Automated instruction aids on a training device can significantly enhance the effectiveness of the device. However, the requirements for these aids (Instructional Features) must be consistent with the intended use of the trainer. If they are not consistent, the system implemented may be either more complex than required, or totally inadequate. This paper describes the development of Instructional Features where this inconsistency did exist. In this case the general processing requirements for student monitoring, student feedback, instructor reports and instructor controls were established. However, the specific in-classroom use of each was not. When the specific requirements were established, they were significantly less than the general processing requirements Implied. The system design did meet both the general and specific requirements. However, a simpler approach would have satisfied the actually-used Instructional Features. This clearly shows the need to consider the specific classroom use of Instructional Features not just the general processing requirements.