![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Deadstick wrote:
On Feb 28, 6:34 am, kontiki wrote: Except for the purpose of explaining how the COM and NAV radios and instrumentation works by a CFI, simulator time should be avoided by pre-solo students. Post solo, other than to experiment with navigation methods, simulators should be avoided by students also. By simulators, I am talking about the basic PC based units, not the multi-million dollar, full motion simulators used to train commercial pilots. But even they should not be used pre-solo. I tend to disagree in some ways. I will agree that some students may make the assumption that the PC simulator is exactly like the real thing and make the assumption that after mastering the simulator they can jump into the aircraft and fly it just as well. However, I believe that the PC simulator can be used to teach basic techniques and principles such as basic aircraft control, basic aerodynamics, use and function of instruments, etc. As long as the student understands that the simulator and the aircraft are different, they can transition from one to the other and apply what they learned from the simulator to the actual aircraft. Additionally, the student can experience things in the simulator that he/she can't or shouldn't do in the actual aircraft. The PC simulator is, in my opinion, a valuable tool if used correctly. I would respectfully disagree with this analysis based on hundreds of hours spent working with both primary students, flight instructors, and Microsoft. Sims have their use, but if used before solo can actually be detrimental for various reasons, some of them absolutely critical to student progress. After solo, and when used with the proper supervision, the sims have their productive side as well. -- Dudley Henriques |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dudley Henriques wrote:
I would respectfully disagree with this analysis based on hundreds of hours spent working with both primary students, flight instructors, and Microsoft. Sims have their use, but if used before solo can actually be detrimental for various reasons, some of them absolutely critical to student progress. After solo, and when used with the proper supervision, the sims have their productive side as well. Hmmm. That seems to be a stronger statement about pre-solo use than I've seen you state in the recent past. Or maybe I'm over-extending "pre-solo" to include "pre-flight-training" that you didn't intend? That is, if time is split thusly: Big Bang - birth - simming - initial flight training - solo - PPL - death - Big Crunch Then that order is okay so long as simming and pre-solo flight training don't overlap? Or you believe simming is _only_ a net positive use after solo and even then only under supervision? Hmmm. Otherwise your advice appears to be at odds with what Bruce Williams wrote in his book "Microsoft Flight Simulator as a Training Aid." That is, while he too says pre-solo simming _can_ be detrimental, it appears he believes that is not an immutable issue and lays out some guidelines that he believes can make pre-flight training use a net positive. But I guess that is not surprising, given that he wrote a book on the subject! (There seem to be anecdotes posted by people who have felt use of MS Flight Simulator helped them get a leg-up in their training and others who felt MS FS actually slowed them down.) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:18:00 -0500, Dudley Henriques wrote:
Additionally, the student can experience things in the simulator that he/she can't or shouldn't do in the actual aircraft. The PC simulator is, in my opinion, a valuable tool if used correctly. I would respectfully disagree with this analysis based on hundreds of hours spent working with both primary students, flight instructors, and Microsoft. Sims have their use, but if used before solo can actually be detrimental for various reasons, some of them absolutely critical to student progress. After solo, and when used with the proper supervision, the sims have their productive side as well. Is this the duty of a good CFI to point out where an individual student would benefit and why? -- Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either! |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 12:04:54 GMT, Steve Foley wrote:
"WJRFlyBoy" wrote in message ... I have been reading the various threads about spins, forced landings, etc and talking with CFIs. The road to a PPL is preset in requirements by FAA. I see that most people are happy to do nothing more than that. Where do you see that? I don't understand. For the most part, I see people who want to get x hours in y (shortest) time to get their license. -- Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either! |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I don't understand. For the most part, I see people who want to get x
hours in y (shortest) time to get their license. You say that like it's a bad thing. I know you're not a pilot yet, and that this is all very exciting and intoxicating. Flying IS the best thing you can do, head and shoulders (literally!) above every other human endeavor, but I'm about to let you in on a little secret. It's a secret that your government, and most of the "big watch" pilot crowd, will never, EVER tell you. You may want to be sitting down when you read this -- but here it is: Flying is easy. You're making it into a much bigger deal than it is. Not that flying can't kill you in a heartbeat -- it can. But that's true of most skills in life, from driving on the freeway to working with power tools. The FAA and a large segment of the pilot population would like you to believe that it takes some sort of super-human skill and intelligence to learn to fly, but it just ain't true. Why is this so? How has this situation evolved? 1. The FAA is "government", which is in the regulatory business. Thus, each year requires more regulations, lest the FAA find itself large pointless (which, on the GA side of flying, it largely *is*). Since, by nature, no government agency can EVER solve the problems it was set up to address (or risk being eliminated), it *must* continue to make things more complex. It also must find new problems to fix, since most of the original problems were quickly resolved. If that means largely inventing new problems, all the better. 2. The "big watch" crowd likes to boast of their flying prowess, and likes to feel above and separate from the "folks on the ground". Obviously, if flying were easy and accessible, this would destroy their self image, so it plays into their game to make flying appear really, really hard. Thus, many airports have unfriendly, elitist FBOs, and pilot groups are traditionally exclusionary good ol' boy clubs, unfriendly and suspicious of newcomers. After long observations and pondering, I believe this attitude evolved from the combat pilots of World War II, who truly demonstrated superior skills and abilities. Those guys moved to their local airports after the war, and their natural attitudes toward newcomers (not combat pilots) was an "us and them" mentality. To some degree, this attitude has been imprinted on every generation of new pilots ever since. These two groups, inadvertently working together, have almost killed general aviation in America. As usual, the FAA's work is done under the guise of "safety" -- the catch-word that makes EVERYTHING okay. (The only words in our society that kick open the treasury vault quicker, and eliminates our rights quicker, is: "It's for the children" -- which have been used for everything from school busing to the building of government-sponsored casinos.) We can fix the FAA, given enough political will -- but I don't know what to do about the big watch crowd. I belong to every pilot's group, both locally and nationally, and I see this attitude toward newcomers slowly improving (basically as a result of their numbers dwindling to the point of death) but it's been a glacially slow change. I hate to burst your bubble like this -- I, too, once thought learning to fly was beyond my means, and must be really, really hard -- but once you've learned the truth, you can quickly and efficiently move from standing on the ground to soaring through the sky. Find a mentor through AOPA (if you need help finding one, email me off-group), and get to it -- you'll never regret it! -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 18:58:38 GMT, Jay Honeck wrote:
I know you're not a pilot yet, and that this is all very exciting and intoxicating. Flying IS the best thing you can do, head and shoulders (literally!) above every other human endeavor, but I'm about to let you in on a little secret. It's a secret that your government, and most of the "big watch" pilot crowd, will never, EVER tell you. You may want to be sitting down when you read this -- but here it is: Flying is easy. You're making it into a much bigger deal than it is. Yeah, it's a tendency of mine, I am sure you are right but I also have a pressing, personal obligation to push the capability envelope. It extends to my business profile, I make a living seeking the work no one wants, has the least chance of success and don't get me started on the VLJ reservations project that we are failing at big-time...for the moment. Regardless, you're right and I appreciate that you took the time to force me to re-center, thx. -- Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either! |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 18:58:38 GMT, Jay Honeck wrote:
The FAA and a large segment of the pilot population would like you to believe that it takes some sort of super-human skill and intelligence to learn to fly, but it just ain't true. Why is this so? How has this situation evolved? 1. The FAA is "government", which is in the regulatory business. Thus, each year requires more regulations, lest the FAA find itself large pointless (which, on the GA side of flying, it largely *is*). Since, by nature, no government agency can EVER solve the problems it was set up to address (or risk being eliminated), it *must* continue to make things more complex. It also must find new problems to fix, since most of the original problems were quickly resolved. If that means largely inventing new problems, all the better. I work with the military in software, you are right but I would also, in their defense (pun), they determine that solving problems is fraught with inevitable delays, wasted time; they have little sense of time management since they have little control of time. It takes ten people to make a committee decision that you could make in ten minutes. They adjust to this sordid reality (and do solve problems in the process). Sometimes. ![]() -- Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either! |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 18:58:38 GMT, Jay Honeck wrote:
2. The "big watch" crowd likes to boast of their flying prowess, and likes to feel above and separate from the "folks on the ground". Obviously, if flying were easy and accessible, this would destroy their self image, so it plays into their game to make flying appear really, really hard. Thus, many airports have unfriendly, elitist FBOs, and pilot groups are traditionally exclusionary good ol' boy clubs, unfriendly and suspicious of newcomers. lol You are right there but the good is that individuals who decide not to be part of that crowd emerge from it. I see that here on RAS/RAP, both entities. After long observations and pondering, I believe this attitude evolved from the combat pilots of World War II, who truly demonstrated superior skills and abilities. Those guys moved to their local airports after the war, and their natural attitudes toward newcomers (not combat pilots) was an "us and them" mentality. To some degree, this attitude has been imprinted on every generation of new pilots ever since. Interesting historical perspective. These two groups, inadvertently working together, have almost killed general aviation in America. As usual, the FAA's work is done under the guise of "safety" -- the catch-word that makes EVERYTHING okay. (The only words in our society that kick open the treasury vault quicker, and eliminates our rights quicker, is: "It's for the children" -- which have been used for everything from school busing to the building of government-sponsored casinos.) Forgot one. "Fight the evil-doers". We can fix the FAA, given enough political will -- but I don't know what to do about the big watch crowd. I belong to every pilot's group, both locally and nationally, and I see this attitude toward newcomers slowly improving (basically as a result of their numbers dwindling to the point of death) but it's been a glacially slow change. Boy's Clubs are part of the less illustrious history of the male constituency. Don't expect change, just a different set of rules. -- Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either! |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 18:58:38 GMT, Jay Honeck wrote:
I hate to burst your bubble like this -- I, too, once thought learning to fly was beyond my means, and must be really, really hard -- but once you've learned the truth, you can quickly and efficiently move from standing on the ground to soaring through the sky. Find a mentor through AOPA (if you need help finding one, email me off-group), and get to it -- you'll never regret it! -- Jay Honeck I don't bring a lot of ego bubbles, I find that they waste my time, and others and get in the way of the task in hand which, in this case, is to be as absolutely good as I can be at flying. Which, if like college, may be beyond dismal but I can live with efforted failure, some say that will be the engraving on my tombstone. "He tried with unmatched attitude, he gave all his heart, he failed like a 1960's Japanese radio." -- Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either! |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:yvDxj.1287$TT4.1154@attbi_s22: I don't understand. For the most part, I see people who want to get x hours in y (shortest) time to get their license. You say that like it's a bad thing. I know you're not a pilot yet, and that this is all very exciting and intoxicating. Flying IS the best thing you can do, head and shoulders (literally!) above every other human endeavor, = You are a complete moron. Bertie |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Bearing and Course, differences? | Allen Smith | Piloting | 27 | September 2nd 07 03:28 PM |
Rep vs. Dem Differences | Jim Weir | Piloting | 212 | September 8th 04 04:02 PM |
Aluminum differences | Lou Parker | Home Built | 16 | August 25th 04 06:48 PM |
ASW 20, ASW 20B, ASW 20C DIFFERENCES | Ventus B | Soaring | 8 | July 18th 04 10:28 AM |
Differences between Garmin 295 and 196? | carlos | Products | 1 | March 6th 04 06:12 AM |