Arniepie From Belgium, joined Aug 2005, 1265 posts, RR: 1 Posted (1 year 6 months 8 hours ago) and read 3696 times:
Quote: Simulators get real
By
David Learmount
on July 20, 2011 1:49 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0) |ShareThis
Cathay Pacific has just become the first customer airline for a revolutionary new simulator motion system that will transform what simulators can be used for.
Even full flight simulators (FFS), at present, are really just sophisticated procedure and systems trainers, although the aviation authorites pretend they can be beneficial to manual flying skills. But US FAA research says there is no evidence that manual flying skills can be taught in simulators - the skills simply do not transfer to the real aeroplane.
Enter Sabena Flight Academy - Development (SFA-D) with a simulator motion modifying system it calls Lm². Developed by aeronautical engineer Capt Filip VanBiervliet, it is based on a rewritten set of algorithms for simulating lateral motion and accelerations, eliminating the confusing sensory feedback that simulator motion systems currently provide.
....
hree years ago I "flew" an Lm²-modified Boeing 737 FFS, first with Lm² switched off, then with it operative, and this is what I wrote at the time:
"So that I could attempt manoeuvres that I knew would be almost impossible to 'fly' in an unmodified FFS, I asked for a crosswind and was given 30kt from the right.
Low res LM2 pic.jpgThe scenario was good night visual at Brussels Zaventem on runway 25L. I chose not to use the flight director, autopilot or autothrottle, and for my first attempt the Lm² was not active.
I managed the take-off adequately, but on approach I deliberately displaced the aircraft well to the left of the extended centreline for Brussels runway 25L, so that recovering against the crosswind to intercept the extended centreline at about 1nm on short final would stress out the motion system and provide plenty of lateral lurches as I lined up the crabbing aircraft for landing. I kicked off drift at about the right time and tried to keep the lurching machine on the runway. It was a seriously inelegant attempt.
SFA-D kindly froze the system and put me back on the approach to do the same thing, but this time with the Lm² operating.
It was a transformation. The simulator handled like the aircraft would. Its reactions to control inputs were predictable and natural, killing the temptation to over-control. The crosswind landing under the same conditions was actually a good one, including the ground run down to taxiing speed.
Just to prove the resulting safe landing was not a fluke, SFA-D suggested I try starting on the approach to 25L and then do a late switch to 25R, but this time with 30kt crosswind from the left. It was a delight to do, and the landing was quite good.
Leaving the runway entailed a left turn through about 130deg, and the tiller allowed me to keep the nosewheel perfectly on the centreline all the way without any swinging or over-correction, or that sick feeling you get when your balance sensory organs don't tally with what you see. The latter may sound unsensational, but taxiing is one of the most difficult things to do in a simulator.
With Lm², simulator flying could actually become fun for the first time, and much less sweaty."
Have any of our HongKong Anetters already used this new Sim , and if so does it make a difference, does this make
it as real as the real thing , or good enough to be a close enough approximation?
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 1, posted (1 year 6 months ago) and read 3492 times:
Quoting Arniepie (Thread starter): US FAA research says there is no evidence that manual flying skills can be taught in simulators - the skills simply do not transfer to the real aeroplane.
If this is true, how on earth do any of the regulators allow you to take credit for sim time?
KELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 5962 posts, RR: 4 Reply 2, posted (1 year 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 3247 times:
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 1): If this is true, how on earth do any of the regulators allow you to take credit for sim time?
Tom.
For a level I, they only allow so many hours to be applied towards instruction time for a certificate or rating. IIRC, only about 5 hours of sime time counted towards instruction time for the Instrument Airplane/Single Engine Land rating. Not sure about higher levels.
When I got my instrument ticket, I took a few sim hops (in a Frasca 142-which is FAA certified for instruction) on days when it was too miserable to fly. It was great for teaching procedures, but horrible at replicating actual stick time in IMC. No motion, of course, and only rudimentary graphics when you popped out at mins. The sound unit in it sounded like it was lifted form a 1980's vintage Pole Position arcade game Even that rudimentary sim costs money to run, the flight school billed something like $50/hour for sim time (granted, part of it was your flight instructor's pay...).
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
atct From United States of America, joined Mar 2001, 2044 posts, RR: 40 Reply 3, posted (1 year 5 months 4 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 3156 times:
I flew a Redbird 2 days ago. Was it great for some IFR currency and refresher, you bet! It does not compare to being by yourself in a 206 flying to mins on a non precision hoping you make it out though. Whatever happened to learning to fly in a Champ or J3 then learning how to use instruments in something advanced...ohh well I guess im old school.
atct
Real pilots fly planes that take and measure oil in gallons
tdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80 Reply 4, posted (1 year 5 months 4 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 3124 times:
Quoting KELPkid (Reply 2): For a level I, they only allow so many hours to be applied towards instruction time for a certificate or rating.
Quoting atct (Reply 3): I flew a Redbird 2 days ago. Was it great for some IFR currency and refresher, you bet! It does not compare to being by yourself in a 206 flying
I totally agree that the basic fixed-based birds are only good for procedure training (which is also the opinion of the OEMs and the regulators).
But the OP's article seems to be specifically targeting full motion Level D sims.
Arniepie From Belgium, joined Aug 2005, 1265 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (1 year 5 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 3032 times:
Quoting tdscanuck (Reply 4): I totally agree that the basic fixed-based birds are only good for procedure training (which is also the opinion of the OEMs and the regulators).
But the OP's article seems to be specifically targeting full motion Level D sims.
Tom.
That's how understood it from the article, I'm not a pilot myself, therefor I assumed that this was something
new where before the realism of the simulation was limited by the algoritmes used in todays level D sims, this
new method is supposed to be much closer to reality.
True or not , I don't know , that's why I asked if anyone had any hands on experience with this new sim since there are
a few pilots here that fly out of Hong Kong, also one big European and US company is starting with this sim.
I would guess BA and AA, 2 other OneWorld members???
Airbus_A340 From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2000, 1555 posts, RR: 21 Reply 6, posted (1 year 5 months 3 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2610 times:
Quoting Arniepie (Thread starter): Have any of our HongKong Anetters already used this new Sim
When they say we are the first customer, we may very well be indeed, however I don't believe the new algorithms have been installed on our sims just yet (well Airbus anyway).
The article is correct in that the feeling isn't really accurate in the sim. Taxiing especially feels odd as the senses really don't line up with what's happening. Sims are a great procedure/handling trainer, if they can now improve the motion, I really do look forward to trying it out when they are updated...hopefully resulting in better flying in the sim
sf260 From Belgium, joined Oct 2007, 136 posts, RR: 0 Reply 7, posted (1 year 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 10 hours ago) and read 2117 times:
I met one of the developers a couple of weeks ago. They are very confident in their product and some leading EU training centres have signed LOI's. He was also very proud to tell that the "Head Of Flight Training" (or whatever) of LH was very pleased with [the movements of] the simulator, and felt very real.
There are also some problems within the company but they should be taken care of very soon, he told me. As it is not about the product itself (it's more shareholder/board stuff), I won't discuss it in detail here.
Sponsor Message: 
From Belgium, joined Aug 2005, 1265 posts, 
From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 5962 posts, 
Even that rudimentary sim costs money to run, the flight school billed something like $50/hour for sim time (granted, part of it was your flight instructor's pay...).
From Hong Kong, joined Mar 2000, 1555 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
