IR in Sim or on A/c?
Thread Starter
IR in Sim or on A/c?
Is it best to do the IR completely on the aircraft or best on a sim?
In my opinion (not having an IR) the sim looks more cost effective. You can stop the sim and reverse the flight to where you want if you make a mistake, in the aircraft you will have to go around and reposition yourself if you make a mistake. Also no weather constraints in a sim!!
Whats best?
In my opinion (not having an IR) the sim looks more cost effective. You can stop the sim and reverse the flight to where you want if you make a mistake, in the aircraft you will have to go around and reposition yourself if you make a mistake. Also no weather constraints in a sim!!
Whats best?
Moving On
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Smith,
You are right both the Aircraft and the sim have their uses on an IR course and you wouldn't want to do the course completley in one or the other.
The sim provides the opportunity to 'freeze' everything when things go wrong so you can step back and see the big picture. The sim also provides the opportunity to vary weather, fail items at will and provide non-standard clearances etc as the instructor sees fit.
On the flip side the sims used for IR training are not sims as such, but are only Procedure trainers and no matter how flashy they are, they will never be exactly like the aircraft. There is no substitute for a significant aircraft time on the course (even every aircraft flys slightly differently).
The best thing is to try and get a good balance of sim and aircraft.
You are right both the Aircraft and the sim have their uses on an IR course and you wouldn't want to do the course completley in one or the other.
The sim provides the opportunity to 'freeze' everything when things go wrong so you can step back and see the big picture. The sim also provides the opportunity to vary weather, fail items at will and provide non-standard clearances etc as the instructor sees fit.
On the flip side the sims used for IR training are not sims as such, but are only Procedure trainers and no matter how flashy they are, they will never be exactly like the aircraft. There is no substitute for a significant aircraft time on the course (even every aircraft flys slightly differently).
The best thing is to try and get a good balance of sim and aircraft.
Last edited by LFS; 26th Nov 2004 at 10:34.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Use the sim as much as possible - although you are required to a minimum of 15 hours in the aeroplane, you can do up to 40 hours in an FNPT2 or full flight sim.
It is far more cost effective to use the sim - and you get better continuity as you are not subject to weather delays (and usually fewer tech problems)
It is far more cost effective to use the sim - and you get better continuity as you are not subject to weather delays (and usually fewer tech problems)
Used effectively, with a good instructor, synthetic trainers/procedural trainers/FNPT2 type devices can significantly enhance training and reduce overall cost. Used ineffectively then you may as well be in the aircraft the whole time & accrue valuable flying hours.
Why pay $$$ / min to learn how to orient using a VOR or NDB, or develop consistancy in procedure/technique to do a type of approach? Just don't confuse this with the level of skill required to do the equivalent in the aircraft.
The more capable the trainer then the more that can be beneficially transferred from the aircraft. Even non-approved devices eg M$ Flight sim, RANT, IFT-Pro etc etc are useful (but rather more limited in what can be achieved with them).
Why pay $$$ / min to learn how to orient using a VOR or NDB, or develop consistancy in procedure/technique to do a type of approach? Just don't confuse this with the level of skill required to do the equivalent in the aircraft.
The more capable the trainer then the more that can be beneficially transferred from the aircraft. Even non-approved devices eg M$ Flight sim, RANT, IFT-Pro etc etc are useful (but rather more limited in what can be achieved with them).
Join Date: May 2003
Location: UK
Age: 47
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You need to strike a balance. I just passed my IR on tuesday (first attempt 
) having done 30 hrs in sim and just over 20 in the aircraft. This worked pretty well for me.
When you're paying £5/minute in the aircraft you want to be sure that you know what you're doing and not wasting money learning new stuff........ that's where the sim comes in. And some sims match aircraft performance pretty accuratly. For instance I know that in the AL200 sim that I used, 7 degrees nose up and 24"/24rpm would give me 100 kts, exactly as it does in the aircraft.
Personally I think 20 hours in the aircraft is the minium one needs to get comfortable....... but I guess you could do it in 15.
Good luck.
) having done 30 hrs in sim and just over 20 in the aircraft. This worked pretty well for me. When you're paying £5/minute in the aircraft you want to be sure that you know what you're doing and not wasting money learning new stuff........ that's where the sim comes in. And some sims match aircraft performance pretty accuratly. For instance I know that in the AL200 sim that I used, 7 degrees nose up and 24"/24rpm would give me 100 kts, exactly as it does in the aircraft.
Personally I think 20 hours in the aircraft is the minium one needs to get comfortable....... but I guess you could do it in 15.
Good luck.
Gizajob
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: uk
Age: 49
Posts: 627
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As you can see - as many opinions as posts. I guess you'll work it out for yourself in the end - there are many things to take into account such as how you learn, how much money you have etc etc etc.
I had done some multi flying before IR and actually found it harder to fly the sim (an Elite thingy FNPT2) than the aircraft. On top of that, the sim doesn't do turbulence or a busy ATC, nor does it count toward logbook flying time. However, it was great for nailing procedures, trying out routes and flying into Cardiff (which was a possible test venue but didn't allow IR training!).
I ended up doing 15 SEP, 15 sim, 25 multi (no CPL so 55 hour course). Whatever you choose, enjoy it and best of luck.
I had done some multi flying before IR and actually found it harder to fly the sim (an Elite thingy FNPT2) than the aircraft. On top of that, the sim doesn't do turbulence or a busy ATC, nor does it count toward logbook flying time. However, it was great for nailing procedures, trying out routes and flying into Cardiff (which was a possible test venue but didn't allow IR training!).
I ended up doing 15 SEP, 15 sim, 25 multi (no CPL so 55 hour course). Whatever you choose, enjoy it and best of luck.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: London
Posts: 444
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the sim, you will always know in the back of your mind that nothing can really go wrong. Whereas in the a/c, its all on your shoulders. The experience of being bumped about while setting navaids, on the ILS etc. cannot really be replicated.
Use the sim to get the procedures and sequence of events sorted in your mind. Then apply this on a proper flight. The last thing you want is being in the air in a hold and for the first time trying to figure out what type of entry u got, when to start timing, what the needles should do next. Once you "lose the plot"..you will always behind the aircraft (during the training phase). and trying to catch up is a struggle.
Best of luck though!
Use the sim to get the procedures and sequence of events sorted in your mind. Then apply this on a proper flight. The last thing you want is being in the air in a hold and for the first time trying to figure out what type of entry u got, when to start timing, what the needles should do next. Once you "lose the plot"..you will always behind the aircraft (during the training phase). and trying to catch up is a struggle.
Best of luck though!
