HC....both Old and Bold....but fortunately I was less bold than old.,,,that is why the ratio is getting better daily too!
One of the reasons I sound so reactionary.....I have seen these Pipe Dreams before.....where without adequate vision, control, and study....have resulted in less than stellar results. A simple example.....the US Army in its infinite wisdom issued one Parachute to every helicopter unit for use during Maintenance Test Flights. I discovered this when I had to sign for the thing in my Unit as part of my assigned Collateral Duty as the Technical Supply Officer. The fact a Chinook had a minimum crew of three had escaped the Army's brightest Aviation Safety folks. Since then....I have not had a lot of faith in edicts handed down by Government based upon Father Knows Best thinking.
My questions remain....who defines "Hazardous Maneuver", the training curriculum to be taught, the standards to which they shall be taught, how to certify the standards and establish certification standards, determine what level Sim is appropriate for which maneuver, which maneuvers are generic and which are type and model specify, the configuration of the training devices to ensure replication of the controls and equipment the Sim is to reproduce.....oh the list goes on!
Just how complicated, complex, bureaucratically, burdensome, and costly does CASA want to make this exercise?
Can I use a JetRanger Sim for McD-500 engine offs.....or must it be a 206BIII and not a 206L4.....for tail rotor failures....do we have to have a Sim that acts l ike a wrong way turning French Product or can we use an old Bell UH-1H SFTS?
If CASA is going to "require" (insist, demand, enact, force, extort) this practice they better get their Ducks in a row or it shall be a real Dog's Breakfast for those in the Industry who have to pay for it!
I am not against Sim training....quite the opposite having done instruction at two Factory schools.....but I do want it to be realistic, efficient, and designed to improve/enhance Pilot training, proficiency, and understanding of the aircraft they are operating.
If the end result is more cost, more bureaucracy, and false input that actually degrades safety.....then I am all against it!