Flight simulator

[Martin257]

Thinking about buying a flight simulator software to help with training. Have heard it could be a good investment and save noticeable amount of cost and time. What are your views on this if i may ask and how realistic and how beneficial are they?

 

[Jim Logajan]

Thinking about buying a flight simulator software to help with training. Have heard it could be a good investment and save noticeable amount of cost and time. What are your views on this if i may ask and how realistic and how beneficial are they?

Whenever my instructor suggested I go home and chair-fly a maneuver, I fired up the flight simulator.

Simulators have a long history:

 

[Jim Logajan]

And sims don't have consequences to flying into turbulence over Vno, overspeeding the engine, or forgetting cowl flaps. Or even wheelbarrowing down the runway.

Haven't tried wheelbarrowing, but MS Flight Simulator does simulate the effects of stress - on FSX there are check mark settings for "Aircraft stress causes damage" and "Engine stress damages engine". A net search shows some players are annoyed when they turn on turbulence and then find their airplanes breaking up in cruise!

Pilotage just doesn't work in a sim, as the landmarks are totally different.

Could you give a specific example? I have not found any discrepancies between what appears on at least the FAA sectionals I use for my local area and what appears on the screen while flying FSX (although I do have a scenery add-on for the pacific northwest that improves things beyond that which shipped with FSX.)

#4 was ATC. There are some sims available for that, but quality is all over the map. Getting a 10 year old controller that doesn't know what "line up and wait" means is not helpful. Getting a veteran controller but only in LA airspace works best if you train in LA airspace, and doesn't help you with the really important local procedures you need otherwise. But good luck reporting over the cement plant for KSQL (as nearly every approach there does) when your sim doesn't have a cement plant.

This looks like an argument against pilotedge.com ATC simulation because it can't be relied on to provide an environment conducive to rote memorization of all one's own local procedures. Applying the same reasoning to all the books and audio training aids that are sold that claim to help master radio communication pretty much leaves only the radio work done while the Hobbs meter is running.

And blaming this on age....jeez. That's the age-old complaint that them geezers don't know anything. Except when you get over 30, you start to realize that that equation was backwards....

I'm a young 57 year old who doesn't trust anyone over the age of 77. Or under 37. Oh heck - I might as well say I don't trust anyone.

I work with technology every day. I'm a systems engineer. That means I have to understand the limitations of the technology; a fanboy SE is a really bad SE.

I think I can one-up you in a small way regarding anti-tech fan-boyism: I don't even own a cell phone! However, I do have an undergraduate degree in fizziks, with and without using straws. Started writing computer programs in high school - in 1973. HP 2000. Teletypes. Stone knives and bearskins.

Seriously though - I don't know of any published studies that support some of the assertions being made regarding use of simulators. Mostly anecdotes and strong opinions. Sac Arrow has already posted links to past discussions on this and we seem to be repeating ourselves here. My post in one of those threads listed the few studies I could find that seemed partially relevant:

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1169402&postcount=42

 

[Jim Logajan]

Spoke to my instructor about the impact of flight simulator and he was adamant that this will cause myself to pick up bad habits, that will not help when I fly the real thing. Well that's that then.

Please ask him to provide reputable proof to you so that you can distribute it more widely.

 

[Jim Logajan]

Proof? Of what? That what he's seen is the same as what every other CFI who's observed such students has seen?

Since some students and CFIs have reported that using home simulators appear to have helped, and there are related formal studies (links previously noted) that fail to note any of the claimed negative consequences, please excuse me if I fail to be convinced by a handful of personal anecdotes.

Why do those same instructors advise that use of desk-top sims is very valuable for IFR training?

They don't want to look like complete arses?

 

[Jim Logajan]

The real answer to that question is that the instructors are trying to provide honest information, rather than advocacy.

If a student completes in just over 40 hours what they might take 60 or more hours, that affects the CFI's income.

At least one of the advocates in this thread is in the business of selling simulation equipment.

One must be careful of selective application of that principle. You failed to apply it to the CFIs.