Simulators

Mxsmanic wrote:

There are instructors who have never flown. You can become an instructor
without flying, as I recall. Do you dismiss them as well?

Only for a subset of things that do not require actual flight to teach,
such as how to do real flight planning.

You might want to look up such a person.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

Only for a subset of things that do not require actual flight to teach,
such as how to do real flight planning.

Hardly anything requires actual flight to teach.

You might want to look up such a person.

Or maybe I should become one.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Only for a subset of things that do not require actual flight to teach,
such as how to do real flight planning.

Hardly anything requires actual flight to teach.

If that nonsense were true the US Air Force wouldn't have a fleet of
primary trainers.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

If that nonsense were true the US Air Force wouldn't have a fleet of
primary trainers.

How much time do their students spend learning things in classrooms, and how
much time do they spend learning things in the air?

wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Only for a subset of things that do not require actual flight to teach,
such as how to do real flight planning.

Hardly anything requires actual flight to teach.

If that nonsense were true the US Air Force wouldn't have a fleet of
primary trainers.

Irrelevant to your contention that hardly anything requires actual flight
to teach.

Teaching actual flight obviously requires actual flight to teach or the
US Air Force wouldn't be using actual flight to teach actual flight.

The leaders of the Air Force aren't delusional like you are.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

Irrelevant to your contention that hardly anything requires actual flight
to teach.

Teaching actual flight obviously requires actual flight to teach or the
US Air Force wouldn't be using actual flight to teach actual flight.

Hardly anything isn't the same as not at all.

So how much time do they spend in class, and how much time do they spend in
the air?

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Irrelevant to your contention that hardly anything requires actual flight
to teach.

Teaching actual flight obviously requires actual flight to teach or the
US Air Force wouldn't be using actual flight to teach actual flight.

Hardly anything isn't the same as not at all.

So you are changing your mind that your contention that flying an aircraft
can be totally taught in a simulator?

So how much time do they spend in class, and how much time do they spend in
the air?

Look it up.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

So you are changing your mind that your contention that flying an aircraft
can be totally taught in a simulator?

It can still be taught entirely in a simulator if the simulator is designed to
simulate everything that the aircraft will be called upon to do, as in the
case of large transport aircraft and small private aircraft flown for
transportation. Teaching aerobatics entirely in a simulator would be a
challenge, although I suppose a simulator suited to that purpose could be
built (NASA has built some very expensive simulators along these lines).

It is not being done very much now, but it could be done. The differences
between a full-motion simulator and normal flight in a real aircraft are small
enough to not worry about.

Look it up.

Because you don't know?

From what I understand, USAF training starts with about 25 hours of flying and
60 hours on the ground in class or in physical activities. That's the highest
flying ratio. Subsequent phases typically spend about 90% of time in class and
10% flying.