leftanddownabit
Quote:
|
As I said in answer to a previous post, the circling approach scenario is a relatively small part of the FFS training requirement to hang such a costly change on. Operators can by all means specify such a FOV when they purchase simulators, but should it really be considered the minimum necessary?
|
Why is the 180 – 200 FOV a costly ‘change on’? The latest LCoS systems can easily support 200 degrees with a 3 channel system and in fact the existing 180 optics can almost be stretched to achieved 200 as well (during a recent upgrade we experimented with optically stretching the FOV and found we could achieve 197)
With a new build, the delta between 180/200 optics should be negligible.
I would also dispute circling approaches being a relatively small part of the FFS training requirements. This may well be true for some operators who only fly into major international airfields, but there are many other operators who typically operate into airfields with very limited facilities where circling approaches are the order of the day. It is these operators who require extended FOVs, highly detailed databases etc.