I recently learned of a facility Id not previously known. Aircraft Simulator Training in Santa Rosa, CA, advertises in my type-club magazine and I decided to give them a try. Due to some date confusion on my part, I thought I was beginning this process with a couple months of flexibility. In reality, I had a couple weeks. In e-mail discussions I was impressed with the approach that Aircraft Simulator Training took, but we just couldnt get the schedule to work. So, I looked elsewhere.
Insurance often mandates recurrent flight training, and the author advocates for varying training facilities and instructors to gain diverse perspectives, similar to aircraft maintenance.
Pilots should define clear personal objectives for their recurrent training—such as instrument proficiency or systems refreshers—to ensure the curriculum effectively meets their needs.
The author's SIMCOM experience highlighted excellent instructors, a good facility, and newly competitive pricing, but the training was significantly hampered by an old, buggy, and unreliable simulator.
Despite the simulator's deficiencies in this particular instance, the article concludes that simulator training is generally superior for building proficiency due to cost-effectiveness, the ability to safely practice failures, and high-repetition practice.
Many insurance companies require their insureds, particularly those flying more complex aircraft, to periodically attend recurrent training. Mine requires it every two years for my twin-engine, pressurized, Cessna 340A. This was one of those years, so I had some decisions to make about quality of training, availability, and economics.
CREATE A FREE ACCOUNT
Sign up to keep reading
Create a free account to continue. Already a member? Sign in below.
