Page 21 - 213934_October20T

The ability to freeze the simulator at any point allows the instructor to focus on a precise point in time to re- veal an error and teach the correction. Considering the previous example of the single-engine go-around, after the instructional moment, they move the “plane” back to the 3-mile final, configured, on profile, and do it again. This can be far more effective than discussing the same event following a real flight while relying on notes and memory for the debrief.
Training things that can’t or shouldn’t be done in reality. The natural example here is an inadvertent thrust reverser deployment at V1. Even if it could be set up in reality, I certainly hope nobody would risk trying it. Most other events can safely be practiced in the plane.
Simulators are relatively more cost-effective. Al- though more of that benefit usually goes to the company providing the sim than to the pilot. Twenty hours of sim training is always less expensive for the customer than 20 hours of jet time.
Now, let’s look at some reasons simulators are not perfect.
Simulation is simply not real. The normal level of anxiety, discomfort and distraction is almost impossible to create in a sim. During some teaching moments this is actually an advantage. However, the realities of flight are always present in the actual airplane; a pilot must be able to function regardless. One of our most important skills as pilots is processing the vast amount of informa- tion and prioritizing our thoughts and actions.
Even the best simulators don’t feel quite right.
Although today’s technology is impressive, several seat-of- the-pants cues, cockpit lighting/shadows and sounds we experience in flight are not accurately replicated. While this can make it easier to focus on some things, it removes information pilots frequently use to maintain situational awareness. The disconnect between visual and vestibular inputs can cause motion sickness in simulators.
Landings are not the same in simulators. This usu- ally results in a student being given a mechanical tech- nique to land the sim that shouldn’t be used in a real plane.
Other sim-isms include instruments that may not move the same. For example, many ITT gauges don’t realistically display a hot start. The temperature rise is often quite different than in real life. Is this critical? Not necessarily, but it does degrade training a bit. Another issue, more common in older sims, is that the sequences used for some tasks may be different from those in a real plane. This is often due to programming or equip- ment issues.
The simulator may not represent the customer plane. This is often the most critical issue. Simulators for say a new King Air 350, Phenom 300, Pilatus or CJ2 tend to very accurately represent the customer’s plane. However, very few legacy airplanes like older King Airs or CE500 series Citations still have the original avionics. Almost all have since had one or more avionics modifica- tions. Many also have other substantial modifications to include different engines.
Simulator training is often handcuffed by Part 142. It’s not that the simulator can’t be used to teach other things. It’s simply because the “approved” training program is quite specific and must be followed until completion. Also, the pilot is usually one of several people in a given class. The schedule has to accommodate everyone in the class, leaving little extra time to cover additional material. That said, many of the simulator-based training providers will develop customized programs on request.
Class demographics and teaching to minimum training standards. Initial classes will often include pilots with vastly different experience and abilities. More experienced, highly capable pilots might be held back while the instructor works to help the less experienced (or less capable) pilots keep up with the material.
Higher time and travel costs. Training in a simulator requires the student to travel to the sim location – endur- ing airlines, hotels, restaurant meals, and more time away from home and family.
Now let’s look at the good and bad about training in the airplane.
In-Airplane Training Advantages:
• It’s a real, accurate representation
• There is no excuse for bad landings
• No sim-isms
• It is the customer plane
• Training is where the client wants
• Training is when the client wants
• Training is more personalized in the airplane
• • • •
In-Airplane Training Disadvantages:
First-timers do not get as much practice
No ability to freeze the flight
Items that can’t (or shouldn’t) be done in flight Operational cost
let’s summarize the areas in which training in
First,
the airplane is not as good.
Pilots working toward their first jet type rating don’t get as much practice on each event. There is considerable time spent burning jet fuel between each
Jet Journal October 2020 / TWIN & TURBINE • 19