I have a couple of concerns here...
1. The equipment is likely to affect the compass....thus it either cannot be used or the compass must be swung with it on or off OR a plaque detailing the error when ON would have to be fitted.
Incidently I have the same concerns over GPS receivers - some of which come very close to the compass...but people seem to think they are untouchable due to having GPS on board....anyway...
2. Um...If the instructor is to evaluate what is going on then the instructor must be wearing a headset too. This then leads to other problems...
3. Loss of situational awareness by those involved - will they still be able to quite clearly see obstacles in the REAL environment. What about controlled airspace? Focusing on this equipment could cuase MORE problems - and we have enough of those in the UK...
4. Loss of lookout - how will continuous lookout by instructor and student be maintained?
5. stall/spin avoidance - we are talking about operating a real aicraft in response to an artificial environment. This seriously concerns me - especially when you say simulation of landing...I can just see the stall/spin accidents starting to happen already.
Not trying to put a damper on it - but operating the real aircraft in the real environment is hard enough for a student - having them think about the real environment, the simulated environment AND the aircraft in both real and simulated environments seems to me to perhaps overload the student rather than enhance their training....
I can see where you are coming from...but how many lives will this *really* save - most accidents in the UK are caused by
1. Loss of control in VMC (stall/spin)
2. CFIT
How will this system particularly solve these issues?
AFAIK those pilots who do carry out forced landings from EFATO, E/F @ height etc etc tend to walk away and we are talking about a reasonable investment in equipment here....so where is the payback?
Where is your information regarding the current dangers of low-level training/manoeuvres? Im just curious...
Very interesting though - Good to see some lateral thinking here...about time there were some new ideas in the industry - as opposed to replacing us all with computers...
BTW...Your new method isnt as perfect as you think...for instance the lack of ground-effect, turbulence & wind-shear encountered at low-level. These will not be felt as the aircraft is not encountering them. On glide approaches you can readily see the student screw it up because they didnt take account of sink due to rotor off of buildings...again - these will not be encountered using your method. However - simulators *can* do this...mind you I still prefer the real environment..