Hi all,
I know this has been discussed at length some time ago, but here goes!
I am the sqn SIM officer (CI), we have two static Sims running p3d, three projectors on each and each is a full fighter jet cockpit. They have recently had new PC’s and should be up and running again soon. We are halfway through building an atc station for them with the aim of being able to run the Sims and have an atc controlling them.
We also have 4 vr Sims ( laptops with quest 2 headsets, simulator chairs with full controls including rudder pedals). On these we currently run DCS with a jet trainer aircraft and a prop trainer.
I have been told that our wing flying officer will not ‘sign these off’ as suitable for blue badge training and so some of the other staff are building another one- very simple desktop pc with a desk mounted joystick.
This seems ridiculous to me, especially given that one of our cadets is currently on qaic where they use a similar set up with p3d.
Is there actually any specific requirements for a SIM? ( Although I can’t imagine any requirements that ours wouldent meet?)
Second question is around instructing blue badge…the cadet who is on qaic has told me he will be able to instruct blue badge after he qualifies which is great, in the meantime thd wing flying officer has signed off a non qai cadet as able to instruct blue badge…
Given how simple the syllabus is, I would think that senior cadets could probably instruct it, but it does beg the question as to what’s the point of doing qaic?
Initially there was a mandate of using P3D and just a pc or laptop with joystick to run the 3 set scenarios of the blue syllabus.
Now P3D has got rid of the academic licenses the. Recommendation is now MSFS 2020 and either on a pc / laptop or Xbox again with either a HOTAS or a simple joystick with throttle and seperate rudders and joystick with twist movement on the rudders.
Re delivering Blue at squadron level any cadet can be a deliverer as long as they have been assessed by a qualified wing trainer, then that cadet can be a deliverer at squadron level, you don’t need to be a QAIC cadet to be the only cadet that can deliver blue.
In my Wing, the AvO offers a ‘Train the Deliverer’ course, with the pre-requisite being:
Candidates are ideally well versed in training delivery (Cadets to be MOI). Must have a good
working knowledge of Principles of Flight and practical experience in flying and flight
simulators. Ideally in Flight Sim X, Prepared 3D and/or XPlane as these are currently the
preferred software delivery platforms.
Ok, great replies thanks guys
So sounds like we can suitable cadets trained to instruct which makes sense …
As for the Sims, I would say then that the p3d ones are of course more than good enough…the vr ones too… I could look at setting them up with p3d in addition to dcs purely for the blue badge part. Although there might be quite a cost…eagle dynamics threw us some dcs modules for free to get going with the trainer aircraft.
The vr ones link together so instructor and student can be in the same aircraft and take control as desired but despite the fact that military training is already heading that way I’ve found quite some resistance in rafac to using these for training ( particularly from staff who haven’t actually used them!!)
Imagine doing the QAIC and only being permitted to teach blue (which by the sound of it, isn’t unique to QAIC graduates). What’s the point?
On the outside looking in, it seems like there needs to be a standardised process for enabling cadets (and staff) to teach stuff, and perhaps to bronze standard.
There must be one heck of a bottleneck at wing level.
Yeah, qaic is a monster course now- they have added cyber onto it too now…7 weekends of flying circuits under Instruction being told cadets cannot instruct blue badge without qaic, then it turns out you can!!
Agreed, and what’s the worst case scenario that can happen, some 15 years olds have bronze patches on their brassards when they perhaps ought not to… On a scale of 1 to 50000 of how much does it matter in the grand scheme of things you’d struggle to get out of single digits
That could be your issue. When i did my Blue ATP instructor training I was told the sim should represent a light aircraft or glider. Fast jets or transport aircraft not suitable.
The aircraft needs to have traditional turn and slip indicator, airspeed indicator and altimeter as these instruments are part of the course. A glass cockpit PFD would not be suitable.
This is true; but in the spirit of the training you’re trying to make the cockpit environment your cadet (might one day) sit in familiar; so you want them to recognise the instruments they’ll see in a Tutor/Viking.
Flight sim can emulate any aircraft or instruments that you like. Yes it’ll feel a bit clunky, maybe, if you’ve got another set of physical glass screens duplicating what is also shown on the screens but
Key thing is getting the cadets interested. Get them a badge if we can, gives them the foundation to then go and do actual training.
If you’ve got another flight sim on the squadron then fine just use that one but to actually prevent a squadron from giving Blue PTT because its flight sim is too good for the course is lunacy.
Stuck record here but we’re not dishing out ATPLs, they won’t be using the qualification to captain a Voyager. It just doesn’t matter.
My understanding is that 2FTS did not want to relinquish control of issue of blue wings; and the fact they have is a big win. But regions are tasked with ensuring it is done exactly how they want it to be.
So although a level of pragmatism and pinches of salt can be applied, the WAvnO could be in for a lot of grief if they don’t maintain what 2FTS stipulate… and could lose their “privilege” of signing off assessors should they not follow the company line. So I have some sympathy.
They don’t, that’s why they are expecting RAvnO and WAvnO to do it.
Abuse it too much and give too much flexibility by region and wings will see 2FTS claw it back and make squadrons go on their courses via AGS like before.
It was a win being able to bring it in house and complete on squadron, its in our interest to do it how they want.
Keep them onside, absolutely. You’d always want to keep in the good books with people, as you should in any walk of life. I’d never condone actively getting on the wrong side of people, especially those in power.
Not at the expense of common sense and allowing blind application of meaningless rules though.
The hardest bit of flying an aircraft, topically for this conversation, is not flying the aircraft. They’re a piece of cake to fly. It’s knowing when to follow the rules as written, or to use judgement and experience to remain within the spirit of the rules but allowing the task at hand to be completed safely.
Risk vs reward. What is the risk of a cadet learning the effects of controls in a PFD equipped simulator at a squadron weather than a steam gauge driven one? Zero. I mean really.
What are the benefits to banning them? Also zero.
What are the risks from banning them? They aren’t getting the full cadet experience. They can’t get their blue wings. They can’t get subsequent wings. They could stall that avenue if their cadet career, and they may be the ones for whom this opportunity may have sparked the interests to pursue it further both within and outside of the corps.
I’m interested in teaching our lot a bit of flying the basics. But I can’t teach with my sieve of a memory. Does anyone have any material I can loan on long term lease so I can get my head back into it?
I’m the kind of person who couldn’t teach a fish to swim. But it’s something I could learn to teach myself until we get a flight sim etc.
Sounds like you’re an advocate of breaking rules to get a result?
How about complying with the rules. If the rules don’t work submit your suggestion for change. We can’t have everybody out there making their own rules….
