Rudder pressure low v1 engine failure
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: AEP
Age: 80
Posts: 1,420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simulators are not perfect
Quoting John T. above -
The other thing to keep firmly in mind is fidelity... the particular sim may, or may not, represent the aeroplane's dynamics well.
Definitely a concern about "some" simulators (sorry, Microsoft Play Station 747 captains)...
xxx
I personally find simulators quite similar to the airplanes (after all, simulators are just training devices) that they are supposed to represent. Some are better than others, obviously. One thing I find simulators to somewhat being exagerating, is "instruments" pitch and/or bank effect on vertical speeds and flight paths. But that exageration is a "plus" in teaching to fly instruments approaches such as an ILS. If you are mastering instrument flying in a simulator, you are likely to do good in the aircraft.
xxx
One thing however is the visual portion of the simulator. That is, the effect on the picture "you see" in front of you... Bank (as seen on the visual) is no problem, you bank 20º, you get 20º with your "horizon". Where there is a lack of "fidelity" is (somewhat) on the pitch axis, and to an extreme on the yaw axis translation of "sim movements/effects" to the picture you see on the visual.
xxx
Let me explain here. And I got an explanation...
Scenario - A takeoff with an "engine failure". You counteract the asymetric trust by a somewhat "slight" rudder input. But visually, your whole picture swerves violently from nose 30º+ left to 30º+ right of the runway. This is definitely not realistic to airplane dynamic reactions.
xxx
In the late 1980s, I had to go through a PanAm classroom/simulator training week of new check-captains/instructors and examiners. We discussed the subject of simulators good and bad points, and the "visual cues". We had that day, the chief simulator maintenance technician to give us some info.
xxx
He explained that the "visual" system was based on the "simulator" hydraulic inputs to the visual system computer (and tons of technicalities). Talking about "yaw axis" visual effect - the picture is using a yaw axis (vertical axis) which is the simulator itself (2 or 3 feet behind the pilot seats). In the "real airplane", the yaw axis (in a 747) is some 110 feet behind your flight deck. If you "yaw" around a "simulator axis", the visual effect is completely different from a real 747 airplane. The "short arm" amplifies the visual effect.
xxx
Same explanation followed for the pitch axis... although the visual inputs for pitch axis seem not to create problems to pilot trainees. The result, as we all discussed, is to pay "less" attention to visual cues, as compared to instrument cues. You basic "T scan" is primordial for any maneuvers.
xxx
No wonder that most pilots say (after their first flight in the "real airplane") that the "actual" aircraft is easier to fly than the simulator at the academy. Definitely my opinion too.
xxx
As John T says, I also try to wrap-up a 2 hrs session in 90 minutes and play funny games with the guys, off curriculum, i.e. 3 engines "out" approaches in a 747... and try myself new "compounded failures and emergencies". Play the scenario of the El Al Cargo Amsterdam double engine failure, and try to survive (which we can often survive). We also try to fly "Al Haynes" no hydraulics approaches, etc... it is your simulator, enjoy, have fun... and learn.
xxx
PantLoad - always be nice to your sim instructors or check-captains, and do not forget after your 2 liters of sweat, and paperwork, the debriefings are at the bar, and the tab is on you, for your F/O, F/E and me. At least 2 rounds, and maybe 3 rounds (to excuse that mistake you made and I closed my eyes for) -
xxx
Happy contrails
The other thing to keep firmly in mind is fidelity... the particular sim may, or may not, represent the aeroplane's dynamics well.
Definitely a concern about "some" simulators (sorry, Microsoft Play Station 747 captains)...
xxx
I personally find simulators quite similar to the airplanes (after all, simulators are just training devices) that they are supposed to represent. Some are better than others, obviously. One thing I find simulators to somewhat being exagerating, is "instruments" pitch and/or bank effect on vertical speeds and flight paths. But that exageration is a "plus" in teaching to fly instruments approaches such as an ILS. If you are mastering instrument flying in a simulator, you are likely to do good in the aircraft.
xxx
One thing however is the visual portion of the simulator. That is, the effect on the picture "you see" in front of you... Bank (as seen on the visual) is no problem, you bank 20º, you get 20º with your "horizon". Where there is a lack of "fidelity" is (somewhat) on the pitch axis, and to an extreme on the yaw axis translation of "sim movements/effects" to the picture you see on the visual.
xxx
Let me explain here. And I got an explanation...
Scenario - A takeoff with an "engine failure". You counteract the asymetric trust by a somewhat "slight" rudder input. But visually, your whole picture swerves violently from nose 30º+ left to 30º+ right of the runway. This is definitely not realistic to airplane dynamic reactions.
xxx
In the late 1980s, I had to go through a PanAm classroom/simulator training week of new check-captains/instructors and examiners. We discussed the subject of simulators good and bad points, and the "visual cues". We had that day, the chief simulator maintenance technician to give us some info.
xxx
He explained that the "visual" system was based on the "simulator" hydraulic inputs to the visual system computer (and tons of technicalities). Talking about "yaw axis" visual effect - the picture is using a yaw axis (vertical axis) which is the simulator itself (2 or 3 feet behind the pilot seats). In the "real airplane", the yaw axis (in a 747) is some 110 feet behind your flight deck. If you "yaw" around a "simulator axis", the visual effect is completely different from a real 747 airplane. The "short arm" amplifies the visual effect.
xxx
Same explanation followed for the pitch axis... although the visual inputs for pitch axis seem not to create problems to pilot trainees. The result, as we all discussed, is to pay "less" attention to visual cues, as compared to instrument cues. You basic "T scan" is primordial for any maneuvers.
xxx
No wonder that most pilots say (after their first flight in the "real airplane") that the "actual" aircraft is easier to fly than the simulator at the academy. Definitely my opinion too.
xxx
As John T says, I also try to wrap-up a 2 hrs session in 90 minutes and play funny games with the guys, off curriculum, i.e. 3 engines "out" approaches in a 747... and try myself new "compounded failures and emergencies". Play the scenario of the El Al Cargo Amsterdam double engine failure, and try to survive (which we can often survive). We also try to fly "Al Haynes" no hydraulics approaches, etc... it is your simulator, enjoy, have fun... and learn.
xxx
PantLoad - always be nice to your sim instructors or check-captains, and do not forget after your 2 liters of sweat, and paperwork, the debriefings are at the bar, and the tab is on you, for your F/O, F/E and me. At least 2 rounds, and maybe 3 rounds (to excuse that mistake you made and I closed my eyes for) -
xxx
Happy contrails
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: AEP
Age: 80
Posts: 1,420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Check-captains
Basil - please - dont try to be politically correct.
xxx
The reason is actually combination of alzheimer, dislexia or digestion "siesta" of the TRE...
Did I really snored that loud...?
xxx
Happy contrails - zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
xxx
The reason is actually combination of alzheimer, dislexia or digestion "siesta" of the TRE...
Did I really snored that loud...?
xxx
Happy contrails - zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
