Tim wrote:

"-b-" wrote

To paraphrase, the programs are not completely without usefulness, but
they are
not simulators.

That's not what he said, he said they weren't "flight training devices".
The FAA has a definition for what qualifies as a "flight training device",
or FTD. They do not have one for "simulator". Webster does, and MSFS seems
to fit that very general definition: "A device, data processing system, or
computer program for representing features of the behavior of a physical or
abstract system."

Notice it doesn't say "all features" or "exact behavior" because those are
qualitative. MSFS is indeed a flight simulator, albeit a poor one.

Actually the FAA does have definitions for simulators and other training
devices in Part 60.

A couple of huge differences between the games and a real simulator is
that a real simulator has all real switches and buttons that operate,
not pictures on a display activated by a mouse and force feedback on
the controls.

PCATD's, i.e. a flight simulator game with enough hardware to qualify
for instrument procedures training, are covered elsewhere.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.