Effectiveness of Aviation Training Devices

[Great Ozzie 101]

It drifts all over the place for me. but someone wiser than me told me it sharpens my skills when I can master a bad flying sim airplane in Fight..

Normally I try to ignore such blather, as I see it nothing more than trolling (as that is not what I said).But surfing the web tonite re: pcatds... I happened across two articles that (reminded me of the above statement) demonstrated the point I was trying to make..."The Elite PI-135 BATD or any PC-based device of its type is not designed to teach a student how to fly an airplane, so it doesn’t behave exactly like one. That’s the realm of high-fidelity, full-motion, and very expensive simulators like the Redbird FMX. But do you really need fancy graphics and flight control feedback to practice your instrument scan, or fly an approach? We think not."http://blog.aopa.org/fsb/?p=58The other... a study conducted by a number of professors at the Institute of Aviation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign:"THE EFFECTIVENESS OF A PERSONAL COMPUTER AVIATION TRAINING DEVICE (PCATD), A FLIGHT TRAINING DEVICE (FTD), AND AN AIRPLANE IN CONDUCTING INSTRUMENT PROFICIENCY CHECKS""If a ground-based device is harder to fly than an airplane, then training in such devices may produce a pilot who has an easier time passing an IPC (Instrument Proficiency Check) in the aircraft."http://www.hf.faa.go...20-%20PCATD.pdfThis was the point I was trying to make...And I am of the belief, if you begin mastering hand-flying a sim plane that is very sensitive to control input (I am not saying you will like it) I believe it will lend itself to much more accurate hand flying of other not-so sensitive airplanes... whether you are trying to hand fly an ILS approach, or trying to do 360° Steep Turns (For Light Sport Aircraft - FAA Standards: "45° Bank, Left or Right Turn, Maintains the entry altitude, ±100 feet, airspeed, ±10 knots, bank, ±5°; and rolls out on the entry heading, ±10°).And when you begin this "mastery"... you will undoubtedly take much more pleasure in flying and have gained a much greater sense of accomplishment.It is a lot of (not very fun) work... but you will reap rewards in my opinion.-Rob O.

[Geofa 108]

Well I am mixed on that one. I used Ift pro in the early 90's to practice for my ifr rating at the time. It was a lot harder on the computer than the real plane. In most cases I would still say if you can do it on the computer with a sim it will be easier in real life.However, I'd prefer it to be more like the real thing on a sim -expected performance, stability, most importantly to me and left out on most sims-real instruments to look and work on ... Simulating should be simulating ....if we want to give credance to that word.

[Great Ozzie 101]

I used ELITE about the same time period Geof. I remember liking it quite a bit but for the life of me don't remember how quick it was to zing off heading / altitude etc. What an expensive piece of software that was at the time. Prices much better now (iirc).I completely understand and am in your camp there... there's just some value, in my opinion, to always having to be sharp on the stick (once in a while practice that way). Think of the FLIGHT Maule as "close kin" to the Frasca 141. :biggrin:Btw I am very glad to have the control sensitivity tweaks... kudos to our tweakers like Fr. Bill.

[fastcarfastplane 0]

heh, i just started training for my Instrument rating....its kinda driving me nuts....imho Flight/FSX are ...'mediocre' at best when i try to use them as a real tool to help my scan....but idk, i just don't get any sense of accomplishment out them. to me they feel like a game...maybe i'm younger than some of you, and have been so enthralled by games my entire life that even the newest stuff is always pretty blah...any tips? i have sportys 'dvd' IFR study course...i want to just throw the damn thing out the window. ....but it was expensive and i hate reading! lol

[LuisFelizTirado 33]

It seems to me that the problem is principally due to differences in control force, not a twitchy flight model. In a real airplane, the pilot pushes against a strong force, the wind, that strikes the control surfaces. There is a lot of resistance. But, a typical joystick only has a stiff spring for centering purposes, so it is extremely easy to overcontrol the airplane. Perhaps if Force Feedback had been successful, the resistance to joystick movement could have been modeled, thus preventing overcontrol.Unfortunately, the solution for avoiding twitchiness seems to be to make very small and gradual movements with the joystick, and reducing its sensitivity considerably.This issue was also present in previous versions of FS and I think that this is not the only unrealistic aspect of all flight simulators. For example, when turning we maintain the same input on the controller throughout the turn instead of centering the control surfaces. It is surprising that more people have not noticed the basic differences between so-called "simmer" flying and the real thing.Best regards.Luis

[Great Ozzie 101]

But, a typical joystick only has a stiff spring for centering purposes, so it is extremely easy to overcontrol the airplane.

Some very good points and observations Luis.This also holds true for my X-65F in which the stick does not move (it senses force applied).I have heard some very good things about the Thrustmaster Warthog... it may be it does not suffer as greatly in this respect.

For example, when turning we maintain the same input on the controller throughout the turn instead of centering the control surfaces. It is surprising that more people have not noticed the basic differences between so-called "simmer" flying and the real thing.

I think there might be a couple reasons here. When you are flying a real plane (or even a sim)... "you do what you have to do"... i.e. you have a basic idea what needs to be done, but it is sub-conscience actions / reactions that "take over" to make the input. And even when banking a "real" plane having removed much if not all aileron input, there is going to be maintaining the bank which if due to "positive lateral stability" tending to return the plane to level flight or maybe turbulence will require (intermittent) aileron input to maintain the desired bank angle.Another reason might be the fact many / most don't have actual stick time. Very expensive stuff. I could have easily bought a (small) home with the money I have invested in my licenses. We all have heard stories here about someone claiming this or that e.g. "I'm an airline pilot" when in fact... the airline "they work for" is a virtual one.@ fast cars & planes...I would like to respond but I need to think out my answer more...Rob

[jcomm 6,020]

Strangely, some simulators really sum-up, in my oppinion, to hands-on proficiency. Being a glider pilot, but also an avid simmer for quite a while, I dicovered that after 20+ years away from the cockpit when I returned in 2006 I was still able to easilyadapt to the new, so called "plastic gliders"... It was rather easy to complete my proficiency tests as, at the 3rd flight and after being solo on the 2nd, I was asked to perform a loop followed by a stall-turn. Althoughrather reluctant I did obey the instructor and... guess what, I did it rather easily, as if I had been flying since I stopped back in the eighties.... Am I a special one? Certainly not,so, I tend to believe that the experience and proficiency gained from my flightsimming time contributed a lot to this "success".Regarding fancy flight controls, I tend to think that it is certainly very important, specially if you are, for instance, simulating helicopter flight. But it also depends a LOT onthe simulator, and I used Condor, the soaring simulator, for quite a while, and still do (it's the only sim I use since I quited flight simulation more than 2 years ago, with an exceptionI am really finding difficult to overcome - FLIGHT! - Loving it!!!!). But I fly condor using my mouse and keybord for the rudder input, and, believe it or not, it is lightyears aheadof my Saitek x52 when I used it with eithet FSX or xplane, FlightGear or even Silent Wings... Why? I believe the answer is in the simulator itself. As a matter of fact, pretty much as it happened with Condor, FLIGHT is feeling great to control using the mouse and keyboard for rudder input, even if it forces auto-rudder inthat mode. So, I believe that PC-based flight simulators, depending a lot on their interface, pourpose, and quality, can halp mantaining not only your instrument scanning skills butalso your overall proficiency as a pilot!

[Oracle427 45]

I am curious to know what control forces you are holding in during a turn?When I bank into a turn, I command a coordinated aileron and rudder input and then some back pressure. I then neutralize the rudder and aileron and hold back pressure until I am ready to roll out of the turn. I will them perform these actions in the same order in the opposite direction.When in a step turn I need to correct for over banking, and I need to use the rudder to account for adverse yaw, torque and p factor in increasing amounts as I get into slow flight and turns.Except for stick forces not changing, I'm not sure how this doesn't feel just right?

[jcomm 6,020]

In RL, on a glider, you end up using opposite controls during a tight turn :-) It seems counter-intuitive, but it works, and is the only way to mantain the turn properly coordinated - there is an intuitive justification for a rolling momment towards the turn on such high aspect ratio airplanes like gliders are. Condor pretty much simulates this.In RL I am constantly using pitch trim during turns while spiraling on thermals, so, the fource on the control column is minimal. While being towed on some gliders/towing airplanes we end up suffering from the corckscrew/slipstream induced by the airplane, and sometimes we have to use aileron to mantain wings level... This is not simulated either in Condor or SilentWings...

I am curious to know what control forces you are holding in during a turn?When I bank into a turn, I command a coordinated aileron and rudder input and then some back pressure. I then neutralize the rudder and aileron and hold back pressure until I am ready to roll out of the turn. I will them perform these actions in the same order in the opposite direction.When in a step turn I need to correct for over banking, and I need to use the rudder to account for adverse yaw, torque and p factor in increasing amounts as I get into slow flight and turns.Except for stick forces not changing, I'm not sure how this doesn't feel just right?

[Oracle427 45]

Agreed JComm, my reply was actually directed at Luis, but I haven't figured out how to quote on my Android.

[LHookins 3,113]

It seems to me that the problem is principally due to differences in control force, not a twitchy flight model. In a real airplane, the pilot pushes against a strong force, the wind, that strikes the control surfaces. There is a lot of resistance. But, a typical joystick only has a stiff spring for centering purposes, so it is extremely easy to overcontrol the airplane.

I've been wondering if Thrustmaster still had the "50 pound centering spring" and I think you've provided the answer. :D The CH joysticks have a much lighter centering spring, and the RV is still a bit twitchy in pitch, and the Maule is twitchy in roll at anything over 100 knots. The problem isn't necessarily the controls. Watch the yoke or stick in the 3d cockpit as you try to apply the least possible control input.I've found that with a lot of time in an aircraft, it becomes less twitchy. I'm still wondering why I found the Stearman to be too twitchy in the pitch axis, as now it seems quite docile. Maybe I've just learned to use a lighter hand on the controls. I don't know what I'd be doing if I had that "50 pound centering spring".Hook

[LAdamson 240]

I've been wondering if Thrustmaster still had the "50 pound centering spring" and I think you've provided the answer. :D The CH joysticks have a much lighter centering spring, and the RV is still a bit twitchy in pitch, and the Maule is twitchy in roll at anything over 100 knots.The problem isn't necessarily the controls. Watch the yoke or stick in the 3d cockpit as you try to apply the least possible control input.I've found that with a lot of time in an aircraft, it becomes less twitchy. I'm still wondering why I found the Stearman to be too twitchy in the pitch axis, as now it seems quite docile. Maybe I've just learned to use a lighter hand on the controls. I don't know what I'd be doing if I had that "50 pound centering spring".

I seldom have a problem with "twitchiness" or overcontrol, because I became very use to short R/C transmitter sticks. I've never had a problem between a real RV, Stearman, or Pitts due to over control. The real RV isn't twitchy in pitch, but you can feel the stick against the wind...........yet the push is quite light. It's heavy on the rudder while in cruise. Roll forces are light also. I prefer lighter springs in my joysticks. The Saitek X52 is fine the way it is, but I removed a section of spring in my X45.L.Adamson

[LHookins 3,113]

Thanks for the feedback. I'm hoping that eventually the RV and Maule will seem as docile as the Stearman. If not, I can always adjust the response curve in my CH control panel.Hook