I’m sure everyone has already read that investigation report which was bounced around last year.
No
(Post must be at least 20 characters long and I only wanted to say no)
Investigation report? Into what?
How often do people use these at their squadrons, when you consider the cost?
I’ve been approached by staff to get one, but when I look at the cost vs predicted usage, I struggle to justify it, especially given it’s electronic technology so will become an insatiable beast.
Could anyone say when you’d need to update hardware/software and what are the potential initial and ongoing costs? What I don’t want is something that looks and works fine now, but 3-5 years down the line is a ZX80. We’ve got to start looking to get new laptops for the sqn in the next couple of years as the OS get unsupported and they’re only 6 years old, but were decent home use spec when we got them.
I can buy tents and so on and know that they’ll (with care) still be serviceable tents in 30 years time, but a piece of electronic technology will be landfill well within 10 years.
We use ours every week and then during Project Days that we run at the weekends as well. It is a key project activity for the cadets - so our big two sims and the 6 standard desktop sims are in use regularly.
We look at it differently - the ICT supports a wide range of functions including flight simulation, eDofE and Ultilearn which makes the investment easier to justify and seek funding for.
Modern computers are really powerful beasts and the lifespan has increased (I think) because we primarily only use flight simulation software, MS Office and the internet - so they don’ t need to be upgraded every year which keeps the lifespan costs down. There is also scope to do incremental upgrades over time to things like RAM capacity and graphics cards.
Also, where possible, I try to avoid paying for anything by getting grants and funding support for our ICT kit.
ICT capacity and capability, as you said, changes rapidly but we have to keep pace to ensure the cadets have access to what they need access to on the right kind of kit. We have invested probably £20k over the past 6 years in technology, but about £10k of that has come through funding and the rest has been spread over time so the hit isn’t as noticeable. I appreciate that sounds a little glib/smug but I am happy to share funding applications etc with anyone that asks for them 
If you want to do flight simulation properly you need to dedicate the IT hardware to that task. It is one thing plugging in a USB joystick to a laptop and using FS-X to demonstrate effects of controls and instrumentation but quite another to have to waste half a night rewiring a machine, realigning projectors and screens and otherwise messing up a potentially complex simulation environment for the sake of sharing the computer between tasks.
If you don’t then use that dedicated sim frequently it becomes a wasted resource, gathering dust and taking up space.
Completely agree with that - we have two main sims: one that is based on the F-16 sims that are in the AOAC at Linton and the other is Tutor focused with dials and panels etc.
We use the desktop sims for precisely what you say; demonstrating the effects of controls and learning how the cockpit works before they hit the AEF
Usage and cost is the biggest issue with Flight Sims, I completely agree. A squadron close to me spent £6000 on 3 big shiny multi screen sims but doesn’t actually have any competent staff or cadets to instruct on them.
I’ve been setting up a dozen networked sims running on xp machines with just 1 monitor and a joystick. As is stated above they can be used for effects of controls, rules of the air, formation flying and Air Traffic Radio-telephony.
I recently had the pleasure of being cornered by OC 2FTS who wanted to talk about the much lauded Part Task-Trainers. From what I understood he was looking for instructors who would be required to attend a course at Syerston and be assessed on a six-monthly basis for competence. These instructors would be drawn from the wider corps rather than the diminishing VGS cadre but presumably would still have to attend at a VGS to instruct on a PTT. He did not sell the concept very well at all, in the words of my also cornered mate ‘Sounds great, I can do a hard and boring course to travel many miles to a VGS to stare at some computers.’
Can have some of whatever he was smoking? What a ludicrous state of affairs. Talk about empire-building - I get assessed every 6 months for my ATPL licence, why on earth would he want to introduce something so restrictive? It’s almost worth volunteering to go & tear things to shreds… 
Obviously, this PTT “flying” is far more dangerous than shooting - RCOs aren’t assessed every 6 months!
Yep…
2 Likes
Never mind, according to what I heard OC 2FTS will have ‘retired’ in under 18 months time. Sounds like he is trying to make an impression before he goes…
For someone that is on record saying ‘It’s not the job of the ACO to teach cadets to fly, that is the job of the Central Flying School’ it sure sounds like he’s trying to sell the idea of flight simulation as a substitute for real flying!
It’s a 360 degree change of attitude to what he told my mate a few years ago…
You have got to wonder where some of this thinking comes from within the higher echelons of the ACO, it sure sounds like ‘not invented here’ syndrome i.e. it’s only a good idea if it’s my idea!
A BITD device trainer with a qualified flight instructor gives up to 5 hours credit towards a PPL or with a good instructor (not a qualified one) they are still a fantastic training device!
Oh! I forgot, only when you are OC 2FTS and not when you are in your previous post…
Given his track record in the ATC, empire building is a most apt expression. Roll on 18 months time, just a pity it’s that long as how much more damage can he do.
I’ve been watching the development of VR headsets with interest as they solve the problem of immersive visual systems very neatly and can make for much more compact and portable simulation suites.
Where they currently fall down is with the interface to the cockpit… For that to be realistic the current best way is to have a real cockpit with real switches and dials. Getting access to these while maintaining a VR field of view is a problem I have not seen solved.
Then I watched this video from ForcesTV: http://forces.tv/77866430 - skip to 2:00 mins
The interaction between the VR user and the displays they are developing are what is needed to make VR simulation a real think. So long as basic controls (stick, rudder, throttle etc.) are provided and synchronised with the location in virtual space, all dials and panels can be viewed and manipulated in the virtual space with relative ease.
1 Like
[quote=“incubus, post:53, topic:2275”]
http://forces.tv/77866430 - skip to 2:00 mins
[/quote]WRT the video, It’s a very similar idea to the Microsoft Hololens and, looking back to 2007, is also very similar to the re-purposing of the Nintendo Wii Controllers for head tracking (of course in the video we’re tracking the points on the gloves rather than the head)
Yeah I saw that as well, one word, WowIReallyWantToDoThat.
Although there isn’t as much training value compared to sitting in a virtual cockpit.
Effects of controls, speed/energy/power management. lookout, situational awareness, control of manouevres, & most importantly, not to get 'shot" down. 
Don’t tell 2FTS, this could put them out of business!
Nice to see the discussion about different things and getting this and that.
Can anyone provide costs for a set up gives the basic level of ‘training’, that can be put out and up and running in and put away in c.10 minutes?
I don’t see how some of the multiscreen set ups being easy to set up/break down and stored.
I would want the screen and hardware for running the software to be multi use. Having something that has the potential to not be cheap sitting in a room doing nothing for large parts of the time is IMO not a good use of sqn funds and the time people will put into raising it.
Frankly a basic system should be given to every single squadron. It might give the people in the ivory towers a clue to the problems many squadrons face funding their whims and fancies.
I think they are doing fine without out help
2 Likes
Very impressive and would be a hit with cadets for sure… I wonder how much it would cost…