I just went through this exercise with my carrier. The Sim school I have used in the past for 340 training is pretty much a joke. Just checking boxes in order to get a check.
I've gotten some mediocre training in the plane also, so I convinced my insurance company to approve my local instructor for recurrent training.
We are halfway through and he cuts me no slack. I know when we are done that I can handle about anything the plane throws at me. I wish there was better sim training, but it hasn't been the case so far. As I transition into the turbine/jet world, I hope there will be better options out there.

Doug, exactly, these are my sentiments. I leave Simcom, and I'm no safer, I leave Shane's training and I'm confident with regards to ever single issue that I can be thrown.

Turbine world (for PC12's) is exactly the same way. In airplane is way, way better.

That’s not a great outcome if that’s the case.

I can honestly say the FSI is the best training I’ve done. At FSI SAT I’m talking about and it is some what dependant on the instructor.

In plane training is great too but I’d chose SIM over the plane based on my experience.


Andrew

I didn’t make the rules and nor am I advocating them them I am just stating the facts. Both CAE and Simcom both offer upgrade courses from SIC to PIC that can get you the PIC in half the time of the full PIC program.

Gary

My thoughts aren’t just about training but how many hours will I spend to become proficient in a turbine at 400kts and Fl40? Myself, I would expect to hold a SIC degree for a while, no matter what the piece of paper says.

As far as saving time. If you aren’t going anywhere for any real reason other than recreation, training, etc can be a waste of time. But if you’re doing it for a business, lots of time can be saved. And flying in a platform with a lot more safety. This is big not only for the pilot, but his passengers. Death or injury is a real time killer.

I agree with this 100%! Simcom recurrent for the MU2 requires me to sit there for 3 days. They used to have a 2 day option for a few more $ if you were in class by yourself, ie they could get the sim time scheduled back to back. But they eliminated that. Why? It’s not because I’m learning more that 3rd day, we usually have to knock off early every day for long lunches, etc. Its merely time killing.

It’s all the least common denominator problem.

I felt the Simulator class (initial) was just like a Navy class. 2 days of material stuffed into 5. we spent many hours going way too slowly.

hours in the sim are plus/minus (good for emergencies, good for learning new avionics; terrible for air-work). I think the ideal-state would be to have a mix of simulator, and in-airplane training.

I’m surprised to hear the amount of dissatisfaction with sim training I’m seeing here. I’ve only trained at FSI, and it’s always been rigorous. They do a great job and go well beyond anything you’d want to do in the airplane. Other Citation pilots I talk to have similar opinions. Maybe other platforms tend to be different. It’s disappointing to hear about other watered-down, time-wasting programs. That’s not how it should be.

Guys I can tell you with some conviction and whether you feel it is right, wrong or indifferent is certainly your opinion - the insurers have been and will be moreso placing a premium on simulator based training - especially when it comes to higher hull value turbine airplanes operated single-pilot (ie $3m+).

Certainly in-aircraft training can still be used in a lot of cases but it isn't carte blanche approved by all insurers in every case/every policy. If you are operating a higher valued turbine airplane as an owner (single-pilot) and want to maximize your renewal options in what has become a very tight market you are best to discuss the topic with your broker. The objective being you want to embark on training with whichever training outfit will best suit your future insurability. In some cases in-aircraft can be rotated with sim every other year and allow for good insurance pricing/options at renewal. In other cases (such as a $4.5m M2 for instance owner/flown single-pilot) if you try and simply just do in-aircraft recurrent with any of the reputable training providers - you are going to have a lot of 'decline to quote' on your market summary come renewal time as a good number of the insurers at that asset value are starting to require sim based school annually.

Every situation is different so you are always best to visit with your broker so that you can best set yourself up for a favorable renewal.

I should be clear, my experience varies a lot based on who is the instructor. For being “standardized” curriculum, the quality of the individual instructor still matters a lot (as you’d expect, of course).

I don’t think my Simcom training is bad. My issue is with all the classroom time covering different systems I can’t legally work on myself anyways. I’ve done PC-12 simcom so many years in a row now I would teach the class.

I do wish the Simcm sim was higher quality. If you try to fast forward the program to the next approach for example the computer crashes. So we spend a lot of time flying as though we’re actually in an airplane.

But, Simcom is the least expensive option so you get what you pay for. I’m not complaining.

My Simcom experience has varied wildly based on the instructor. I've had really good, highly experienced instructors and I've had some guys who have never even flown the real airplane. I've also gotten conflicting information from two different instructors. Overall I think the training is pretty good, but at a lower quality than Flight $afety.

Andrew, find a real quality instructor in your airplane and you won't touch Simcom or Flightsafety again. Obviously it's the instructor. Simcom/FS make it about the system.
They can take any instructor and make him/her able to teach the course. I will state this again, just for Tom's sake, they don't do a good job with the PC12 training. The next time I'm required to go, will be great, because they'll be on my ass for being an ass!!!

I find that those schools focus on the ground and not the air. Your sim time is very little and normally later on after ground, when you're done mentally anyways. The sim experience is NOTHING like the real airplane! It's finnicky and it's not correct. I hand fly a lot. I had to hand fly coming over the rockies today. It was moderate to severe turbulence and throttle back and hand fly was the only way.

I'm bashing Simcom and Flight Safety AND THE INSURANCE AGENTS that won't stand up and be counted because I honestly believe that a good instructor in airplane is way, way better than a sim.


I think that the insurance companies have actuaries with their heads up their ass!!!

It's cause they're lazy. Simcom/FS covers their ass and nothing more. If they actually cared about accident rates then they would evaluate the actual f'n instructor, not the program. As noted by EVERY single person here (except the bloody Aussie) the experience is wildly variable. I choose an instructor who knows how to fly, evaluate and improve a student.

When I purchase a Baron again my initial will be with Doug or Stan, not Simcom or FS.

I disagree, in aircraft is the cost of fuel and the cost of training. Works out to be about the same, but the training quality is way, way, way better.