D training for performing specific manoeuvres.

Failure of the evaluation: failure of the T2 evaluatio n indicates that major differences exist in handling qualities during the critical phases of flight (such as take - off or landing) , or that numerous less critical but still significant differences in handling qualities exist between the base and the candida te aircraft. A failure of a T2 evaluation requires to assign level E training.

Also with level E training , a separate type rating is normally assigned to the candidate aircraft being evaluated. Normally , a T2 re - evaluation is not appropriate; however, a re - evaluation may be proposed.

(g) Evaluation 3 (T3) This is a test of the system and equipment differences , and validation of the proposed difference training and checking or of the reduced type rating training, based on credit for previous experience on si milar aircraft types.

Evaluation purpose: to evaluate the proposed difference training, and the checking and training devices at level A, B, C , or D. T3 is also used to evaluate reduced type rating training, checking, and currency, as well as training devi ces for reduced initial type rating training, based on credit for previous experience on similar aircraft types.

Evaluation subjects: pilots designated by EASA , trained and experienced in the base aircraft and having been given the proposed difference trai ning or reduced initial type rating training for the candidate aircraft.

Evaluation process: if level A or B training is deemed appropriate, T3 may be completed by analysis. If level C or D training is deemed appropriate, administer appropriate portions of a proficiency check in system trainers or an FSTD for manoeuvre training , or in an aircraft, as mentioned in CS FCD.415(a) . Following the completion of the proficiency check, a simulated LOF check may be administered by EASA . This LOF check is normally administered in an F STD , but may be conducted in a test aircraft , as appropriate.

Successful evaluation: permits assignment of level A, B, C or D training and validates the proposed differences training or checking programmes.

Powered by EASA eRules Page 41 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2 Failure of evaluation: indicates that either the proposed training is inadequate and is in need of revision to qualify for a re - evaluation opportunity or T3 failure may r equire the assignment of level E training. With level E training a separate type rating is normally assigned to the candidate aircraft. Re - evaluation may be proposed.

(h) Evaluation 4 (T4) — C urrency validation Evaluation purpose: used to evaluate relief f rom established currency requirements. This currency evaluation addresses system s , equipment, procedural and manoeuvring differences between aircraft , and does not address the recent experience requirements for take - off, approach , and landing , as mentioned in FCL.060(b) of Part - FCL.

Evaluation subjects: as established by EASA based on a proposal by the applicant.

Evaluation process: as established by EASA based on a proposal by the applicant, but normally involves a process for validating a specific currenc y proposal made by the applicant or alternative evaluation methods such as direct observation of proficiency checks or LOF FSTD sessions.

Successful evaluation: validates that the proposed currency provision(s) is (are) accepted as a means of compliance wi th the applicable requirements and provides an equivalent level of safety. T4 may be completed as part of an initial certification or evaluation process or as a follow - up of evaluation.

Failure of evaluation: indicates that the proposed currency requiremen ts do not provide an equivalent level of safety and may lead to re - evaluation as determined by EASA based on a proposal by the applicant, if appropriate.

(i) Evaluation 5 (T5) — I nitial or transition training programme validation Evaluation purpose: used t o validate training courses at level E (new type rating). In accordance with the pilot prerequisites for the subject training course, training courses to be evaluated is (are) either a full type rating course(s) or reduced type rating courses with credit f or previous experience on similar aircraft types.

Evaluation subjects: as established by EASA based on a proposal by the applicant , who meet the prerequisites that are established under Part - FCL for issuing a type rating .

Evaluation process: as established by EASA based on a proposal by the applicant, but normally involves evaluation subjects receiving the proposed training and EASA observing or administering the checking upon completion of the training. A T2 and T3 evaluation may be performed if credit for commonality is requested. This evaluation may be structured to evaluate specific commonality objectives as established by EASA based on a proposal by the applicant.

Successful evaluation: validates that the proposed training satisfies the appropriate requ irements.

Failure of the evaluation: indicates that the proposed training programme requires changes to satisfy the appropriate requirements. A re - evaluation , as established by EASA based on a proposal by the applicant , would normally be required.

A T5 evaluation may give credit for an applicable evaluation that is carried out during T2 and T3 evaluations in the event of T2 or T3 evaluation failures.

(j) Evaluation 6 (T6) — CTLC Powered by EASA eRules Page 42 of 43 | Jun 2023 Easy Access Rules for Operational SUBPART D — OPERATIONAL Suitability Data (OSD) Flight Crew Data EVALUATION CS - FCD – Issue 2 Evaluation purpose: to establish credit be tween the base and candidate aircraft towards the recent experience requirements for take - off and landing.

Evaluation subjects: pilots designated by EASA , neither trained nor experienced in the candidate aircraft.

Evaluation process: the evaluation subject s are first provided with refresher training in the base aircraft to establish a baseline of proficiency. This training may be completed in the aircraft or in an approved level C or D FFS. The subject is then evaluated in the candidate aircraft, without an y training in it, by accomplishing a minimum of three take - offs and landings without use of the autopilot. It may not be practical to conduct some evaluations in an aircraft , and in such cases, an FFS may be used to conduct these evaluations. The e valuatio n subjects should be evaluated on the ability to fly the aircraft manually through take - off, initial climb, approach , and landing (including the establishment of the final landing configuration).

Successful evaluation: validates that the proposed training satisfies the appropriate requirements , and that an equivalent level of safety can be maintained when full or partial credit for take - offs and landings is given between the base and candidate aircraft.

Failure of the evaluation: indicates that an equivalen t level of safety cannot be maintained when either full or partial credit for take - offs and landings is given between the base and candidate aircraft.

(k) Disposition of evaluation results Evaluation results should be summarised by EASA and sent to the app licant, and the outcome should be documented in the OSD FC .

Prior to the issuance of the OSD, a statement declaring the results of the type rating determination may be issued.

[Issue No: FCD/2] Powered by EASA eRules Page 43 of 43 | Jun 2023