Flight Training Device Review
Stephen Hasenick
Western Michigan University
Abstract
Flight simulators are used in training people to be pilots. This educational analysis will review one category of simulators called Flight Training Devices or FTDs. The FTD referenced is a Cirrus SR 20. This review discusses the basic functions, history, and purpose of flight simulators. It analyzes the educational value by type of experience, imagination, and cost effectiveness.
Cirrus SR20 Flight Training Device
1. Detail description of the functionality of a flight training device
A simulator tries to reproduce the experience of flying by electronic hardware and software. Computers receive inputs from different flight controls, interpret this data, and simulate the output on various flight instruments. Simulators come in different categories, based on how well the device mocks the real experience of flying. The most accurate are Airplane Simulators followed by Flight Training Devices, and then Aviation Training Devices. Airplane Simulators accurately mimic many flight experiences. These include an exact full size cockpit layout, cockpit sounds, handling and aerodynamic affects, control loading dynamics, aerodynamic modeling, replicated motion, and generated visuals of the view out the windows (US Department of Transportation, 1991). Flight Training Devices or FTDs have less fidelity than Airplane Simulators, but accurately replicate different instruments, equipment, panels, and controls. They are not required to replicate motion (US Department of Transportation, 1992). Aviation Training Devices are more generic. They only provide a limited amount of actual controls, but are more realistic than using a gaming joystick to control the represented aircraft model (US Department of Transportation, 2008). Simulators provide an effective, viable environment for flight instruction, demonstration, and practice of maneuvers and procedures.
The FTD reviewed is the Cirrus SR20 Flight Training Device. A computer models the SR-20 aircraft’s aerodynamics including various combinations of drag and thrust encountered in flight. This includes additional portions of the flight envelope not required for FAA certification. Additional data was collected and modeled in slow flight and stalls for training purposes. The cockpit is an actual front section of a Cirrus aircraft. The FTD simulates the different aircraft systems and avionic equipment present in the Cirrus Aircraft use for training. Control loading mimics the actual flight forces felt by pilots on the yoke. The visual system includes three projectors that show 220 degrees of horizontal display of the view out the cirrus windows. A custom database includes a 50 nautical mile radius around Battle Creek, Michigan (Frasca International Inc., 2006). The FTD does an excellent job replicating the actual aircraft.
2. When was the flight training device first created
The first simulator was the Pilot Trainer produced by Edwin Link in the United States in 1929 (Link Trainer - Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia, 2010). The second version rotated on three axes and simulated different flight instruments. The US Army Air Force purchased this trainer in 1934 to train pilots. A large number of these trainers were used during War World II for training. The Fight Training Device reviewed here was made by Frasca International Inc. in 2006 for Western Michigan University to simulate a Cirrus SR20.
3. What are the educational purposes of this tool
The main objective of Flight Training Devices is to provide a means for flight students to acquire the skills required to perform to a desired training standard (US Department of Transportation, 1992). The original trainers were used to train pilots to fly in conditions when visibility was insufficient (instrument conditions) to control the airplane. The trainee learned to interpret different flight instruments, combine this information, and then control the aircraft. Modern technology has allowed the FTDs to simulate more flight conditions and controls. These improvements have expanded the role of these devices in modern training.
4. Which of the categories in Dale’s Cone of Experience does it fit
Modern improvements allow trainees to almost receive direct experiences in flight simulators. They respond to flight conditions and scenarios similar to real flight. These conditions are represented in a simulator. Dale in The Cone of Experience states “When we contrive an experience, we deal with a representation that differs from the original reality” (Dale, 1969). Flight Training Devices provide contrive experiences. The model varies in complexity and size with the category of the simulator. Flight Simulators are often as complex as the aircraft they represent. Training devices are far less complex and smaller, than an airplane. A greater complexity maybe distracting for some simple task. Greater complexity allows for more tasks to be instructed in the same piece of equipment.
5. Describe 3 examples of how the tool could be used in educational practice
Advances in technology have reduced the cost of modeling more aspects of flight. The Cirrus FTD’s 220 degree high definition visual leaves many students feeling like they are really flying. The visuals created by computers are exactly what Siegel’s computer imagination is about (Siegel, 2003). This visual has a desired end and allows training to go beyond just instruments. These high details of visual conditions and control loading allow teaching of beginning training concepts. Beginning fundamental skills including effect of controls, straight and level, and climbs and descents can be taught.
Today’s Advance Avionics systems take longer to become proficient to operate. These systems have a large amount of data available at the finger tips of the pilot. Learning to operate and find information in flight promptly is a good match for simulators. While texting and driving is illegal in many states, entering text, turning dials, and talking on a radio is a requirement for learning to fly. Students learn these skills while safely on the ground.
Actual flight scenarios can be attempted in the flight training device or airplane simulator. Many of these cannot be done in an airplane for safety reasons. More training can be reproduced on emergency procedures. Scenarios are presented that required students to make decisions. This is important because recent accident trends show Aeronautical Decision Making as a main factor (AOPA Air Safety Foundation, 2008). In a simulator the trainee response to a scenarios or emergencies can be allowed to continue to its actual outcome.
6. Non-computer-based method to accomplish task
The lowest technology method would be Chair-flying; a student sits in a chair and looks at a poster of a cockpit. Another non-computer method, but not necessarily low tech, is to fly an airplane. The chair and poster is really cheap. Cockpit posters run about 10 to 15 dollars and most of us already have a chair or something to sit on. New Cirrus SR-20 aircraft cost approximately three hundred thousand dollars. A new high end FTD from Frasca International Inc. runs about four hundred thousand dollars. To learn to fly you have to use an airplane. The Federal Aviation Administration requires a minimum number of flight hours in an actual plane. Since you need an airplane, it comes down to operating cost of the FTD and plane. Loan payments and other cost add up in the FTD and aircraft. A Cirrus SR-20 aircraft cost about 200 dollars an hour to keep it fueled, insured, and properly maintained. A Flight Training Device cost is only about 60 dollars an hour to power and maintain. Both costs per hour are affected by number of trainees.
The Flight Training Device is a lot safer to operate. No actual emergencies to worry about. Basic task can be repeated and better discussed in the FTD than in an airplane. Radio work and information management can be learned in a more relax environment. Scenarios can be completed to allow students to learn first hand the result of their decisions. Simulators are better at teaching decision making skills.
The cost of a Flight Training Device, if used for a small group of students is prohibitive. Large groups of students can spread out the additional purchase cost of FTDs and reduce the per hour rate. If your flight school is large enough I would recommend a Flight Training Device. It allows trainees to learn task before they step into an airplane and improve safety of your flight program.
7. Reference
AOPA Air Safety Foundation. (2008) . 2008 Nall Report . Frederick, MD
Dale, E. (1969). Audiovisual Methods in Teaching. New York: Dryden Press.
Frasca International Inc. (2006). Specification FAA Level 6 Cirrus SR20/22 Flight Training Appendix D. Urbana, IL
Link Trainer - Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia. (2010, May). Retrieved May 28, 2010, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Link_Trainer
Siegel, M. (2003). Falling Asleep at Your Keyboard: The Case for Computer Imagination. Unpublished Manuscript.
US Department of Transportation. (2008) . FAA Approval of Basic Aviation Training Devices (BATD) and Advanced Aviation Training Devices (AATD) (Advisory Circular No. 61-136) . Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office
US Department of Transportation. (1991) . Airplane Simulator Qualification (Advisory Circular, No. 120-40B) . Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office
US Department of Transportation. (1992) . Airplane Flight Training Device Qualification (Advisory Circular, No. 120-45A) . Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office
