Flight Training Disruptors

New and more capable training devices below the full-flight simulator (FFS) level are shaking the foundations of defense departments’ training enterprises. Group Editor Marty Kauchak provides insights from four randomly selected companies on developments in the military aviation training market space.

Military aviation commands use training systems of differing levels of fidelity throughout a pilot’s continuum of training. One notional architecture that captures quite well the essence of the community’s current strategy for these platforms was presented by Randy Gawenda, Business Development Manager at Frasca International. He described a pyramid of simulation devices, with the base being a large quantity of “pure” VR-type trainers; the next level is a smaller number of lower-level CPT (cockpit procedures trainer)/PTT (part-task trainer)-category of devices.

“This level has some added features and functionality to build upon the basic and familiarization level of the VR trainers,” Gawenda explained, and added, “Above the CPTs and PTTs you have a smaller number of high-fidelity FTDs (flight training devices). The FTDs will include crew training, not just pilot training, and have a more holistic crew training environment possible. And then above that, you may just have the aircraft itself or a very small number of FFSs/OFTs (operational flight trainers)/full-mission trainers.”

Training devices below the FFS level are certainly being delivered to an expanding list of military customers.

Platforms Proliferating

Chris Ryan, Managing Director of Ryan Aerospace, said his company is servicing “hundreds of flight training devices all around the world.” Its key market focus has been on lower cost, virtual reality devices which have been very popular and successful in the US.

The Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia-based company has 35 HELIMOD Mark III devices currently with the US Army at Fort Rucker, Alabama, which are being used for the primary flight training phase of the Aviator Training Next (ATN) Program. Also in the US, the Navy is using Ryan’s devices in a similar way, and he added, “last year we began rolling out a new fixed-wing version for the US Air Force as part of the Pilot Training Transformation program in partnership with Vertex Solutions.”

Ryan Aerospace’s HELIMOD Mark III devices are also being used in Asia and Europe, specifically for helicopter sling load training and vertical reference. Ryan added that some of his company’s higher-end (FAA-approved) devices are being used in the Middle East (UAE and Saudi Arabia) for maintenance training, and “customers in the UK and South Africa are coupling our HELIMOD devices with ground crews to conduct marshal training as well as ship deck landing training. We have an Australian customer using our rear crew/hoist trainer.”

Frasca’s Gawenda noted his company recently delivered a T-53 FTD to the US Air Force Academy and is in the midst of building eight new TH-73A FTDs for the US Navy as part of the FlightSafety International team that was awarded the Navy Advanced Helicopter Training System (AHTS)-Ground Based Training System (GBTS) training services contract.

The industry veteran further explained the Navy contract, “will also include us updating and modifying the 10 TH-57 B/C FTDs we completed for TRAWING 5 at Naval Air Station Whiting Field (Florida). We were also awarded a contract to add our TH-57 flight models, instrumentation, and visual elements to the wing’s VR trainers. This will help ensure that the wing has a compatible and standardized suite of training systems to support the in-aircraft training.”

Aechelon Technology, a supplier of image generators and databases, is part of the FlightSafety-led Navy TH-73A training program contract team.

Beyond the US, Illinois-based Frasca recently provided a reconfigurable Bell 212/412 FTD as part of a US Foreign Military Sale to the Mexican Air Force. Gawenda continued, “And along with the TH-73 FTDs keeping us busy, we just kicked off a Level D EC725 FFS for an [unspecified] international military who has been a customer of Frasca for a long time.”

More than numbers, training devices for aviators are rapidly becoming more capable – and with good reasons – as the S&T industry is responding to rapidly evolving and more exacting defense departments’ requirements.

Requirements “Quick Look”

Bert Sawyer, Director Strategic Management, FlightSafety International, provided one insight on these developments, from the perspective of his company having delivered 214 training devices below the level of FFSs to government customers around the globe.

The industry veteran’s precise, focused, short list of recently observed and received requirements includes: virtual and mixed reality visual systems being requested more frequently; Windows 10 and Linux Red Hat equivalent operating systems being required, as demand for cyber security requirements increase; customers seeking more containerized and/or portable training systems; and an increased desire from the US government to maintain data/intellectual property rights. Sawyer noted, “Many of the recent military requirements we have received, and responded to, are for display devices to support FTDs around the world. They range from fast-jet to helicopters.”

Another trend shaping defense training command programs is diverse, underpinning technologies being brought to bear in training devices.

Technology Foundations

Ryan Aerospace called attention to the “Virtual Instructor” as a key enabler to support lower-cost training devices and provide excellent training outcomes. Ryan pointed out his company is working with a number of companies, such as Vertex Solutions, SASimulations and SAIC, to name a few, to support such technology. “The key here is self-sufficiency. For example, a student can climb into their own sim, fire it up, log on, load a mission (or missions) and fly them – all without the need to (necessarily) have an instructor present,” he explained.

Two underpinnings for the Virtual Instructor are data and data analytics. Each mission has set objectives and parameters, and the student needs to meet all of the criteria to be deemed competent. The data is captured and reported back in such a way that trainers can effectively measure the performance of the student and identify deficiencies. Ryan summarized: “The key here is to be able to assess the data and make meaningful assumptions from it without spending every waking second with a student in a real aircraft or high-level sim.”

Ryan Aerospace's support of initial studies with US Army showed that the cohort that trained on the company's devices (with fewer hours in the real helicopter) consistently outperformed their peers who conducted training in the real helicopter in the traditional way. Image credit: Ryan Aerospace.

Sawyer noted FlightSafety is investing heavily in advanced analytics through programs such as FlightSmart, an integrated pilot performance evaluation and training tool developed in conjunction with IBM. The executive added that as AI and Machine Learning are native to the FlightSmart program, FlightSafety does not rely on third-party contributors to achieve advanced analytics and promote technology differentiators.

The corporate executive provided some returns on investment from FlightSmart, noting “We are using the FlightSmart program to enhance the FlightSafety family of products, from ground-based courseware to advanced simulation. It is now possible to analyze the entire pilot training life cycle including inputs from: learning management systems (LMS); training management systems (TMS); advanced qualification programs (AQP); flight operations quality assurance (FOQA); and safety management systems (SMS), in addition to simulator-derived data.”

As a result, the collected data can be analyzed on a discrete training event or continuous basis, looking for trends and performance levels, and through advanced analytics, predict training outcomes.

“Data is key,” according to Sawyer, who added, “one key advantage FlightSafety has is many of our 600-plus devices are already equipped with the data acquisition component. Key outputs provided by FlightSmart’s analysis of big data are performance metrics that instructors may not have had the opportunity to capture. Also, FlightSmart processes additional information highlighting remedial actions needed for the student to attain the highest level of mastery. Big data concepts, applied to training and evaluation, have allowed our users to better understand training requirements and identify weak points in their performance, which supplement a pilot’s progression.”

FlightSafety is working with the US Air Force to integrate its MissionFit flight training device and FlightSmart into the service’s advanced training pipeline. Additionally, FlightSafety is collaborating with the US Navy to retrofit currently fielded UTDs (unit training devices) with Mixed Reality Flight (MRF) technology, expanding the training envelope for primary instruction. Sawyer added, “In 2021, FlightSmart will be adapted to ingest new forms of data such as biometrics, cognitive loading, and eye tracking.”

Another new training platform in the sector is AVT Simulation’s Apache Gunnery Trainer (AGT), the first three of which were recently delivered to the US Army’s Aviation Center of Excellence at Fort Rucker, Alabama. The devices are “all in one” part-task procedural trainers that prepare AH-64 “front seaters” to fight the aircraft – handling the rigors and complexities of onboard weapon systems’ engagement.

The newest FTDs offerings in use by military services include AVT Simulation’s Apache Gunnery Trainer (AGT), an “all in one” part-task procedural trainer to prepare AH-64 “front seaters” to handle the rigors and complexities of onboard weapon systems’ engagement. Image credit: AVT Simulation.

Kevin Vizzarri, Vice President of Business Development, described the AGT, first noting it has a variety of haptic buttons, knobs, switches, rheostats and pressure toggles and associated multi-purpose displays, and a thumb-force controller, allowing the air crew member to manage onboard weapons. Speaking from his background as a career AH-64 pilot, the corporate executive provided several other datum points on the expanding capabilities of military FTDs – first noting the AGT can be used to teach the front-seater how to use Link16, “which connects you into the big battlefield network.” Further, the AGT weighs 50lbs [23kg] to support portability and ease of use in different training venues, and “is relatively inexpensive.”

Meeting Projected Insatiable Demand

As military training enterprises advance aircrew training and other projects with more and increasingly capable training devices below the FFS level, training platforms will also figure prominently for future aircraft.

One major evolving Pentagon acquisition programs finds the Bell Textron V-280 Valor tiltrotor competing with the Sikorsky-Bell Defiant-X for the build of the Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA) to replace the ubiquitous, Cold War-era UH-60 Black Hawk.

AVT is developing the Training System Requirements Analysis (TSRA) for the V-280 Valor. AVT, as the TSRA prime contractor, has an industry team consisting of St. Moritz Enterprises and Engenix.

As FLRAA is in a competitive phase, Tony Attales, AVT’s V-280 TSRA program manager, provided general insights beyond the V-280 – how FTDs are expected to support the next generation FLRAA training system. At this early point, the government customer is considering “some level” of embedded training capability in its FLRAA aircraft.

Attales, also a former career US Army Apache pilot, further noted the Army has decided “there are still things you have to do – being able to put your hands on components in a simulator. So, there will still be needs for flight training devices, along with whatever embedded training capabilities are in FLRAA.” The retired aviator then explained, “There are still tasks that must be done that are too risky to practice in real aircraft when not in combat, such as training for emergencies or flying in bad weather.”

As the Army has asked for both embedded training and TADSS (Training Aids, Devices, Simulators, and Simulations) training solutions, Attales noted, “they will also need to be tied to the new aircraft and be updated as quickly as the new aircraft, which is tied into that open system architecture. When software upgrades go to the aircraft, they also go to TADSS, so as not to have a negative transfer of training. I believe there will be a place for FTDs in the future vertical lift family as we go forward.”

AVT is scheduled to begin its V-280 TSRA for Bell this April, so the OEM can, in turn, present it to the Army in early 2022.

Meeting Current and Future Demands

The simulation and training industry is meeting the defense customer’s demand for additional training devices below the FFS level. At the same time, industry teams are integrating and, in some instances, leading, the quest for more capable training platforms to support legacy-era and next-generation air platforms. As military departments also advance pilot training transformation programs, significant opportunities in this market space are on the S&T industry’s horizon.

Further Reading