ZFT
You wrote
In the initial phase of simulator production a Malfunction Definition Document and Acceptance Test Manuals are supplied to the end user for approval. These documents detail exactly what the malfunction is and exactly what characteristics simulated systems will exhibit. On more modern simulators this Malfunction Defn Doc is even being linked into the Instructors Station help system
Point well taken. But, herein also lies the problem if I understand your words correctly. In my most recent escapade (as well as one before it on the other side of the world). I was dealing with a brand new simulator. The end users in both cases were airlines. Therefore, they end up having some say in what happens when a malfunction is programmed, as well as accepting the final result. In many cases, this is where the lack of knowledge of the systems can be a factor.
As an example: In the sim I dealt with last year, one problem was a simple generator failure. In the CRJ 100/200 a failure of the right generator for any reason (including as a result of engine failure) will result in the loss of the autopilot for about five seconds due to the way that the power feeds into the FCC's. This is (unfortunately) as big a truism for these aircraft as the forces of gravity. Obviously the guy who ordered the sim, the guy who accepted it and the local TRE all forgot this basic bit of groundschool background knowledge, and the sim was put into service (Level D) with no autopilot failure ever with a gen fail. I was the first user of the sim, and snagged it on day one. We "lived with it" for two weeks until the manufacturer sent over some fresh code to introduce the correct result. This was of course wrong/incomplete and we waited another week for the full fix. Several other malfunctions reflected the 700/900 version of the aircraft.
In my recent experience, several similar (although slightly less obvious) faults still exist, even after the airline-owner used the box for over a year, went belly up and the box was casually dry leased for another year, before I showed up. Again, the only help had to come directly from the sim manufacturer even with an expert team on staff that was maintaining at least seven sims. Now, that's not their fault. The fault lies in the fact that the original owner didn't know or care that there were these problems.
I'm sorry for the babbling here folks. I'm just trying to explain what I've already said. Why aren't the manufacturers forced to build to a defined set of standards in these respects when they already are with respect to basic handling, visuals, etc? To me there is a lot more negative training to be had due to incorrect system response than the realism of the airport visual scenes. That would fix almost all of my problems!
