Originally posted by tdracer
Of course now days, nearly all of that training is done in simulators - with obvious cost savings and it's certainly much safer (I've yet to hear of anyone getting hurt when they crashed the simulator ). But I've also noticed that many (most?) simulators are fixed - full motion simulators being far more costly.
Have we gone too far in the simulation direction?
Whilst there are plenty of fixed base simulators (Flight Training Devices, or FTD), the regulatory requirements dictate that Full Flight Simulators (FFS) are used for zero flight time training/testing and most types of recurrent training/testing. In my experience, FTDs are mainly used during aircraft conversion courses, where they are useful for teaching pre-flight and checklist procedures, and for demonstrating the effects of the cockpit controls on aircraft systems.
My big gripe is that FFS are not being used effectively during recurrent training, where they are mainly used to train 'canned' exercises. In many airlines, recurrent training events have become a 'box ticking' exercise where there is huge pressure to complete as many items as possible in a limited amount of time. That satisfies the various regulatory authorities, but does little to prepare pilots for the unexpected events that occur in the real world. That aspect is slowly changing with the introduction of Advanced Qualification Programs and Evidence Based Training by some airlines, but it remains to be seen if they have much of an effect on safety outcomes.