The Differences Between PPLicensing And Learning

On Feb 28, 8:51*am, WJRFlyBoy wrote:
On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 12:34:16 GMT, kontiki wrote:
Understand what and how the instrumentation works (shortcomings included)
Own all the fundamentally necessary flight gear (i.e carry-ons in flight
bag or on person)

Obtain hours in flight simulation

See Dudley's comments regarding pre-solo students and simulators.
More...enough for now.

Ye, a point I neglected to mention. We've already had one poster
here who had a disappointing discovery flight by going into it with
a severe case of overconfidence and unrealistic expectations due to
having spent so many hours 'perfecting' his technique on a simulator.

Thanks for the heads up.

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.

Interesting opinion.

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.

Followed by another one.

So it is fair to say that the outcome of pre-solo sim is generally
negative?
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!

First, so you can gauge how much to believe me: I am a recent Private
Pilot (April 2006) who works in the simulation industry.

Yes, it is fair to say that pre-solo sim is not helpful and may even
hurt. Much of what is learned in pre-solo and getting to solo (which
is the point of pre-solo) is physical cues and muscle memory. None of
that is recreated in any PC based sim environment. Also the limited
visual area and field of view (even in a 3 screen uber-setup) causes
dependence on the instruments and prevents using many of the visual
cues which are important in VFR flying. I was quite good at instrument
flying (for a PP student) but not so hot at watching for traffic,
watching the horizon for attitude, etc.

I am now working on my instrument rating and in that environment the
simulator is helpful. I can use it to practice procedures and
sequences. Control pressures, sounds, etc. are still missing. (To be
clear: the sim makes sounds, but the cues do not match what sounds are
important in the real plane. Force feedback controls also do not match
the real world - it's a matter of energy and mass as well as
programming.)

You will hear from simulation proponents how wrong this opinion is,
but those folks (at least the loudest on these groups) do not and have
not flown a real airplane. Those of us who have done both, seem to
pretty much share this opinion. Simulation has its place, but it is
_not_ pre-solo.

John

On 2008-02-28, wrote:
Yes, it is fair to say that pre-solo sim is not helpful and may even
hurt. Much of what is learned in pre-solo and getting to solo (which
is the point of pre-solo) is physical cues and muscle memory. None of
that is recreated in any PC based sim environment.

Don't underestimate the power of muscle memory, too. My ease of flying the
Tecnam Sierra and difficulty transitioning into the Zodiac, both after 15
years out of the cockpit, are directly related to that.

I can't fly a sim worth a damn, and it's because the muscle memory expects
feel that just isn't there.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
http://www.hercules-390.org (Yes, that's me!)
Buy Hercules stuff at http://www.cafepress.com/hercules-390

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 07:55:54 -0800 (PST), wrote:

So it is fair to say that the outcome of pre-solo sim is generally
negative?
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!

First, so you can gauge how much to believe me: I am a recent Private
Pilot (April 2006) who works in the simulation industry.

Yes, it is fair to say that pre-solo sim is not helpful and may even
hurt. Much of what is learned in pre-solo and getting to solo (which
is the point of pre-solo) is physical cues and muscle memory. None of
that is recreated in any PC based sim environment. Also the limited
visual area and field of view (even in a 3 screen uber-setup) causes
dependence on the instruments and prevents using many of the visual
cues which are important in VFR flying. I was quite good at instrument
flying (for a PP student) but not so hot at watching for traffic,
watching the horizon for attitude, etc.

I am now working on my instrument rating and in that environment the
simulator is helpful. I can use it to practice procedures and
sequences. Control pressures, sounds, etc. are still missing. (To be
clear: the sim makes sounds, but the cues do not match what sounds are
important in the real plane. Force feedback controls also do not match
the real world - it's a matter of energy and mass as well as
programming.)

You will hear from simulation proponents how wrong this opinion is,
but those folks (at least the loudest on these groups) do not and have
not flown a real airplane. Those of us who have done both, seem to
pretty much share this opinion. Simulation has its place, but it is
_not_ pre-solo.

John

John, thanks, this makes a lot of sense. I spent a chunk of years strength
and power training athletes. The f,m,a relationships you mentioned hit home
as did the cross-over training strategies (or lack thereof) in
visualization systems. Good luck on your IFR.
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!

"WJRFlyBoy" wrote in message
...


So it is fair to say that the outcome of pre-solo sim is generally
negative?

Flights sims are spectacular for teaching you the instrument panel and
navigation, but overuse can reinforce bad habits (like radio com, use of
checklists, cheating by looking at the map or GPS, taxi procedures, etc)
Their biggest downfall for student pilots is that the experiences of
peripheral vision and flight control pressures are different. The yoke on
a Cessna 152 will require a different amount and type of touch than a
typical joystick or plastic PC yoke.

Having said that, I'm a fan of MSFS and play with it one or twice a week.

-c
CP-ASEL-IA

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 09:23:58 -0800, gatt wrote:

"WJRFlyBoy" wrote in message
...


So it is fair to say that the outcome of pre-solo sim is generally
negative?

Flights sims are spectacular for teaching you the instrument panel and
navigation, but overuse can reinforce bad habits (like radio com, use of
checklists, cheating by looking at the map or GPS, taxi procedures, etc)
Their biggest downfall for student pilots is that the experiences of
peripheral vision and flight control pressures are different. The yoke on
a Cessna 152 will require a different amount and type of touch than a
typical joystick or plastic PC yoke.

Having said that, I'm a fan of MSFS and play with it one or twice a week.

-c
CP-ASEL-IA

I'm getting the understanding that how you use a sim comes best post-flight
which appeared bassackwards until your comments and others. There can't be
zero value, the trick appears to be knowing where the value is and
concentrating on that.

In my case, it prolly has as much to do with justifying to my wife that
triple-screen 24" monitor, overclocked, freon cooled PC I couldn't convince
her I needed for .xls spreadsheets.

wow - I think that is the truth.
--
Remove numbers for gmail and for God's sake it ain't "gee" either!

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.

Deadstick wrote:


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.


How many hours you got there Deadstick?

"Deadstick" wrote in message
...

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.

Therein lies the problem. How does a student know if he's using the tool
correctly?

-c

"gatt" wrote in message
...

"Deadstick" wrote in message
...

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.

Therein lies the problem. How does a student know if he's using the tool
correctly?

-c


You answered your own question...if he's a student, he's taking instruction.
Otherwise he's just a user or tinkerer.

--
BobF.
Lincoln actually got it right but was way ahead of his time when he said,
"You can have some of you computer working all of the time and all of your
computer working some of the time but..." It was he that said that, wasn't
it?

Took the words right out of my mouth. I can see a lot of time devoted to
un-learning if everyone followed the OP's method.

Bob Gardner

"gatt" wrote in message
...

"Deadstick" wrote in message
...

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.

Therein lies the problem. How does a student know if he's using the tool
correctly?

-c