Sim Training: Why?

[Ernie Martin]

Let me ask, if you've got like 400 hrs on the Skymaster and do extensive biennials, how important do you all see simulator training? I fly only in good VFR conditions, have had my share of "incidents" (blown nose tire on landing, failed rear engine while climbing at 1000 feet, and aborted take-off at 50 ft which overran the runway by 20 yds) and have therefore never considered going through sim training. But then Kevin, which I figure has probably more experience than me, is planning a session on April.

Aside from insurance requirements, can we get a dialog going here on your views. If you've gone through it, tell us why the rest of us should. If you haven't, tell us why you didn't think it was important.

Ernie

[kevin]

For me, there is a 900 lb gorrilla reason, and then other reasons.

The gorrilla is that USAIG, my insurance carrier, requires it. Now that we have covered that, if left to my own devices, I would do sim training every 24 months. Reasons:

1.) More realistic engine failure training. Can practice engine failures on takeoff roll, just after liftoff, after gear up. Can do them over and over again, just for rote practice. AND, best of all, they can be a total suprise. My CFI sometimes reaches up and turns off the fuel selector when I am distracted, but he never does it at full power, and never close to the ground. In the sim, I can be doing a go around from a 200 1/2 ILS missed approach and lose an engine.

2.) Can do more realistic IFR training in less time. If you only fly VFR, this is not important.

3.) Can practice identifying and dealing with systems failure that are difficult to do in an airplane. In a sim, your artificial horizon can be made to slowly fail, as it would in real life. Blocking the instrument for partial panel practice is just not the same.

4.) Going someplace else and getting training naturally teaches you new things, as different instructors emphasize different things. Sim courses are usually a bit more structured than training with your buddy the CFI, this can make for a useful experience as well.

That's my list, I am sure there are more reasons. If I was purely a VFR pilot, I might take a couple of hours of sim training once in a while, just for engine cut practice, and to keep my emergency instrument skills current. For an IFR pilot, as I said at the start, I think it is a must every two years, and currently my insurance requires it yearly.

Kevin

[Bob Cook]

Ernie

Lot depends on
1) insurance requirements
2) Amount of IFR flying.

I would think that going with a good CFII would be more beneficial than a simulator to catch any irregularities if dealing with mostly VFR flying.

Sim training is good for making sure there are no bad habits creeping in. You can get more proceedural training done in a shorter time in a simulator. Too bad RTI does not have a motion simulator <G>.

If you are not doing a lot of instrument flying then the simulator is probably far less beneficial than the local CFI route. I agree with everything that Kevin has said.

I think everyone, even professionals, can benefit from Sim training. It is good life insurance, however, I feel that it is not as beneficial as shooting real approaches in real weather. There is a vast difference in the "pucker factor". I would say it is best done in September before the onslaught of long nights and miserable wx in the north east.

Doesn't really matter how many hours or years of experience. Complacency kills pilots and bends hardware.

Being current and alert is still the best insurance. Things can deteriorate really quickly including the wx and your personal confidence.

Bob

[Jim Rainer]

I don't know that it is sim training so much as it is the total package with RTC in Champaige, IL. You get about 6-8 hours in the sim but you get more hours than that of ground school which sharpens our proceedure skills and reminds us of things long forgotten. I have taken only one RTC session (only sim only session in 48 years of flying) and found it to be very beneficial. I haven't kept my proceedure skills up to their snuff but I refer back to the material given me from time to time.

Two important things - the sim is much harder to fly than the actual plane so you really develop some skill here. You can pratice emergency situations which would not be safe in a plane. You get much more actual maneuvering time because you don't have near as much "dead-head" time in the sim as you do in the plane.

John Kileen, the owner of RTC is especially knowleable about 337s as he owns one (or two, maybe.) He'll teach yuou things you never knew about your own plane!

I have mentioned RTC only because they are the only folks who have specifically designed a program for 337s. Flight Safety or Simcom may be just as good but you'll be in a Baron or 310 or something.

I have also taken 2 or 3 ITC refresher courses where they put a simple sim in your room to practice proceedures like holding; climbs and turns, etc. The real work is done in the airplane - again 6 hours or so. They also have type sepcific training which is mostly a book and a test of your knowledge of your airplane.

Most of the time I get an instructor and get a IPC in less than 2 hours total time in the plane plus an hour or so of ground school. It makes me legal for another 6 months but doesn't have near the training impact either RTC or ITC has.

[Jim Rainer]

Sorry. I said ITC when I meant to say PIC. Professional Instrument Courses. Good outfit.