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 |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
2018 - AN EXCITING YEAR
On Saturday, February 17, 2018 at 7:38:01 PM UTC-5, Jeff Morgan wrote:
On Saturday, February 17, 2018 at 12:42:17 PM UTC-7, Scott Manley wrote: The airlines fully qualify pilots in simulators, essentially reaching 100%. A bit overstated. After 6-8 sessions in a full motion Level D sim and the Check Ride airline pilots require 20-40 hours Initial Operating Experience in the airplane under the supervision of a Check Airman before being "finished" and signed off for line operations. The flight footprint is often larger than the sim footprint. And then if the new airline pilot fails to gain 100 flight hours within 90 days of the simulator check ride (IOE counts towards this), the entire training process must be repeated - FAA requirement. === I stand corrected. I should know better than to use 100% in any argument. === But most importantly, airline pilots are not primary students. === 'Not sure why that is "most" important. Both are simply humans trying to learn something. The use of simulation is about improving human learning. === Understand I'm not downing your product. Sims have their place. Primary students need to actually fly and land the real aircraft too. For clarification: Condor is not "my product". (I should probably stop using the nickname "The Condor Guy", given to me by others. I am actually the "Advocate for the use of flight simulation in glider flight training GUY"). I have no financial stake in Condor. I am a professional educator who understands the value of simulation in the human learning process. I use Condor because it is the best glider flight simulation available. When a better glider flight simulation becomes available, I will use it. === It has never been my position that "all" flight training, primary or otherwise, can or should be conducted in simulation, only that a very large percentage of it (approximately, IMHO, based on my 10 years of experience in simulation-based flight training, 80%) can and should be. Simulation is the superior "learning" environment. Actual flight is the superior "application of learning" environment. === My original reply to this post was not intended to highjack the thread and spur yet another debate over the value of simulation in human learning. My intent was to provide clubs / commercial operations who struggle with the cost and complexity of maintaining actual aircraft for the purpose of providing flight training, what I believe to be a viable solution for their consideration. Scott Manley 3167160CFI ---- Out! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Any news from this exciting design? | TRKA | Soaring | 9 | January 4th 11 02:17 PM |
out of focus can sometimes be exciting too | Pensacola Beachcomber | Aviation Photos | 3 | May 5th 08 03:27 PM |
Read an exciting, intelectual Novel after flight? | The Masconi's a Novel | Owning | 0 | May 4th 06 07:19 PM |
How come military aviation is so exciting....? | Garamondextended | Military Aviation | 1 | May 13th 04 03:49 PM |
EXCITING NEW POSSIBILITIES | John Roake | Soaring | 0 | December 9th 03 12:59 AM |