Using Flight simulators for LSA flight training

[Paul Hamilton]

I am putting together a training system for using flight simulators for training in LSA at:
http://simulatorflighttraining.com/
Am focusing on Microsoft FSX and X-Plane.

Trying to get all LSA aircraft for both these flight simulators to provide options for pilots so they can find the airplane they want and have it simulate the LSA as close as possible.

So far I have tested the Zodiac in X-Plane
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGNeEqOaru8

and personally plan on testing the CTLS.

Any suggestions, recommendations, thought, and/or experience any one has for flight simulators and/or LSA on flight simulators is appreciated.

[Aerco]

It's nice to see somebody going against the grain of most instructors and actually endorsing the appropriate use of simulators for flight training. The majority will give a student hell if he admits to being a sim-flyer. Maybe it's vested interest, who knows? I personally found it very helpful during the training for my private and once I get my Sport Pilot CFI I have no hesitation in using it to help a student understand what is going on. Especially if there are accurate models of the aircraft he/she will actually train on, with identical panel layouts etc.

Currently I fly a Cub and hope to teach on one for a while eventually; there is a very accurate model of a J3 available from a2asimulations.com and I am very impressed with its flying qualities compared to the real thing. At the very least it is useful for demonstrating on the ground, what you will be doing in the air. The ability to freeze certain situations and explain what is happening is also very useful - wish we had a pause button in real airplanes!

I'm all for it.

[Paul Hamilton]

Aerco,
Yes there is big controversy over using flight simulators for flight training.

Yes there are some disadvantages but I am seriously looking at developing a program using flight simulators to aid in primary flight training and figure out how to mitigate the disadvantages. I do not think there are more benefits than problems. It is hard to change old ways of thinking.

As far as the flight simulator models, the J3 cub is offered with Microsoft FSX , I have a Cub Crafters by 3 point for X-Plane. The J3 cub is probably the most used FS model out there. Have you thought of evaluating different types of cubs?

Are you using FSX or X-Plane for your a2asimulations.com model?

It would be nice to get someone such as your self to look at all the models since you fly one?

[rsteele]

I've used the X-Plane Tecnam Echo Super, which is the plane I did my SP training in. The good is its performance is very close to the actual plane, including climb, glide, landing, power settings, flaps. The bad is that it doesn't actually fly like the real thing. In particular, the real plane requires an enormous amount of right rudder on take off and climb, where the sim doesn't; you can fly it with your feet on the floor.

I'm currently building a Zenith 601/650 (probably a blend of the two) and I fly the 601 sim a lot. It's by far my favorite to fly as it's performs will, behaves well and is just a lot of fun. You could make my year by telling me the plane flies a lot like the sim.

Ron

[deltafox]

While it should be close, I don't think the 'flying' part of the simulator is its strength. (You certainly wouldn't learn to land with one.) However they excel at procedures and establishing/practicing scan patterns.

[Aerco]

Aerco,
Yes there is big controversy over using flight simulators for flight training.

Yes there are some disadvantages but I am seriously looking at developing a program using flight simulators to aid in primary flight training and figure out how to mitigate the disadvantages. I do not think there are more benefits than problems. It is hard to change old ways of thinking.

As far as the flight simulator models, the J3 cub is offered with Microsoft FSX , I have a Cub Crafters by 3 point for X-Plane. The J3 cub is probably the most used FS model out there. Have you thought of evaluating different types of cubs?

Are you using FSX or X-Plane for your a2asimulations.com model?

It would be nice to get someone such as your self to look at all the models since you fly one?

The a2a model of the J3 I use on FSX; there is an enhanced version (the "Accusim" pacakge) but I have not been able to get that to work bug-free and it cuts the frame rate dramatically. No wonder, since it simulates details like cold/warm engines and even engine wear, among a myriad of other things. Not really necessary for a training aid. But a2a's J3 model is superior to the standard FSX version, by a long way. Ground handling especially is more realistic; the standard FSX model is actually far harder to land in a crosswind than the real thing!

I have X-plane and while I appreciate its elegantly engineered, real-world, physics-based platform, this does not really make much difference to the end user and FSX is more user friendly.

Many of the aftermarket models out there, some free to download, bear little resemblance to the real thing as far as flight characteristics are concerned. They are simply look-alike "skins" with crudely copied and modified flight models from existing models. Thus you have DH Beavers that fly like C172s etc. Not really advisable to use such things for real world training.

But again, the a2a Cub is certainly a cut above the rest as far as realism goes.


Peter, Corona CA

[Paul Hamilton]

The a2a model of the J3 I use on FSX; there is an enhanced version (the "Accusim" pacakge) but I have not been able to get that to work bug-free and it cuts the frame rate dramatically. No wonder, since it simulates details like cold/warm engines and even engine wear, among a myriad of other things. Not really necessary for a training aid. But a2a's J3 model is superior to the standard FSX version, by a long way. Ground handling especially is more realistic; the standard FSX model is actually far harder to land in a crosswind than the real thing!

I have X-plane and while I appreciate its elegantly engineered, real-world, physics-based platform, this does not really make much difference to the end user and FSX is more user friendly.

Many of the aftermarket models out there, some free to download, bear little resemblance to the real thing as far as flight characteristics are concerned. They are simply look-alike "skins" with crudely copied and modified flight models from existing models. Thus you have DH Beavers that fly like C172s etc. Not really advisable to use such things for real world training.

But again, the a2a Cub is certainly a cut above the rest as far as realism goes.


Peter, Corona CA

Peter,
Very helpful. Can I use your evaluation of the cub model at my web site? http://simulatorflighttraining.com/ to be helpful to others flying cubs? Not sure exactly how I am going to do this but would appreciate your experience at flying the airplane and comparing the models?

Yes as much as I like the X-Plane, I have found the FSX to be better in a number of ways. Overall, I feel both should be options depending on the goal of the user.

In fact the Google flight simulator is pretty bad with only 2 airplanes, but it has a national airspace plug in that I feel makes it a useful tool.

[Aerco]

Certainly, feel free to use anything I post here.

The Cub I fly at our club is a 1946 model, with a 'hybrid' engine; it's a C-85, but with a different accessory case - no starter, no electrical system. The propeller is not perfectly matched to this engine and we're limited to only 2350 rpm; so we're not getting anything like 85 hp. At a wild guess I would say it is similar to a light Cub with an A-75. Other than that it perfectly stock and typical of a well-maintained Cub.

I don't have a huge amount of experience in yet, but that is probably helpful in judging the usefulness of using the simulator. I originally learned to fly on two seat Drifters, but have not done much with tailwheels for years. I got my tailwheel endorsement last year in a Citabria and then joined this club. I had about 6 flights with an instructor before they let me loose in the Cub.

Predictably my early difficulties were with getting the flare just right and always landing with the stick fully aft for the three-pointers and getting wheel landings right and not turning them into awful bounces. Flying from the rear seat is an additional problem with the Cub. In all this the a2a version of the Cub on FSX has helped me a lot; judging the nose attitude by where the horizon crosses the cowling and and staying centered by watching the edges of the runway peripherally. The sight picture is the very same as the real thing, but you must remember to set your default eyepoint the same way as you see from the real thing - this would vary according to your stature.

All I can say is that my wheel landings improved dramatically after a lot of simulator practice. I would say I did about 4 hours of practice on the simulator between my last checkout flight with the instructor and the next time I tried it on my own. I went from doing awkward, bouncy wheelers to being able to pin it on every time, precisely where I want it.

I was quite amazed. Of course I could have learned this on the real thing, but being able to do them over and over again without going around the pattern every time is helpful and of course a lot cheaper.

Crosswind practice is another area where practice on a sim helps, in my opinion, especially for taildraggers. You can practice in winds that you may not ever want to fly a real airplane in.

I would add that decent hardware like good rudder pedals is essential, of course. Some things like the control responsiveness can be tailored to resemble more closely the real thing, but I found the a2a model a very good facsimile of the real thing right out of the box.

I know opinion on this will be sharply divided, but if you treat it as a learning tool and not a game and if you sit down and actually analyze everything that goes wrong (or right), it is a great asset for any student pilot.

[Helen]

Paul, while I normally agree with your posts, I couldn't disagree more with promoting flight simulator use for light sport training. While I don't "give a student hell" who has used such, I marked differences between those who have and those who haven't. Those who have I need to spend time with breaking them from watching instruments. That whole law of primacy thing, you know. Not quite so bad in a side-by-side plane where I can cover the panel but a real night mare to break a student from in a tandem trainer. I had the same problem when I used to teach PPL with a Jepp syllabus that put instrument training in the beginning. What a relief it is not to have to do any instrument work until post solo!

I tell you I have 19 other seasoned instructors on my staff with more than 60,000 hours of dual given between us all and I'm quite sure you'll find them all in agreement with me on this one. We actually just wrote a new PPL syllabus for the school and unanimously put all 3 hours of the instrument instruction after the solo for this exact reason.

My two cents,
Helen

[bryancobb]

Helen,

I approach the PC/Sim issue this way with my students:

I know that a Sport Student is going to "simming-it-up" a lot at home because they are new and excited about anything that resembles flying and the programs are cheap. BUT...

I let them know that for the kind of skills that a Sport Pilot needs to develop, (I.E. Seat of the Pants, Eyes Outside, Stick and Rudder Skills) what they do on the sim has ALMOST ZERO benefit, except it is fun of course.

Even with high end $2000 equipment and a high end $800 program, you still are not going to "get the feel" of a plane. That rush of air noise as your airspeed builds, the mushy controls at low speed, and your butt pushing in and out of the seat, not to mention a split second view almost anywhere in the sky just by moving your eyes and raising a wing.

Now using even cheap sims for instrument training or to teach VOR/NDB use or even as a ground trainer for YOUR specific GPS... that's a different story!!

I did every instrument approach within 100 miles of my home airport, dozens of times on Microsoft FltSim 7, preparing for my instrument checkride. I'd pause it, take notes, and continue on. I had done 20 or so of them so many times that the approach plates were seared in my memory. Because of that, my checkride was a breeze!

As long as my Sport students just fly on the sim for fun, and realize that it may acually lengthen their training, I don't guess I object. You can't push a rope.

I DO LET THEM BORROW A COPY OF THIS BOOK AND TELL THEM ..."I KNOW FLYING THE SIM IS FUN, BUT SPEND YOUR TIME YOU WOULD BE FLYING THE SIM, READING AND RE-READING THIS BOOK AND IT WILL LITERALLY TAKE AT LEAST 5 HOURS AWAY FROM HOW LONG IT TAKES YOU TO GET TO YOUR CHECKRIDE, WHILE THE BAD HABITS YOU MAY LEARN ON THE SIM MAY ADD TO IT."

[Paul Hamilton]

Very interesting to see how divided the industry is on using a flight simulator as a training aid.

Yes there are bad habits that must be dealt with, mainly staring at the instruments. This is a problem for all students even without the flight simulator.

Yes it does not give you the feel of the aircraft, wind in your face, G’s in the seat, etc. So far neither to books, CD’s, DVD’s or on line training. I have not seen many flight instructors oppose these, although some still do.

No question, full agreement, these words I hope are understood and I believe in them strongly, make no mistake about what I think ---- “NOTHING IS AS GOOD AS FLYING THE AIRPLANE”.

Repeat so there is no misunderstanding, Paul Hamilton said and believes “NOTHING IS AS GOOD AS FLYING THE AIRPLANE”.

Back to this divided industry for my 30,000 look: I have been researching this for years with blogs/forums at EAA360, AOPA, X-Plane, Microsoft flight simulator and generic flight simulator sites.

The results show the split overall at 70% for and 30% against.

Helen, I know you respect Rod Machado's opinions and training techniques. I feel he is one of the best overall instructors in the world. As an example I will quote part of Rod’s Foreword in Bruce Williams (also a legendary flight instructor) book “Microsoft Flight Simulator as a training aid”. Rod Machado specifically wrote April 2006 on Page vii and viii about using flight simulation:

“And why would anyone want to do that? It is hard to argue against learning more efficiently, with less stress, and having more money left in the bank at checkride time”. The foreword goes on and on and perhaps this would be good reading for anyone who wants to learn what Rod thinks about using slight simulation as a training tool, all of which I agree with. In fact it is Rod’s and Bruce’s foundation that supports my quest to pursue this additional resource for training.

I feel a student should try and use as many resources as possible to learn to fly including different instructors and flight stimulators, sorry I mean flight simulators.

I do respect both Helen and Bryan’s opinions but you are in the 30% against. That is OK. I need people to be shooting holes at my goal to make it a better product. Yes thank ___ we all have different opinions.

Any other specific problems besides staring at the instruments and no wind in the face that I need to figure out how to fix?

[bryancobb]

I am 100% in the 70% which are FOR FOR FOR FOR computer based simulators!

I just opined that in the very early hours, from 0 hours to Sport License... Flying your simulator will only do three things:
1) Satisfiy your urge to FLY SOMETHING right that minute
2) Give you a lot of enjoyment
3) Cost you very little

[bryancobb]

This is very unscientific, but I'm pretty sure that relying too heavily on "the gauges" would be the main bad habit that would develop while flying the sim in the first few hours. The other one that is a close second, is lack of precision.

I relate these two topics to MY first few hours in 1985/86. Peter O'Knight where I was training got $56/hr wet for their Tomohawks, if I remember correctly.

The MacDill AeroClub owned a Piper Colt for rent to private pilots and above, that was kept there. It rented for $19/hr wet! YES $19 ! The only problem with ME was the Colt did not have an attitude indicator. I would not fly it for fear of dying!

Moral: An Inexperienced pilot has a tendency to focus too much on instruments.

My attitude on precision flying at that time was that as soon as I got my license, I could quit trying to be so precise when there was no CFI there to chastise me. When I got my license, I quit trying to be precise at all.

Moral: In the first few hours, the CFI needs to BE PRESENT to develop that habit of striving for perfection in flying.

[rsteele]

Having "been there and done that" I think that if a student wishes to use a flight simulator, then he or she could certainly benefit from guidance from an instructor on how to use it. In this regard I think Paul is right on the money. With all the retention problems flight schools have, I'd think that anything that keeps the student involved with aviation might help and sims certainly fall into that category of activity.

Here's some things I learned about the process.

1 - Most Important! concentrate on procedures. I flew all to seldom during my training. If I did a few patterns in the sim the night before a lesson, concentrating on doing the right thing at the right time, it made a huge difference (benefit) in the next day's lesson. Since the sim doesn't have all the bits of the airplane, you have to do things like speaking aloud "check fuel selector now". You can certainly practice radio calls this way.

2. Keeping a heading. There is nothing at all preventing you from keeping a heading in a sim by looking at the scenery. In fact it's really useful to work on your scan this way. BUT, you have to make the effort and realize that's the correct thing to do. Same thing applies to a turn, but that can be harder depending on sim setup. Since sims allow you to hide the instruments, it's just about perfect - if used properly.

3. You can crank in a lot of wind and fly a rectangular pattern, but thats probably the only maneuver that should be practiced in a sim. You are learning to compensate for a cross wind and NOT on controlling the plane in a maneuvers such as turn-about-a-point or Ss

4. In the sim I was using the V numbers were almost perfect. There is some mental gymnastics required to practice hitting the V numbers in the pattern and separate this from plane flying skills. Proceed with caution. This is why anything more than 2 or three times around the pattern before a lesson was not a benefit. You don't want sim flying muscle memory.

5. The number one benefit I had from using the sim was learning taxiing with rudder pedals. I probably saved 3 or 4 hours of instruction and probably saved an airframe. I was TERRIBLE at it and scared both myself and my first instructor. I tried everything to get this skill down and the sim was the only thing that really worked.

[Paul Hamilton]

rsteele,
Interesting experiences and observations.