aeroEBT
EBT Scenario Builder · the flagship product of AeroEBT
Great EBT starts with a great scenario. We make EBT easy to build, use, and improve.
Where every AeroEBT programme begins. AeroBrain drafts from your SMS data and aircraft procedures, and coverage and difficulty are checked as you write. As of October 2026 we know of no other scenario builder made for EBT and CBTA.
The foundation of EBT
Scenarios come first. No EBT programme succeeds without its foundations.
Grading, concordance and reporting all measure what a scenario was designed to elicit. If the scenario is generic, unbalanced or written as an essay about competencies, everything downstream inherits the flaw. That is why AeroEBT starts here, with building the scenario, made simple.
Generic scenarios
Built from a textbook list instead of the risks your own operation reports, so the simulator never meets the threats your crews actually face.
Coverage found at the audit
Competency and observable-behaviour balance rebuilt in a spreadsheet after the cycle is written, when it is too late to change anything.
Tools only an expert can drive
Design software so complex that one person in the department can use it, and the programme stalls when they are away.
Contextual Composition Protocol · developed by SkyDynamics
One simple screen. The whole scenario held behind it.
An EBT scenario is simple to read and hard to design. The Contextual Composition Protocol holds everything an event touches in memory and correlates it with what the designer is doing at that moment.
Held in memory
The A/B/C specification, the competency framework, the aircraft procedures, the simulator's failure list and the balance of the semester.
Correlated as you work
Place a malfunction and its procedure, cluster, observable behaviours and effect on coverage are already there.
One context, two apps
The same protocol works in the instructor app during recording and assessment.
The designer decides
It works behind the scenes and decides nothing. No cross-referencing between manuals, matrices and spreadsheets.
How it works
Five steps. From a safety finding to a scenario in the simulator.
Brief
Start from a training need, from your SMS data, your programme or the regulatory topics for the period.
Phases
Lay out the flight phases of the session: the shape of the day, not a document template.
Events
Drop in procedures and malfunctions from the database for that aircraft type and that simulator, with difficulty set per event.
Competencies
Competencies and observable behaviours are mapped as you write, with coverage and complexity checked live.
Export & deploy
Export the scenario document for approval and push it to the instructor app for the session.
See it build
From topic list to compliant scenario. Every check runs while you write.
Coverage, balance and difficulty visible while you write. Illustrative session.
From days to one session
A first draft in minutes. A checked scenario in about two hours.
These are SkyDynamics' figures for one trained designer, and they vary with scenario complexity. Traditionally a scenario takes days to reach the simulator: designers draft, meet, reconcile, check compliance, send it round by email and revise. In the EBT Scenario Builder, AeroBrain writes a first draft from your specification and your aircraft catalogue, and the checks that used to need a meeting run while the designer edits.
- Start from a four-hour session skeleton, a blank part or an AeroBrain draft
- First draft in minutes: evaluation phase first, catalogue events only, A/B/C topics covered
- Coverage, malfunction equivalency and load checked on every edit, not in a review round
- One draft instead of three, and no rework loop after a late compliance check
From your SMS to the scenario
Your safety data in. A tailored EBT programme out.
Connect the safety management system you already run. Findings become training needs, and every scenario can answer "why is this in our programme?"
Your data in
Occurrence reports, FDM / FOQA trends, LOSA and audit findings, by CSV, JSON or paste, including from SkyDynamics FSMS.
Prioritised needs
Each finding is tied to TEM and the ICAO competencies it points at.
Not everything is training
A "Why training?" check runs before any need enters the programme.
Approved, never pushed
Proposals for the next period go to the training team to approve.
Traceable from safety finding to scenario to grade, as ORO.FC.231 and ICAO Doc 9995 intend. The next cycle shows whether the risk moved. Your safety data sets the scenarios of the EBT programme you run today; it is not an approval of an enhanced EBT programme.
What a scenario actually is
An instructor script. Not an essay about competencies.
Scenarios are written the way instructors run them: short, imperative beats a colleague could pick up and fly. SET, INSERT, OBSERVE, NOTE, ADVISE, REPOSITION: each event pulled from the malfunction and procedure catalogue for that aircraft, tagged as normal, abnormal or supplementary.
- SET START VALVE FAULT: failed closed or open
- INSERT A/P FAILURE: difficulty 3
- SET NW STEERING FAULT + SLIPPERY SURFACE on the landing roll
- TCAS EVENT in the climb, then XBLEED FAULT
- Competency tags sit as metadata on the phase, where they belong
Aircraft procedures database
Your fleet is already in it. From day one.
The builder ships with a large database of aircraft procedures, already mapped to ICAO competencies and observable behaviours. Day-one implementation for A320, A220, A330, A350, A380, B737, B777, B787, Q400, ATR 72, E170, E175, E190 and E195.
Structured like QRH and FCOM
Normal, abnormal and emergency procedures with duration, steps and competency mapping.
Equivalency worked out
Malfunction clusters and equivalency (ORO.FC.231(f)) come from the database.
A failure list per simulator
A scenario only uses failures the FSTD can insert, full flight simulator or FNPT II (FNPT 2).
Your procedures on top
Your manuals and company procedures are added, and AeroBrain suggests the mapping for review.
Other aircraft types are added with you.
Real-time requirement checking
Requirements checked as you write. Not discovered at the audit.
Every event you place updates the picture. The coverage matrix someone rebuilds in a spreadsheet before every programme review stops being a job.
Observable behaviours
Coverage per scenario, live as you edit.
Regulatory checks
Evaluation phase first, ORO.FC.232 A/B/C topics, and malfunction equivalency under ORO.FC.231(f).
A balance, not a checklist
Competencies spread smoothly across phases: no clusters, no blind spots.
Gaps flagged early
What is over-trained and what is never seen, while there is still time to fix it.
Coverage evidence is exportable for the programme review.
Beyond one scenario
The cycle has to be compliant. Not just the session.
A perfectly designed session inside an unbalanced cycle still fails a programme review. The builder checks every level while you write.
Scenario
Events, phases and the observable behaviours the session is designed to elicit.
Scenario group
Evaluation, manoeuvres and scenario-based phases balanced against each other.
Cycle
No competency trained four times in one cycle and never in the next.
Fleet and programme
The same view across fleets, with each type keeping its own catalogue.
For the audit: reusable templates, a history of who changed what, a record of what each pilot population has already seen, and a scenario document exported for your authority.
Complexity and difficulty monitoring
Know how hard the session is. Before a crew does.
Load, difficulty and complexity are measured per flight phase and for the whole scenario while you build it.
Per phase
Difficulty per event and phase, with load against Light, Nominal or Dense targets.
Whole scenario
Event load, session complexity, input completeness and competency concentration.
Both pilots
A competency by phase heatmap, and left and right seat demand.
Pressure made visible
Time pressure, concurrent conflicts and surprise or startle markers.
These are design aids for the author, clearly labelled: never a crew grade.
Tailored to the trainee group
One programme. Adjusted for the crews who need it.
Not every group needs the same session. Choose the trainee population and the load and demand targets move with it.
Population targets
New hire or early command, typical line crews, experienced recurrent.
Design focus
Primary and supporting focus per competency and observable behaviour.
Led by grading
Grading trends from AeroEBT show where a group needs more exposure.
Warnings
The builder flags load or demand above the target for that group.
Design focus shapes the scenario; it never limits what the instructor observes or grades (AMC8 ORO.FC.232(e)).
AeroBrain AI assistant
Simple commands. Draft, fill gaps, check coverage and review.
AeroBrain sits beside the scenario as a co-designer. You say what you want in plain words, and every draft shows its coverage and difficulty before you apply it.
Draft
Writes a scenario from your aircraft database, using only events for that type.
Fill gaps
Adds beats for missing competencies and ORO.FC.232 topics.
Coverage and QA
Explains the balance, and reviews regulatory and CBTA wording against the reference.
You decide
Apply to the timeline, keep the current version, or undo with one click.
Ask works on any single flight phase. Competency prose is rejected and rewritten as instructor beats.
Three ways to work
You choose how much it does. Assist, semi-agentic or agentic.
The same engine, with the amount of autonomy your training standards team is comfortable granting. Change it per author, per fleet or per programme.
Assist
You write; the tool suggests events from the catalogue, flags gaps and checks coverage as you type. Nothing is written without you.
Semi-agentic
You set the objective; it drafts phases and proposes the events. You keep or discard, phase by phase, and it explains why each one is there.
Agentic
You set the cycle goals and constraints; it builds the scenario group, balances coverage across sessions and presents the whole cycle for approval, as a proposal, never a publication.
Governed AI
AeroBrain. The high-assurance set of AI technologies for aviation.
The engine behind the assist and agentic modes is built and documented as a regulated AI system, not a general chatbot pointed at a manual.
Grounded in your documents
Every suggestion shows its source and its reasoning, so an author can disagree on evidence.
The author decides
SkyDynamics classifies AeroBrain as Level 1B (human cognitive assistance) under the EASA AI Concept Paper: it assists and never holds the decision.
Logged and reversible
What was proposed, accepted and overridden is recorded for the programme file.
Your data stays yours
Scenarios and records are held in data centres in Switzerland and are not used to train models for anyone else.
Compliance is tracked requirement by requirement against EASA NPA 2025-07 DS.AI, SC-AI-01, the AI Concept Paper and the EU AI Act. We publish what is implemented, what is partial and what is planned.
For a team of scenario designers
Several designers. One library, one review path.
Most EBT programmes are written by more than one person. Every designer works from the same organisation library, and every scenario shows where it stands.
One library
Preview any scenario, then import it or fork it as your own draft.
A status on every scenario
Draft, In review, Approved, Published, Retired. Retired scenarios stay readable.
Nothing overwritten
If a colleague changed the scenario, publishing shows what changed, then you reload and reapply.
Version history
Kept for each scenario on the designer's workstation.
In development: live co-editing, with designers visible to each other in the same scenario.
Connected apps
One system, three applications. The scenario you wrote is the screen the instructor flies.
The Scenario Builder, the web administration panel and the instructor app share the same organisation data: no re-typing, no paper and no second system between design and delivery.
Publish once
The same version reaches the instructor app on every iPad, at every base.
Checked first
An instructor preview and an iPad compatibility check run before it is published.
Flown offline
Script on one side, grading and notes on the other. It syncs afterwards.
Evidence returns
Grading analytics, as aggregates only, and instructor concordance come back to the designer.
Questions about the Scenario Builder
How do you build an EBT scenario?
In five steps. Start from the brief: the assessment and training topics (the A, B and C topics of ORO.FC.232) and the findings of your safety management system. Lay out the flight phases of the session. Choose the events, threats and malfunctions that elicit the target competencies, from the aircraft procedures and the failure list of your simulator. Map the competencies and observable behaviours expected at each event, and check topic coverage, malfunction equivalency, competency distribution and difficulty. Export the scenario document for approval, validate it in the simulator and publish it to the instructors with its intent and its observable behaviours. In the EBT Scenario Builder the first draft comes from the AeroBrain assistant in minutes, the checks run as you write, and the finished scenario goes straight to the AeroEBT instructor app.
How long does it take to build an EBT scenario?
AeroBrain produces a first draft in minutes. One trained designer takes a scenario from the approved specification to a checked scenario in about two hours, because coverage, equivalency and load are checked while it is written rather than in review rounds. These are SkyDynamics' figures and they vary with scenario complexity.
What does the Contextual Composition Protocol do in the Scenario Builder?
It holds the context of the scenario in memory (the A/B/C specification, the competency framework, the aircraft and simulator catalogue, the programme's coverage) and correlates it with what the designer is doing at that moment. The designer works on a simple script screen and the context is already there. It is SkyDynamics technology, it runs behind the scenes, and it makes no decisions.
Can several designers work on the same programme?
Yes. Designers share one organisation scenario library, each scenario carries a status from Draft to Published, and publishing never overwrites a colleague's change: the builder shows what changed and asks the designer to reload and reapply. Live co-editing, with designers visible to each other inside the same scenario, is in development.
How is it connected to the instructor app and the web administration panel?
A published scenario goes through the web administration panel to the instructor app on every iPad. Organisation settings such as grading scales and fleets are managed in web administration, and aggregated grading analytics and instructor concordance come back into the builder for the next design cycle.
Can it use data from our safety management system?
Yes. Occurrence reports and FDM / FOQA exports are ingested by CSV, JSON or paste, including from SkyDynamics FSMS, grouped into signals and translated into prioritised training needs. A "Why training?" check runs before a need enters the programme, and the training team approves every proposal. This sets the scenarios of the EBT programme you run today with your own safety data. It does not make it an approved enhanced EBT programme: our guide from baseline EBT to enhanced EBT covers what the rules allow.
Is the EBT Scenario Builder an AI training tool?
Yes, as an assistant. AeroBrain drafts the scenario from your safety data and aircraft procedures and checks topic coverage, equivalency and difficulty while the designer writes. The training team decides what is flown: the AI assists and never steers.
Which aircraft are ready from day one?
A320, A220, A330, A350, A380, B737, B777, B787, Q400, ATR 72, E170, E175, E190 and E195, with procedures mapped to competencies and observable behaviours. Other types are built with you, and your own manuals and company procedures sit on top.
Does it know what our simulator can do?
Each simulator keeps its own failure list, so a scenario only uses failures that device can insert. With FCS++ the programme also sees which devices can credit the session.
Can we tailor a scenario for a group that struggles on specific competencies?
Yes. Set the intended trainee population and make the weaker competencies the primary design focus; coverage is weighted toward them and load warnings follow the population targets. Design focus never limits what the instructor observes or grades.
Does the AI write our training programme?
No. It drafts phases from your objective and your aircraft catalogue, and flags its own output when it drifts into generic prose. The author keeps or discards each phase.
Where do the malfunctions come from?
From the malfunction and procedure catalogue for that aircraft type. If we do not hold a catalogue for your fleet, we build it with you.
Can we keep writing scenarios by hand?
Yes. The editor is the primary path: type an event, pick from the catalogue, done. AI assist is optional.
How does it reach the simulator?
The same scenario opens in the instructor app on iPad, offline, with grading and notes alongside the script.
Can we export for our authority?
Yes: a scenario document for approval, the coverage picture behind it, and the session records afterwards.
How does the agentic mode differ from AI assist?
Assist suggests while you write. Semi-agentic drafts phases you keep or discard. Agentic builds a whole scenario group against your cycle goals and presents it for approval. In every mode the output is a proposal until a person accepts it.
What does "real-time compliance monitoring" actually check?
Observable behaviour coverage and competency distribution for the scenario you are editing, and what that does to the balance of the scenario group and the training cycle, measured against your programme requirements, updated as you type.
Is your AI compliant with the EASA rules?
The EASA framework for AI is still developing, so nobody can hold a finished certificate today. What we can show you is the work: SkyDynamics classifies AeroBrain as a Level 1B human cognitive assistance system and tracks it requirement by requirement against NPA 2025-07 DS.AI, SC-AI-01, the AI Concept Paper and the EU AI Act, with implemented, partial and planned status and evidence for each. Ask and we will send it.
See a scenario built in the time this page took to read.
A live demonstration: your aircraft type, one training objective, from blank phase to instructor app.
We respond within one business day.