Flight simulator availability

[mxalix258]

Having gone through Private and Instrument training at a local flight school, I'm realizing the limited supply of quality flight simulators. The one at my flight school felt 40 years old and had no feel or touch that made it impossible to really take anything of value away.

Given flight costs that don't seem to be getting cheaper, do you all envision the need for quality simulators (that are actually some fun to use) to rise to remain proficient?

For my own situation, I find it difficult to fly as much as I'd like...but think if there was a newer model frasca that I could go fly a few hours for fun or even hop in with an instructor I think that'd go a long way for remaining half-way proficient.

 

[jordane93]

The school I train at has a Redbird that is great for instrument training.

 

[OkieAviator]

Would have to disagree with you. There are a ton of advanced flight simulators out there built with the same avionics and controls used in the real aircraft.

If you're talking specifically about general aviation then there's a few options like the above mentioned Redbird product lines. There's also an entire community of flight sim hobbists that set up various home built cockpits. Now you can't log your time on your home PC but it can be used as a training device.

 

[MauleSkinner]

If you have to have "feel or touch" to take away anything of value, you're not looking in the right places, IMO.

 

[mxalix258]

I was thinking more of simulators for general use and proficiency...and not the frasca simulators with no screen and if you touch the yoke the airplane is in a 30 degree pitch up (that's what I mean by touch and feel).

Ive seen a few redbird around, but even those seem to be rare.

 

[MAKG1]

The school I train at has a Redbird that is great for instrument training.

Adequate, maybe.

I took an instrument lesson on one recently, and spent the whole time fighting with trim. Feel is totally wrong, and I just don't see that problem in a real plane. The only way I can get anything done in that Redbird is to fly the trim wheel.

Then, the roll response is wrong. Too much control pressure needed to get any response, then it all comes at once, resulting in over controlling. Another problem I dont have in a real plane.

They look pretty, but I'm not impressed. They cost half as much per hour as a 172, but that isn't a very good deal.

 

[mkosmo]

Adequate, maybe.

I took an instrument lesson on one recently, and spent the whole time fighting with trim. Feel is totally wrong, and I just don't see that problem in a real plane. The only way I can get anything done in that Redbird is to fly the trim wheel.

Then, the roll response is wrong. Too much control pressure needed to get any response, then it all comes at once, resulting in over controlling. Another problem I dont have in a real plane.

They look pretty, but I'm not impressed. They cost half as much per hour as a 172, but that isn't a very good deal.

Considering that nobody is going to waste time in something like a Level D sim for a the light GA fleet, I'd argue that the sims that are out there for us are fantastic. We have full motion and force feedback combined with realtime instructor manipulation and fantastic graphics. Sure the feel isn't right, but the feel isn't what the sims are for, either.

 

[OkieAviator]

I was thinking more of simulators for general use and proficiency...and not the frasca simulators with no screen and if you touch the yoke the airplane is in a 30 degree pitch up (that's what I mean by touch and feel).

You're not going to get the touch and feel of a real airplane to improve your stick and rudder skills on a simulator. Even the T38 one I got to play that had force feedback wasn't 'real'. Flight simulators are typically used to get familiar with cockpit, controls and procedures in a controlled risk free area before jumping in a real plane.

Here's a thread I made about my setup before starting my instrument training. Not including the computer it's probably $800 worth of hardware and software. As I learn something with my CFII I replicate it on the game, with a fake plane that matches my real planes avionics and radio setup. The great part is if I get turned around or lost I can pause it. Think or draw it out and then unpause and try to correct it.

Adequate, maybe.

I took an instrument lesson on one recently, and spent the whole time fighting with trim. Feel is totally wrong, and I just don't see that problem in a real plane. The only way I can get anything done in that Redbird is to fly the trim wheel.

Then, the roll response is wrong. Too much control pressure needed to get any response, then it all comes at once, resulting in over controlling. Another problem I dont have in a real plane.

They look pretty, but I'm not impressed. They cost half as much per hour as a 172, but that isn't a very good deal.

Unless I'm just playing around I use autopilot almost full time for this very reason. You can get good at flying a simulator plane, but it's not going to translate to a real plane. You make get some muscle memory doing coordinated turns ect but that's' about it. I use something called FSUIPC which lets me make the controls heavy for larger planes or lighter for smaller planes but again without feedback it's still not very realistic.

My home field is getting a Red Bird full motion this month. I'll do a few lessons in it I'm sure. They don't have the price worked out yet but anticipate it being $70 or so an hour. But if you think about it you can crunch more approaches, more patterns ect in a sim because you skip preflight, takeoff, ect... do a missed approach and roll it back 4 minutes to your start.

 

[jordane93]

Adequate, maybe.

I took an instrument lesson on one recently, and spent the whole time fighting with trim. Feel is totally wrong, and I just don't see that problem in a real plane. The only way I can get anything done in that Redbird is to fly the trim wheel.

Then, the roll response is wrong. Too much control pressure needed to get any response, then it all comes at once, resulting in over controlling. Another problem I dont have in a real plane.

They look pretty, but I'm not impressed. They cost half as much per hour as a 172, but that isn't a very good deal.

The "feeling" of these simulators will never be realistic IMO. However the Redbird was invaluable for nailing down procedures like holding patterns and approaches and that is where these simulators excel. Instead of going up in the plane and wasting money, you can go in the Redbird and pause, reset, and load various weather.

 

[jordane93]

My home field is getting a Red Bird full motion this month. I'll do a few lessons in it I'm sure. They don't have the price worked out yet but anticipate it being $70 or so an hour. But if you think about it you can crunch more approaches, more patterns ect in a sim because you skip preflight, takeoff, ect... do a missed approach and roll it back 4 minutes to your start.

Also you can pause and go over things. That is really hard to do in an airplane!

 

[James331]

If you have to have "feel or touch" to take away anything of value, you're not looking in the right places, IMO.

That

For IFR training it's more about procedures and juggling, frankly you can get 95% of that out of a USB yoke and pedals and Microsoft FSX on a desktop with a TV monitor.

For VFR ops, you're really limited on what you're going to get out of any sim.


FYI the redbird sims run on MS flight sim anyway :wink2:

 

[MAKG1]

Well, procedures training seems to be largely about workload management. Which is totally different when it's dominated by fiddling with trim and controls that don't work right.

There seems to be little value to substitute an autopilot when the training aircraft doesn't have one. And the GPS is different.

 

[Bonchie]

Well, procedures training seems to be largely about workload management. Which is totally different when it's dominated by fiddling with trim and controls that don't work right.

Certified simulators let you practice all the different navigation/approaches/holds/MAPs, etc. in a cheaper way, without having to fly 50nm to shoot a certain approach you need. Even if the controls aren't perfect, you still get the experience of navigating in flight, correctly doing procedures, etc. all while being able to pause and ask questions for a fraction of the cost.

The FAA certifies them and that's good enough for me. You still get plenty of time in the plane.