PC flight simulators

Subject: PC flight simulators
From: Steve
Date: 11/19/03 2:22 PM Pacific Standard Time

1943!! ROFLMAO!!

If you were with us (The 344th Bomb Group) in 1943 I don't think you would
have found much to laugh about. We sure didn't. There was a lot going on, but
none of it was very funny.

Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

On 19 Nov 2003 22:30:20 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: PC flight simulators
From: Steve
Date: 11/19/03 2:22 PM Pacific Standard Time

1943!! ROFLMAO!!

If you were with us (The 344th Bomb Group) in 1943 I don't think you would
have found much to laugh about. We sure didn't. There was a lot going on, but
none of it was very funny.

Could you tell more about that simulator, Art?
How were the visuals done? What computed the flight model?

Bye
Andreas

Subject: PC flight simulators
From: Andreas Maurer
Date: 11/19/03 4:34 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

On 19 Nov 2003 22:30:20 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: PC flight simulators
From: Steve
Date: 11/19/03 2:22 PM Pacific Standard Time

1943!! ROFLMAO!!

If you were with us (The 344th Bomb Group) in 1943 I don't think you would
have found much to laugh about. We sure didn't. There was a lot going on,
but
none of it was very funny.

Could you tell more about that simulator, Art?
How were the visuals done? What computed the flight model?

Bye
Andreas
..

Sure Andreas. Since you ask like a gentleman, I'll be glad to discuss it with
you. As I stated before, it was a real B-26 truncated behind the radio/Nav
compartment and mounted on a swive-l tilt base in a hanger. When we climbed
into it the pilots went into the cockpit, and went through turning on all their
switches and starting and running up the engines as if for a real takeoff.
Everything lit up and came to life. I climbed into the nose, and switched on
everything activating the bombsight, watched the gyro stand up and come to
speed, watched the intervelometer light up and the bomb rack station indicator
show loaded bomb racks on each station. Now to the interesting stuff. My view
was a color photograph chart that rolled under me at groundspeed. But it was
a scrambled image, That is the target area might be a port that showed
Manhattan in the center, the China coast to the West and San Francisco to the
East. This was to prevent anyone rom being familiar with any area so you
couldn't say, "hey I lived there and know it well" You had to fly and navigate
since no one had a recognition advantage. We had been briefed before the
simulator drill as to the exact rarget are we were to hit and the route we were
to fly. Where we were to expect flak and fighters but we were never given any
indcation of the damage that we would sustain. On course we had extensive flak
that shook the simulator violently. We had an engine out that rolled us
violently into the dead engine but Paul and Bob caughtiit in time and we
connued on course on sungle engine. We were now losing about 300 feet /minute
and couldn't do a damned thing about it. We were jumped by fighterand returned
fire. Our cockpit and my nose filled with smoke and had a strong cordite
smell;; mixed with the odor of urine and vomit which was always present. I
opened the vent and a strong relative wind blew the nose clear of smoke. We
stopped losing altitiude and the target came into sight.I lined up the Norden
head with the target uncaged the gyro and called "on course" to Paul locking
in the Norden head to the base, Suddenly we got heavy Flak that rocked the
plane violently. "please don't tumble my gyro" I prayed. ****, The gyro
tumbled.I grabbed the gimble ring erector knobs, got the gyro up and caged it.
But it was too late. We would now have to do a go around through that ****ing
flak again. I had totally forgotten I was in a simulator. I was sweating ,
tense and upset about the go around as though it was real It was real to me at
that point. I got on the intercom and asked Paul to hold us steady through the
run.I forgot that the simulator was pre-programed and there were certain things
that were going to happen that was beyond our control. On the second run we hit
the target with good results. closed the bombay doors and we turned for home.
The run was over, We got out of the plane sweating and shaken. Note that I
call it a plane, not a simulator because to us it was a plane,not a simiulator.
And we were almost surprised to find that when we got out of the plane we were
in a hanger. Reality rushed back. That night we went to the officers club and
over a few Scotches we drank and kept saying. "holy ****. holy ****"

Adreas that is as I remember it. If you have any questions I will be glad to
answer them.


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

On 19 Nov 2003 22:30:20 GMT, (ArtKramr) wrote:

Subject: PC flight simulators
From: Steve
Date: 11/19/03 2:22 PM Pacific Standard Time

1943!! ROFLMAO!!

If you were with us (The 344th Bomb Group) in 1943 I don't think you would
have found much to laugh about. We sure didn't. There was a lot going on, but
none of it was very funny.

I waw refering to the simulator that you mentioned...that was way better
than todays flight sims.

Only REAL MEN flew the B-26. And only the B-26 could scare the **** out of the
elephant.(grin)

Now my great great great grandfather fought at Waterloo. He was on horseback
and fought with a sword. Not at 10,000ft, eye to eye. Now thats a REAL MAN.

;-) :-)

Just to add. No personal disrespect to you was intended of course.


--
Steve.

"Bjørnar Bolsøy" wrote in message
...

I was wondering if anyone in this NG play simulators?
If so, which one? What's the best out there, currently.


Regards...

I put "flight sim" in "Newsgroup Subscriptions" and got 13 hits. You will
probably get more play there.

Tex

The big problem PC 'pilots' will run into if they have really gotten
into 'flying' the PC is that when they get into a real airplane to
learn to fly the instructor will be concentrating on teaching them how
to control the aircraft by looking !outside! at the real world and not
concentrating on the gauges. 'IFR/IMC' flying comes into play much
later - first you have to learn to land the airplane and that is done
looking outside! Also since most of your initial flying will be done
in the vicinity of the airport it's a damn good idea to watch out for
other aircraft - 'blue on blue' the hard way is generally not
survivable. That said, I reiterate that you can keep your instrument
scan/crosscheck up to snuff using a decent PC program more
conveniently and a lot cheaper than renting an aircraft or decent
instrument trainer (AST300 or similar.)
Walt BJ

"WaltBJ" wrote in message
om...
The big problem PC 'pilots' will run into if they have really gotten
into 'flying' the PC is that when they get into a real airplane to
learn to fly the instructor will be concentrating on teaching them how
to control the aircraft by looking !outside! at the real world and not
concentrating on the gauges. 'IFR/IMC' flying comes into play much
later - first you have to learn to land the airplane and that is done
looking outside! Also since most of your initial flying will be done
in the vicinity of the airport it's a damn good idea to watch out for
other aircraft - 'blue on blue' the hard way is generally not
survivable. That said, I reiterate that you can keep your instrument
scan/crosscheck up to snuff using a decent PC program more
conveniently and a lot cheaper than renting an aircraft or decent
instrument trainer (AST300 or similar.)
Walt BJ

Hi Walt;
It's funny picking you up in this thread for two reasons. I was thinking
about you just this morning after I downloaded an absolutely beautiful
zipper for my FS2004 :-) Secondly, my sentiments about the desktop
simulators are about in line with yours and Mary's.
I've actually done some work in this area, both as a consultant to sim
software developers, and as an instructor dealing with the issue with
students. I have some strong opinions about it, and have spoken to the issue
many times in seminars with CFI's.
First of all, I make a huge differentiation between the general desktop
simulators and the simulators used professionally by both the professional
airline and military communities. Both have one striking similarity however,
and that is the fact that in my opinion, both can actually retard the
learning curve if used during the initial stages of flight training, where
sight picture, physical sensation, and especially required control pressure
is a factor.
I like simulators to be integrated into the flight training program after
solo for just these reasons. I've found them extremely useful for practicing
instrument and emergency procedures. The old Link ANT18 (blue and yellow
peril :-) was a good way to learn how to fly a low freq range, but hardly
what I'd use to teach someone to fly an airplane :-)) In the T-Bird days, we
had the old C11B simulator where you could learn to use that damn zero
reader correctly...but you couldn't handle the T33 without training in the
airplane of course.
The desktop sims, especially Microsoft's effort, are a wonder of software
engineering for the layman. I've worked with MS on their new simulator, and
it's a great program that offers a substantial look into our world for those
who might not ever get the chance to fly otherwise. I'm amazed at exactly
what MS has managed to achieve with their effort. I use the sim when I have
the time, and I have to admit, it's VERY well done. I understand that the
services have ok'd it's limited use for training. Still, as a flight
instructor, I absolutely would demand that any student of mine stay
completely away from ANY simulator, ESPECIALLY a desk top simulator until
after solo for the reasons I have given.

BTW, while I have your ear, can I ask you..... just how audible was that God
awful howl that was the result of the marriage between the zipper, the J79,
and the IGV's on the airplane? Could you actually hear that mess through the
helmet between 80 and 90%
???? :-)))
All the best as always,
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
ink.net...

"WaltBJ" wrote in message
om...
The big problem PC 'pilots' will run into if they have really gotten
into 'flying' the PC is that when they get into a real airplane to
learn to fly the instructor will be concentrating on teaching them how
to control the aircraft by looking !outside! at the real world and not
concentrating on the gauges. 'IFR/IMC' flying comes into play much
later - first you have to learn to land the airplane and that is done
looking outside! Also since most of your initial flying will be done
in the vicinity of the airport it's a damn good idea to watch out for
other aircraft - 'blue on blue' the hard way is generally not
survivable. That said, I reiterate that you can keep your instrument
scan/crosscheck up to snuff using a decent PC program more
conveniently and a lot cheaper than renting an aircraft or decent
instrument trainer (AST300 or similar.)
Walt BJ

Hi Walt;
It's funny picking you up in this thread for two reasons. I was thinking
about you just this morning after I downloaded an absolutely beautiful
zipper for my FS2004 :-) Secondly, my sentiments about the desktop
simulators are about in line with yours and Mary's.

I am pleased FAA has taken a different position.

"Tarver Engineering" wrote in message
...

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message
ink.net...

"WaltBJ" wrote in message
om...
The big problem PC 'pilots' will run into if they have really gotten
into 'flying' the PC is that when they get into a real airplane to
learn to fly the instructor will be concentrating on teaching them how
to control the aircraft by looking !outside! at the real world and not
concentrating on the gauges. 'IFR/IMC' flying comes into play much
later - first you have to learn to land the airplane and that is done
looking outside! Also since most of your initial flying will be done
in the vicinity of the airport it's a damn good idea to watch out for
other aircraft - 'blue on blue' the hard way is generally not
survivable. That said, I reiterate that you can keep your instrument
scan/crosscheck up to snuff using a decent PC program more
conveniently and a lot cheaper than renting an aircraft or decent
instrument trainer (AST300 or similar.)
Walt BJ

Hi Walt;
It's funny picking you up in this thread for two reasons. I was thinking
about you just this morning after I downloaded an absolutely beautiful
zipper for my FS2004 :-) Secondly, my sentiments about the desktop
simulators are about in line with yours and Mary's.

I am pleased FAA has taken a different position.

No John, I'm afraid the FAA hasn't taken a contrary position at all .

Since I'm fairly familiar with this issue, having worked on it a bit myself,
I've pasted in the entire PCATD cert advisory for you to browse if you wish.
You will note that nowhere in the text does the FAA even come anywhere
close to recommending a simulator during the initial phases of flight
training, which was my salient point. The entire PCATD push is geared ONLY
toward instrument procedures and practice as a certified replacement for
flight time. Even this stresses the move toward an instrument rating, which
as I said, and it's fairly safe to assume, is well past the pre solo stage
for any "normal pilot". Of course I can't speak for you. :-)
This is EXACTLY in line with what I have posted here on this issue, which of
course I assume you already know anyway.
Of course; please feel free to select the text in the advisory you feel
takes a "contrary position" by the FAA to what I posted. Then we can take it
on sentence by sentence. You'd like that I'm sure......counting responses
and all. I'm not busy tonight...go for it!! :-))
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/ CFI Retired
For personal email, please replace
the z's with e's.
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt

Subject: QUALIFICATION AND APPROVAL OF
PERSONAL COMPUTER BASED AVIATION TRAINING DEVICES

Date: 5/12/97
Initiated By: AFS-840
AC No: 61-126

1. PURPOSE. This Advisory Circular (AC) provides information and guidance
to potential training device manufacturers and aviation training consumers
concerning a means, acceptable to the Administrator, by which personal
computer-based aviation training devices (PCATD) may be qualified and
approved for flight training toward satisfying the instrument rating
training under the provisions of Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(14 CFR) parts 61 and 141. While these guidelines are not mandatory, they
are derived from extensive Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and
industry experience in determining compliance with the pertinent parts of 14
CFR. Mandatory terms used in this AC such as "shall" and "must" are used
only in the sense of ensuring applicability of this method of compliance.
PCATD's are distinct from flight training devices (FTD) qualified under AC
120-45, Airplane Flight Training Device Qualification, and flight simulators
qualified under AC 120-40, Airplane Simulator Qualification. It also
provides acceptable criteria under which the airplane or FTD flight-hour
training time required for an instrument rating may be reduced by using
PCATD's that have been determined to meet acceptable FAA standards. This AC
details only one means of determining the acceptability of such devices for
use in instrument training curricula.

2. RELATED 14 CFR SECTIONS. Sections of the regulations to the information
in this AC are in parts 61 and 141.

3. DEFINITIONS.

a. PCATD. A device which:
1. Meets or exceeds the criteria shown in Appendix 1.
2. Functionally provides a training platform for at least
the procedural aspects of flight relating to an instrument training
curriculum.
3. Has been qualified by the FAA.

b. Qualification Guide. Design criteria to assist in the
evaluation and qualification process for PCATD's. A Qualification Guide is
included in Appendix 1.

4. BACKGROUND. During the past several years, there has been significant
development in training aid and training device technology. This includes
the development of aviation-related computer hardware and software
applications. There is considerable interest in making use of new
technology which may provide increased training capability at decreased
cost. This AC reflects the FAA's objective to formally recognize the
potential of aviation training devices for use in general aviation
instrument flight training.

a. Flight Task Procedural Skills. Flight task procedural skills have
traditionally been trained almost exclusively during in-flight training.
Ground training has been used to impart required aeronautical knowledge.
Recent studies, however, have suggested that procedural understanding of
instrument flight tasks can be taught during ground training using devices
such as those described in this AC. Two of the most recent studies were
conducted by the Embry Riddle Aeronautical University and the University of
Illinois.

b. Evaluations of PCATD's and Associated Aviation Training Software.
The FAA has evaluated several computer hardware and software applications at
the request of manufacturers and potential users. These evaluations were
conducted to determine whether certification of airman recency of experience
requirements reasonably could be met using such devices under applicable
provisions of part 61 or part 141. A study conducted by the University of
Illinois, titled "Transfer of Training Effectiveness of Personal
Computer-Based Aviation Training Devices: Final Report", dated October 1996,
examined each task addressed in the AC. The director of the study affirmed
that all instrument training tasks allowed by this AC have a positive
transfer effectiveness, or no statistically-significant negative transfer
effectiveness. Given this background, the FAA has determined that there is
sufficient justification to allow the use of PCATD's meeting acceptable
standards as creditable devices for meeting some of the training
requirements for an instrument rating under the applicable provisions of
part 61 or part 141.

5. AUTHORIZED USE.

a. Instruction by an Authorized Instructor. Qualified PCATD's may be
highly beneficial when used under the guidance of an authorized instructor
to achieve learning in certain procedural tasks such as area departures and
arrivals, navigational aid tracking, holding pattern entries, instrument
approaches, and missed approach procedures. Accordingly, the FAA has
determined to continue the policy that any time instruction is to be used to
log time toward meeting any requirement of the regulations, an authorized
instructor must have presented the instruction.

b. Reducing Flight Hours Through Ground Training. This AC provides for
some training time on PCATD's meeting acceptable FAA standards to be used to
reduce the total flight hour that otherwise would have to be accomplished in
an aircraft or a flight training device to meet the requirement for an
instrument rating under part 61 or part 141. PCATD's determined to meet the
criteria established by this AC may be used in lieu of , and for not more
than, 10 hours of time that ordinarily may be acquired in a flight simulator
or flight training device authorized for use under part 61 or part 141,
However the FAA has not authorized the use of PCATD's for conducting
practical tests nor for accomplishing recency of experience requirements.

6. GUIDELINES FOR QUALIFICATION OF PCATD's.

a. One qualification is required for each model of PCATD. Normally,
the qualification will be obtained by the manufacturer. It will be valid
for all serial numbers of that model, provided that no value for criterion
in Appendix 1 is changed.

b. Should a PCATD be modified in any manner, a revised Qualification
Guide must be submitted to the FAA, accompanied by a request for
qualification as modified, as described in paragraph 6d below.

c. Qualified PCATD's may be used by part 61 schools without further
approval, and should be used in accordance with the guidance provided in
paragraph 7. Qualified PCATD's may be approved for use in a part 141 pilot
school as outlined in paragraph 8.

d. To request qualification of a PCATD, manufacturers should send a
request for qualification to the General Aviation and Commercial Division,
Airman Certification Branch, AFS-840, 800 Independence Avenue, SW.,
Washington, DC 20591. The request for qualification must include a
qualification guide stating a value for each item in Appendix 1. Each value
must meet or exceed the minimum value sated in Appendix 1. The request for
qualification should be submitted at least 60 days before any training using
the PCATD involved is scheduled to commence. This time frame is necessary
to permit the FAA to properly review and evaluate the PCATD. Upon Finding
the PCATD acceptable, the FAA will approve the qualification guide and
return it to the manufacturer. The manufacturer must ensure that the PCATD
meets the criteria stated in the qualification guide. The PCATD may be
evaluated at the manufacturer's facility or at another site that may be
mutually agreeable to the manufacturer and the FAA.

7. ACCEPTABILITY OF PCATD's FOR USE UNDER PART 61

a. To be acceptable for use in part 61, a PCATD must:

1. Be capable of providing training in all elements for
which it will be used. Those elements should be specified in a curriculum.
2. Meet the description and criteria established in this AC.

b. The PCATD should be used in a curriculum which will provide
for:

1. A scope and content which should be in general compliance
with part 141.
2. Not more than 10 hours of flight instruction in a PCATD
in lieu of 10 of the 20 hours of flight instruction allowed for a flight
simulator or FTD. The 20-hour allowance for a flight simulator or an FTD
and the 10-hour allowance for PCATD's are not additive. If a PCATD is used
for the maximum of 10 hours, that 10 hours shall be a part of the 20-hour
maximum allowance for a flight simulator or flight training device.
3. Instructional materials for flight events.
4. An outline of stage (phase) checks and criterion levels
of performance.

8. APPROVAL OF PCATD's FOR USE UNDER PART 141.

a. To be approved for use under the provisions of part 141, a
PCATD must:

1. Meet the description and the criteria established in
this AC.
2. Be capable of providing training in all elements in which it will
be used, as specified in the syllabus.
3. Be used for not more that 10 hours of flight instruction
time in lieu of 10 hours of the flight instruction time in a flight
simulator or flight training device time allowed by part 141. The 10-hour
allowance for use of a PCATD and the 15-hour allowance for flight simulator
or flight training device under the provisions of part 141 are not additive.
If a PCATD is to be used in the certificate holder's part 141 curricula. It
is not the intent of the FAA to require each user to seek individual PCATD
qualification from the jurisdictional FSDO.

9. REPORTING PCATD TRAINING DATA. While there is no requirement to do so,
annually, during the anniversary month of FAA qualification or approval of a
PCATD, as applicable, pilot schools and other persons utilizing PCATD's
under part 61 or 141 in accordance with this AC in an instrument rating
curriculum are requested to provide the General Aviation and Commercial
Division with the information shown below. This information will be used to
validate the permissible use of PCATD's and to determine whether additional
permissible use or regulatory amendment to provide for such use is
warranted. The information provided should be sent to the address shown in
paragraph 6d. The report should contain:

a. The name and address of the individual, organization, and pilot
school certificate number (if applicable) providig the training;
b. The number of persons enrolled in the instrument rating course in
which the PCATD is used;
c. The number of flight hours each graduate required to satisfactorily
complete the course of training;
d. The number of graduates who passed the instrument rating practical
test the first time; and
e. Any other information deemed helpful in determining the level of
effectiveness of the devices used as authorized under the provisions of this
AC; e.g., the portion of the curriculum attributable to the PCATD used, the
grading scheme used, and how the instructional management of training using
the simulation device differs from that using an aircraft.

10. REQUEST FOR INFORMATION. Requests for additional information or
guidance about using training devices should be directed to AFS-840 at (202)
267--8196.

W. Michael Sacrey
Acting Deputy Director
Flight Standards Service

APPENDIX 1. PERSONAL COMPUTER-BASED AVIATION TRAINING DEVICE (PCATD)
QUALIFICATION GUIDE

This qualification guide provides a means for qualifying PCATD's for use as
FTD's in part 61 or approved part 141 instrument training curricula. This
Qualification Guide may be used to determine that a PCATD meets or exceeds
minimum acceptable FAA design criteria. PCATD's qualified in accordance
with this AC may be used for instrument training tasks only. They may not
be used for testing or checking.

Each qualification Guide submitted to the FAA for evaluation must state what
type airplane or family of airplanes is being replicated and used as the
basis for the following criteria.

PCATD DESIGN CRITERIA

Controls. A PCATD must provide some physical controls and may provide some
virtual controls.

1. Physical controls should be recognizable as to their function and how
they can be manipulated solely from their appearance. Physical controls
eliminate the use of either a keyboard or mouse to control the simulated
aircraft.

2. For the purposes of this guide, virtual control is any input device to
control aspects of the simulation (such as setting aircraft configuration,
location and wind) and to program, pause, or freeze the device. Virtual
controls should be primarily for instructor use.

Control Requirements.

1. A physical, self-centering, displacement yoke or control stick that
allows continuous adjustment of pitch and bank.

2. Physical, self-centering rudder pedals that allow continuous
adjustment of yaw.

3. A physical throttle lever or power lever that allows continuous
movement from idle to full power settings.

4. Physical controls for the following items, as applicable to the
aircraft or family of aircraft replicated:

a. Flaps
b. Propellers
c. Mixtures
d. Pitch trim
e. Communication and navigation radios
f. Clock or timer
g. Gear handle
h. Transponder
i. Altimeter
j. Microphone with push to talk switch
k. Carburetor heat
l. Cowl Flaps

5. Control Inputs.

a. Time from control input to recognizable system response (transport
delay) must be 300 milliseconds or less. This standard must be certified by
the manufacturer in the qualification guide submitted for qualification.
Users will not be required to verify this standard when requesting approval
of a PCATD. Normally, FAA inspectors will not be expected to measure or
verify this maximum delay time as a part of the PCATD approval process.

b. The control inputs must be tested by the computer and software at
each start and displayed as a confirmation message or a warning message that
the transport delay time or any design parameter is out of original
tolerances. This test must consider the items listed under Display
Requirements (see paragraphs 1 through 4 below.)

Display Requirements.

1. Instruments and indicators.

a. An adjustable altimeter with incremental markings each 20 feet or
less, operable throughout the normal operating range of the aircraft or
family of aircraft replicated.

b. A heading indicator with incremental markings each 5 degrees or
less displayed on a 360 degree circle. Arc segments of less that 360 degree
may be selectively displayed if desired or required, as applicable to the
aircraft or family of aircraft replicated.

c. An airspeed indicator with incremental markings as shown on the
aircraft or family of aircraft replicated; however, airspeed markings of
less than 40 knots need not be displayed.

d. A vertical speed indicator with incremental markings each 100 feet
per minute (fpm) for both climb and descent, for the first 1000 fpm of climb
and descent, and at each 500 fpm climb and descent for the remainder of a
minimum 2000 fpm total display, or as applicable to the aircraft or family
of aircraft being replicated.

e. A turn and bank indicator with incremental markings for a rate of 3
degree per second turn for left and right turns. The 3 degree per second
rate index must be inside of the maximum deflection of the indicator.

f. A slip and skid indicator with coordination information displayed in
the conventional skid ball format where a coordinated flight condition is
indicated with the ball in the center position. A split image triangle
indication may be used if applicable to the aircraft or family of aircraft
being replicated.

g. An attitude indicator with incremental markings each 5 degrees of
pitch or less, from 20 degree pitch up to 40 degree pitch down or as
applicable to the aircraft or family of aircraft replicated. Bank angles
must be identified at "wing level" and at 10, 20, 30, and 60 degree of bank
(with an optional additional identification at 45 degrees) in left and right
banks.

h. Engine instruments as applicable to the aircraft or family of
aircraft being replicated, providing markings for normal ranges and minimum
and maximum limits.

i. A suction gauge or instrument pressure gauge, as applicable, with a
display applicable to the aircraft or family of aircraft replicated.

j. A flap setting indicator which displays the current flap setting.
Setting indications must be typical of that found in an actual aircraft.

k. A pitch trim indicator with display that shows zero trim and
appropriate indices of aircraft nose down and aircraft nose up trim, as
would be found in an aircraft.

l. Communication radio(s) with display (s) of the radio frequency in
use.

m. Navigation radio (s), including an ADF and a VOR with ILS indicator
(each with an aural identification feature), and a marker beacon receiver.
As applicable, the incremental markings noted below must be present.

1. One-half dot or less for course/glide slope deviation (i.e.,
VOR/ILS)
2. 5 degree or less for bearing deviation for ADF and RMI, as
applicable.

n. A clock with sweep second hand and incremental markings each minute
and second or a timer with a display of minutes and seconds.

o. A magnetic compass with incremental markings each 10 degrees or less.
The compass should display the proper lead or lag during turns.

p. A transponder panel which displays the current transponder setting.

q. A fuel quantity indicator(s) which displays the fuel remaining,
either in analog or digital format, as appropriate for the aircraft or
family of aircraft replicated.

2. All instrument displays listed above must be visible during all flight
operations. The update rate of all displays must provide an image of the
instrument that:

a. Does not appear to be out of focus.
b. Does not appear to "jump" or "step" to a distracting degree during
operation.
c. Does not appear with distracting jagged lines or edges.

3. Display update must be 10 Hz or faster. Each display must sense a
change and react at a value less than the stated. Display updates must
display all changes (within the total range of the replicated instrument)
that are equal to or greater than the values stated below:

a. Airspeed indicator: Change of 5 knots
b. Attitude indicator: Change of 2 degrees in pitch and bank.
c. Altimeter: Change of 10 feet
d. Turn and bank: Change of 1/4 standard rate turn.
e. Heading indicator: Change of 2 degrees
f. VSI: Change of 100fpm
g. Tachometer: Change of 25 rpm or 2% of turbine speed.
h. VOR/ILS: Change of 1 degree for VOR or 1/4 of 1 degree for ILS.
i. ADF: Change of 2 degrees
j. Clock or timer: Change of 1 second

4. Displays must reflect dynamic behavior of an actual aircraft display;
e.g., a VSI reading of 500 fpm must reflect a corresponding movement in
altimeter, and an increase in power must reflect an increase in the rpm
indication or power indicator.

Flight Dynamics Requirements.

1. Flight dynamics of the PCATD must be comparable to the way the training
aircraft represented performs and handles. There is no requirement for a
PCATD to have control loading to exactly replicate any particular aircraft.
An air data handling package is not required for determination of forces to
simulate during the manufacturing process.

2. Aircraft performance parameters (maximum speed, cruise speed, stall
speed, maximum climb rate) must be comparable to the aircraft or family of
aircraft being replicated.

3. Aircraft vertical lift component must change as a function of bank,
comparable to the way the aircraft or family of aircraft being replicated
performs and handles.

4. Changes in flap setting, slat setting (if any), and gear position (if
any) must be accompanied by changes in flight dynamics, comparable to the
way the aircraft or family of aircraft replicated performs and handles.

5. The presence and intensity of wind and turbulence must be reflected in
the handling and performance qualities of the simulated aircraft and must be
comparable to the way the aircraft or family of aircraft replicated performs
and handles.

Instructional Management Requirements.

1. The instructor must be able to pause the system at any point for the
purpose of administering instruction regarding the task.

2. If a training session will begin with the aircraft already in the air
and ready for the performance of a particular procedural task, the
instructor must be able to manipulate the following system parameters
independently of the simulation:

a. Aircraft geographic location
b. Aircraft heading
c. Aircraft airspeed
d. Aircraft altitude
e. Engine power
f. Wind direction, speed and turbulence

3. The system must be capable of recording both a horizontal and vertical
track of aircraft movement for later playback and review.

4. The instructor must be able to disable any of the instruments prior to
the beginning of a training session, and to simulate failure of any of the
instruments during a training session without stopping or freezing the
simulation to effect the failure.

5. The PCATD must have at least a navigational area data base that is
local to the training facility to allow reinforcement of procedures learned
during actual flight in that area. All navigational data must be based on
procedures as published in 14 CFR part 97.

Task Requirements List.

A PCATD having the features specified above will be qualified for use in
procedural training in the instrument flight tasks listed below. These
instrument tasks must be incorporated in an integrated ground and flight
instrument training curriculum:

1. Flight by Reference to Instruments

a. Straight and level flight
b. Change of airspeed
c. Constant airspeed climbs
d. Constant rate climbs
e. Constant airspeed descents
f. Constant rate descents
g. Level turns, including standard rate turns
h. Climbing turns
i. Descending turns
j. Steep turns

2. Abnormal and Emergency Procedures

a. Timed turns
b. Compass turns
c. Instrument failures
d. Procedures for turbulence

3. Radio Navigation Procedures

a. VOR navigation
b. NDB navigation
c. Localizer and ILS navigation
d. VOR holding pattern
e. NDB holding pattern
f. Localizer holding pattern
g. Intersection holding pattern
h. Use of RNAV, including GPS
i. Use of DME

4. Instrument Approach Procedures

a. Precision approaches
b. Nonprecision approaches
c. ILS back course approach
d. Missed approach

5. Communications Procedures

a. Air traffic control clearances

i. Departure clearances
ii. Enroute clearances
iii. Arrival clearances

b. Radio advisories and warnings

i. ATIS and CTAF

ii. SIGMETS, AIRMETS, NOTAMS, FSS communications, and flight
plan changes.

6. Cross-country Procedures

a. Departure
b. Enroute
c. Arrival

END------------------------------------------------------------------------E
ND

The big problem PC 'pilots' will run into if they have really gotten
into 'flying' the PC is that when they get into a real airplane to
learn to fly the instructor will be concentrating on teaching them how
to control the aircraft by looking !outside! at the real world and not
concentrating on the gauges.

As instructors, I have a couple of questions for Walt and Dudley (I
certainly agree that PC sims are nothing near a perfect substitute for air
under your ass). First, wouldn't flight sims help in the important area of
understanding the principles of flight? I would expect that compared to
someone straight off the street, someone who had flown sims would know a lot
more off the bat about the basic physics of flight, as well as how an
airplane works. A significant advantage I'd think (at least during that
stage of instruction). Second, are you referring to PC pilots in general,
or just those that fly commercial flight sims. Questions about required
control pressure would only seem to be valid if you were flying a similar
plane in both (I don't think my experiences flying the virtual Su-27 have
much to do with flying a Cessna).
Also, as far as looking outside goes, I have two general comments.
First, there's a really neat invention that may partially alleviate that.
It's basically a helmet-mounted sight that changes the view on your monitor
based on how you move your head (within limits). Second, and just as a bit
of anecdote, I've heard that's actually common amongst USN fighter who go to
Top Gun (or FWS now) to not look out often enough and rely too heavily on
their radar/avionics. So perhaps the problem isn't limited to PC pilots!
Regards,

Tony