Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T05:27:28.228Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The case for flight simulation in general aviation†

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2016

D. J. Allerton
D. J. Allerton*
Affiliation:
College of Aeronautics, Cranfield University, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper sets out the case to extend the role of flight simulation in general aviation. It outlines the benefits that flight simulation has brought to airline safety but observes that the majority of pilots worldwide receive no simulator-based training or checking. The paper reviews the potential benefits of synthetic training and provides an analysis of accidents in general aviation to show that a significant reduction in fatal accidents is achievable by instituting recurrent pilot checks in a flight simulator, similar to the simulator checks undertaken by airline pilots. The paper summarises the advances in simulator technology which have occurred in recent years and outlines a scheme to fund the introduction of flight training devices in general aviation, based on compulsory recurrent checks for PPL and CPL pilots. The paper surmises that flight simulation offers a practical means to reduce the accident rate in general aviation and concludes by outlining a financial case to fund the introduction of mandatory simulation-based recurrent checks in general aviation.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 106 , Issue 1065 , November 2002 , pp. 607 - 612
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2002 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

This paper is based on the author's keynote address at the Royal Aeronautical Society Conference on Aircrew Training — Time to Take Stock

References

1. ANON, ICAO Statistical Yearbook, Doc 9180/23, October 1999.Google Scholar
2. ANON, NALL Report, General aviation accident trends and factors for 1999, 2001, AOPA Air Safety Foundation, pp 2–27.Google Scholar
3. ANON, Status report on accident statistics for 1999, European Civil Aviation Conf, No ACC/18(Inf)-IP/3, Tallinn, October 2000.Google Scholar
4. ANON, NTSB Report NYC99MA178.Google Scholar
5. Bar-Gill, A. and Stengel, R.F. Longitudinal flying qualities criteria for single-pilot instrument flight operations, 1986, J Aircr, 23, pp 111–117.Google Scholar
6. Pitman, C. and St George, R. Modelling pilot decision making in New Zealand general aviation accidents using the Surry decision model, 1995, Proc 8th Intern Symp on Aviation Psychology, pp 1284–1290.Google Scholar
7. Bruckhart, J.E. Analysis of changes in the pilot population and general aviation accidents, 1992, Aviation, Space and Environmental Medicine, 63, pp 75–79.Google Scholar
8. Guide, P. and Gibson, R.S. An analytical study of the effects of age and experience on flight safety, 1991, Proc Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting, 1.Google Scholar
9. Allerton, D.J. Developments in flight simulation, 2000, Aeronaut J, 104, (1042), pp 651–663.Google Scholar
10. Allerton, D.J. The design of a real-time engineering flight simulator for the rapid prototyping of avionics systems and flight control systems, 1999, Trans Institute of Measurement and Control, 21, (2/3), pp 51–62.Google Scholar
11. Koonce, J.M. The training and certification of the general aviation pilot, 1984, Proc Aerospace Behavioural Engineering Technology Conf, pp 87–91.Google Scholar