What Is the National Simulator Program (NSP)? A Practical Guide for Training Centers
The NSP is the FAA office that qualifies and re-evaluates flight simulators for use in pilot training. Here's what NSP evaluations actually involve, what triggers one, what failure looks like, and how Part 142 centers stay on top of the cycle.
If you operate a flight simulator that's used to credit FAA-approved training time, the National Simulator Program (NSP) is the office you answer to. Most Part 142 directors of training know the NSP exists; far fewer can describe what an NSP evaluation actually looks like, what triggers one, and what happens when a simulator gets pulled out of qualification. This guide is a plain-English walkthrough.
What the NSP actually is
The National Simulator Program is a specialized FAA office (technically AFS-205, sitting under Flight Standards) that operates under 14 CFR Part 60 — the rule governing flight simulation training device qualification. Part 60 sets the technical standards a simulator must meet (visual systems, motion fidelity, control loading, instructor station capability, and so on) for each qualification level: A through D for Full Flight Simulators, 4 through 7 for Flight Training Devices.
When you buy or build a new simulator, the NSP evaluates it against those standards, assigns it a qualification level, and issues a Statement of Qualification (SOQ). That SOQ is what lets a Part 142 training center credit time logged in that device toward type ratings, recurrent training, ATP minimums, and the like. Without an SOQ, the simulator is — from a regulatory standpoint — a very expensive cabinet.
What an NSP evaluation involves
There are two kinds of NSP visit you'll encounter on a recurring basis.
Initial qualification
The first evaluation. A team of NSP evaluators arrives at the simulator, runs the device through the Master Qualification Test Guide (MQTG) — a battery of objective tests covering motion, sound, visual, handling, performance, and ground/flight dynamics — plus subjective tests where a pilot evaluator flies the device through scripted maneuvers and signs off on its fidelity to the actual aircraft. The center provides Initial QTG data to back the objective tests. This is a multi-day visit, often a week-plus for a Level D FFS, and centers prepare for months.
Recurring evaluation
Once a simulator is qualified, the NSP comes back at least annually for a recurring evaluation (sometimes called a recurrent QTG). Same playbook but shorter — typically 1–2 days. The evaluators rerun a subset of the MQTG, look at sponsor-conducted self-tests since the last visit, and sample the subjective handling tests. If the simulator passes, the SOQ is renewed. If something doesn't, the team writes findings.
What triggers an NSP visit besides the calendar
The annual recurring visit is the baseline, but several events also trigger an NSP visit (or a delta evaluation):
- Modifications to the simulator that affect handling, motion, visuals, or any system covered by the qualification.
- Aircraft data updates the manufacturer issues to better match an updated production aircraft.
- Instructor station replacements, IOS upgrades, or visual-system swaps.
- Discrepancies the sponsor self-reports — Part 60 obligates the operator to flag certain failures.
- Failures of the recurring evaluation requiring corrective action.
- Changes in the type or category of aircraft the simulator represents.
What "failing" actually looks like
It's rare for a recurring evaluation to outright fail in a way that yanks the SOQ. What's common is the NSP team writing findings — discrepancies that need to be resolved within a defined window. A finding might be a motion subjective test outside tolerance, an instructor-station feature that no longer matches the documented spec, or a system that's drifted from the QTG baseline.
The center has a finite window to correct each finding (typically 30–90 days depending on severity). Until corrective action is verified, the simulator may operate under a restricted SOQ — for example, allowed for training but not for checking events. Center directors of training watch this window closely; an unaddressed finding can compound, and unresolved Level 1 findings can pull the SOQ entirely.
The day-to-day work that NSP cycles create
If you're running a Part 142 center with three or four simulators, the NSP-related work is a steady stream rather than an annual scramble. Here's what's typically on the director of training's plate at any given time:
- Tracking the next due date for each simulator's recurring evaluation (one per device, staggered).
- Maintaining the daily QTG self-tests that Part 60 obligates between NSP visits.
- Recording each NSP evaluation's findings, corrective-action plan, and status.
- Tracking the simulator's modification history (modifications, IOS swaps, visual upgrades) so deltas can be reported.
- Managing the simulator's Master Qualification Test Guide (MQTG) and any approved updates.
- Coordinating instructor evaluator currency for any sim-based pilot evaluations the center conducts.
How AviationAlley models the NSP cycle
AviationAlley's compliance module has NSP evaluations as a first-class object — separate from generic compliance items so the data model matches how Part 60 actually works. Each evaluation captures the date, the evaluator name and organization, the result (Pass / Fail / Conditional), the findings, the corrective actions, and the next-due date. The next-due date drives the dashboard alert and the weekly compliance digest email so nothing slips. Over time the center accumulates an NSP history per simulator that's exportable for audit prep.
Common questions
Who does the NSP evaluation work — FAA employees or contractors?
+
Evaluations are performed by FAA-employed NSP specialists, with sponsors (the training center) providing data and access. Some specialized assessments may include subject-matter experts, but the NSP itself is the FAA office that owns the qualification decision.
What's the difference between an SOQ and a Letter of Authorization?
+
An SOQ (Statement of Qualification) is the formal document that says the simulator meets Part 60 standards at a specific qualification level. A Letter of Authorization (LOA) is what an air carrier or training center receives that incorporates the simulator's SOQ into its own approved training program. Different documents, different audiences.
What's a Level D simulator vs. a Level C?
+
Both are Full Flight Simulators with 6 degrees of motion. Level D is the highest civil simulator qualification — the FAA permits full credit toward type-rating training, including all of the Initial training in the simulator without time in the actual aircraft (zero-flight-time training). Level C requires some real-aircraft time for initial type ratings. The technical differences are in motion fidelity, sound, visual scene, and certain objective tests.
If a simulator fails an NSP recurring evaluation, can the center still train on it?
+
Depends on the findings. Severe findings can lead to immediate SOQ suspension; lesser findings may allow continued training while corrective actions are completed within a defined window. The NSP team's documentation will spell out the operating constraints. Centers typically pause certain types of credit (initial type rating, checking events) before they pause general training time.
Does the NSP show up unannounced?
+
Recurring evaluations are scheduled in advance — sometimes months out — with the center. Unannounced visits are uncommon but possible, particularly if there are discrepancy reports or a self-disclosure to chase down. Centers don't typically need to plan for surprise inspections in the way a Part 121 carrier does, but the SOQ documentation must be current at all times regardless.
See what AviationAlley looks like for a Part 142 center
Simulator scheduling, NSP compliance tracking, training records, parts & work orders, and a built-in audit log — in one workspace.