European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) for its Robinson R22 virtual-reality training device, the first approval by the agency for such a product. With its EASA flight and navigation procedures trainer (FNPT) II certification, the device can be used for credit toward European private and commercial helicopter licenses. Te company plans to obtain FAA certification for this and several other model-specific devices in the works.
The Big Hurdle VRM Switzerland’s recent EASA certification highlights a major hurdle that continues to limit simulator training across the US helicopter industry: the lack of FAA credit for sim- ulator use in VFR training and currency. IFR training and recurrency is already accepted by the FAA for multiple types of training devices, yet VFR credit remains out of reach. “Safety advocates and simulator training providers have
done a great job of educating the industry to understand the importance of simulators, with an emphasis on Level D simulators,” Palmer says. “But you don’t need the expensive full-motion simulators to practice and train for many emer- gency maneuvers and situations. Te push now is for more FTDs and to make simulator training more affordable for all operators.” While individual operators may provide
simulator training for their pilots, convincing the rest of the pilot population to pay out of pocket to access this technology for training and proficiency remains an uphill battle without FAA credit. “To ensure everyone is using them to increase their safety, we need the FAA to recognize their value and offer training and recurrency credit in FTDs,” says Palmer. Tim Tucker, former chief flight instructor at Robinson
Helicopter Co., FAA designated pilot examiner, and industry safety advocate, agrees. “Te only way simulator technology will take hold is if the FAA grants credit for simulator use, whether it be in initial training, recurrent training, or reviews,” says Tim Tucker, “Otherwise, you’re just relying on people’s safety attitudes.” Today’s simulator technology has become so advanced,
Tucker says, that it provides very realistic opportunities for VFR pilots to practice maneuvers and emergency procedures that are just too dangerous to fully perform in an aircraft. “When you can practice something properly that you can’t
do in the aircraft, there’s considerable value there,” Tucker says of simulators. “For helicopters, that’s instrument training, because most training helicopters can’t actually fly in instru- ment meteorological conditions or safely execute some high-risk emergency procedures such as low-G recovery, engine failure, or tail-rotor failure.”
Although simulator training for inadvertent IMC (IIMC)
is widely endorsed by some safety advocates, Tucker doesn’t advocate this training for non–instrument-rated pilots who fly non–instrument-certificated aircraft. “When it comes to IIMC, that’s where my opinion differs,”
Tucker says. “For non–instrument-rated pilots, I’m against discussing and practicing what to do if you get into inadvertent IMC. For many pilots, that doesn’t work. I’m more for teaching people how to stay away from getting anywhere near that situation. Certainly, you can teach avoidance in a simulator.” Tucker is excited by the EASA approval of the VRM
Switzerland simulator. He sees it as being almost on par with a Level D FFS, which opens the door for new pilots to embrace realistic simulation training from the beginning of their schooling. Tis is the first device to closely resemble the world’s most popular training aircraft, the R22. “To have that for a Robinson is pretty incredible,” Tucker
says. “It shows that the quality of VFR simulation is getting better, better, and better. It truly can have a positive impact in training.”
“Access to an affordable simulator is now a part of the buying decision. If you don’t have a simulator in-country, you could lose the sale to a competitor.”
—Terry Palmer, president, Pilot Landing Without FAA credit for VFR simulator training, however,
Tucker and Palmer believe this technology can’t reach its full potential to save lives. Currently, the US training system incentivizes aircraft time over training value. Pilots’ invest- ment in simulator time does nothing to help them achieve the minimum aircraft hours needed to achieve a license or rating. Without the incentive of credit for simulator use, pilots scraping to afford their education can’t or won’t reg- ularly choose sim training, Tucker emphasizes. How much time a pilot chooses to train using simulated
flight training technology after receiving a rating, license, or check out in a new aircraft really depends on the pilot’s experience and skill, Tucker says. Practicing emergency procedures an hour or two in a top-level FTD twice a year would be very valuable for all pilots, as even the highest time aviators can get rusty. Tucker recommends using these devices more often, perhaps even quarterly, if you’re a low- time pilot or fly only a few hours a month. “Te key is you’re able to do things in a sim that you can’t
do in the aircraft,” Tucker says. “Terefore, the simulator becomes valuable at every pilot skill level.”
JUNE 2021 ROTOR 31
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76
