Before simulators?

[donaldflyer]

I keep reading about pilots' simulator sessions, presumably done for purposes of training, refresher work and re-validating licences (?). How were these processes conducted before the advent of contemporary computing power (in, say, the 60s and 70s)?

[BelArgUSA]

Initially, (World War 2 years) - there were "Link Trainers"
Was the manner for pilots to learn to fly instruments.
But all the rest of training was made in airplanes.
xxx
Back then, people learned in Tiger Moths, in Harvards... then went to Spitfires.
The airlines trained in the actual airplanes.
I recall first airline F/O assignments to be RHS on cargo C-47/DC-3s...
xxx
I joined airlines in the late 1960s... the first simulators were crude.
Few had motion, and visual equipment.
I started as pilot trained as flight engineer in 727.
Even had to demonstrate manual gear extension in the airplane.
Then, later, as new 727 F/O, had to do a few "touch and goes" after "simulator" training.
Did it like that, for the 707 and the DC-8 as well.
xxx
Then came the 1980s, with excellent simulators, motion and visual.
The "real airplane" was EASIER to handle than... these simulators.
My first trip as captain on the 747... was the first time I landed one.
Never had been a F/O or F/E on type.
Just had a check-captain with me, in the co-pilot seat... and 300 passengers.
The only seat I had experience with in the 747 was... the toilet seat.
After my 747 first landing (ever) was FRA... I said "is that all there is...?" -
And I think I recall the passengers clapping their hands.
Only the cabin crew knew
After some 25 hrs and 3 landings, the check-captain said "so long, go kill yourself...!"
xxx
:8
Happy contrails

[WHBM]

Before simulators got good enough the training was indeed done on actual aircraft - as some still do.

Concorde must have had a simulator but live training was also performed in circuits (patterns to our US cousins) throughout its service life, generally at Shannon.

There had been a steady attrition of aircraft over the years, well into the jet era, of aircraft on type conversion training being lost in engine failure/go-around scenarios and similar, when the trainee lost it and the check crew didn't grab the situation in time.

[SNS3Guppy]

Donaldflyer,

Simulators do more than just replicate the airpalne. They make advanced training cost-effective, and they enable a lot of training that can't be duplicated in the real airplane. We can safely reject a takeoff or do something wrong in the airplane and suffer no more than bent pride and resetting the simulator to do it again.

By it's nature, a simulator replicates the cockpit of the airplane, and the responses to certain actions we make in the cockpit. Some simulators are motion, some have visual effects, some have nothing at all out there...don't move, don't do anything. Before we go into a simulator session, we often spend time reviewing drills in a mockup that has only paper instruments. We sit in our crew positions and go over drills, etc. Then we go get in the real simulator, and both of those only after having spend a week to five weeks or so in the classroom preparing.

Simulators have been around for a very long time. As a kid we made them just as described in the boy scout manuals, with a stick and ropes that could make the airplane bank and pitch and roll...a little. Since the second world war, the Link trainer had been available to teach basic instrument skills. Simulators, including motion simulators have been around for a long time. While they've continued to get better and more sophisticated, they've always provided only the amount of benefit proportionate the the effort of that of the pilots undertaking the training. It's not the computers...it's the way the training is given, and received.

When I did my first corporate job, I used the Sabreliner 60, and that was in the oldest simulator offered by Flight Safety International...the oldest one they have, and are still using today. The sabre is a complciated airplane mechanically...more so than a lot of things today, with a lot of relays and components which could fail. We spent the first hour in the simulator just dealing with steering runaways at low speeds. That's not something you can duplicate in the airplane, and can cause serious airplane damage and personnel injury...but we could do over and over in the simulator, before moving on.

The most important part of the sim that makes it realistic isn't the motion, or the computer graphics or the sound. It's the experience one brings into the sim. The sim doesn't make the airplane real...one's experiene elsewhere is transferred naturally into the sim, and that helps make it real. It's realistic enough today, and the simulators are advanced and good enough that one can do an entire type rating for an airplane without ever setting foot in the real thing. Without that level of sophistication, however, even the older simulators have been providing valueable service for many, many years. I flew simuflites oldest simulator,the Learjet 35 sim (I think it was their oldest), and it did an excellent job of replicating the airplane in some respects, but had performance built into it that just doesn't happen in the real thing.

I've met several pilots who had Learjet type ratings, for example who believed that approaching a high speed the ailerons would slam side to side...because when they were shown aileron buzz and mach effects in the sim, that's what happened. As it happens, I've had the real airplane to the speeds where that's reported to happen in the sim, and that's not what really occurs. The characteristics in the sim were exaggerated and programmed to make a point, as a teaching tool in that case, not to replicate the very mild habits that the airplane really displays.

That's a little off subject, but suffice it to say that sims have been around for a long time, and even if they don't precisely duplicate the airplane in the way that current simulators do, they still have provided some valueable training material. Before computers were logic cicruits made of other kinds of switches, some better than others. Many didn't even move, but the instrumentation did...and that was the whole purpose behind the sim in the first place. It provided an environment that was a big step up from a paper mockup in which one could perform the various drills, see the appropriate reactions on the instrumentation in the cockpit, and learn procedure.

I've flown for other operators where everything was done in the airplane. It's often said that the cockpit is a terrible learning environment...and it's very, very true.

[411A]

It's often said that the cockpit is a terrible learning environment...and it's very, very true.

Can't agree.
The best FD learning environment is....'do it right the next time, dammit, or you're out on your ear.'

Works every time...:E

....when the trainee lost it and the check crew didn't grab the situation in time.

Or, when an FAA inspector reached up and switched OFF the rudder boost during an engine out go-around in a 707.
Nasty business, that.:{

All recorded on the CVR, the airline later was presented with a brand new airplane, courtesy of the FAA.
And, FAA inspectors were told, keep hands to self.

[donaldflyer]

Thanks, PPRuners, for some very interesting replies. (And pleased, also, to have started a wee debate - don't stop now... ).

[mutt]

This in an old style Link Miles simulator.... I'm sure that some of the posters above learned to fly in these :)


http://files.myopera.com/Hijazi2/albums/565372/thumbs/Link.jpg_thumb.jpg http://files.myopera.com/Hijazi2/albums/565372/thumbs/Link1.jpg_thumb.jpg

Mutt

[Doors to Automatic]

The early airliner simulators had a very crude visual system involving a camera running over a physical model of terrain which would either be laid out on the floor or wall mounted. The "landscape" would typically only have one airport allowing for take-off and landing practice as well as circuits.

Image:TL39 Flight Simulator Visual System.jpg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:TL39_Flight_Simulator_Visual_System.jpg)