Computer-Based Training · for airlines, OEMs, MROs & training organizations
Explore narrated aviation examples with visible source labels. For client work, the source set, reviewers, deliverables, rights, price and schedule are agreed in a written proposal before production.
Public portfolio examples, not certification or regulatory approval. Open a film to inspect its named source.
watch the films below · or write to us: contato@resumocast.com.br
Instant estimate
Finished hours of training
≈ 90 short lessons · indicative planning estimate
Your investment
$5,400A written quote confirms scope, price and schedule.
Define the project before production
Since 2016
creating educational audio, video and courses at ResumoCast
12 demos
aviation formats with named public sources
Per project
sources, review roles and acceptance criteria are defined
In writing
deliverables, schedule, price, rights and security are agreed
Named sources behind the public demonstrations
These public examples explore flight physics, dangerous goods, regulations, weather and ramp operations using named public sources. They demonstrate production formats, not a certified syllabus, client delivery or regulator-approved course. Press play to inspect the source label shown in each film.
Living figure · manifest-driven · 0:59
Airbus’s official ramp layout brought to life - the safety line first, then the full ground-support choreography, exactly as the Aircraft Characteristics manual draws it.
§ Airbus A320 AC · fig. 5-1-2
Animated vector · code · 0:36
Draw-on physics: the lift curve, the critical angle and the stall.
§ FAA Pilot’s Handbook (PHAK)
Real artwork · fidelity · 0:35
Official UN hazard labels, divisions, UN number and shipping name.
§ UN Model Regulations · ICAO TI
Photoreal AI scenes · 0:24
Cinematic generated scenes carrying the hard numbers: up to −50% lift, up to +200% drag.
§ FAA AC 91-74B
Manual figure → vector · 0:40
Official PHAK Figure 8-1, re-vectorized into 982 strokes and assembled live on screen.
§ FAA PHAK · fig. 8-1
Mix: AI scene + vector + data · 0:27
A photoreal final approach, animated wake vortices and the separation minima on top.
§ FAA AC 90-23G
Data-driven · 0:32
The world fatal-accident rate, 1970 → 2022, animated straight from the dataset.
§ Our World in Data (ACRO/IATA)
Generative · procedural · 0:32
A procedural sky and an animated climb through the ISA numbers.
§ FAA PHAK ch. 4
3D in code · 0:23
The official label as a physical object - it orbits, tilts and catches light. Zero 3D assets.
§ UN Model Regulations
Mix: live data + typography · 0:35
A real KJFK weather observation decoded token by token.
§ aviationweather.gov · FAA PHAK ch. 13
Kinetic typography · 0:28
The actual regulation text, choreographed word by word.
§ 14 CFR 121.542 (eCFR)
This prototype curriculum demonstrates how five lessons can be organized around selected references to Brazil's RBAC 175 regulation. It is not a certification course, an approved syllabus or evidence that every requirement of the regulation is covered.
Sample lesson · native pt-BR
§ RBAC 175.103 · 175.105 (ANAC)
Course outline - Air Transport of Dangerous Goods (RBAC 175)
Module 1 - Fundamentals
Module 2 - Training
Module 3 - Classification
Beginwiththetrainingneed.Agreethesources,reviewersandacceptanceevidence.Thenproduceagainstascopebothteamscanverify.
The workflow starts with explicit boundaries. Source access, review authority, acceptance criteria and deliverables are project decisions. The demonstrations show possible formats; the proposal establishes what the team must actually prove.
The written proposal identifies the approved source set and the citation method. The public films below demonstrate visible source labels; project traceability requirements are agreed before production.
Software and generative tools can assist writing, illustration, animation and narration. The selected workflow, source access and output format depend on the approved project scope.
The proposal names the client and supplier review roles required for the subject. No professional review or regulatory approval is implied unless that role and its acceptance evidence are part of the project.
Acceptance criteria, assessment rules, review rounds and any pilot lesson are defined in writing. Only accepted deliverables move to the next agreed stage.
Our research manifest catalogs 24 papers used to evaluate learning and AI-production claims. Thirteen local open-access copies have verified SHA-256 hashes; the remaining records retain DOI and retrieval metadata. The cards below state the measured scope and the limitation relevant to this offer.
6 min
An observational study of 6.9 million viewing sessions found median engagement of at most 6 minutes regardless of total video length. This supports short, purpose-made segments; it does not prove course completion.
§ Guo, Kim & Rubin, 2014 - ACM Learning@Scale
68→90%
In one experiment, interpolated quizzes reduced measured mind-wandering from 41% to 19% and raised the immediate final-test result from 68% to 90%. It did not test long-term retention or this exact product.
§ Szpunar, Khan & Schacter, 2013 - PNAS
3×
Across 95 studies and 20,991 workers, more engaging safety training produced about three times the safety-knowledge effect of passive lecture or video. The factor applies to knowledge, not a promised behavior or accident outcome.
§ Burke et al., 2006 - American Journal of Public Health
+64%
Separate studies found substantial skill decay after more than a year without use and up to 64% higher recall with optimally spaced review at the same study time. Applying that evidence to a regulatory cycle is an inference.
§ Arthur et al., 1998 - Human Performance · Cepeda et al., 2008 - Psychological Science
40%
A preregistered randomized trial found generative AI reduced professional writing time by 40% and raised measured quality by 18%. The study concerned writing, not aviation-film delivery time, cost or approval.
§ Noy & Zhang, 2023 - Science
10×
In a blinded multicenter study, AI generated exam questions about ten times faster than professors, with no significant difference in quality ratings. Humans performed better on relevance, so subject review remains important.
§ Cheung et al., 2023 - PLOS ONE
Research catalog: 24 papers. Local custody: 13 open-access copies with verified hashes. Remaining records: DOI and retrieval metadata.
Scope before speed
A quote follows review of the training need and proposed source set. The delivery date belongs in that quote, not in an unsupported promise on a public page.
The proposal identifies who reviews subject matter, media and acceptance criteria. Credentials are represented only when the named project role can be evidenced.
Generative tools may assist production, but client approval, subject-matter review and regulatory acceptance cannot be inferred from the tool that created a draft.
CBT Studio is the training-films division of ResumoCast - a professional media company from Brazil creating educational audio, video and course experiences since 2016. Project-specific capabilities remain governed by the written proposal.
Decision
Evidence in the proposal
Approved inputs
Source set, permitted use and document versions
Named in the proposal
Review authority
Client and supplier roles, credentials when required
Named in the proposal
Acceptance evidence
Citation method, checks and approval records
Defined before production
Change process
Impact review, revision rounds and new acceptance
Quoted for the project
Outputs
Media, assessments, accessibility and packaging
Listed explicitly
Commercial terms
Price, schedule, rights, security and retention
Agreed in writing
The public calculator is indicative. The written quote controls scope, price and schedule.
Use the slider for an indicative planning estimate. Do not send protected source material until handling terms are agreed. A written quote confirms the exact scope and price.
Finished hours of training
3lessons
modules
Your investment
$5,400$1,800 per finished hour
Estimate boundary
Not an offer or competitor benchmark. The written quote controls.
Schedule and acceptance
Timing depends on the approved sources, curriculum coverage, review roles, deliverables and acceptance rounds. The project schedule is confirmed in the written proposal.
USD, indicative launch pricing. Final quote confirmed after source and scope review. Prefer email? Send this estimate by email instead.
What arrives
These are planning options, not guaranteed deliverables. The proposal identifies exactly what is included and who accepts it.
The proposal identifies the approved source set, review roles and acceptance criteria for the project. Our public demonstrations show how citations can be displayed, but they are not evidence of certification or regulatory approval.
AI can assist production, but it is not a regulatory authority. Required subject-matter review, approvals and acceptance evidence must be named in the project scope before any course is represented as suitable for regulated use.
Start with a description of the training need. We then agree which source documents, subject-matter access and review inputs are required. Do not send confidential material before handling terms are agreed in writing.
The schedule is quoted after the source set, curriculum coverage, reviewers, deliverables and acceptance rounds are understood. No public page deadline overrides the schedule agreed for a specific project.
A pilot lesson can be included in the proposal so both teams can evaluate the treatment before a broader production. Its content, review rounds, price and delivery date are confirmed in that proposal.
We assess the changed source, identify affected outputs and quote the revision. Timing and cost depend on the amendment and are not guaranteed by the public demonstrations.
The public portfolio demonstrates narrated video and a web learning experience. Resolution, assessments, accessibility assets and any LMS package must be listed in the signed project scope.
The current public page and demonstrations are primarily in English. Language, voice, translation review and accessibility requirements are confirmed for each proposal.
Ownership, licenses, confidentiality, retention and permitted processing are agreed in writing before protected material is received. The public page does not replace those project terms.
The calculator is an indicative planning estimate, not an offer or a competitor benchmark. A written quote confirms the source set, coverage, deliverables, review rounds, schedule and final price.
Related destinations
These are distinct editorial, learning and institutional destinations. They can provide context, but they do not replace the project-specific sources, review roles or written acceptance terms of a CBT engagement.
Tell us about the training need and the sources you expect to use. We will assess the request and prepare a proposal that names deliverables, review roles, acceptance rounds, schedule, price, rights and information-handling terms.
contato@resumocast.com.br