Originally Posted by
jayteeto
Sims are good but you don’t crash if you meet the programmers preset parameters. Many programmers have never flown........
Jayteeto, - its is definitely a problem. However, in my own experience with AH, a lot of input is provided by the Test Flight Department as the flight loop is developed. Each FTSD has an OEM TRI/TRE responsible for ensuring the device performs as best as it can. QTG protocols regularly check the fidelity of the FSTD against a set of known parameters. In my own experience I described above, local TRI/TREs can effect changes if they are justifiable. The software for the systems in a modern AH FSTD comes directly from the aircraft. Of course this has to interfaced with the "simulated" helicopter to ensure the flight loop and displays respond accordingly.
In the end, its a box on legs with a finite range of movement. However, a determination to achieve optimum training value by the team responsible can produce some good results. The bad aspect of FSTD training is when the instructor, either by design or his own poor experience, tells the student its OK to crash because the FSTD is not good enough to simulate the particular exercise. Mostly these scenarios centre around EOLs, UAs and TR Failure conditions. Sadly, these are the very scenarios we simply cannot practice in the real helicopter. It is therefore really important that maximum effort is made to provide positive, sensible training for these events. Quite a few FSTDs I have flown perform better than the local Instructors believe them to be capable of. Rumour and urban legend travels around the local community and is often taken as gospel.
If it is generally accepted that the FSTD doesn't do good EOLs, the amount of training time afforded to Autos and Drills is correspondingly short. In the subject of this accident thread, clearly Dave was a very capable experienced guy. If we breathe out and accept he may not have had sufficient exposure to the conditions he faced that night and therefore his response was not as sharp as it could have been we can start to identify the problem. Regulations and Rules do not generally fix these issues as the people making them are not as experienced as we are in the field. Its up to us to try and extract the juice from these events.
There are not many of us in MEH operations that cannot make a sensible response to CAT A OEI rejects and CTOs. Mainly because these seem to always be the flavour of the day on our OPCs. However, the law allows us, for example, to conduct TR failures once every 3 years if we are dumb enough the accept it. It calls for an Auto every 6 months but no EOL in MEH. I don't want to be radical, but maybe more FSTD time should be apportioned to these unusual handling exercises. EASA is almost there. It demands "Startle" and "Resilience" training during recurrent cycles but it does specify which events lead to these conditions. Its left to the Operator to decide. If we think about it, Startle effect comes from the pilot being unfamiliar with what is happening to the helicopter. Only intensive progressive FSTD training can overcome this effect.
Good pilots, poorly or inadequately trained, are left only with their internal resources to cope. We see time after time, these resources alone don't seem to be enough to ensure survival.