Sims, CFIs, and Students, oh my

[labbadabba]

So, the other post about fast learners got me thinking. I was one of those fast learners and I attribute much of my success as a student to the time I spent in my sim. I realize to some here, simming is a bad word but I believe, if used properly, they can be a fantastic tool.

With that said, I'm looking in the coming months to add my CFI rating and get started on instructing aviation and music full-time. One of my thoughts is to make a home-built sim available for a nominal fee to any of my students. No, it wouldn't be an FAA-approved sim, but students could use it to pre-fly a lesson or even rehash what was just learned in a lesson.

I can build a very realistic sim that emulates a GA cockpit with everything functioning for $2k, a heck of a lot cheaper than an approved simulator.

Thoughts?

 

[StevieTimes]

You are part of the rebel alliance and a traitor!!!!

 

[Harold Rutila]

I wouldn't take issue with any of that. It would have been nice to have a sim for bad weather days, even one that's not FAA approved. Getting FAA approval might not even be that hard if your hardware happens to comply with the order concerning simulator certifications (not that this matters a whole lot).

 

[Ravioli]

If you're going to charge for it in any way, spend the extra for a certified Sim. Everything I paid a CFI for is in my logbook, as it should be.

 

[WannFly]

So, the other post about fast learners got me thinking. I was one of those fast learners and I attribute much of my success as a student to the time I spent in my sim. I realize to some here, simming is a bad word but I believe, if used properly, they can be a fantastic tool.

With that said, I'm looking in the coming months to add my CFI rating and get started on instructing aviation and music full-time. One of my thoughts is to make a home-built sim available for a nominal fee to any of my students. No, it wouldn't be an FAA-approved sim, but students could use it to pre-fly a lesson or even rehash what was just learned in a lesson.

I can build a very realistic sim that emulates a GA cockpit with everything functioning for $2k, a heck of a lot cheaper than an approved simulator.

Thoughts?

interested to know how did you come up with that 2K number. I ran some numbers and they came out quite a bit more if you want rudder paddles, throttles and stuff which gives you actual feel. didn't even take the computer hardware into account, already have a bunch of them

 

[James331]

interested to know how did you come up with that 2K number. I ran some numbers and they came out quite a bit more if you want rudder paddles, throttles and stuff which gives you actual feel. didn't even take the computer hardware into account, already have a bunch of them

Lots of that stuff can be found on Craigslist, doesn't take a supercomputer to run most flight sims.

 

[labbadabba]

interested to know how did you come up with that 2K number. I ran some numbers and they came out quite a bit more if you want rudder paddles, throttles and stuff which gives you actual feel. didn't even take the computer hardware into account, already have a bunch of them

Bargain shopping mostly. I'm not too concerned with feel, i.e., force feedback. Even the full motion sims that I've flown don't really evoke a sense of flying unless you're doing something in a Level D sim or something like that, it's not worth the premium.

That said, DesktopAviator has a wealth of DIY modules that can be built for pennies compared to others. I have an Emuteq GNS530 which was by far my most expensive part ($600), everything else is off the shelf. Pedals are Saitek Cessna pedals and they work fine. My yoke is a PFC yoke that I got off eBay that is lightyears beyond Saitek in terms of not having dead spots and a more natural feel. My sim I built for about $1500 and is very capable (that my sim in my avatar pic) and it simulates the flow of a Cessna cockpit very well.

 

[GrahamC]

You could very easily sell, and log the use of that simulator as Ground Training. It wouldn't count toward any aeronautical experience requirements, but for most every BATD you can only log 1.5 hours toward the total time requirements for a Private Pilot certificate anyway.
There's a lot you can teach in a Simulator, and it can seriously cut down on dual instruction needed in the airplane, so long as the sim is used appropriately.

If a sim is to be used for training, it should be treated as an airplane. I've found that the moment a student does something in a simulator that they would never do in a simulator (aerobatics, intentional crashing, taking off with 100kt winds etc.) it looses its effectiveness as a worthwhile procedures trainer.

 

[Kritchlow]

So, the other post about fast learners got me thinking. I was one of those fast learners and I attribute much of my success as a student to the time I spent in my sim. I realize to some here, simming is a bad word but I believe, if used properly, they can be a fantastic tool.

With that said, I'm looking in the coming months to add my CFI rating and get started on instructing aviation and music full-time. One of my thoughts is to make a home-built sim available for a nominal fee to any of my students. No, it wouldn't be an FAA-approved sim, but students could use it to pre-fly a lesson or even rehash what was just learned in a lesson.

I can build a very realistic sim that emulates a GA cockpit with everything functioning for $2k, a heck of a lot cheaper than an approved simulator.

Thoughts?

Lesson 1

You're adding a new certificate.
Not a rating, not a new grade of certificate.

You are not adding a CFI rating.

 

[Kritchlow]

So, the other post about fast learners got me thinking. I was one of those fast learners and I attribute much of my success as a student to the time I spent in my sim. I realize to some here, simming is a bad word but I believe, if used properly, they can be a fantastic tool.

With that said, I'm looking in the coming months to add my CFI rating and get started on instructing aviation and music full-time. One of my thoughts is to make a home-built sim available for a nominal fee to any of my students. No, it wouldn't be an FAA-approved sim, but students could use it to pre-fly a lesson or even rehash what was just learned in a lesson.

I can build a very realistic sim that emulates a GA cockpit with everything functioning for $2k, a heck of a lot cheaper than an approved simulator.

Thoughts?

And a simulator is great for learning IFR procedures, but I see no use for it teaching at the private level.

 

[AggieMike88]

but I see no use for it teaching at the private level.

Since I was obtaining my PPL part 61 at a school that also had lots of part 141 activity, they had several of the Elite desktop sims.

We took advantage of them on a day that got scrubbed due to weather to get me oriented to VOR navigation, including setting the frequency, twisting the OBS, intercepting the radial, and flying the desired TO or FROM course.

The sim made the rinse and repeat and pause to ask questions much easier and more efficient. Next lesson in the aircraft doing intercepting and flying radials went very smoothly and I was done with that check box in less than 0.5hrs.

 

[Kritchlow]

Since I was obtaining my PPL part 61 at a school that also had lots of part 141 activity, they had several of the Elite desktop sims.

We took advantage of them on a day that got scrubbed due to weather to get me oriented to VOR navigation, including setting the frequency, twisting the OBS, intercepting the radial, and flying the desired TO or FROM course.

The sim made the rinse and repeat and pause to ask questions much easier and more efficient. Next lesson in the aircraft doing intercepting and flying radials went very smoothly and I was done with that check box in less than 0.5hrs.

Okay... but building a sim for one lesson??

If they will be teaching the IR than I whole heartedly agree.

 

[AggieMike88]

I was refuting your statement "no use at private level"

 

[Kritchlow]

I was refuting your statement "no use at private level"

Yes... I thought I responded appropriately, but perhaps not??

 

[labbadabba]

And a simulator is great for learning IFR procedures, but I see no use for it teaching at the private level.

While generally I agree, I found that the sim was very useful for my PPL as well. Here are some examples of how I used the sim (both mine and the school's) during my primary training:

1. Learning the basics of
Setting up the plane for stalls
Crosswind Landing techniques
Inadvertent IMC
Emergency procs
Lost procs
VOR/RNAV
Impossible turns
etc. you get the idea...

2. Pregaming: When my CFI told me we were going to do stalls, steep turns in the next lesson, I practiced the procedures for setting up stalls and slow flight as well as sight picture for steep turns. Was it a 1:1 representation of real life? No. But it certainly was more effective than chair flying

3. De-brief: After every lesson, I would immediately fire up my sim and home and fly the entire lesson again to ingrain the lessons learned. Muscle memory, flow checks, sight pictures. Again, I recognize the 'feel' isn't the same and doing maneuvers in the sim can be counter-productive. But, I think bad habits develop if you're doing these things in a vacuum. If you're doing them in the sim in conjunction with real-live flying and checking in with your CFI, your progress will accelerate.


So that's really my idea. After I do a lesson with a student and do the de-brief, I have that student fire up the sim and fly the lesson again on their own. When the stress of being in the airplane is removed and the student is on their own to explore what they've just learned they will for a stronger learning connection than what they'd learn by rote in the air.

 

[OkieAviator]

You have to take flight sims for what they are... aviation themed video games. Even the full motion Red Bird is lackluster in the flying dynamics, so from a stick and rudder skills perspective you might as well play NES Top Gun.

Flight sims helped me in my PPL as a form of advanced chair flying and it helped in my instrument rating from a procedural perspective. I still do 2-3 full IFR flights on my home setup a month just to keep things fresh. If you're doing the same then it's important to have the game match what you use in real life... so for example I have the GTN 650 addon and I connect to my EFB. The plane doesn't really matter, I typically use a really fast one to make it more of a challenge.

 

[MAKG1]

And a simulator is great for learning IFR procedures, but I see no use for it teaching at the private level.

I see two uses. One is VOR navigation. The GPS simulators are not close enough (excepting those trainers written by the manufacturers, but those are poor flight simulators). There are also several good two-axis KAP-140 sims, too, so you can learn how altitude capturing works without spending Hobbs time.

VORs are a bit too perfect in all the sims I've used; the needles don't wander, the zone of confusion is too regular, and reception is too good. But the basics of finding location, tracking radials, and locating an arbitrary spot by crossed radials all work fine.

But I thoroughly agree the utility is quite limited.

 

[MAKG1]

While generally I agree, I found that the sim was very useful for my PPL as well. Here are some examples of how I used the sim (both mine and the school's) during my primary training:

1. Learning the basics of
Setting up the plane for stalls
Crosswind Landing techniques
Inadvertent IMC
Emergency procs
Lost procs
VOR/RNAV
Impossible turns
etc. you get the idea...

2. Pregaming: When my CFI told me we were going to do stalls, steep turns in the next lesson, I practiced the procedures for setting up stalls and slow flight as well as sight picture for steep turns. Was it a 1:1 representation of real life? No. But it certainly was more effective than chair flying

3. De-brief: After every lesson, I would immediately fire up my sim and home and fly the entire lesson again to ingrain the lessons learned. Muscle memory, flow checks, sight pictures. Again, I recognize the 'feel' isn't the same and doing maneuvers in the sim can be counter-productive. But, I think bad habits develop if you're doing these things in a vacuum. If you're doing them in the sim in conjunction with real-live flying and checking in with your CFI, your progress will accelerate.


So that's really my idea. After I do a lesson with a student and do the de-brief, I have that student fire up the sim and fly the lesson again on their own. When the stress of being in the airplane is removed and the student is on their own to explore what they've just learned they will for a stronger learning connection than what they'd learn by rote in the air.

Most of that stuff is dramatically different in a real aircraft. Inadvertent IMC, for instance, doesn't have the disorienting inertial forces. Impossible turns only work if the flight dynamics are perfect, which is very seldom true, even for those expensive Redbirds (no, I can't climb at 500 FPM at 90 KIAS and 2500 RPM at any altitude in a real 172N, though Redbird thinks I can -- IRL, the airspeed needs to be a bit slower than that).

 

[labbadabba]

Most of that stuff is dramatically different in a real aircraft. Inadvertent IMC, for instance, doesn't have the disorienting inertial forces. Impossible turns only work if the flight dynamics are perfect, which is very seldom true, even for those expensive Redbirds (no, I can't climb at 500 FPM at 90 KIAS and 2500 RPM at any altitude in a real 172N, though Redbird thinks I can -- IRL, the airspeed needs to be a bit slower than that).

Indeed, but procedures are the same. I was in a Red Bird when my CFI had me look at a sectional while he flew me into a cloud. I looked up and he asked, "now what?"

Standard rate 180 and descend. Legally we wouldn't be able to do that in a lesson.

 

[labbadabba]

I see two uses. One is VOR navigation. The GPS simulators are not close enough (excepting those trainers written by the manufacturers, but those are poor flight simulators). There are also several good two-axis KAP-140 sims, too, so you can learn how altitude capturing works without spending Hobbs time.

VORs are a bit too perfect in all the sims I've used; the needles don't wander, the zone of confusion is too regular, and reception is too good. But the basics of finding location, tracking radials, and locating an arbitrary spot by crossed radials all work fine.

But I thoroughly agree the utility is quite limited.

Again, I'm not going for a 1:1 recreation, this won't be like Flight Safety. Whether or not the VOR needle jumps a few degrees or wiggles bit is immaterial to the basic theory and practice of intercepting and tracking a radial.

As far as the GPS, the Garmin trainers for both GNS and GTN series can be imported into the sim. I have a GNS 530 driven by the Garmin GNS simulator.

I know what you're saying, that sims are bad because they're not a real airplane. Training in anything other than a real airplane is folly since you cannot faithfully reproduce every nuance. But what I'm saying is that I believe there is a ton of value in a well configured sim as a briefing and debriefing tool. For me, using the sim in close conjunction with my training was invaluable.

The question that I have for PoA is whether or not any other CFIs have taken a similar approach with their students?

 

[dmspilot]

Again, I'm not going for a 1:1 recreation, this won't be like Flight Safety. Whether or not the VOR needle jumps a few degrees or wiggles bit is immaterial to the basic theory and practice of intercepting and tracking a radial.

As far as the GPS, the Garmin trainers for both GNS and GTN series can be imported into the sim. I have a GNS 530 driven by the Garmin GNS simulator.

I know what you're saying, that sims are bad because they're not a real airplane. Training in anything other than a real airplane is folly since you cannot faithfully reproduce every nuance. But what I'm saying is that I believe there is a ton of value in a well configured sim as a briefing and debriefing tool. For me, using the sim in close conjunction with my training was invaluable.

The question that I have for PoA is whether or not any other CFIs have taken a similar approach with their students?

Don't let the naysayers get you down. Most of the ones posting in this thread aren't instructors.

They don't realize how many students have trouble with the basics, attitude+power=performance, or performing checklists correctly, or entering the traffic pattern/landing/taxiing at big airports with complicated runway layouts, etc. Remember the Cirrus lady that crashed after not being able to figure out which runway was which?

The problem I've seen in my attempt to use simulation as an instructor is that simulators have a learning curve to them, and sometimes more time is spent learning "the simulator" that it's not always productive. It would be a big help if the student spent some time by themselves with the sim, or with their own sim at home...but only in similar vein that most students would be helped by spending more time in the books (e.g. AFH).

 

[MAKG1]

Indeed, but procedures are the same. I was in a Red Bird when my CFI had me look at a sectional while he flew me into a cloud. I looked up and he asked, "now what?"

Standard rate 180 and descend. Legally we wouldn't be able to do that in a lesson.

With turbulence? That's an important detail. Not having it leads to the false conclusion that it is more survivable than it is. Same with the "impossible turn," as the real wildcard there is nerves.

And since when is it illegal in a lesson to tell a student he's flown into a cloud and here's a hood to put on? If you really wanted to do it, you could get a block clearance for maneuvers in IMC, but I wouldn't suggest it for time.

The objection I have is the simulator makes it look "more realistic" on the surface, yet it isn't really.

 

[James331]

Again, I'm not going for a 1:1 recreation, this won't be like Flight Safety. Whether or not the VOR needle jumps a few degrees or wiggles bit is immaterial to the basic theory and practice of intercepting and tracking a radial.

As far as the GPS, the Garmin trainers for both GNS and GTN series can be imported into the sim. I have a GNS 530 driven by the Garmin GNS simulator.

I know what you're saying, that sims are bad because they're not a real airplane. Training in anything other than a real airplane is folly since you cannot faithfully reproduce every nuance. But what I'm saying is that I believe there is a ton of value in a well configured sim as a briefing and debriefing tool. For me, using the sim in close conjunction with my training was invaluable.

The question that I have for PoA is whether or not any other CFIs have taken a similar approach with their students?

For instrument stuff, for sure. Actually didn't do anything fancy like having faux nav heads, just a satek home and pedels and a semi high end PC on my desk, logged it as ground instruction, but I didn't charge for my computer, just my normal CFI rate. Frankly I think it worked just as well as a expensive redbird fmx for what we were using it for, really it all comes down to the instructor.

My only suggestion is I wouldn't go too hog wild on a sim that you can't FAA log time on, still a great service to offer instrument students, but I wouldn't have a business model out of it.

 

[Kritchlow]

Don't let the naysayers get you down. Most of the ones posting in this thread aren't instructors.

They don't realize how many students have trouble with the basics, attitude+power=performance, or performing checklists correctly, or entering the traffic pattern/landing/taxiing at big airports with complicated runway layouts, etc. Remember the Cirrus lady that crashed after not being able to figure out which runway was which?

The problem I've seen in my attempt to use simulation as an instructor is that simulators have a learning curve to them, and sometimes more time is spent learning "the simulator" that it's not always productive. It would be a big help if the student spent some time by themselves with the sim, or with their own sim at home...but only in similar vein that most students would be helped by spending more time in the books (e.g. AFH).

Don't know how many are and how many aren't.. I am still, but I'm expired.

That said, I have flown numerous level D "real" simulators. I'm typed in many airplanes in those sims.
That said. I have no clue how realistic a homebuilt sim would be.

 

[BigBadLou]

I realize to some here, simming is a bad word but I believe, if used properly, they can be a fantastic tool.

I have been saying the same thing: a simulator (any kind) if nothing but a tool.
It depends on the user how it is utilized.

Take a hammer. You can build a dog house, you can hang pictures, you can improve your life with it. Or you can use it to kill a living creature. *shrug*

You will get a lot (more) pushback, do not fear. Oh it's coming.

 

[BigBadLou]

If you're going to charge for it in any way, spend the extra for a certified Sim.

I think he meant that he wants to build a GOOD sim. Not one of those certified toys that simmers laugh at.
The price of certified BATDs reflects the certification cost, not build quality or realism.