Flight sims in N.Z.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flight sims in N.Z.
Hi just wondering if anyone knows anything about the flight sims that are operating in N.Z. at Flight Experience.I believe there is one in Christchurch, Wellington and soon to be one in Auckland.
I saw their website it looked quite impressive. Has anyone been and actually flown in their simulators???
Interested to hear from anyone that may been there and used them.
Any comments much appreciated.
I saw their website it looked quite impressive. Has anyone been and actually flown in their simulators???
Interested to hear from anyone that may been there and used them.
Any comments much appreciated.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Not NZ anymore sadly!
Age: 62
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flight Experience
An aviaition biz in Tauranga bought the first one they sold. Its been there since mid Dec 05. 
And yes there is the original facility in CH, one in WN and soon to be one in AA.
And yes there is the original facility in CH, one in WN and soon to be one in AA.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: The Land Downunder
Posts: 765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I recently went with my Father to the simulator operated by Flight Experience in wellington whilst back home on holiday from Europe. I have to say that I was fairly impressed by the whole operation, very friendly staff and not to bad price wise. As for the simulator itself I was a little disappointed that there was no movement in any axis as it is just a fixed base simulator, however having flown airbus and 737 types I can say it is very realistic and does have excellent visuals. The chap in the office was saying that they either had just recieved or were about to recieve authorisation from the CAA to count up to 10 hours in the simulator towards licence issue with regard to the instrument rating. Well worth a visit whether it is for a bit of fun or indeed to actually do some instrument practice. If you do it then I hope all goes well.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NZ Flight Sims
Hi,
The Flight Experience sims seem to be getting good feedback, the sims are 100% per the -800 dimensionally and hardware wise (as Cloud Cutter mentions), software is almost there to replicate the 737NG in a generic fashion, rather than being Boeing proprietary data. Understand a motion platform might follow in time. NZ visuals excellent, and they have just updated the FMC with RNP into Queenstown.
The Flight Experience sims seem to be getting good feedback, the sims are 100% per the -800 dimensionally and hardware wise (as Cloud Cutter mentions), software is almost there to replicate the 737NG in a generic fashion, rather than being Boeing proprietary data. Understand a motion platform might follow in time. NZ visuals excellent, and they have just updated the FMC with RNP into Queenstown.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They aren't even close to being usable for type-specific training. The one I saw had very basic visuals (just a screen out the front, no wrap-arounds), half the switches did nothing, and the flight model isn't even close to what a 737 actually performs like, being as it is MSFS. There was no control feedback either, which makes it unusable as an SFD. The CAA might let you use it for ten hours IF, but then you can do that on any basic simulator. There is no way these 737 "sims" would ever achieve JAA or FAA approval as SFDs, and those are the only approvals that matter.
There is also the interesting issue of using Microsoft Flight Sim for training, as it has a specific disclaimer that it must not be used for flight training. Wonder how they got around that one.
And they aren't cheap, either.
There is also the interesting issue of using Microsoft Flight Sim for training, as it has a specific disclaimer that it must not be used for flight training. Wonder how they got around that one.
And they aren't cheap, either.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: with the porangi,s in Pohara
Age: 66
Posts: 983
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MOR...... sort of have to agree with you......whilst not having seen or being in these Sims(but plenty of others) and I,m sure the other posts are accurate regarding the quality...the bottom line for me is unless it has 3 axis motion ...its an expensive "plaything".......but Im sure many will find its use to be a great help......Whats the hourly rate ?????
Join Date: May 2004
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MOR...I don't think they are putting them out there as being certified as NG/type specific trainers in any shape or form. More like modelled on the -800. Did you get a chance to try one? I thought they were there as being a hell of a lot of fun for anyone to try, with a potential training application.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I realise that... just responding to Cloud Cutters comment about airlines being interested in them.
They are indeed "modelled" on the -800, an exact copy would raise all sorts of interesting copyright questions (as other sim manufacturers have found out to their cost). There are really only two sorts of simulator, "approved" ones, which pay Boeing for the right to copy their flight deck, and which use proprietary flight test data to build the the flight model; and the "expensive toy" variety, which use a best guess for the cockpit and use completely inadequate software such as microsoft flight sim.
There is a reason that proper sims cost a lot, you know! The flight test data alone would cost you upwards of $1.5 million US from the major manufacturers.
The Flight Experience sims are fine for entertainment purposes, but not even close to a real 737 when it comes to the bits that matter. Anybody can buy the panels and knobs from the internet, add the Project Magenta software and call it a simulator... but it ain't. As Pakeha Boy says, without at least three-axis (preferably six axis) motion and control feedback, it's just a toy.
They are indeed "modelled" on the -800, an exact copy would raise all sorts of interesting copyright questions (as other sim manufacturers have found out to their cost). There are really only two sorts of simulator, "approved" ones, which pay Boeing for the right to copy their flight deck, and which use proprietary flight test data to build the the flight model; and the "expensive toy" variety, which use a best guess for the cockpit and use completely inadequate software such as microsoft flight sim.
There is a reason that proper sims cost a lot, you know! The flight test data alone would cost you upwards of $1.5 million US from the major manufacturers.
The Flight Experience sims are fine for entertainment purposes, but not even close to a real 737 when it comes to the bits that matter. Anybody can buy the panels and knobs from the internet, add the Project Magenta software and call it a simulator... but it ain't. As Pakeha Boy says, without at least three-axis (preferably six axis) motion and control feedback, it's just a toy.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: The Land Downunder
Posts: 765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MOR, you are quite right, this device will never be certified for fully blown type training. What it is excellent for is to allow wannabes or indeed those who only have an interest in aviation to have a go and get a fairly realistic look at the workings of a jet airliner. Also it has potentional as both a IR procedural trainer and an MCC trainer. I hear the airlines are interested in using it not as a type trainer but as the platform that they conduct their simulator checks for prospective employees.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MOR...and with the feedback from Artificial Horizon the situation is summed up beautifully.
Yes, agreed and understood that "proper" sims cost the money (20 years in the industry in Europe and the US so I know what you mean about cost), but lets not get too hung up on "sim" versus Fixed Base FTD or however one wants to refer to what Flight Experience may have/not have, at least in the context of how they seem to be presenting them.
From what I saw of the one in Wellington recently, it's something more than your "best guess" description but what the heck, they are on to something and it seems to be working.
Yes, agreed and understood that "proper" sims cost the money (20 years in the industry in Europe and the US so I know what you mean about cost), but lets not get too hung up on "sim" versus Fixed Base FTD or however one wants to refer to what Flight Experience may have/not have, at least in the context of how they seem to be presenting them.
From what I saw of the one in Wellington recently, it's something more than your "best guess" description but what the heck, they are on to something and it seems to be working.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes perhaps what I should have said was they cannot claim it is a accurate representation without opening themselves up to copyright problems... the magic figure being 90% (court case in the US a few years ago). It may well be 100% accurate, you just can't claim it. As I said before, all the bits are readily available on the internet.
You can't "officially" use it as an MCC trainer without certification (FNPTII in JAA-speak), unless you invent some ersatz NZ-only qualification.
You could use it as an IR procedural trainer, but it's pointless unless you are going to do your flight test on a 737. A trainee would be far better off spending their money on something that simulates a piston twin, such as a FRASCA 242 or similar. That way, there is some correlation between the skill set you learn, and the one you need. Training in an EFIS jet in no way prepares you for a flight test in an analogue twin with no flight director or FMS.
You could use it as a pre-employment tool, but without some form of control feedback, it tells you virtually nothing except how good the candidates scan is.
You can't "officially" use it as an MCC trainer without certification (FNPTII in JAA-speak), unless you invent some ersatz NZ-only qualification.
You could use it as an IR procedural trainer, but it's pointless unless you are going to do your flight test on a 737. A trainee would be far better off spending their money on something that simulates a piston twin, such as a FRASCA 242 or similar. That way, there is some correlation between the skill set you learn, and the one you need. Training in an EFIS jet in no way prepares you for a flight test in an analogue twin with no flight director or FMS.
You could use it as a pre-employment tool, but without some form of control feedback, it tells you virtually nothing except how good the candidates scan is.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NZ
Posts: 835
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MOR, I was referring to airline interest in the operation that builds them, not the existing sims (although one of them is used in Mount Cook interviews). There is a possible move to add motion and bring them up to type training standard in the future. I agree that MSFS won't cut it as a software base. You have to agree that, starting from scratch only a few years ago, these guys have done a fantastic job already, and could quite conceivably develop their product to focus on training rather than entertainment.
Even as they are, they are a good CPT device, much better than the cardboard box used by some.
Even as they are, they are a good CPT device, much better than the cardboard box used by some.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Euroland
Posts: 959
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I understand what you mean.
You can't add motion very easily because the MS flight sim software doesn't support it... even if you could write acceptable washout software, getting the two to talk to each other would be a major mission.
I would call them more lucky than clever... the original sim was very, very basic and would have been the end of the story if Mr Mortgage hadn't stepped in... they were gone without his money.
I agree it looks impressive to sim-starved NZ pilots, but if you know anything about the real McCoy, or even the international competition, you would see how very far away it is from being a viable commercial sim.
Good luck, though.
You can't add motion very easily because the MS flight sim software doesn't support it... even if you could write acceptable washout software, getting the two to talk to each other would be a major mission.
I would call them more lucky than clever... the original sim was very, very basic and would have been the end of the story if Mr Mortgage hadn't stepped in... they were gone without his money.
I agree it looks impressive to sim-starved NZ pilots, but if you know anything about the real McCoy, or even the international competition, you would see how very far away it is from being a viable commercial sim.
Good luck, though.
