I have always wondered if PMDG add ons could be certified by the FAA due to the extreme realism.

I'm not really sure about FAA certification, although I've been asking myself the same thing.

 

Imagine a new pilot being hired by an airline to fly the NG fleet and then being given a copy of the NGX for home training!

Stop making double post's about one topic will you!!!??

 

Maikel Rozemeijer.

Stop making double post's about one topic will you!!!??

 

Maikel Rozemeijer.

 

There are problems with the forums and new posts; the problem lies with the server not the OP.

Possibly for pilot familiarization or for pilots to keep up to date between simulator check-ups, not sure about official training recognition....

Stop making double post's about one topic will you!!!??

 

Maikel Rozemeijer.

Have a look, there are lot's it's the forum's not the posters, thank you!!!

 

Possibly for pilot familiarization or for pilots to keep up to date between simulator check-ups, not sure about official training recognition

agree

Could you please explain a bit more why it is so? I'm just curious. :)

Could you please explain a bit more why it is so? I'm just curious. :)

 

Concerning PMDG, they have a reputation based on realism and the fact that their products fly like the real bird. Could be useful for keeping procedures (flows and checklists) fresh while at home between annual (or is it six months?) training.

 

Now, with training recognition by the FAA or other authority, I would seriously hope not. FSX is a video game (I think I just signed my death warrant). All (or most) controllers cannot produce the feel of the aircraft flight controls. And there are things that may be in the real aircraft that may not be in FSX aircraft.

Keep in mind there are different levels of FAA licensing...

 

You know those nice cockpit posters PMDG has in its store? those 2D views of panel you can hang over your bed and go to sleep while practicing your flows...

well this kind of product is routinely licensed as a cockpit orientation training tool...

 

Now why wouldnt a "video game" be licenseable to provide a similar (or, well, even better) level of cockpit orientation help? Those of you who have been to an NG cockpit can confirm that you were feeling rather at home there, after all those hours in the NGX. (There is at least one MSFS add-on licensed on similar level)

 

Of course nobody in their right mind would not license the NGX to be a level-c or level-d equivalent sim... but it has its purposes, and I see no big problems with certifying it accordingly, should there be sufficient demand. It may not even be licensed as a "737 NG" training tools. Might be certified as a "generic twin engine jet airliner" thing.

the FAA requires that a pilot do all recurrent training and check rides in a level D full motion sim...PMDG if they want to spend that kind of money can do that but is it worth it? Probably not..Will PMDG be a licensed cockpit prep tool maybe but there is a process that needs to be done for that to happen. I'm sure that most Check pilots and instructors recommend the program.

 

Just like my flight instructor recommended FS9 when i did my instrument rating

the FAA requires that a pilot do all recurrent training and check rides in a level D full motion sim...PMDG if they want to spend that kind of money can do that but is it worth it? Probably not..Will PMDG be a licensed cockpit prep tool maybe but there is a process that needs to be done for that to happen. I'm sure that most Check pilots and instructors recommend the program.

 

Just like my flight instructor recommended FS9 when i did my instrument rating

Perhaps you were equating Level D sims as full flight sims. In fact Level B is sufficient for recurrent training and most conversion training for that matter. Takeoff and landing checks can be done in Level C sims.

 

If the NGX were to get some kind of FAA approval it would be at a basic, generic level. It doesn't matter how good the NGX flight dynamics are because it certainly couldn't be used for any kind of handling training, that's very much full flight sim territory. It would be used for instrument and procedure training only. It would have to be packaged by a manufacturer in a representative cockpit layout with at least a minimum of specified physical controls. It would be the manufacturer of this Training Device that would get regulatory approval, unlike FTDs and FFSs which are approved for the airlines or training schools which operate them.

FSX would at best be considered a "procedures trainer", it is not a simulator by the FAA's definition.

Stop making double post's about one topic will you!!!??

 

Maikel Rozemeijer.

Maikel, you have already received a rocket from a few other posters in another thread for the very same point you have raised here!!(see Dash 8 thread)

I'm not really sure about FAA certification, although I've been asking myself the same thing.

 

Imagine a new pilot being hired by an airline to fly the NG fleet and then being given a copy of the NGX for home training!

 

Imagine this. Would would you rather help fly a real 737 in an emergency...., some joe who has spent a week training in a prop jet? Or some dude with 3+ years training in FSX PMDG 737 sim? Also, picture this.....the first person who does land and airplane in an emergency situation. Like a real pilot, and says that they got his/her training from FSX and PMDG is going to be the next poster child for the franchise. Not to mention rich, and free training in a real sim.? :)

I think as far as an FAA approved sim, it's not really the software that matters.

It's the total system, including the hardware+ what ever software is used.

They approve the whole system, not just the software.

And by the time you had all the needed hardware, etc, you would almost be

to the "level D" sim stage. :/

Without all the hardware, no software would ever qualify no matter how

accurate it was.