Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Uaco (mostly CO) Fighting For Cheaper Simulators  
User currently offlineKFitz From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (4 years 2 weeks 3 days 10 hours ago) and read 1626 times:


Internal struggle between UA and CO folks going on over pilot simulator training.

CO lobbied the FAA to accept cheaper, non moving simulators to save approximately one third of the price. No other major airline utilizes these cheaper units in the world.

Now they want the UA folks to go along with it, because CO believes this "innovative" solution is better (and saves a few dimes). It's not going along too well with the UA folks, who believe you need full motion simulators for safety's sake and tthe company should not be attempting to.shortchange pilot training to save small amounts of money.

It falls right into the new methodology of the new UA downgaging to save menial sums of money on things the old UA wouldn't have (eliminate domestic F pillows, doengrade to.cheaper blsnkets, charge for premium alcoholic mixers in F, downgage compensation for elites). Should be interesting to see which mentality wins out aat the combined company.

4 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlinetozairport From United States of America, joined Oct 2005, 694 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (4 years 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1554 times:

Fixed base sims have their use. They are excellent procedural trainers and really could be used to replicate a lot of real world scenarios.

Full motion sims are great if you are using the visual picture, as using visuals with no motion feels really awkward.

All that being said, full motion simulator fidelity will never come close to replicating the actual emergencies pilots face. There is no good way to produce the bone jarring bangs of a compressor stall, the actual smoke in the cockpit of an avionics fire, or the noise and debris associated with a rapid depressurization.

All in all, this is something for the combined airline to work out, and something that, as usual, the press got completely wrong. It was just another fluff story.

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 22348 posts, RR: 55
Reply 2, posted (4 years 2 weeks 3 days 9 hours ago) and read 1534 times:

You want to use a fixed-base sim for procedures and CRM training, I'm all for it - no need for motion when you're doing that sort of stuff. But when it comes to certain emergencies - engine failures, windshear, terrain, etc., there's no substitute for motion.

Not to mention that fixed-based sims can really make you sick.   


7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineCODC10 From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 2539 posts, RR: 6
Reply 3, posted (4 years 2 weeks 3 days 1 hour ago) and read 1172 times:

CO isn't using fixed-base sims exclusively. They still operate full-motion sims for all training procedures where they are essential. I should know, I've 'flown' them before  !

The fixed-base sims allow training on tasks and procedures where full motion is not critical to be carried out for substantially less money. If the FAA approves it, I don't have a problem with it.

User currently offlineIAHFLYR From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 4790 posts, RR: 21
Reply 4, posted (4 years 2 weeks 3 days ago) and read 1121 times:

Quoting CODC10 (Reply 3):
CO isn't using fixed-base sims exclusively. They still operate full-motion sims for all training procedures where they are essential. I should know, I've 'flown' them before !

Myself as well and they have two fairly new 738 sims with GLS.

IIRC, CO just took delivery of their 787 sim in Houston which was to be full motion, that certainly wasn't cheap.

Any views shared are strictly my own and do not a represent those of any former employer.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Suit Against CO Pilots For Sham Divorce Thrown Out posted Mon Oct 19 2009 20:04:01 by Enilria
CO-Date For Star Alliance? posted Fri Apr 3 2009 18:45:30 by TonyBurr
CO Applies For Fiji Routes posted Sun Mar 15 2009 00:08:29 by MasseyBrown
CO Applying For Daily (MSY)-IAH-GIG Service posted Tue Oct 28 2008 10:32:47 by MSYtristar
CO Equipment For IAH-CDG posted Fri Oct 24 2008 11:12:34 by RonmacIAH
CO Question, For EWR-AMS Last Night posted Fri Apr 11 2008 08:43:34 by STT757
Is CO Done For 2008? posted Sun Jan 20 2008 01:26:03 by Diesel33
Support CO’s Application For Shanghai posted Wed Jul 25 2007 01:15:53 by Ewrw4co
CO Reapplies For EWR-PVG 2009 Startup posted Tue Jul 17 2007 05:15:53 by Falcon84
Need CO Registration For Yesterday Flight... posted Thu May 3 2007 17:48:12 by AA737-823