ELITE or ON TOP for IFR training?

The idea is that a simulator controls the number of decisions per minute
that you, the pilot, have to make. This allows effective learning. In
a real airplane just about anything can start happening at anytime,
complicating the learning.

exactly. Especially with ATC calling out traffic or an approach is
down for MX or the winds don't agree with the VOR approach you want
to do.

The other thing to keep in mind is when you fly IFR, you fly IFR.
You don't 'practice IFR.' Ok, you can do VFR practice approaches
but you still have to do them as ATC expects you to do them the
published way. The first time I went up with my CFII out of SQL,
our clearance was 'maintain VFR at 1100 or below.' I didn't have
the skills to do that, checklists, call departure, etc. and I busted
altitude by no less than 50 feet. ATC was on my ass immediately.
You 'do' and not 'practice' in the system. The simulator helps
that.

Gerald

G. Sylvester wrote:

The other thing to keep in mind is when you fly IFR, you fly IFR.
You don't 'practice IFR.' Ok, you can do VFR practice approaches
but you still have to do them as ATC expects you to do them the
published way. The first time I went up with my CFII out of SQL,
our clearance was 'maintain VFR at 1100 or below.' I didn't have
the skills to do that, checklists, call departure, etc. and I busted
altitude by no less than 50 feet. ATC was on my ass immediately.
You 'do' and not 'practice' in the system. The simulator helps
that.

While this may have happened to you, I'd say that kind of experience is
exceptional. Sorry it happened to you.

Where I live, I can fly VFR with few altitude restrictions, but then I don't fly
out of SQL.

When flying VFR practice approaches I've never had ATC care whether or not they
were done "in the published way". VFR is VFR.

In 16 years and 1500+ hours of flying, I've never heard of anyone busted by ATC
for a 50 foot altitude deviation (well, I guess now I have).

Regardless, I agree a PC-based flight simulator can save you time and money on
IFR training.

Dave

One of my most memorable early lessons during my instrument training was
with a simulator. The instructor set it up, and said that the game plan was
that I was to fly to an intersection, intercept a radial to a VOR, and hold
at the VOR. I was "flying" along holding the CDI pretty good. Whoops a
little bank, level out. Still a bank, level out. OK "seems" to be coming
back now. PAUSE (nice that these simulators have that). "OK, What's wrong
with this picture?". Ummm, spiral dive? Sneaky instructor had failed the
vacuum system. It's a lesson I won't forget.
Now, if I use a simulator, and I know that whatever I plan on doing is
going to take say "twenty" minutes, I set a "random failure" to happen
between five and "sixty" minutes. That way I don't know if it's going to
happen or not.

While this may have happened to you, I'd say that kind of experience is
exceptional. Sorry it happened to you.

no big deal. I learned and no one got hurt and no one had to
deviate.

In 16 years and 1500+ hours of flying, I've never heard of anyone busted
by ATC for a 50 foot altitude deviation (well, I guess now I have).

it was not the 50 feet, it was that you basically fly the pattern which
is right underneath the approach into SFO. The big iron passes at
around 1800 and maybe a mile or two east of the pattern. I was not
only 50 feet high but I was also climbing. Remember the transponder
encoder shows in hundreds of feet and is not as accurate as the
altimeter in the plane. Add it all up and it could have shown me at
150 feet high and still climbing.

Regardless, I agree a PC-based flight simulator can save you time and
money on IFR training.

definitely. It can also more realistically teach you about
failures without risking your life.

Gerald