To follow up on the sim discussion, remember what the simulator is - a Basic Aviation Training Device. It is not an airplane. The goal of using it is to enhance and augment instruction - not replace it. Additionally, the sim is not just a tool for simulating zero vis flying. It can be used for nearly anything to supplement a student’s instruction - anything. That is our goal. Used well, it will make instruction more efficient and cost effective for our students. 
Yes, a student can count 2.5 hours of instruction on our sim for the PPL but since nearly every student goes beyond the minimum time, that figure becomes less important. Also, the amount of time per lesson should not be a target. The skills are the target. As you know, students do not typically master skills on the first attempt nor is the timeline for mastery consistent from one student to the next. It's as variable as the students we teach. 

​Part of our role as flight instructors is to modify instruction and support our students as needed to help them reach their goals. If they can learn, practice, and repeat skills using the simulator, then take those skills to the airplane - with fewer repeats in the airplane - that just makes their training more efficient and cost effective. It makes sense. The goal is not to simply check off boxes on the syllabus to say tasks have been completed. We must support mastery and excellence and assess what they are doing with fidelity. Using a simulator in flight instruction is an industry-wide accepted tool to help make that happen. We are relying on tried and true evidence-backed best practices as we continue to integrate this resource into our instruction. 

​Be sure to see the Instructor Resources page to find the posted information on our simulator. The manual is posted there as well as a guide on using the RedBird for various types of instruction. Also remember that our attitude toward the use of the simulator translates to our instruction with it. If the instructor is of the mindset that the simulator is of little to no benefit, the student will pick up on that quickly which will end up having a negative impact on them using this valuable tool. Simulators are here to stay and will be incorporated throughout pilot instruction at all levels. Build the strong foundation early on to help the student maximize the tool well beyond the current rating they are working on. 
​

Other Useful Reads
FAA AC 61-136B
"Don't Fly, Simulate" - AOPA Article on efficient training with a simulator
Simulation Implementation - AOPA Webinar on using simulators to help flight school business (about 1 hr long)
Learning to Fly With a Simulator - Flying Magazine article on using a sim to augment training
University of North Dakota research paper on the efficacy of simulator and virtual reality in flight training

This is a repost from our WhatsApp group but it is worth archiving here

It has come to my attention that there was a rather spirited conversation in the office the other day on an old topic: the interpretation of the long commercial cross country flight and whether it can be done VFR or IFR.

It is true that FAR 61.129 does not specify VFR or IFR for the long cross country. It doesn’t even specify day or night. However, and this is a big HOWEVER, the ACS is what the DPE will use to measure the applicants skill, knowledge, and risk management. The ACS specifies often that the skills being evaluated for a commercial pilot are for VFR flight. Our local DPEs have specifically mentioned that doing any of the commercial cross country flights as instrument flights would defeat the purpose of the commercial pilot requirements and that they would not consider a flight logged under IFR valid as prerequisite for any cross country in 61.129. I agree. 

With respect to the cross country training, the logic is that commercial applicants are further developing their skills at the commercial pilot level - not instrument pilot level. Among many other areas, this includes greater accuracy and precision with pilotage (requires VFR) and dead reckoning (VFR when using visual landmarks) as they apply to cross country piloting. The syllabus also incorporates this into the cross country training for commercial pilots. Thus, we will continue to have our applicants complete this requirement daytime VFR. The interpretation of the regulations only begins with the FAR. We are not the legal experts but, believe me, there is a lot of time invested here seeking interpretation and guidance on the regulations. Always feel free to ask for help with interpretation.

After our instructor meeting and conversations with some of you recently, I wanted to follow up on the topic of risk management. I know that some of you would love it if we just had a matrix to follow that gave you a go / no-go for any given flight. Unfortunately, that won’t happen. It isn’t that easy. Risk management is much too important of a topic to make it that simple. Those two words appear together nearly 150 times in the Private Pilot ACS, as an example. The target is moving on every single flight and there is no black and white. Each scenario is different.

My main thing that I have been focusing on, and want all of us to focus on, is the lesson for the student and where they are in their instruction. We must model and teach sound risk management techniques that will benefit the student - always. Their tolerance of risk should be gradually stretched without the mentality of ‘showing them what it’s like to fly in XYZ conditions.’ We also must be careful not to push them too far beyond their abilities knowing that you’ll save them. Ideally, by the time the student is soloed, they should be making the go / no-go decision on their own. If you have talked with me more than five minutes on this topic you know I am a big fan of Flight Risk Assessment Tools.

I’m also a huge fan of having the student make the go / no-go call then respecting that once they have a good grasp on the process. Yes, most of the time, you can probably handle the given flight scenario with a higher safety margin than the student but, again, if the student doesn’t get to flex that intellectual muscle and make the decision, they may not get to practice the sound decision making called for so often in the ACS. If the student is soloed and has solo limits, then you blast through those limits for a dual flight, what does that teach? If the student isn’t even soloed yet and the modeling is that you do really funky conditions with the CFI but the student gets stuck with more benign weather, what does that model?

There are numerous opportunities to bring no-fly days into the classroom or simulator. Keep the target moving and don’t fixate on hard numbers. Instead, fixate on the goals of your lesson with the student and think about everything you model throughout your instruction. Point the students to the FAA’s Risk Management Handbook. I’d also recommend reviewing Chapter 10 in the Aviation Instructor’s Handbook. That’s got some good info in there!