Bombardier Challenger 604 - Bombardier Challenger 605

The Operational Evaluation Board (OEB) report Bombardier Challenger 604 - Bombardier Challenger 605 is available in PDF format (file size 383 KB) which will download in approximately 2 minutes 39 seconds on a 28.8 connection and may be viewed using version 3.0 or higher of the Adobe® Acrobat Reader. This reader may be downloaded free of charge by visiting the Adobe® web site.

Revision 1 dated January 12, 2010

Bombardier Challenger 604 - 605

Table of Contents

Report Amended by:

Douglas Ingold
Original Report by:
John McNamara
Chairman, CL-600-2B16
Operational Evaluation Board

Transport Canada, Safety and Security
Commercial & Business Aviation, Operational Standards
Place de Ville, Tower C, 330 Sparks Street
Ottawa ON K1A 0N8

Telephone: (613) 990-1065
Fax: (613) 954-1602
E-Mail: douglas.ingold@tc.gc.ca

APPROVED

Roman Marushko
Program Manager, Flight Technical

Transport Canada, Safety and Security
Commercial & Business Aviation, Operational Standards
Place de Ville, Tower C, 330 Sparks Street
Ottawa ON K1A 0N8

Telephone: (613) 993-4692
Fax: (613) 954-1602
E-Mail: roman.marushko@tc.gc.ca

Arlo Speer
Chief, Certification & Operational Standards
Commercial & Business Aviation
Transport Canada, Civil Aviation

Don Sherritt
Director, Standards
Transport Canada,
Civil Aviation

Table of contents

REVISION RECORD
PART 1 – OEB REPORT

  1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
  2. TRANSPORT CANADA CIVIL AVIATION TEAM MEMBERS
  3. PURPOSE AND APPLICABILITY
  4. ACRONYMS
  5. BACKGROUND
  6. PILOT "TYPE RATING" REQUIREMENTS
  7. MASTER COMMON REQUIREMENTS
  8. MASTER DIFFERENCE REQUIREMENTS (MDRS)
  9. ACCEPTABLE "OPERATOR DIFFERENCE REQUIREMENTS" (ODRS) TABLES
  10. SPECIFICATIONS FOR TRAINING
  11. SPECIFICATIONS FOR CHECKING
  12. SPECIFICATIONS FOR CURRENCY
  13. AIRCRAFT REGULATORY COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST
  14. SPECIFICATIONS FOR DEVICES AND SIMULATORS
  15. APPLICATION OF REPORT
  16. ALTERNATE MEANS OF COMPLIANCE TO THIS REPORT

PART 2 – OEB SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT
APPENDIX 1 – HISTORICAL SUMMARY BOMBARDIER CHALLENGER AIRCRAFT
APPENDIX 2 - ACCEPTABLE ODR TABLES
ANNEX A – ODR TABLES – CHALLENGER 604 TO CHALLENGER 605
ANNEX B – ODR TABLES – CHALLENGER 605 TO CHALLENGER 604
APPENDIX 3 CAR 704 OPERATORS WITH AN APPROVED LEVEL “ D “ TRAINING PROGRAM
APPENDIX 4 CL-604 TO CL-605 AND CL-605 TO CL-604 LINE ORIENTED FLIGHT TRAINING
APPENDIX 5 TO OPERATIONAL EVALUATION BOARD REPORT

Revision Record

Revision No. Section/Page Description Date
Original All Original Document April 2, 2007
Revision 1 Cover Page
 
Amended Revision number and date
 
January 12, 2010
  Page 2
 
Amended signature title blocks
 
 
  Page 3
 
Updated Table of Contents
 
 
  Page 4
 
Updated Revision Record
 
 
  Page 5   Amended Executive report to include short summary of HUD and EFVS Operational Evaluation
 
 
  Page 8
 
Added Acronyms for HUD and EFVS
 
 
  Appendix 5 New Appendix added to address Rockwell Collins Model 6605 HUD and EFVS Training, Checking and Currency Requirements. The OE was lead by Ron Tidy and  conducted in August 2009  

PART 1 – OEB REPORT

1. Executive Summary

1.1 August-September 2006 Bombardier Challenger 605 Operational Evaluation

In August and September 2006 Transport Canada conducted an operational evaluation (OE) of the Bombardier Challenger 605.

The evaluation team consisted of an Operational Evaluation Board (OEB) of Transport Canada Civil Aviation (TCCA), a Flight Standardization Board (FSB) of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and a Joint Operational Evaluation Board (JOEB) of the European Aviation Safety Agency / Joint Aviation Authorities (EASA/JAA). Each board endeavored to consolidate and harmonize findings and present a report to their respective National Authorities. This report is the Transport Canada Operational Evaluation Report.

The Transport Canada Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS) A-131 identifies that the Challenger 604 and 605 share the aircraft model number CL-600-2B16. The serial numbers for the Challenger 604 range from 5301 to 5664. The Bombardier Challenger 605, the latest variant of the Model CL-600-2B16 entered service with serial numbers starting with 5701. For purpose of brevity and clarity the nomenclature “CL-604” and “CL-605” will be used in this report to distinguish between the CL-600-2B16 variants.

Bombardier’s application, dated February 3, 2006 states that:

“Since training, checking and currency differences are proposed at Level C/B/A, … request that all the benefits associated with Same Type Rating be granted to the Challenger 605 and Challenger 604.”

The application also proposed Operator Differences Requirements (ODR) tables to identify the training requirements for pilots transitioning from one variant to the other.

The Transport Canada Operational Evaluation was conducted in accordance with the procedures described in the Common Procedures Document (CPD) for Conducting Operational Evaluation Boards, 10 June 2004.

TCCA did not have a formal OE process when the Challenger 604 was introduced however they participated as observers on the FAA FSB Evaluation of the Challenger 604 and adopted the FAA findings. The original FAA FSB findings are incorporated in this report.

This report details the findings of the OEB and accepts Bombardier’s proposal that Challenger 604 and 605 should share the same type ratings. This report will help Canadian private and commercial air operators in the development of training programs and Principal Operations Inspectors (POI) in the approval of operator training programs pursuant to Canadian Aviation Regulations Part VII Subpart 4. Provisions of this report are effective until amended, superseded, or withdrawn by subsequent operational evaluation determinations.

1.2 August 2009, Rockwell Collins Model 6605 HUD and EFVS Operational Evaluation

The Bombardier Challenger CL-605 Operational Evaluation Team consisting of Ron Tidy (administrative team leader) and Peter Vetere (test subject) participated with the FAA and EASA in an evaluation of the Rockwell Collins Model 6605 Head-up Display (HUD) System and Enhanced Flight Vision System (EFVS) in August 2009.  The evaluation used the Bombardier Challenger CL-605 Level D simulator at the Bombardier Aerospace Training Centre and a CL-605 aircraft at Bombardier’s Flight Test facility in Wichita, KS.  The evaluation included initial HUD and EFVS training, and three aircraft flights to evaluate the HUD and EFVS in day and night, VFR and IFR operations.

Specific details of the Operational Evaluation activity are contained in Appendix 5.

2. Transport Canada Civil Aviation Team Members

The Transport Canada, Bombardier Challenger 604 and 605 OE team included the following individuals:

John McNamara - Chairman and CL604 to CL605 pilot candidate;
Greg McConnell - CL605 Initial and CL605 to CL604 differences pilot candidate;
Peter Vetere - CL604 to CL605 pilot candidate;
Doug Ingold - Observer.

The Transport Canada Bombardier Challenger 605 Rockwell Collins Model 6605 HUD / EFVS OE team included the following individuals:

Ron Tidy (CL-605 HUD & EFVS Team Lead)
Transport Canada, Safety and Security
Commercial & Business Aviation, Operational Standards
Place de Ville, Tower C, 330 Sparks Street
Ottawa ON K1A 0N8
Telephone: 613-990-2600
Fax: 613-954-1602
E-Mail: ron.tidy@tc.gc.ca

Peter Vetere
Inspector, Business Aviation - Certification
Dorval Regional Office
700, Leigh Capréol
Dorval QC H4Y 1G7
Telephone:  514-633-3573
Fax: 514-633-3697
E-Mail: peter.vetere@tc.gc.ca

Revision 1 of this report was prepared by:

Doug Ingold
Transport Canada, Safety and Security
Commercial & Business Aviation, Operational Standards
Place de Ville, Tower C, 330 Sparks Street
Ottawa ON K1A 0N8
Telephone:  613-990-1065
Fax: 613-954-1602
E-Mail: douglas.ingold@tc.gc.ca

3. Purpose and Applicability

The primary purpose of this report is to specify Transport Canada master training, checking and currency requirements applicable to crews operating the Bombardier Challenger 604 and Challenger 605 aircraft.  This report will help Canadian private and commercial air operators in the development of training programs and POIs in the approval of operator training programs pursuant to Canadian Aviation Regulations Part VII Subpart 4.  Provisions of this report are effective until amended, superseded, or withdrawn by subsequent operational evaluation determinations.

Relevant acronyms are defined as follows:

4. Acronyms

AARTF Certification and Operational Standards
AFCS Automatic Flight Control System
AFM Aircraft Flight Manual
C&BA Commercial and Business Aviation
CAR Canadian Aviation Regulation
Challenger 604 CL-604 Model CL-600-2B16 (604 Variant) serial 5301 to 5664
Challenger 605 CL-605 Model CL-600-2B16 (604 Variant) serial 5701 and subsequent
CPD Common Procedures Document for Conducting Operational Evaluation Boards, 10 June 2004.
CRT Cathode ray tubes
EASA European Aviation Safety Agency
EFIS Electronic Flight Information system
EFVS Enhanced Flight Vision System
EICAS Engine Indicating and Crew Alerting System
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FAR Federal Aviation Regulation 
FMS Flight Management System
FSB Flight Standardization Board
HUD Head Up Display
JAA Joint Aviation Authorities
JOEB Joint Operational Evaluation Board
LCD Liquid crystal displays
LOF Line-oriented flying
LOFT Line-oriented flying training
MCR Master Common Requirements
MFF Mixed Fleet Flying
MLW Maximum Landing Weight
NSEP National Simulator Evaluation Program
ODR Operator Differences Requirements
OE Operational Evaluation
OEB Operational Evaluation Board
POI Principal Operations Inspectors
PPC Pilot Proficiency Check
QRH Quick Reference Handbook
SID Standard Instrument Departure
SLD Super cooled liquid droplet
STAR Standard Terminal Arrival
TCCA Transport Canada Civil Aviation
TCDS Type Certificate Data Sheet
VNAV Vertical Navigation

5. Background

Transport Canada (TCCA) Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS) A-131 identifies the Challenger 604 aircraft as Model CL-600-2B16 (604 Variant) serial numbers 5301 – 5664

Bombardier Inc. introduced a new variant of the aircraft that is identified in the amended TCDS A-131 as the “Model CL-600-2B16 (604 Variant) serial numbers 5701 and subsequent”. The new variant is being marketed as the Challenger 605. The changes from the 604 to the 605 include a number of weight reduction measures, an avionics upgrade and cabin upgrades. The most significant change from an operational perspective is the Rockwell Collins ProLine 21 avionics suite. The ProLine 21 uses four 10” x 12” adaptive multi-function liquid crystal displays (LCDs) rather than the six 7.25” cathode ray tubes (CRT) of the Challenger 604’s ProLine 4 suite. As well Challenger 605 includes an autothrottle system as a standard installation rather than as an option in the case of the Challenger 604.

Both variants are identified as Model CL-600-2B16 (604 Variant) with the distinction dependant on the aircraft serial number.

In August and September 1995, the CL-604 FAA Flight Standardization Board (FSB) completed a CL-604 initial pilot ground school utilizing Canadair’s training facilities in Montreal, Canada. Although Transport Canada did not have a formal Operational Evaluation process at that time, a Transport Canada inspector participated as an observer. Training was received in a classroom and in a Canadair Regional Jet simulator. No CL-604 simulator had been manufactured at that time. The FSB then received flight training in the CL-604 aircraft in Wichita, Kansas. It then conducted AC 120-53 test T5, which is essentially an evaluation of all FAR Part 61 Appendix A maneuvers.

The FSB report established the following:

The pilot type rating for the CL-604 has been established as “CL-604” (CL64 for TCCA purposes). The Canadair CL-604 shares the same Type Certificate Data Sheet (A21EA – FAA, A-131 – TCCA) as previous Canadair Challenger Series aircraft (CL-600, CL-601-1A, CL-601-3A, and CL-601-3R). Those preceding aircraft all share a same pilot type rating  “CL-600”. For pilot type rating purposes, the CL-604 aircraft is not considered a variant or derivative of the Canadair Challenger Series aircraft (CL-600, CL-601-1A, CL-601-3A, and CL-601-3R). The FSB did not conduct a comparison between CL-600/601-1A/601-3A/601-3R aircraft and the CL-604; therefore, no credit may be given between these aircraft for training, checking, or currency.

For pilot type rating purposes, the CL-604 is also not considered a variant or derivative of the Canadair Regional Jet (CL-600-2B19). The Canadair Regional Jet pilot type rating is “CL-65”. The FSB did not compare the CL-65 to the CL-604 therefore; no credit may be given between these aircraft for training, checking, or currency.

Transport Canada has adopted the FAA FSB findings and incorporated them in this report to establish the base line for comparison with the 605.

In February 2006, Bombardier submitted an application in accordance with the Common Procedures Document for Conducting Operational Evaluation Boards, for an OEB to determine the requirements for pilot qualification and type rating for new variant.

In their application they proposed that:

Since training, checking and currency differences are proposed at Level C/B/A, … request that all the benefits associated with Same Type Rating be granted to the Challenger 605 and Challenger 604.

The application also proposed ODR tables to identify the training requirements for pilots transitioning form one variant to the other. 

Since Bombardier conceded that there would be a requirement for difference training, the T1 test was waived.  The OEB agreed to defer the T2 test pending the TCCA Aircraft Certification Flight Test pilot’s confirmation that that there were no discernable differences in the handling characteristics between the two variants. 

The Joint Evaluation team consisted of eight pilots and one engineer representing TC, FAA and EASA/JAA.  Four pilots who were previously type-rated on the Challenger 604 conducted 604 recurrent and then took the proposed 605 difference-training course.  They then conducted the T3 test in the Challenger 605 simulator that consisted of a Pilot Proficiency Check (PPC) conducted in accordance with national regulations and standards followed by simulated line-oriented flying (LOF) test.

The four pilots with no previous Challenger experience conducted the proposed Challenger 605 Initial type-rating course.  They conducted a PPC and LOF in accordance with national standards.  They then took the proposed 604 difference-training course and did another PPC and LOF in the Challenger 604 simulator.

All eight pilots then participated in CL-605 Operational Suitability flights to validate the proposed Aircraft Flight Manual (AFM) normal, abnormal and emergency procedures in the actual operational environment.

A comment-response document was used to communicate between the team leader and the manufacturer. Some forty comments were raised and will be replied to by Bombardier. Most of those comments were about the abnormal/emergency procedures and the Quick Reference Handbook (QRH).

Future Evaluations

The OEB is responsible for conducting evaluations of future changes to the Challenger 604 and 605 (such as engines, system instrumentation, or other new systems) and their derivatives. The OEB will determine the impact of those changes on training, checking and currency, and will amend this report accordingly.

6. Pilot "Type Rating" Requirements

In 1995, after the evaluation of the Challenger 604 (in accordance with CAR 421.4) the pilot type rating for the “Model CL-600-2B16 (Challenger 604)” was designated by TCCA as "CL64”. In 2006, the TCCA evaluation of the “Model CL-600-2B16 (Challenger 605) determined that the CL-605 could share the CL64 licensing designator with the CL-604. Training, checking and currency requirements for pilots who convert from the Challenger 604 to the 605 and vice versa, are discussed below.

7. Master Common Requirements

Master Common Requirements (MCR) for all CL-604 and CL-605 airplanes:

  • Normal ‘Final’ Landing Flap Setting:

    • The normal ‘final’ landing flap is 45 degrees for the CL-604 and CL-605.

  • Automatic Flight Control System (AFCS):

    • The AFCS pilot/machine interface is the same for the CL-604 and CL-605.

  • Aircraft Operating Weights:

    • Aircraft maximum operating weights are the same for both the CL-604 and CL-605 aircraft.

  • Handling and Performance:

    • Handling and performance are identical for both aircraft.

  • V Speeds:

    • All maximum speeds for landing gear and flaps are identical for both aircraft. V Speeds for takeoffs and approaches are dependent upon aircraft weight and are identical for both aircraft when operated at the same weight.

  • Engine Indicating and Crew Alerting System (EICAS)

    • Only minor changes to crew alerting messages and applicable synoptic page architecture have been made to support the ProLine 21 changes in displayed information.

  • Primary and Secondary Flight Controls:

    • Pilot operation of the primary and secondary flight controls is the same for both the CL-604 and CL-605.

  • Procedure Knowledge:

    • Takeoff Climb and Descent Profiles:

      • The takeoff, climb, and descent profiles for the CL-604 and CL-605 are identical for both aircraft.

  • Landing Minima Category

    • The following straight-in approach minima (based on Maximum Landing Weight (MLW) and 1.3 times Vso) for the CL-604 and CL-605 are as follows:

      Aircraft Landing Flap Category
      CL-604 45 degrees C
      CL-605 45 degrees C
  • Approach Profiles and Speed:

    • The approach profiles are the same for the CL-604 and CL-605.

    • Approach speeds are dependent upon aircraft weight. All critical speeds are automatically presented to the pilot in a standardized manner for the CL-604 and CL-605 aircraft.

  • Abnormal & Emergency Procedures:

    • Abnormal and emergency procedures are presented in QRH. The QRH for both aircraft share an identical presentation format and direct the pilots to carry out emergency or abnormal procedures in a methodical and structured manner.

  • Special Emphasis Training

8. Master Difference Requirements (MDRs)

Master Difference Requirements (MDRs) for the CL-604 and CL-605 are shown in the table below.  The requirements  apply to operators whose crews operate both variants, or apply for conversion between variants.  The Difference Level Definitions (A/A/A etc.) are specified in accordance with the criteria contained in, Common Procedures Document for Operational Evaluation Board (OEB) FAA -JAA –TCCA where the first letter refers to training requirements, the second to checking requirements, and the third to currency requirements.

AIRPLANE TYPE
RATING: CL600-2B16
FROM AIRPLANE
TO AIRPLANE   604 605
604 ------ C*/B/A
605 C*/B/A ------

MDR Table

* Level C differences training is the highest level required for the Challenger 604 and 605. In the case of pilots moving from one variant to the other, operators and training providers must provide pilots with training permitting them to become fully cognizant of the differences in flight deck layout and avionics controls.

Interactive computer based training is suitable to impart the necessary knowledge. However, the operator is responsible to ensure the training is consolidated through the use of a device, which provides for tactile manipulation of system related controls and switches, and emulates panel and instrument indications. An acceptable “device” as described in this paragraph is one that replicates the functionality, operation and installation of the Collins ProLine system in the Challenger 604 or 605 as appropriate, and may include, but is not limited to, an FTD, aircraft simulator, or aircraft.

9. Acceptable "Operator Difference Requirements" (ODRs) Tables

ODR tables are used to show an operator's compliance method. Acceptable ODR tables for operators conducting Mixed Fleet Flying (MFF) operations, or convert between the CL-604 and CL-605 are shown in Appendix 1. MFF is defined as operations in which crews alternately fly the CL-604 AND CL-605 between PPC /training events.

The ODR tables represent an acceptable means to comply with MDR provisions, for the aircraft evaluated, based on those differences and compliance methods shown. The tables do not necessarily represent the only acceptable means of compliance for operators with aircraft having other differences, where compliance methods (e.g., devices, simulators, etc) are different, or for combinations of aircraft not evaluated. For operators flying variants, which are the same as the aircraft used for the ODR table development, and using the same compliance methods, the ODR tables in Appendix 1 have been found acceptable by TCCA. Equivalent tables, therefore, may be approved by the POI for a particular operator.

Operators flying variants with differences not shown on, or addressed by, the acceptable ODR tables attached in Appendix 1; or operators seeking a different means of compliance, must prepare and seek TCCA approval of specific ODR tables applicable to their fleet. New ODR tables proposed by operators should be coordinated with the Program Manager, Flight Technical in Certification and Operational Standards (AARTF) to ensure consistent treatment of variants between various operators’ ODR tables and compatibility of the MDR table with MDR provisions. The operator retains the originals of the approved ODR tables. The Program Manager Flight Technical will retain copies of approved Challenger aircraft ODR tables.

10. Specifications for Training

In accordance with CAR 421.40 the pilot type rating for the CL-604 and CL-605 is designated as CL64.

Further, due to the design of this aircraft, the type shall not be eligible for PPC grouping in accordance with CAR Parts VI or VII. The concept of grouping is not applicable in the context of the CL-604 and CL-605 variants as they are the same type-rating.

Initial, Transition and Upgrade Training:

The Bombardier Aerospace Training Centre’s CL-605 training program was closely modeled upon the original CL-604 training program and share the same philosophy in use of resource material and courseware presentation whenever possible. Both versions of the course meets the requirements of CARs Subpart 402, 604 and 704, for the initial training of Canadian pilots to be type rated CL64 and to operate it in private and commercial service. Minimum training times requirements specified in CARs Standard 724.115(31) Table 1 apply.

Recurrent Training:

Annual recurrent training is accomplished in accordance with the operators approved training program that meets the standards of CAR Std 724.115.  Minimum Ground and Flight (Simulator) specified in CARs Standard 724.115(31) Table 2 apply.

Differences Training:

When any combination of the CL-604 and CL-605 are flown, appropriate instruction in design and systems differences will be required for both airplanes, consistent with MDR provisions detailed in section 8. In the future, when significant hardware or software product improvements are introduced for a single aircraft variant or for both the CL-604 and CL-605, a reassessment of the differences training requirements must be undertaken by TCCA. The POI will determine what additional training is required for crewmember proficiency using the upgraded hardware or software.

Special Emphasis Training (CL-604 and CL-605):

Special emphasis training is recommended. Such training should be conducted to improve basic crew understanding and confidence regarding aircraft handling qualities, options and procedures as these relate to design characteristics and limitations. Examples of this training should include the following:

  1. Recovery from unusual attitudes;
  2. Handling qualities and procedures during recovery from an upset condition (e.g., wake vortex encounter);
  3. Operation of aircraft in icing environments including super cooled liquid droplet (SLD) events;
  4. Low Energy Awareness Training;
  5. High Altitude Stall Recovery;
  6. Engine Failure/Malfunction Recognition Training;

The OEB also found that early exposure to the automatic flight control system (AFCS), auto-throttles, and flight management system (FMS) is important, especially for pilots with no previous, auto-throttle or FMS experience.  Establishing early confidence in manually flying the aircraft, converting from manual to automatic (FMS controlled) flight mode and back is equally important due to heavy reliance on the AFCS.  In the event of a flight path deviation due to input error or system malfunction, the flight crew must be able to comfortably transition from automatic to manual mode and back in an orderly fashion.

Similarly, exposure to the use of VNAV in the terminal environment including SIDs, STARs and LNAV/VNAV approaches is important.  Establishing confidence in converting from basic autopilot modes to FMS VNAV controlled flight modes and back is equally important in order to cope with ATC clearance amendments to speed and altitude constraints.

Systems Integration Training:

  1. Flight Control Panel (FCP)
  2. Flight Mode Annunciator (FMA)
  3. Flight Management System (FMS)

Flight Training (Full Flight Simulator - Level C or D and/or aircraft):

  1. Dual hydraulic system malfunctions (system 1 or 2, and system 3)
  2. Air Driven Generator (ADG) deployment
  3. Primary Flight Display (PFD), Multifunction Display (MFD), EICAS status page reversionary modes
  4. Inability to exclusively use EICAS messages to determine aircraft system status. Some switches (i.e. L/R to aux fuel transfer, fuel crossflow, and AC essential bus transfer) are not represented by EICAS messages.

The OEB also found that early exposure to the FCP, FMA and FMS is important, especially for pilots with no previous EFIS or FMS experience.  Establishing early confidence in manually flying the aircraft, converting from manual to automatic (FMS controlled) flight mode and back is equally important due to heavy reliance on the Automatic Flight Control System (AFCS). In the event of a flight path deviation due to input error or system malfunction, the flight crew must be able to comfortably transition from automatic to manual mode and back in an orderly fashion.

Special Flight Characteristics:

Special emphasis during training should be placed in the area of roll control during multiple hydraulic system failure, crosswind landing and rollout, and zero-flap landing.

Flight Training (Level C or D Flight Simulator and/or aircraft):

The OEB has determined that zero-flap approaches and landings to a full stop are required to be demonstrated by applicants seeking type certification in this aircraft.  The aircraft has a relatively high approach and landing speed and has a tendency to “float” if normal landing flare technique is used.  Thrust reverser deployment during a zero flap landing tends to cause the nose to pitch-up, requiring significant pilot input to maintain nose wheel contact with the runway

CL-605 Special Emphasis Training

The CL-605 OEB has identified additional items (listed below) that should receive special emphasis in an approved CL-605 Training Program:

Systems Integration Training:

  1. Display Control Panel (DCP)
  2. Cursor Control Panel (CCP)
  3. Integrated Flight Information System [IFIS] [Optional equipment not evaluated by OEB]

Flight Training (Level C or D Flight Simulator and/or aircraft):

  1. Operations with inoperative Autothrottle
  2. Flight Control System Jam procedures

11. Specifications For Checking

Testing, Checking, and Evaluations specified by the CARs Subpart 402 and 704 apply.

12. Specifications For Currency

Currency is considered to be common for the CL-604 and CL-605.  Separate tracking of currency for the CL-604 and CL-605 is not necessary or applicable. Currency will be maintained, or re-established, in accordance with CAR 724.115 or the approved Company training program.

13. Aircraft Regulatory Compliance Checklist

Any Canadian operator wishing to operate the Challenger CL-604 or CL-605 aircraft will have to demonstrate to Transport Canada that the aircraft fully complies with all applicable CAR 605/704 parts before that aircraft enters service.

The first production CL-604 aircraft, serial number 5301, was utilized by the FAA FSB to conduct its evaluation on September 5 - 14, 1995.  This aircraft was, except for a few items, representative of an aircraft that could be issued a U.S. Airworthiness Certificate. It enabled the FSB to determine compliance with the appropriate Part 91 and Part 135 operating requirements. 

Serial number 5701 was utilized by TCCA OPS to conduct its evaluation on September 7, 2006. Serial number 5701 was a flight test aircraft in a pre-production configuration and was not fully representative of a production aircraft (the aft cabin was not completed).

As each completed aircraft is unique and the majority of items are operator’s responsibility, a compliance checklist is not included in this report.  

POIs may contact C&BA Operational Standards, Flight Technical to obtain a sample checklist for guidance in determining an operator’s compliance with all applicable CAR 605/704.

14. Specifications For Devices And Simulators

Device and simulator characteristics are designated in Aeroplane and Rotorcraft Simulator Manual (TP 9685). The acceptability of differences between devices, simulators, and aircraft must be addressed by the POI. Requests for device approval should be made to the POI.  The POI may approve those devices for that operator if their characteristics clearly meet the established TC criteria and have been qualified by the National Simulator Evaluation Program (NSEP).

15. Application Of Report

All relevant parts of this report are applicable to operators on the effective date of this report.

16. Alternate Means Of Compliance To This Report

TCCA Manger Flight Technical should be consulted by the POI when alternate means of compliance, other than those specified in this report, are proposed. If an alternate means of compliance is sought, operators will be required to submit a proposed alternate means for approval that provides an equivalent level of safety to the provisions of CPD and this OEB report. Analysis, demonstrations, proof of concept testing, differences documentation, and/or other evidence may be required.

In the event that alternate compliance is sought, training program hour reductions, simulator approvals, and device approvals may be significantly limited and reporting requirements may be increased to ensure an equivalent level of training, checking, and currency. TCCA will generally not consider relief through alternate compliance means unless sufficient lead-time has been planned by an operator to allow for any necessary testing and evaluation.

PART 2 – OEB SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT

Documents kept on file at TCCA C&BA Operational Standards Flight Technical are as follows:

CL-604/605 Master Minimum Equipment List
CL-604 and 605 Operational Manuals
CL-604/605 Training syllabus of FSB members
CL-604 and 605 Aircraft Flight Manuals

Documents included are as follow:

Appendix 1 Historical Summary Bombardier Challenger Aircraft

Appendix 2 Acceptable ODR Tables

Annex A ODR Tables – Challenger 604 to Challenger 605

Annex B ODR Tables – Challenger 605 to Challenger 604

Appendix 3 CAR 704 Operators with an approved Level “ D “ Training Program

Appendix 4 CL-604 to CL-605 and CL-605 to CL-604 Line Oriented Flight Training

Appendix 5 Rockwell Collins Model 6605 Head-up Display (HUD) and Enhanced Flight Vision System (EFVS) Training, Checking and Currency Requirements

Appendix 1 – Historical Summary Bombardier Challenger Aircraft

Model CL-600 1A11, August 10, 1980

  • Original wide-body corporate aircraft
  • Serial 1002 – 1085

Model CL–601-2A12 601 Variant, Febraruy 25, 1983

  • Powerplant change
  • Increased range
  • Increased gross weight
  • Serial 3001 – 3066

Model CL–600-2B16 601-3A Variant, April 21, 1987

  • Improved powerplant
  • New avionics
  • Improved field performance
  • Serial 5001 – 5134

Model CL-600-2B16 601-3R Variant, July 2, 1993

  • Increased range
  • Improved field performance
  • Serial 5135 – 5189

Model CL-600-2B16 604 Variant, September 20, 1995

  • Increased range / Improved powerplant
  • ProLine 4 Avionics suite
  • Improved field performance
  • Increased gross weight
  • Serial 5301 – 5664

Model CL-600-2B16 604 Variant, November 2006 (marketed as Challenger 605)

  • Passenger cabin upgrade
  • Exterior fuselage changes
  • ProLine 21 Avionics suite
  • Serial 5701 and subsequent

Appendix 2 - Acceptable ODR Tables

Definitions ODR Training Levels

Definitions ODR Training Level
“HO” = Handout A
“S/T” = Slide/Tape presentations
“TCBT” = Tutorial Computer Based Training
“SU” = Stand-up lectures
“VT” = Video Tapes
B
“ICBT” = Interactive Computer Based Training
“CSS” = Cockpit System Simulators
“CPT” = Cockpit Procedures Trainers
“PTT” = Part Task Trainers
“FTD 4-5” = Flight Training Devices (level 4-5)
C
“FTD 6-7” = Flight training devices (level 6-7)
“FFS A-D” = Full Flight Simulators (level D or lower )
D
“FFS C-D” = Full Flight Simulators (level C or D)
“ACFT” = Aircraft
E

Annex 1 – ODR Tables – Challenger 604 to Challenger 605
Annex 2 – ODR Tables – Challenger 604 to Challenger 605

Annex A – ODR Tables – Challenger 604 to Challenger 605

DIFFERENCE AIRCRAFT CL-600-2B16 (605)
BASE AIRCRAFT: CL-600-2B16 (604)
APPROVED BY
(POI)____________________________
COMPLIANCE METHOD
TRAINING CHKG/CURR
DESIGN REMARKS FLT
CHAR
PROC
CHNG
LVL
A
LVL
B
LVL
C
LVL
D
CHK CURR
Air Gen Passenger cabin windows increased in size and raised. Over wing emergency exit raised. No No X       A A
Air Gen Aerodynamic tail cone redesigned No No X       A A

DIFFERENCE AIRCRAFT CL-600-2B16 (605)
BASE AIRCRAFT: CL-600-2B16 (604)
APPROVED BY
(POI)____________________________
COMPLIANCE METHOD
TRAINING CHKG/CURR
SYSTEM REMARKS FLT
CHAR
PROC
CHNG
LVL
A
LVL
B
LVL
C
LVL
D
CHK CURR
21 Air conditioning & pressurization Thermostatically controlled pilot and co-pilot heated floor mats installed No No X       A A
21 Air conditioning & pressurization Footwarmers and windshield heater and fan deleted. Copilot Demist handle and CKPT HEAT switch on air conditioning panel removed No No X       A A
21 Air conditioning & pressurization 2nd CPAM installed, standby cabin altitude indicator removed No Minor X       A A
21 Air conditioning & pressurization Cabin temperature control transfer switch (CABIN TEMP CONT XFER) added to air conditioning control panel No Minor X       A A
22 Auto Flight Auto-throttle is standard equipment No Minor   X     A A
22 Auto Flight Auto-throttle control panel and switches installed on left glareshield No Minor   X     A A
23 Comm Radio Tuning Units (RTU) removed, tuning functions performed by CCP/MFD No Minor   X     A A
24 Electrical Power AC utility switch/light added to Electrical Power panel No Minor X       A A
24 Electrical Power Minor changes in electrical power distribution No Minor X       A A
27 Stall Protection STALL annunciators removed from glareshield, replaced by STALL indications on PFD No Minor X       A A
31 Indicating and Recording ProLine 21 replaces ProLine 4 6 displays replaced by 4 large (10 X 12) displays Air Data Reference Panel (ARP), Display Control Panel (DCP), Weather Radar Control Panel (WXP), EICAS Control Panel (ECP) removed, replaced by Display Control Panel (DCP) (On-side PFD) and Cursor Control Panel (CCP) (On-side MFD). Industry standard colour convention adopted No Major     X   B A
31 Indicating and Recording EICAS - CAS messages combined into single stack, same stacking philosophy. No No X       A A
31 Indicating and Recording EFIS - Advisory AOA indicator available on each PFD No No X       A A
31 Indicating and Recording APU temperature and RPM display on MFD is different in format. No No X       A A
31 Indicating and Recording Capable of supporting optional: Enhanced map displays, XM/Universal weather display, etc. (*) (*) (*)       (*) (*)
31 Indicating and Recording Over speed test (OVSP TEST) switch removed, No preflight over speed test required. No Minor X       A A
31 Indicating and Recording EICAS – Single warning/caution switch/light on glareshield (one per side) No No X       A A
31 Indicating and Recording Standby instruments, Electro-pneumatic standby Altitude/Airspeed and Attitude instruments replaced by an integrated standby instrument (ISI) No Minor X       A A
31 Indicating and Recording Electronic clocks (2) replaced with a single GPS-capable clock No No X       A A
33 Lighting Circuit breaker and integral cockpit panel lighting and some switch/lights changed to LEDs No No X       A A
33 Lighting Pulsating landing lights are standard equipment No No X       A A
34 Navigation Baro knob functionality modified No Minor X       A A
34 Navigation IRS system capable of in-flight nav alignment No Minor X       A A
34 Navigation FMS CDU. Smaller CDU- 6200 installed. Alpha-numeric key layout differs No No X       A A
34 Navigation FMS Color convention modified No No X       A A
34 Navigation TAWS altitude callouts available for both DH and MDA No Minor X       A A
49 APU APU Honeywell 36-150 is standard. No Minor X       A A

DIFFERENCE AIRCRAFT CL-600-2B16 (605)
BASE AIRCRAFT: CL-600-2B16 (604)
APPROVED BY
(POI)____________________________
COMPLIANCE METHOD
TRAINING CHKG/CURR
MANEUVER REMARKS FLT
CHAR
PROC
CHNG
LVL
A
LVL
B
LVL
C
LVL
D
CHK CURR
  Not Applicable                

(*) Enhanced map displays, XM/Universal weather display, etc. is a customer option and was not evaluated by the FSB.

Annex B – ODR Tables – Challenger 605 to Challenger 604

DIFFERENCE AIRCRAFT CL-600-2B16 (604)
BASE AIRCRAFT: CL-600-2B16 (605)
APPROVED BY
(POI)____________________________
COMPLIANCE METHOD
TRAINING CHKG/CURR
DESIGN REMARKS FLT
CHAR
PROC
CHNG
LVL
A
LVL
B
LVL
C
LVL
D
CHK CURR
Air Gen Passenger cabin windows are smaller in size and situated lower. Over wing emergency exit is situated lower. No No X       A A
Air Gen Different aerodynamic tail cone No No X       A A

DIFFERENCE AIRCRAFT CL-600-2B16 (604)
BASE AIRCRAFT: CL-600-2B16 (605)
APPROVED BY
(POI)____________________________
COMPLIANCE METHOD
TRAINING CHKG/CURR
SYSTEM REMARKS FLT
CHAR
PROC
CHNG
LVL
A
LVL
B
LVL
C
LVL
D
CHK CURR
21 Air conditioning & pressurization No thermostatically controlled pilot and co-pilot heated floor mats installed No No X       A A
21 Air conditioning & pressurization Forced air foot-warming and windshield demist provided. Fan and electric heater controlled by CKPT HEAT switch on Air conditioning panel Full foot warmer/full windshield vent control knob installed on copilot side panel removed No No X       A A
21 Air conditioning & pressurization Single CPAM installed, standby cabin altitude indicator provided beneath glareshield. No Minor X       A A
21 Air conditioning & pressurization No cabin temperature control transfer switch on air conditioning control panel No Minor X       A A
22 Auto Flight Auto-throttle is optional equipment No Minor X       A A
22 Auto Flight Autopilot mistrim icons appear on PFD. No Minor X       A A
23 Comm Radio tuning functions performed at Radio Tuning Units (RTU) vice CCP/MFD No Minor   X     A A
24 Electrical Power No AC utility switch/light on Electrical Power panel No Minor X       A A
24 Electrical Power Minor changes in electrical power distribution. No Minor X       A A
27 Stall Protection STALL annunciators on left and right glareshield, vice PFD No Minor X       A A
31 Indicating and Recording ProLine 4 avionics suite installed vice ProLine 21. Four (4) displays replaced by six (6) smaller displays Air Data Reference Panel (ARP), Display Control Panel (DCP), Weather Radar Control Panel (WXP), EICAS Control Panel (ECP) installed, vice Cursor Control Panel (CCP) No Major     X   B A
31 Indicating and Recording EICAS - CAS messages displayed on two EICAS Displays same stacking philosophy although two stacks. Some color philosophy changed No No X       A A
31 Indicating and Recording EFIS – No Advisory AOA indicator on PFDs No No X       A A
31 Indicating and Recording Over speed test (OVSP TEST) switch installed to facilitate testing during preflight. No Minor X       A A
31 Indicating and Recording EICAS – Separate warning/caution switch/lights on glareshield (one warning and one caution per side) No No X       A A
31 Indicating and Recording APU temperature and RPM display on MFD is different in format. No No X       A A
31 Indicating and Recording Standby instruments, Electro-pneumatic standby Altitude/Airspeed and Attitude instruments installed No Minor X       A A
31 Indicating and Recording Two (2) Electronic clocks installed no GPS interface. No No X       A A
33 Lighting Circuit breaker and integral cockpit panel lighting and switch/lights are incandescent No No X       A A
33 Lighting Pulsating landing lights available as optional equipment only. No No X       A A
34 Navigation Baro knob functionality and location differs No Minor X       A A
34 Navigation IRS system not capable of in-flight nav alignment No Minor X       A A
34 Navigation FMS Color convention non industry standard No No X       A A
34 Navigation FMS CDU. Larger CDU- 6000 installed. Alpha-numeric key layout differs No No X       A A
34 Navigation TAWS altitude callouts available for radio altitude (DH) only No Minor X       A A
34 Navigation Radio Altitude, pilot initiated test function provided. No Minor X       A A
49 APU APU GTCP-36-100E is standard. No Minor X       A A

DIFFERENCE AIRCRAFT CL-600-2B16 (604)
BASE AIRCRAFT: CL-600-2B16 (605)
APPROVED BY
(POI)____________________________
COMPLIANCE METHOD
TRAINING CHKG/CURR
MANEUVER REMARKS FLT
CHAR
PROC
CHNG
LVL
A
LVL
B
LVL
C
LVL
D
CHK CURR
  Not Applicable                

Appendix 3 CAR 704 Operators with an approved Level “ D “ Training Program

CAR 724.115 (10.2)(b)(ii) requires simulated line flights of at least 2 sessions (2 sectors as pilot flying and 2 sectors as pilot not flying. Pilot flying duties shall be carried out from the appropriate seat”. The following scenario was found to satisfy this standard.

Simulator Period 6
2.0 Hours

Use of AFM supplement No. 2 Operation on wet and contaminated runways.

MEL and Configuration Deviation List Review
  • NDB Approach
  • Back Course Approach
  • Balked landing initiated in the low-energy regime
  • CFIT Escape Maneuver in IMC
  • 1200 RVR – Rejected Take-off
  • 1200 RVR – V1 Cut
  • 600 RVR – Rejected Take-off
  • 600 RVR – V1 Cut
  • Pilot Incapacitation
  • Windshear Escape Maneuver
Simulator Period 7
2.0 Hours

Visual flight with dusk and night with variable VFR weather visibilities

Note: CASS requires a visual training program in FFS to ensure VFR flight skills of at least 4 hrs 2 hours a PF and 2 hours as PNF
  • Take-off and landings to 100% of the published Crosswind Component
  • Visual takeoff (normal and crosswind) for a visual Circuit ?with Visual landing with variable wind and runway illusions
  • No electronic glideslope approach and landing
  • Approach and landing with Flight Control Failure
    • Elevator split
    • Stabilizer trim malfunction
    • Aileron/Elevator System jam
  • Engine inoperative approach and landing
  • Engine failure during takeoff and missed approach

Appendix 4 CL-604 to CL-605 and CL-605 to CL-604 Line Oriented Flight Training

For operators that choose to supplement the Difference training program with Line Oriented flight Training the following syllabus is recommended:

Simulator Period 1
2.0 Hours

Line flight 1st session

CYYZ to CYUL

Use of AFM supplement No. 2 Operation on wet and contaminated runways.

Emphasis on use of Company SOPs and auto throttles as applicable.

Operator may elect to conduct Cold weather operations line fight to introduce flight crew to use FMS Temperature Compensation feature
  • FMS programming for
    • departure
    • ?enroute
    • holding
    • arrival
    • ?approach selection
    • FMS performance initialisation for take-off and approach
    • FMS enroute progress monitoring
  • 1200 RVR or 600 RVR takeoff
  • SID departure to Enroute climb
  • Cruise introduce MFD fail
  • ATS revised clearance to destination
  • Descent to destination introduce TCAS alert (RA or TA)
  • Transition from descent to STAR RNAV using VNAV to fly STAR RNAV profiled altitudes
  • Transition to selected Approach
  • Introduce fault at 1000 ft (engine failure)
  • Transition to landing at published minimums for selected approach
Simulator Period 2
2.0 Hours

Line Flight 2nd session

CYUL- CYOW- CYYZ

MEL and Configuration Deviation List Review

Emphasis on use of Company SOPs and auto throttles as applicable.

Operator may elect to conduct Hot weather operations line flight with runway limitations
  • FMS programming for
    • departure
    • enroute
    • holding
    • arrival
    • approach selection
  • FMS performance initialisation for take-off and approach
  • FMS enroute progress monitoring
  • 1200 RVR or 600 RVR takeoff
  • SID departure to Enroute climb
  • Cruise introduce PFD fail
  • ATS revised clearance to destination
  • Introduce weather that requires deviation form routing using WX Radar
  • Descent to destination introduce TCAS alert (RA or TA)
  • Transition from descent to STAR RNAV using VNAV to fly STAR RNAV profiled altitudes
  • Transition to selected Approach
  • Weather below published minimums to cause a Missed Approach
  • Introduce Windshear
  • Return for to field for on radar vectors with unprogrammed FMS for Approach and transition to crosswind landing.

Appendix 5 - ROCKWELL COLLINS MODEL 6605 HEAD-UP DISPLAY (HUD) and ENHANCED FLIGHT VISION SYSTEM (EFVS) TRAINING, CHECKING AND CURRENCY REQUIREMENTS

1. BACKGROUND

The Bombardier Challenger CL-605 Operational Evaluation Team consisting of Ron Tidy (administrative team leader) and Peter Vetere (test subject) participated with the FAA and EASA in an evaluation of the Rockwell Collins Model 6605 Head-up Display (HUD) System and Enhanced Flight Vision System (EFVS) in August 2009. The evaluation used the Bombardier Challenger CL-605 Level D simulator at the Bombardier Aerospace Training Centre and a CL-605 aircraft at Bombardier’s Flight Test facility in Wichita, KS. The evaluation included initial HUD and EFVS training, and three aircraft flights to evaluate the HUD and EFVS in day and night, VFR and IFR operations.

Weather conditions during the aircraft certification testing and subsequent operational evaluation did not permit the testing or determination of the EFVS operational suitability in day or night IMC. Therefore, until the Rockwell Collin 6605 EFVS is certified and evaluated in IMC, the EFVS is limited to operations in VMC. Low visibility takeoff and Category II approach operations using the HUD and/or EFVS were not evaluated.

2. SUMMARY

The training, checking and currency requirements for the operational use, in all phases of flight of the Rockwell Collins Model 6605 Head Up Display (HUD) with or without the Enhanced Flight Vision System (EFVS) are provided in this appendix.

Initial and recurrent training require the use of a TCCA approved level C (or higher) CL-605 aircraft full flight simulator (FFS) equipped with the Rockwell Collins 6605 HUD and EFVS (as applicable) and with day and night visual displays. It is assumed that the Pilot in Command (PIC) is the Pilot Flying (PF) seated in the aircraft equipped with the HUD/EFVS installed for the left pilot station. As a minimum, the PF flying the HUD requires a partial Pilot Proficiency Check (PPC), which incorporates specific maneuvers identified under the Checking Requirements of this appendix. An air operator’s PICs require line indoctrination and consolidation after initial qualification on the HUD and EFVS (as applicable). Air operator 90-day PF takeoff, approach and landing currency requirements apply to the PIC.

This appendix is divided into two sections. The first covers HUD training, checking and currency requirements; and the second covers the additional training, checking and currency requirements associated with a HUD equipped with EFVS.

SECTION 1 – ROCKWELL COLLINS MODEL 6605 HEAD-UP DISPLAY (HUD) TRAINING, CHECKING AND CURRENCY REQUIREMENTS

1. PREREQUISITE FOR HUD TRAINING

Unless the HUD training is integrated with or occurs sequentially preceding the initial qualification PPC, a prerequisite to HUD training on a CL-605 aeroplane, are prior training, qualification and currency on the CL-605 aeroplane.

2. HUD TRAINING - GENERAL

The Bombardier Aerospace Training Centre’s CL-605 HUD course meets the requirements of the CARs Subpart 604 and 704, for the initial and conversion training of Canadian pilots to operate CL-605 aircraft using the Rockwell Collins 6605 HUD in private or commercial service.

The HUD pilot training requirements consist of those related to initial and recurrent ground and flight training. It should be noted that the HUD training program focuses principally upon training events flown in the left seat by the Pilot-In-Command (PIC) as Pilot Flying (PF). Nevertheless, HUD training of Pilot Not Flying (PNF) Second-In-Command (SIC) duties in the right seat is required, when there are SOP differences for the PNF when the PF is heads up (compared to heads down). SIC HUD familiarization flown in the left seat is recommended.

Note: Special training emphasis should be placed in the following areas:

  1. Crew coordination;
  2. Crew briefings and callouts;
  3. Duties of flying and non-flying pilots; and
  4. EICAS messages and use of QRH and checklists applicable to HUD operations.
3. HUD INITIAL/CONVERSION GROUND TRAINING

For air operators and private operators, initial/conversion training should be conducted in accordance with the applicable provisions of CARs 704.108 or 604.26. For all operators, the initial ground training program should include the following elements:

  1. Classroom instruction covering HUD operational concepts, crew duties and responsibilities and operational procedures including preflight, normal and abnormal operations, EICAS messages, miscompare, and failure flags.

  2. Classroom instruction or Computer Based Training (CBT) on the HUD symbology set and it’s inter-relationship with airplane aerodynamics, inertial factors, environmental conditions, comparison to Primary Flight Display (PFD), and actual HUD video of the following maneuvers:

    1. Take off Reference Box. Use of the takeoff reference box (which is not immediately visible) and the aircraft reference symbol for take off and go around rotation and the transition to the FPS and the FD cue.
    2. Unusual Attitudes. Transitions to and from the decluttered display, and the use of the aircraft reference symbol during the recovery and when to transition back to the FPS.
    3. Approach to Stall and Stall Recovery. Use of the AOA Limit Indicator for approach to stall awareness and its use with respect to the FPS during stall recovery.
    4. Glideslope Reference Line. Use of the glideslope reference line and the FPS as a sole visual approach reference.
  3. The AFM Supplement, HUD pilot guide/training manual, and/or equivalent material in the Flight Crew Operations Manual (FCOM) is required, which:

    1. explains the limitations, all modes of operation, clear descriptions of HUD symbology, (including limit conditions and failures), and

    2. incorporates a crew procedures guide clearly delineating PF and PNF duties, responsibilities and procedural call-outs and responses during all phases of flight during which HUD operations are anticipated.

4. HUD INITIAL FLIGHT TRAINING

Unless integrated with initial type rating training, flight training dedicated to HUD familiarization and proficiency is in addition to other required training elements. Initial training requires a Level C or higher Full Flight Simulator (FFS) with both a day and night visual system equipped with the Rockwell Collins 6605 HUD. All required approaches should be flown from no closer than the final approach fix (FAF) for instrument approaches and from no closer than approximately 1,000 feet AGL (3 - 4 NM) to the runway threshold for visual approaches.

The following flight training program is generic in nature and should not be construed to dictate or limit what the flight course of instruction consists of. Each operator has their own unique requirements, route structure, fleet composition and operations policies to consider in developing their training program. Therefore, what follows is to be considered a guide to operators who are tailoring a HUD training program to fit their own needs. Amendments to an operator’s training program require TCCA approval.

  1. Ground Operations:

    1. Deployment of HUD and stowage including installation and removal of the HUD sun-visor, and
    2. Taxi using HUD under various lighting and visibility conditions.
  2. Airwork:

    1. Straight and level flight, accelerations and decelerations,
    2. Normal and steep turns, climbs and descents,
    3. Wind Effects on HUD display,
    4. Approach to stall recovery; and
    5. Unusual attitude recoveries.

      Note: Special emphasis training for Airwork should be placed upon the following areas:

      1. HUD unique symbology with the autopilot and flight director both on and off, i.e. FPS, flight path acceleration cue, speed error tape, low and high speed cues, flight mode annunciator, use of non-conformal symbology including the use of the FPS to recognize and recover from flight at high angles of attack, and excessive pitch chevrons.,
      2. Use of the AOA Limit indicator and the FPS for approach to stall awareness and its use during a stall recovery.
      3. Use of the unusual attitude display, the aircraft reference symbol, the change to a normal display, and when to transition to the FPS during recoveries.
      4. Transitioning to Head Down Displays (HDDs) and the inclusion of HDDs in the crosscheck including EICAS displays and other cockpit indications.
      5. Avoidance of fixation on HUD display and symbology elements, particularly during the landing flare manoeuvre and appropriate conditions to turn OFF the HUD display.
      6. Use of HUD in conjunction with the sun-visor.

        When this training is complete, the trainee should have a thorough understanding of the relationship between aircraft flight path parameters and the HUD symbology, and have begun to develop an aggressive crosscheck within the HUD and incorporating HDDs, rather than fixation on the FPS and FD cue.
  3. Visual Take-offs, Circuits, Approaches and Landings

    1. Crosswind take-off and landing,
    2. Visual approaches to runways at night with minimal lighting (“black-hole” approaches),
    3. Engine failure on take-off,
    4. One Engine Inoperative (OEI) landing, and
    5. OEI go-around;

      Note 1: It is desirable to fly these approaches with dissimilar approach and runway lighting systems.

      Note 2: Special emphasis training for Visual Take-offs, Circuits and Approaches should be placed upon the following areas:

      1. Use of the takeoff reference box and the aircraft symbol for the pitch rotation target on takeoff and go-around,
      2. Use of the glideslope reference line and FPS for visual approaches,
      3. Cross-wind landing technique, and
      4. Proper HUD brightness settings for different ambient conditions and approach lighting systems.
  4. Instrument Approaches:

    1. Precision and APV approaches to the lowest authorized minima including an approach and landing with OEI,
    2. Missed approach OEI, and
    3. Non-precision, and circling approaches (if applicable).
  5. Abnormal/Emergency Operations: Perform the following manoeuvres (as applicable):

    1. Wind shear escape,
    2. TAWS escape,
    3. TCAS RA,
    4. HUD failure on approach, and
    5. Approaches with the aircraft in a non-normal flap configuration.

      Note: System/component failures could include flap abnormals, engine-out operations, HUD failure, warning flags, etc. Failure demonstrations may be incorporated into other elements of Initial Flight Training. Special emphasis training for Abnormal/Emergency Operations should be placed upon how HUD failure can reduce precision and increase pilot workload unless PF/PNF duties and responsibilities are clearly delineated and understood.
5. INITIAL HUD PILOT PROFICIENCY CHECK

For air and private operators, the PIC should complete a partial PPC employing the HUD, within 30 days subsequent to completion of HUD conversion training. For air and private operators, the PIC should complete a full PPC that samples the employment of the HUD following initial type training that integrates the HUD or HUD training that occurs immediately following the initial type training. For air and private operators, when there are SOP differences for the PNF when the PF is heads up (compared to heads-down), the PNF should complete a partial PPC on HUD related PNF duties, within 30 days subsequent to completion of HUD training.

The following manoeuvres should be evaluated as a minimum:

  1. Engine failure on take-off and departure;

  2. Instrument approach and missed approach OEI; and

  3. Failure of HUD during instrument approach.

6. INITIAL HUD LINE INDOCTRINATION

For air operators, PICs should complete line indoctrination employing the HUD. This requirement should include at least three HUD assisted takeoffs, one visual approach, and two instrument approaches in VMC.

7. HUD CONSOLIDATION PERIOD

For air operators, a consolidation period should apply prior to utilizing the HUD for instrument approach operations in IMC. PICs should accomplish at least ten manually flown HUD assisted takeoffs and ten HUD approaches to authorized minima in VMC conditions. Each approach should terminate in a manually controlled HUD assisted landing or HUD assisted go-around. Upon completion of these requirements, the HUD qualified PIC should then be qualified to conduct HUD takeoffs and approaches to the authorized minima as set forth in the operator’s operations specifications.

8. HUD RECURRENT TRAINING REQUIREMENTS

For air and private operators, recurrent training should include the following HUD operations in addition to regular requirements:

  1. Takeoff, at the lowest authorized visibility, with crosswind;

  2. Takeoff, at the lowest authorized visibility, engine failure before or after V1 with crosswind;

  3. Approach and landing, at the lowest authorized visibility, with crosswind;

  4. Approach, at the lowest authorized visibility, with crosswind, with missed approach;

  5. Non-precision approach(s), including circling (if applicable);

  6. Selected abnormal/emergency manoeuvres. This should include approach and landing OEI.

Selected HUD related ground training subjects should be reviewed on a recurrent basis.

9. HUD RECURRENT CHECKING REQUIREMENTS

For air and private operators, the required manoeuvres on subsequent PIC PPCs should include a sample of operations requiring the use of the HUD. For air and private operators, when there are SOP differences for the PNF when the PF is heads up (compared to heads-down), the required manoeuvres on subsequent SIC PPCs should include a sample of PNF duties related to the use of the HUD.

10. HUD CURRENCY REQUIREMENTS

An air operator’s PICs should have completed at least three takeoffs, approaches and landings using the HUD in the aeroplane; or have completed at least three takeoffs, approaches and landings as PF using the Rockwell Collins 6605 HUD in a TCCA approved level C (or higher) CL-605 full flight simulator with day and night visual displays, within the previous 90 days before acting as PF using the HUD.

SECTION 2 – ENHANCED FLIGHT VISION SYSTEM (EFVS) TRAINING, CHECKING AND CURRENCY REQUIREMENTS

1. INTRODUCTION

This Section is intended for use to supplement Section 1 (Rockwell Collins 6605 HUD) of this Appendix. The contents of Section 1 (HUD) apply in addition to the following except where noted.

Weather conditions during the aircraft certification testing and operational evaluation did not permit the testing or determination of the EFVS operational suitability in day or night IMC. Therefore, until the EFVS is certified and evaluated in IMC, the EFVS is limited to operations in VMC.

2. PREREQUISITE FOR EFVS TRAINING

As a prerequisite for EFVS training, pilots should have successfully completed HUD training in the CL-605 aircraft, however HUD and EVS training can be conducted concurrently.

3. EFVS TRAINING - GENERAL

The Bombardier Aerospace Training Centre’s CL-605 EFVS course with the required prerequisites meets the requirements of CARs Subparts 604 and 704, for the initial and conversion training of Canadian pilots to operate CL-605 aircraft using Rockwell Collins 6605 EFVS in private or commercial service.

The EFVS pilot training requirements consist of those related to initial and recurrent ground and flight training. It should be noted that the HUD and EFVS training program focuses principally upon training events flown in the left seat by the PIC (PF). Nevertheless, EFVS training of PNF duties in the right seat is required. SIC EFVS familiarization flown in the left seat is recommended.

4. INITIAL/CONVERSION GROUND TRAINING

For air operators and private operators, initial/conversion training should be conducted in accordance with the applicable provisions of CARs 704.108 or 604.26. For all operators, the initial ground training program should include the following elements:

  1. Classroom instruction covering EFVS operational concepts, crew duties and responsibilities and operational procedures including preflight, normal and abnormal operations, EICAS messages, miscompare and failure flags.

  2. Classroom instruction or Computer Based Training (CBT) on EFVS symbology set and its inter-relationship with airplane aerodynamics, inertial factors, environmental conditions and comparison to HUD symbology and the Primary Flight Display (PFD).

  3. The AFM Supplement, EFVS pilot guide/training manual, and/or equivalent material in the Flight Crew Operations Manual (FCOM), which explains the limitations, all modes of operation, clear descriptions of EFVS symbology, including limit conditions and failures, and incorporating a crew procedures guide clearly delineating PF and PNF duties, responsibilities and procedural call-outs and responses during all phases of flight during which HUD operations are anticipated.

    Note: Special training emphasis should be placed in the following areas:

    1. Crew briefings, callouts and Standard Operating Procedures (SOP’s);

    2. Duties of PF and PNF;

    3. Crew coordination and Crew Resource Management (CRM);

    4. EICAS messages and use of QRH and Checklists applicable to EFVS;

    5. Transition from EFVS imagery to non-EFVS, visual conditions. (Maximum use should be made of videos of actual HUD EFVS approaches. The relative luminosity between IR imagery and that of approach lighting systems should be identified);

    6. The effects of lighting conditions and crosswinds on EFVS symbology and Flight Path Symbol (FPS);

    7. Visual anomalies such as “noise”, “blooming”, and rain;

    8. Appropriate use of “Clear” switch;

    9. Importance of the “design eye position” in acquiring the proper EVS image;

    10. Where PF should look to acquire the required visual references (i.e. approach lights);

    11. Importance of cross-checking the EFVS instrumentation presentations against the EFVS visual scene presentation to enable the pilot to recognize malfunctions of the EFVS, navigational guidance information, and improper presentation of elements in the visual scene during an approach;

    12. Use of autopilot and auto-throttle coupled approaches allowing for better pilot monitoring of the EFVS image;

    13. Effective and appropriate monitoring by the PNF of EFVS imagery presented on MFD.
5. INITIAL FLIGHT TRAINING

Unless integrated with initial type rating training, flight training dedicated to EFVS familiarization and proficiency is in addition to other required training elements. Initial flight training requires the use of a level C (or higher) CL-605 aircraft full flight simulator equipped with Rockwell Collins 6605 EFVS with day and night visual displays and able to display a suitable IR image. All required approaches should be flown from no closer than the final approach fix (FAF) for instrument approaches and from no closer than approximately 1000 feet AGL (3 - 4 NM) to the runway threshold for visual approaches.

The following flight training program is generic in nature and should not be construed to dictate or limit what the flight course of instruction consists of. Each operator has their own unique requirements, route structure, fleet composition and operations policies to consider in developing their training program.

Therefore, what follows is to be considered a guide to operators who are tailoring an EFVS training program to fit their own needs. Amendments to an operator’s training program require TCCA approval.

  1. Ground Operations:

    1. Initialization of EFVS for operations;

    2. Taxi using EFVS under various lighting and visibility conditions.

  2. Airwork: There is no additional EFVS airwork requirement over and above HUD training.
  3. Visual Take-offs, Circuits and Approaches:

    1. Normal Take-off and Landing with crosswind;

    2. Visual approaches to runways at night with minimal lighting (“black hole” approaches) and use of FPS and the glideslope reference line to achieve desired descent angle.

      Note: Sufficient manoeuvres should be provided of HUD/EFVS imagery over various terrain features during ground and flight operations under various conditions. IR imagery of other aircraft, vehicles, buildings and airport lighting systems should also be provided.

  4. Instrument Approaches:

    Precision and APV approaches to the lowest published minima with missed approach or landing (day and night VMC only); and
  5. Abnormal/Emergency Operations:

    Failure of EFVS.

    Note: Special emphasis training should be conducted in the following areas:

    1. Proper use and setting of HUD contrast and EFVS brightness controls for various ambient conditions;

    2. Crew briefings and callouts with emphasis on the duties of PF and PNF;

    3. Importance of the “design eye position” in acquiring the proper EFVS image;’

    4. Manual and Auto Calibration functions; and

    5. Use of the EFVS “Clear” switch.
6. INITIAL EFVS PILOT PROFICIENCY CHECK

For air and private operators using the EFVS in VMC for enhanced situational awareness, no checking is required.

7. INITIAL EFVS LINE INDOCTRINATION

For air operators, PICs should complete line indoctrination employing the EFVS. This requirement should include at least three EFVS assisted takeoffs at night, one visual approach at night, and two instrument approaches in VMC.

8. EFVS CONSOLIDATION PERIOD

For air operators using the EFVS in VMC for enhanced situational awareness, no consolidation period is required.

9. RECURRENT TRAINING REQUIREMENTS

For air and private operators, the recurrent training applicable to the HUD apply with the addition of the following requirements using the EFVS:

  1. Selected ground training subjects should be reviewed on a recurrent basis; and

  2. An instrument approach and landing using the EFVS in VMC.

10. RECURRENT CHECKING REQUIREMENTS

For air and private operators using the EFVS in VMC for enhanced situational awareness, no recurrent checking is required.

11. EFVS CURRENCY REQUIREMENTS

An air operator’s PICs should have completed at least one night takeoff, approach and landing as PF using the Rockwell Collins 6605 EFVS; or have completed at least one night takeoff, approach and landing as PF using the EFVS in a TCCA approved level C (or higher) CL-605 full flight simulator with day and night visual displays and able to display a representative IR image, within the previous 90 days before acting as PF using the EFVS. The EFVS currency requirement can be credited to the Rockwell Collins 6605 HUD currency requirements.

Date modified: