DCS: R-44? just bear with me for a sec...

[Draco]

Idea for ED.

 

Ever think of producing a civilian helicopter training sim? Think about how many new rotor heads start training every year. And while there are great procedural trainers/eyecandy packages like FSX out there which are great if you want to practice IFR navigation or shoot approaches into some far off airfield. But none of them really come to grips with the aerodynamics very well. The autos, as modeled in FS are deadly wrong; it lacks any modeling of settling with power whatsoever, and really hasn’t given much thought to rotor craft at all.

 

Personally as a low time helicopter student, autos in particular scare the piss out of me. Especially doing max glide or minimum decent rate autos, when you’re walking that line where the low rotor RPM horn starts screaming at you about impending doom. If the RPMs drop to low the blades will fold up into an unrecoverable position and you’re skydiving with a helicopter on your back. So from my point of view I would love to be able to practice my emergency procedures from the safety of my home where I’m not going to ball-up someone else’s helicopter and kill myself if I mess up. Helicopters as a rule do not permit learning from your mistakes.

 

Civilian helicopters especially the lower end ones used in training aren’t overly complicated machines, certainly nowhere near as complicated as a Ka-50. I definitely didn’t see a laser warning receiver in the last R-44 I flew. I doubt it would take that much work to develop a Robinson or even a high performance (by our standards any way) ship like an MD-500 when compared to the labor that went into the black shark.

 

I feel the market is there if it is presented as a serious training aid as well as an entertainment package. I believe it would yield a good return on investment. I would gladly pay $50-$70 per helicopter module and I think a lot pilots would see it as a great and cost effective way to get additional practice in and sharpen there skills considering dual place instruction in an R-44 costs about $400 per hour. Even $100 for a package like I’m proposing would be a good investment to most pilots.

 

Just an idea that popped into my head last night driving home from the airport. What do you think DCS: R-44?

Edited September 30, 2008 by Draco
copy paste failure

[nscode]

You DO NOT want to learn emergency procedures in a PC simulator. PERIOD. You can learn navigation and enjoy lots of other stuff, but there is a good reason why real training simulators cost the money they cost, and in case of a R-44 I'm afraid that would be more than the actual helicopter.

[Zorrin]

Surely a longshot Draco.

I can tell you one thing, don't think that because you can do something in a PC simulator you can do it in the real thing.

 

I used to run a helicopter charter and training school (rotary & fixed)... Chappie strolls in one day and enquires about the cost of a PPL. Reckons he "knows enough to get one airborne and do a cirucit".

 

"So how many hours do you have?" I ask.

 

"Oh none, but I have played a lot of MS Flight Simulator. Now I know a lot of people knock it, but it's very realisitic. I know I could get in one of those little planes out there and fly a circuit safely..."

 

(Those "little planes" were the Cessna 152. The proverbial spam can).

 

"Okay, here are the keys. Off you trot.."

 

Well he couldn't even figure out how to start the aircraft.

 

Now I know that is a little out of context, but that actually happened.

 

And it's dangerous to think that using a high fidelity recreation simulator can help. The only thing it can ever help you with is navigation principles.

 

However, once you get your license, will you still be interested in the simulator version? I doubt it. As a license pilot of course I own a plethora of simulators. Which ones do I actually use often? Well only the ones that let me do things I cannot do in real life.

 

I'd rather spend the $400 on an hour in the 44 (which by the way is 50% cheaper than you'll find over here in Blighty...)

 

You're lucky if you can get an R22 dual for $550!

 

Best of luck with your license. And even if you can't understand my point of using a sim for things you cannot do for real. I'd happily bet your opinion will change when you have first tasted solo flight.

[Draco]

Certainly no simulator weather PC or multi-million dollar full motion, will ever be able be able to take the place of actually training time in the aircraft. And I'm not proposing that emergency procedures be learned entirely on a PC but that it can be used to develop a good foundation and understanding of what's going on and the proper response before being taught in the aircraft when lives and large sums of money are on the line. Enter an auto, let your rpms tank in the simulator see what happens learn keep it from happening. Let a new pilot find out why an approach at 400 foot per minute descent rate at 20kts is a really bad idea. Then he'll learn the importance of avoiding those situations in real life. I’m not proposing to “learn to fly on your home computer” but a supplement where straying outside the envelope won’t actually kill you. But the results of such transgressions will still be readily apparent and where you can as I said learn from your mistakes. Of course it will never be perfect but it would be a lot better than using say FSX in your spare time and developing a bunch of bad habits.

And thanks for the well wishes Zorrin. My instructor says that most of my flying is at a commercial level and once I have a better handle on autos would be confident to let me solo. Having 14 hours I however plan on getting a lot more experience before I do that.

[Zorrin]

You'll be pleasantly surprised how much you learn in those harrowing ten/fifteen minutes! :D

 

I'm sorry Draco, I have to disagree. Or at least, disagree with your example of Vortex Ring. What's one of the warning signs that you are entering vortex ring - given that you are descending fast, with power and at a low IAS. It shakes right? How can you convey that in the simulator?

 

Maybe I'm just sceptical.

 

But so much of learning to fly is initially all about how things feels. When you come in to put down on the pad, how do you know how much power you need to get her settled before you can let it down onto the skids? Varies with the conditions. And how often are you looking at the manifold pressure gauge in the 44 when you are putting it on the pad? It's feeling. You know how much power you need because you can feel what the helicopter is doing and what you are learning is how to react to these feelings.

 

You moot at FSX developing bad habits. Well just because you are using DCS:R44 doesn't mean you won't be learning bad habits. No disrespect to the devs, but how do you know that what you are going to be doing in the sim is the exact equal of the real life variant? You don't unless you have that real option. And if you have that real option why are you doing something on a PC that you can do for real.

 

I always found that the instructor screaming at me kinda made me not want to go to the wrong side of the envelope. A bit like Pavlovs dogs... Feel the buffett hear you instructors voice telling you off...

 

Strayed OT but if you wanna discuss it some more PM me :)

Edited September 30, 2008 by Zorrin

[GGTharos]

And I'm not proposing that emergency procedures be learned entirely on a PC but that it can be used to develop a good foundation and understanding of what's going on and the proper response before being taught in the aircraft when lives and large sums of money are on the line.

 

If you mean in terms of watching which gauges do what, maybe - but the simulator is a bare minimum - effectively chalkboard knowledge. You definitely do NOT want to start learning flight technique on a simulator ... you can pick up bad habits that'll get you killed in the real world. (Example: A lot of people correct speed, altitude, etc at all costs when landing - esp. in LOMAC ... in the real world you abort because correcting at all costs is a good way to bring your aircraft to the point of departure, and at 300' off the ground, your seat better say martin-baker on it)

 

Enter an auto, let your rpms tank in the simulator see what happens learn keep it from happening. Let a new pilot find out why an approach at 400 foot per minute descent rate at 20kts is a really bad idea. Then he'll learn the importance of avoiding those situations in real life. I’m not proposing to “learn to fly on your home computer” but a supplement where straying outside the envelope won’t actually kill you.

 

You are taught and shown departure modes by your instructor, so you can FEEL and KNOW the onset, and practice how to get out of them. All you need is altitude. I wouldn't /DARE/ try to fly a Ka-50 alone, despite testing Black Shark, unless the other option was certain death - THEN I would take my chances with the Ka-50. And AFAIK, Black Shark is as realistic a FLIGHT simulation as it gets for the PC, never mind weapons etc.

 

But the results of such transgressions will still be readily apparent and where you can as I said learn from your mistakes. Of course it will never be perfect but it would be a lot better than using say FSX in your spare time and developing a bunch of bad habits.

 

The first bad habit you'd learn in the simulator is not care about the crash. This is the biggest problem when someone tells you 'we'll teach you how to fly on this simulator'. Half this stuff is psychological, and you might not think it is a big deal, either for yourself or otherwise, but there's a reason why people are started off flying on the training aircraft and progressed up rather than being started on simulators - and money isn't it (proliferation of simulators would make them cheap)

[Zorrin]

... but there's a reason why people are started off flying on the training aircraft and progressed up rather than being started on simulators - and money isn't it (proliferation of simulators would make them cheap)

 

Actually they've tried it and done it. It's called the MPL - or Multicrew Pilot's License. Involves 100hrs[?] simulator time and thereafter type rating training straight onto a 737/A320 series aircraft before embarking on a career as a First Officer for good.

 

Of course this license has already shown a shortfall what with the recent culling of services and various airlines going bust. The first lot of MPL pilots were made redunant a while back. Problem is their license is specifically tailored to an airline... yadda yadda.

 

But point is they've already done it in an attempt to cure the shortage of qualified pilots in civvy street.

 

I don't belive its a good thing but it's [commercial aviation at least] becoming more about the accountants than the guys, or girls, at the pointy end.

[douglas_a]

Draco, if you're looking for a civilian helicopter simulator software try x-plane FAA certified version. Mind you I think I agree with the people who say that the manoeuvres you trying to practice are better done in a real thing.

 

When I did my pre PPL training I remember using ms flight simulator for circuit training, but mainly for remembering procedures, speeds, etc, come to think of it I could have done it in an arm chair. There are at least three factors in learning how to fly: 1. Physical memory, your muscles remember how to react before your brain analyses it. 2. procedures/speeds/ system knowledge 3. Good judgement and common sense.

 

Simulators can cover completely No 2 only, i.e. start up procedures, system operation, IFR flight etc. In a complex aircraft I think it would be more appropriate to practice in a simulator since there are more systems and therefore procedures that need to be executed in a specific sequence during various system failures for example. Just knowing how the aircraft feels is not enough here. As an analogy think of trying to build a pc hang glider simulator... a complete nonsense right.

 

Personally, I am going to use black-shark as a complex combat simulator/game and maybe something else.

 

Good luck with your training.

[aaron886]

I'll say for myself that using a computer-based mouse-actuated checklist trainer HAS helped me in memorizing checklists to a greater degree than reading them on a piece of paper. Visually pairing actions to a cockpit representation is helpful, though keys may not be. A clickable 3d cockpit environment would undoubtedly be useful in training.

[Koriel]

I completely agree with the sentiments expressed here that a sim should never be used to lean the basics. Some parts of flying can be explained and sometimes even practised in a desktop sim. Procedures, especially IFR ones.. the story of Zorrin reminded me of a student of mine.

 

I used to run a helicopter charter and training school (rotary & fixed)... Chappie strolls in one day and enquires about the cost of a PPL. Reckons he "knows enough to get one airborne and do a cirucit".

 

"So how many hours do you have?" I ask.

 

"Oh none, but I have played a lot of MS Flight Simulator. Now I know a lot of people knock it, but it's very realisitic. I know I could get in one of those little planes out there and fly a circuit safely..."

 

(Those "little planes" were the Cessna 152. The proverbial spam can).

 

"Okay, here are the keys. Off you trot.."

 

Well he couldn't even figure out how to start the aircraft.

 

Now I know that is a little out of context, but that actually happened.

 

In the early 90's I was teaching at one of those flightschools where we did 10-day instrument ratings, 2 or 3 day multi-engine ratings and the likes. And we did PPL crash courses..

 

In walks this swedish student, gets assigned to me, forgot his name. His flying skills (handeling the a/c) a bit below average, not unsafe, but he was thinking too much.. Anyways, our flights were usually filled with exercises from t-o to landing. And departing the airfield to the practise area we already started flying "under the hood" tracking radials outbound after a couple of hours. On this particular flight I was planning on introducing him to this practice ( he had 4-5 Hours) but time constraints made me forget/skip the briefing. I mentioned this to him while climbing out, and he replied basicall like Zorrin's student.. I know how to do it, no sweat.. So under the hood he went, and lo and behold, he did just fine!! I was testing him, and let him do intercepts, tracking in and outbound etc.. Ok, coming back he did mess up the ILS, but that was due to his handling :)

 

Before he came over he had apparently practised a whole lot on Flight Simulator, ( version ?? 2-3-4? Have no clue, was early 90's) So he makes a perfect example of what you can and can't learn in a basic sim.. No handeling skills, but using IFR equipment and procedures is fine.

 

And going a bit further about full motion sims, I have flown quite a few, but i wouldn't say that you can learn how to fly on one of those.. Every 6 months I have to remind myself that it's a computer,and not an a/c and I do fine..

Edited October 1, 2008 by Koriel
Typo, and more typo's

[EvilBivol-1]

It's an interesting idea, but at least at this time it's outside of ED's focus of combat simulation, which is already quite a load and challenge.

[ARM505]

I think one of the OP's points was indeed quite valid - that MSFS is totally and utterly wrong when it comes to rotary winged sim modelling. In other words, it's not just suffering from PC limitations, it's just plain wrong. I would also wish for a sim that promoted correct techniques etc when it comes to handling. And sims do have a certain level of potential: I just flew my first line flight on a 737-400 (two days ago), having NEVER touched the real aircraft until fare-paying passengers started climbing in the back. Many EMERGENCY procedures can ONLY be taught in the simulator. I know most people here know about zero-time conversions on full motion sims, but it's worth a mention. And when it comes to fixed base sims, there's still a lot of potential. Some points that self taught MSFS pilots tend to forget however, is that training on sims is done in a highly structured environment, by highly experienced pilots, with full knowledge of the limitations of the sim. Certainly, the further the training to be done is from actual handling of the aircraft, the better. In other words, sims are excellent at teaching procedures, interpretation of instruments etc, but not so good at teaching handling itself. The sim technicians (ie the guys who fix the sim itself) at the company I work for are able to handle the sim like legends - and can indeed fly the real aircraft (it has been known to happen on test flights, shhhh!) But not with the same level of situational awareness as a normal crewmember. Helicopters present a unique challenge - they're VERY 'hands on' compared to an airliner - hence the shortcomings of a sim are at there most apparent.

 

Still, taken with the correct attitude, a sim can be very useful in laying basic foundations.

Edited October 1, 2008 by ARM505