Level D sim

[John Grier]

I'm currently a right seat instructor in CE 680 and the Challenger 300. I'm having trouble with the idea that the time spent training in these sims don't count as flight experience required for an ATP rating. I've learned way more flying right seat in the sim than I have flying in circles dropping sky divers.

Is there way to petition the FAA's ruling on counting formal level D training towards the total time needed for the ATP rating? If they will allow 100 hours why not 200?

Flying SIC in a sim is much more valuable experience than sitting right seat on a charter flight.

 

[BobDDuck]

What's the worst that could happen when you make a bad decision in a sim.

What's the worst that could happen if you make a bad decision in an actual airplane.

 

[Retired in SAN]

Unfortunately John, that's the common mindset in the flying community. The fact that you are sharpening your skills repeating and honing emergency procedures in the sim all day bears less importance than someone doing little more than turning money in to noise. If I had a choice of my perfect aviation job it would be training pilots in a level D simulator all day. The knowledge and confidence in being able to handle just about every scenario in the real aircraft with little effort is satisfaction enough for me.

 

[Cptnchia]

You may be successful in getting the FAA to allow it, but then what? Most airlines, especially legacies, are not going to accept that for a flying position. They'll want to see actual flying time, not sim time. If your goal is to do something in aviation other than airline flying, I would check to see if employers would be OK with it.

 

[PilotDefenseAttorney]

http://www.faa.gov/regulations_policies/rulemaking/petition/

 

[pilotmec]

Same basic scenario for Flight Instructor. You can log time but are you actually flying the plane all the time.

 

[Johnny Beau Bekkestad]

Same basic scenario for Flight Instructor. You can log time but are you actually flying the plane all the time.

That is a very interesting point, cause when you instruct in order to get TT for an ATP, that does not mean you get any more proficient. I've had students from PPL all the way up to instructor, usually i've taken the same student up to those ratings. Which means that the longer the time goes with the same student or any more advanced student that is. The less work you will need to do as an instructor.

 

[Patrick]

While it's certainly an interesting paradox, I think Bob has another good point, where no matter how much you are learning in the sim (and I concur- it's an incredible learning environment), the fact that there's no risk to be had, I think is where the difference is.

 

[JeppUpdater]

The sim is also very monotonous and every training facility has their standardized lessons. Seeing them day in and day out, you're going to become very familiar with what's required of the crew. You may get absolutely incredible at memorizing and performing emergency procedures, etc.

None of that translates to being operationally efficient in the actual airplane. I learned a ton in the sims at SimuFlite, Flight Safety, and in in-house training at a couple of companies, but on IOE and in your first few months a pilot is where you really learn the airplane and experience flying the line is what builds your decision making abilities that are expected of a good Captain.

 

[Fly_Unity]

Many companies dont really care how well you can shoot an ILS down to minimums or how awesome you are at the flows. Were looking for actual experiance such as, customer service, loading baggage, passenger briefs that make the customers feel good, keeping the plane clean, making wise weather/mx desicions that in a sim can be black and white. Even Instructing you can get some of that experiance. Right Seat in a Sim?

 

[Ajax]

When did ATP become a rating

:stir:

 

[pilotmec]

When did ATP become a rating

:stir:

It's a certificate. I don't see where this comment came from.

 

[Ajax]

It's a certificate. I don't see where this comment came from.

Op said ATP rating

 

[pilotmec]

I see it now.

 

[matthew]

Same basic scenario for Flight Instructor. You can log time but are you actually flying the plane all the time.

I would argue that you've shown your ability to fly, now you're developing your ability to command.

 

[typhoonpilot]

The sim is also very monotonous and every training facility has their standardized lessons. Seeing them day in and day out, you're going to become very familiar with what's required of the crew. You may get absolutely incredible at memorizing and performing emergency procedures, etc.

None of that translates to being operationally efficient in the actual airplane. I learned a ton in the sims at SimuFlite, Flight Safety, and in in-house training at a couple of companies, but on IOE and in your first few months a pilot is where you really learn the airplane and experience flying the line is what builds your decision making abilities that are expected of a good Captain.

This may be true in the corporate world, but at a good training department in the airlines I would have to disagree.

At my previous airlines we did a number of training LOFTS for new captains. One hot weather/monsoon; one cold weather/de-icing; and one ETOPS. These were full on 4 hour sessions with numerous issues relating to the specific situation. They culminated in a Line Oriented Examination, which was a 4th four hour session. After all that the new captain certainly had built his decision making abilities expected of a good captain. Certainly they had built some in their time as a first officer and at previous companies, but probably never put it into practice as required in the LOFTs.

What I found conducting the LOFTS and the Exams is that the only way you can see the true measure of a pilot and their aviation decision making/CRM/flight deck management skills/knowledge is to put them under pressure. Not ridiculous amounts of pressure, but a slow build up of a situation like it would/could occur in the real world. Slot time, de-icing, passenger issues, little non-normal, weather, etc. The only place you can combine that all in a controlled environment to teach the requisite skills is in a simulator. That kind of training and experience is priceless.



Typhoonpilot

 

[BobDDuck]

What I found conducting the LOFTS and the Exams is that the only way you can see the true measure of a pilot and their aviation decision making/CRM/flight deck management skills/knowledge is to put them under pressure.

How "choose your own adventure" are you lofts? I've now been through them at two different companies and in both cases, every scenario I saw allowed for very little decision making (assuming you didn't make any "bad" decisions). I always felt like it was an old school first person shooter video game, where every side street is blocked off by an abandoned car, all the doors, except the one you need to go through, are locked and you can only look out the windows but even though you can break the glass in them, you can't go through them.

Examples include, after moderate cabin leak forcing an emergency decent, even though the airplane is structurally ok, and your destination airport is 50 miles away, passengers are "sick" so you HAVE to divert to the airport right underneath you. Or, after getting compressor stalls, pull the power back doesn't clear it so you have no call other than to shut down an engine.

I'd rather see guys have to decide, do we divert or not. How bad is the "damage" we can't see? Or, should we shut down the engine that is is still producing some power although it is stalling every once in a while? Or do we leave it and hope it holds together all the way to the runway?

I've never felt like I've had to make any sort of decisions in a loft. Sure, it pushes you to run the QRH and practice CRM, but the flow is almost all preordained.

 

[Patrick]

How "choose your own adventure" are you lofts? I've now been through them at two different companies and in both cases, every scenario I saw allowed for very little decision making (assuming you didn't make any "bad" decisions). I always felt like it was an old school first person shooter video game, where every side street is blocked off by an abandoned car, all the doors, except the one you need to go through, are locked and you can only look out the windows but even though you can break the glass in them, you can't go through them.

Examples include, after moderate cabin leak forcing an emergency decent, even though the airplane is structurally ok, and your destination airport is 50 miles away, passengers are "sick" so you HAVE to divert to the airport right underneath you. Or, after getting compressor stalls, pull the power back doesn't clear it so you have no call other than to shut down an engine.

I'd rather see guys have to decide, do we divert or not. How bad is the "damage" we can't see? Or, should we shut down the engine that is is still producing some power although it is stalling every once in a while? Or do we leave it and hope it holds together all the way to the runway?

I've never felt like I've had to make any sort of decisions in a loft. Sure, it pushes you to run the QRH and practice CRM, but the flow is almost all preordained.

What I've done is very similar, and I agree that it forces good CRM (hopefully, at least) and makes you an expert at running through the QRH, you are indeed pushed down a certain path, with little room to deviate.

I'd prefer to see multiple paths to go down, each with a unique set of challenges. Sure, one or two paths are not going to work- and that's a learning experience for the pilot, but the other paths can all have good outcomes- if proper steps and procedures are followed.

The only time that I had an instructor who really thought "outside the box," and threw us scenarios that seemed totally out of "left field" (but were certainly plausible in the real world), I thoroughly enjoyed the session and walked away feeling like I really and truly learned something. I wish more were like this.

 

[BobDDuck]

I'd prefer to see multiple paths to go down, each with a unique set of challenges. Sure, one or two paths are not going to work- and that's a learning experience for the pilot, but the other paths can all have good outcomes- if proper steps and procedures are followed.

At my previous gig we had a scenario given to a very senior crew who, after block out had a equipment failure of the sim (can't remember what it was) that coupled with an MEL that was part of the scenario meant no go. So they they taxied back in to the gate and that was the end of the checkride.

 

[typhoonpilot]

How "choose your own adventure" are you lofts? I've now been through them at two different companies and in both cases, every scenario I saw allowed for very little decision making (assuming you didn't make any "bad" decisions). I always felt like it was an old school first person shooter video game, where every side street is blocked off by an abandoned car, all the doors, except the one you need to go through, are locked and you can only look out the windows but even though you can break the glass in them, you can't go through them.

The rules under which we conducted LOFTS were:

1) Only 1 MEL allowed pre-dispatch
2) One minor non-normal allowed at any time
3) One major non-normal/emergency, which could have follow on effects within reason
4) Any number of distractions within reason ( pax, weather, cabin crew, ATC )

A well constructed training LOFT would easily have 3 or 4 possible avenues to go down. Of those, 1 was probably the best choice, one okay but not the best, one not very bright, and one really eye opening. To construct these LOFTS with all the flight plans, maintenance logs, enroute weather, and other real world paper work was very time consuming for the instructor.

Training LOFTS allow for stopping the sim to discuss decision making, CRM, management, procedures, etc. The Exam does not.

I'd give some examples, but am pressed for time now. Maybe later.



Typhoonpilot