"Michael" wrote in message
om...

while someone with no experience has a learning curve. In my
experience, FAA-certified FTD's generally offer terrible simulations.

Well, I gave demos this week to 2 airline pilots in my FAA-certified FTD and
they both flew an ILS to Laguardia down to minimums in a crosswind on the
first try, broke out at minimums over the approach lights, and landed on the
first try.

I think when you say "FAA certified FTDs" it depends what equipment is
installed. Even at a given certification level, there is a very wide
variance in the control feedback and trim system the FAA wil permit. In
general, the FTD manufacturers are switching over from analog to digital
design and that permits more precise scaling and update rates of the
instruments, which in turn makes it easier to fly the FTD with a
conventional scan. It is hard to just call a device a "Frasca" or an "ATC
300" just like it is hard to refer simply to a "PC" running "Microsoft
Word" -- there are so many versions which have evolved over time.

As for PC-based devices, generally they turn out to be a lot easier to fly
if you add a throtte quadrant with flap and gear controls, rudder pedals,
and a generic avionics console. A self-centering yoke with increasing
resistance at the extremes of travel makes a *huge* difference in the
ability to hand-fly an instrument approach on one of these devices -- that
is probably the most important component of any home PC-based FTD.


--
Richard Kaplan, CFII

www.flyimc.com