"Mike Ash" wrote in message
...
In article
,
a wrote:

The reality is, use would have to be pretty high, for 2000 hour rental
years -- that's 40 hours a week, the device alone would have to earn
$10 an hour for a 3 year payback, and that contributes nothing for
space and instruction time. A more realistic use rate might be 500
hours a year, device charges $40 an hour for a 3 year payback (more or
less a 30% ROI, not a bad target for high risk ventures). I think I'll
keep my checkbook unopened.

For things where the simulator is just as good or better than a real
plane (practicing instrument procedures?) then $40/hour is a great rate.
But still somewhat hefty....

On the other hand, there are things I'd like to do in my airplane and
would happily pay a few hundred dollars to try them in a realistic
simulator.

Oh yes. I'd easily pay WAY more than what I pay for actual flight time
to practice takeoff aborts at difficult altitudes in a simulator good
enough for the experience to translate into reality.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

That's a pretty good example of one of the good uses of a sim for emergency
procedures.

I used to be an advocate for true motion, almost to the point of bigotry,
after having the oportunity to try one for a few minutes years ago; but I've
since come to doubt the need for any more motion than the old link trainers
could provide--as far as I have been told, they could jostle around more
than enough to simulate turbulence and almost certainly helped to win the
war with far fewer casualties than might have otherwise been the case.

Peter