A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Logging Simulator Time



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 26th 04, 04:43 PM
Bob Gardner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"FAA approved" misleads a lot of people. It means that someone at FAA HQ has
evaluated the box and decided that it has training value. Each individual
location, however, has to be checked out by the local FSDO and a letter of
authorization issued. The FSDO came into my place with a 30-page checklist,
looking into such things as VOR sensitivity, accuracy of the turn-and-bank,
aerodynamic responses, etc. They flew the AST-300 for most of a day before
conferring their blessing on it. The fact that the box had been "approved"
by HQ meant nothing.

Bob Gardner

"Bartscher" wrote in message
...
I also had a letter from the FSDO laying out
exactly what the AST-300 could be used for...does the box you used have
similar authentication?

Bob Gardner


Well, the Frasca web site was only partially useful here. They did a good

job
of reviewing what parts of what ratings the 141 can be used for, but they

don't
say much about how to log it.

http://www.frasca.com/web_pages/info...n/logtime2.htm

http://www.frasca.com/web_pages/brochures/141bro.htm

They also managed to call it both a simulator and a flight training device

on
the same page (not helpful). They do claim the following: "FAA approved

under
14 CFR parts 61 and 141. Guaranteed FAA Level 2 or 3 qualification We not

only
build these devices to AC120-45A Level 2 or 3 standards, but we can also
guarantee that they can be qualified in conjunction with the National

Simulator
Program Managers office in Atlanta". Of course I'm not quite sure what

that
means.

Sounds like it is Simulated Instrument but maybe not Total Flight Time

(which
seems odd, not that it has to make sense). Also, the consensus appears to

be
that it was neither day or night (which does make sense since there wasn't

a
visual system)

Thanks,
Eric Bartsch



 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Logging approaches Ron Garrison Instrument Flight Rules 109 March 2nd 04 05:54 PM
CFI logging instrument time Barry Instrument Flight Rules 21 November 11th 03 12:23 AM
Logging again Doug Instrument Flight Rules 10 September 17th 03 02:38 AM
Logging PIC time as student instrument pilot in IMC Greg Esres Instrument Flight Rules 24 August 2nd 03 05:20 PM
Logging instrument approaches Slav Inger Instrument Flight Rules 33 July 27th 03 11:00 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.