Glider Simulator Training at the USAFA

On Thursday, November 15, 2018 at 5:00:12 PM UTC-8, wrote:
Back when the rains came & the earth cooled:

400-series academic courses were associated with a cadet's freshman ("4-degree") year.
AM-451 was typically taken the summer break before a cadet's began his sophomore year.

The USAF ACADEMY SOARING PROGRAM SYLLABUS OF INSTRUCTION FOR AIRMANSHIP 451, BASIC COURSE GLIDER, Dated APRIL 1980, states, "This syllabus outlines...the training required...to solo a glider."

As for the 1980s through the 1990s--The vast majority of BASIC COURSE GLIDER students achieved solo. It was rare not to solo.
When did not soloing become the norm (hence the modern-day possibility to double the BASIC COURSE GLIDER solo rate)?

This is true. Back when the USAFA was training in 2-33s, the solo rate was much higher. They are now using a "club" version of the DG-1000, and the solo rate has been around 40%. By adding simulator training there were able to get that up to 89%.
-Russell Holtz

Not sure about their logic of using an aircraft apparently less conducive to the intended task.
Congratulations on finding a way to help overcome that incongruity.

On Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 5:05:35 PM UTC-5, wrote:
In the summer of 2018, the United States Air Force Academy began using Mach 0.1 Simulated Glider Cockpits as part of their "Glider Airmanship" course.

Back to the merits of glider simulator training...

Student pilots pay for the majority of aerotows at most clubs. This cash flow keeps the club afloat. If we used simulators to train up students with fewer aerotows, then we would need to recruit more students, or the cash flow would suffer and aerotow rates would go up. Everybody would pay more for each tow, but students would still provide most of the cash flow. Certificated pilots would pay more, maybe a lot more.

How do we use simulator training to recruit and retain more pilots? Reducing the overall cost and duration of primary training will marginally increase the number of pilots, but I'd like to think that we could use Condor to potentially recruit even more pilots. I don't know exactly how though.

On Monday, November 19, 2018 at 12:47:50 PM UTC-7, son_of_flubber wrote:
On Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 5:05:35 PM UTC-5, wrote:
In the summer of 2018, the United States Air Force Academy began using Mach 0.1 Simulated Glider Cockpits as part of their "Glider Airmanship" course.

Back to the merits of glider simulator training...

Student pilots pay for the majority of aerotows at most clubs. This cash flow keeps the club afloat. If we used simulators to train up students with fewer aerotows, then we would need to recruit more students, or the cash flow would suffer and aerotow rates would go up. Everybody would pay more for each tow, but students would still provide most of the cash flow. Certificated pilots would pay more, maybe a lot more.

How do we use simulator training to recruit and retain more pilots? Reducing the overall cost and duration of primary training will marginally increase the number of pilots, but I'd like to think that we could use Condor to potentially recruit even more pilots. I don't know exactly how though.


Should be a mix in my opinion, but as Scott Manley has demonstrated (convincingly at a Barnaby Lecture in Denver), it can be used effectively prior to actual flight. Simulators can also advance student knowledge and opportunities for reflective thinking in learning the art and science of soaring by several lessons.

If you indeed acquire a Mach 0.01 or put effort and money into another simulator setup, do what Black Forest Soaring Society does, charge some hourly rate for use.

Frank Whiteley

On Monday, November 19, 2018 at 3:37:12 PM UTC-8, Frank Whiteley wrote:
On Monday, November 19, 2018 at 12:47:50 PM UTC-7, son_of_flubber wrote:
On Wednesday, November 14, 2018 at 5:05:35 PM UTC-5, wrote:
In the summer of 2018, the United States Air Force Academy began using Mach 0.1 Simulated Glider Cockpits as part of their "Glider Airmanship" course.

Back to the merits of glider simulator training...

Student pilots pay for the majority of aerotows at most clubs. This cash flow keeps the club afloat. If we used simulators to train up students with fewer aerotows, then we would need to recruit more students, or the cash flow would suffer and aerotow rates would go up. Everybody would pay more for each tow, but students would still provide most of the cash flow. Certificated pilots would pay more, maybe a lot more.

How do we use simulator training to recruit and retain more pilots? Reducing the overall cost and duration of primary training will marginally increase the number of pilots, but I'd like to think that we could use Condor to potentially recruit even more pilots. I don't know exactly how though.


Should be a mix in my opinion, but as Scott Manley has demonstrated (convincingly at a Barnaby Lecture in Denver), it can be used effectively prior to actual flight. Simulators can also advance student knowledge and opportunities for reflective thinking in learning the art and science of soaring by several lessons.

If you indeed acquire a Mach 0.01 or put effort and money into another simulator setup, do what Black Forest Soaring Society does, charge some hourly rate for use.

Frank Whiteley

Exactly. Why would changing for simulator time ever not be a consideration? Ideally you are paying for an instructor to monitor and guide learning and for the use of capital equipment and people costs to set all this up. etc. The more "professionally" the use of those simulators is conducted, I'd hope the more folks should be willing to pay for them and the more likely to be gained from them. I've seen early use of these where charging seemed to just have not been considered and the justification/concerns issues spiral into negative thought territory fairly quickly.