correct in 121 you must have 3..I wonder how cape air does this ? im guessing wavier
Glass, or Steam?
- Thread starter Positive Rate
- Start date
correct in 121 you must have 3..I wonder how cape air does this ? im guessing wavier
The simulator I'm referring to is not a desk top. Desk tops are fine for learning general procedure and concepts, but for actually practicing aircraft specific stuff, you need to be in a real sim with the switches and all the rest of the interface as in the airplane.
Flying is actually very easy, learn it in the plane you need. If you like flying, there's no rule that says you can't also get or rent another plane for bouncing around local, you won't have much issue stepping down. Personally I suggest you take the aerobatic course much earlier than you plan, the earlier the better, start around 20hrs or so if you go the learn in the Citation method, or just after you get the PP if you go the step up method.
Flying is actually very easy, learn it in the plane you need. If you like flying, there's no rule that says you can't also get or rent another plane for bouncing around local, you won't have much issue stepping down. Personally I suggest you take the aerobatic course much earlier than you plan, the earlier the better, start around 20hrs or so if you go the learn in the Citation method, or just after you get the PP if you go the step up method.
Positive Rate
Pre-Flight
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2013
- Messages
- 72
- Display Name
Display name:
Vr
RedBird, has a few at between $50k to over $70k with nice bells and whistles. With CAE, you can spend up to a cool million and get 3-axis with 6-degrees of freedom and have all the "switches" you will need.
Though the RedBird does interest me at some point down the road, the desktop sim that I use has the same "switches," but they are virtual switches. However, you can go out and buy some hardware to simulate the "physical" aspect of reaching for a switch, toggle, knob or button. For me, I'm only interested in the procedures and memory work aspects for now. However, one of the RedBird systems does look very interesting.
If the aircraft is modeled correctly, you can actually get a better representation of the aircraft's cockpit hardware in the desktop sim, than you can with a higher end physical simulator. For example, the fuel selector switch, fuse panels, AP, GPS, ADF, VOR, HSI, etc., etc., all can be modeled in the desktop simulator with their switches, knobs, buttons and toggles all in place and functional. But, the aircraft developer really does have to take the time necessary to do the modeling correctly.
It won't be a physical reach & touch, but the logical, mental reach & touch will register with the brain as well. Not as tightly as the physical reach & touch, but it will set the memory deep enough to be recalled later in the physical world.
I'm thinking about the Duke turbine modification or a Baron turbine modification for the local flights, when the VLJ just makes little practical sense. Either the Rocket Engineering Duke or Baron with the PT6 engines, is a 300kt aircraft or pretty darn close. So, local trips can be done quite well, I would suppose.
I do want the acro, so that's a given. I also want Glider and Skydiving ratings as well, but I'll have to see about squeezing that once the program starts. I've also just become exposed to the line of Eurocopters and both the EC130-T2 and the EC135, really get my attention for a number of different reasons, namely the local flying aspect that you mention. Of course, that requires a Rotor rating as well.
I said I wanted to be an Aviator, not just a pilot. I would like to be competent enough to fly just about anything that can be flown, really.
As far as the "flying is easy" thing - my real concern is mastering the Procedures in every category. All of them. Normal, Emergency and Radio. I too, find that flying the C172 in the simulator is somewhat easy. However, it quickly stops being all that easy, once I have to talk to a live human being on the radio, listen to what they are telling me and respond accordingly. Once that happens, I find myself falling behind the airplane and playing catch-up for the remainder of the flight - all because I struggle with fundamental procedures of various kinds.
This is why I would like to get a head start on such procedures, so my brain is not playing constant catch-up during the real flight training and when I'm responsible for talking to ATC, listening to their instructions and doing what they say to do.
I'd like to get my brain in gear before the live training starts - regardless what aircraft I use.
I appreciate your input, here! Thanks.
You don't buy the good sim, you go to someone like Flight Safety and and use theirs.
Ted
The pilot formerly known as Twin Engine Ted
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2007
- Messages
- 30,019
- Display Name
Display name:
iFlyNothing
A number of other people were surprised, as well. In retrospect, what we should have done was install a 750 instead of upgrading the 530 to WAAS and replacing the Collins transponder. Those two combined (~$6,000) plus the sale of the used 530 (let's call it $6,000) would have almost paid for a 750. Then get a little more money out of selling the GMA340 while I'm at it to get pretty close. Then we would have had the latest and greatest (arguably last longer), and then it would have made sense to put the 650 in. Still less experience with those vs. the 430/530, but would've caught up quickly. Given that we went the route we did, the 430W saved money and worked fine.
If you find a plane with a 430/530 that otherwise fits your needs, go for it.
It would take you a couple hours to figure out the 650/750 architecture, it's that simple. The reason I bought a 430w rather than a 530w was because I knew that Garmin was close to releasing a radio that fixed my complaints with the 430/530 architecture.