Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Canadian pilots no longer have to fly real aircraft to keep valid licences

theglobeandmail.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 50 posts

Re: Canadian pilots no longer have to fly real aircraft to keep valid licences

#31

Post by jcrawfordor »

afarrell wrote: post #8

It would be nice if we had either public driving simulators or classes that you could use to improve your driving and response to erratic other drivers. I suspect that the lack of this deliberate training is one reason why driving is much more dangerous than flying. Back when I owned a car, it seemed like all of the classes on driving marketed themselves as either: 1) A totally unchallenging formality that will satis…

Most racing schools offer courses that are intended to improve street driving skill - e.g. winter driving is a common one, often with a "skid car" rigged with casters that remove much of the car's weight from the tires so that it will go into slides easily (as if it were on ice). There are also often "defensive driving" courses that cover swerving and fast braking under control. I've taken one of these courses and thought it was absolutely useful and improved my driving. That said, it was pretty expensive, and not well publicized.

Basic driver's education in the state I grew up in was state subsidized and offered through the community college so it was quite inexpensive. On the flipside, it was a terrible course, with minimal actual driving time and a terrible case of design for the lowest common denominator. I wonder if more advanced driving courses could be offered the same way, but perhaps they'd fall to the same problems.

You might look at motorcycling as a positive example. While many states require the Motorcycle Safety Foundation basic course for a motorcycle endorsement, MSF also publishes an advanced course and various skill courses that seem to be relatively popular amongst motorcyclists. MSF courses are developed by the Foundation and all the materials are licensed (I would assume at nominal cost) to various local organizations that actually teach them, in my area affiliated also with the community college.

Re: Canadian pilots no longer have to fly real aircraft to keep valid licences

#32

Post by nas »

clarry wrote: post #29

Is CAE a major player among flight sim companies? Because in that case, there's clear economic incentive in making simulator training accepted.. first in Canada, with the hope that other countries will follow. Big company will get a good chance to export their product.

Yes they are. For military and commercial aircraft.

Re: Canadian pilots no longer have to fly real aircraft to keep valid licences

#33

Post by fit2rule »

dleslie wrote: post #10
annerajb wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the purpose of the head position tracking? Did the aircraft you build the simulator for has some sort of advanced HUD that always shows correctly no matter the position of the pilot head??

So it would feel real; you could look out the side window, or shift your weight to look around trees or to get a better view down the side of the helicopter. I work in VR now and honestly nothing comes close to the experience we built.

>I work in VR now and honestly nothing comes close to the experience we built.

This is an interesting statement, because in all the wide sphere of points where VR can be applied, it seems to me that the only place of any 'validity' or .. true social value .. (i.e. not gaming/entertainment) .. is in the realm of training for high-performance/life-critical operator scenarios.

Which is not to say that these things can/can not be gamified - but perhaps that the end result of such a stringent effort by society to apply VR technology to training and simulation of otherwise-life-threatening roles/responsibilities/duties is that it all becomes a bit of a game.

What I mean to say is, why is there such a gap between "work in VR" and "built serious simulator system", in your opinion?

Re: Canadian pilots no longer have to fly real aircraft to keep valid licences

#34

Post by Dylan16807 »

drittich wrote: post #27
ghaff wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In an ideal world, sure. In the real world, what could be the problem with making everyone take a regular test to have the right to continue doing something that's an inherent part of most people working and participating in society? Yes, there are some people driving who probably shouldn't be on the road. But until such times as automation arrives, you'll find exactly zero support for that idea outside the young and…

I strongly disagree that driving is a right. It is a privilege that should be validated as well as is practical to protect yourself and the rest of society. I don't think we are anywhere near the limits of what is practical. Because we don't currently do this doesn't make it right, or something we shouldn't think of ways to solve. See recent changes in North American society regarding smoking laws. Change can happen…

Doesn't matter if it's a birthright (and the use of "to have the right" in that sentence was more the meaning of "entitlement"). It's "an inherent part of most people working and participating in society". You need to change that if you want it to be reasonable to stop more than a few extreme cases from driving.

Re: Canadian pilots no longer have to fly real aircraft to keep valid licences

#35

Post by venomsnake »

drittich wrote: post #9
annerajb wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a pilot that is learning. Why can't a simulator recreate the real flying experience? Especially on this fly by wire aircrafts?

Completely putting aside the question of the quality of the simulation of the aircraft and physics involved, one possible reason is that simulations can remove extreme emotions from the equation. The pilot knows they won't die in the simulator if they make an error. (This can be both a positive and negative gain.) To take it to the extreme, would you be willing to attempt landing a real 747 solo, having only ever flo…

I will be willing to do it. I won't be willing to be present in an aircraft while someone elae does it. Not because I am a pilot - just I am ok with dying from my own mistake.

Re: Canadian pilots no longer have to fly real aircraft to keep valid licences

#36

Post by dleslie »

fit2rule wrote: post #33
dleslie wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So it would feel real; you could look out the side window, or shift your weight to look around trees or to get a better view down the side of the helicopter. I work in VR now and honestly nothing comes close to the experience we built.

>I work in VR now and honestly nothing comes close to the experience we built. This is an interesting statement, because in all the wide sphere of points where VR can be applied, it seems to me that the only place of any 'validity' or .. true social value .. (i.e. not gaming/entertainment) .. is in the realm of training for high-performance/life-critical operator scenarios. Which is not to say that these things can/c…

You don't think that entertainment holds "true social value?" We are playing game at this moment, with points, turns and rules.

To answer your question, the difference is in fidelity. HMDs are slow, low resolution, heavy and uncomfortable compared to a properly built cave.

Re: Canadian pilots no longer have to fly real aircraft to keep valid licences

#37

Post by pjc50 »

afarrell wrote: post #8

It would be nice if we had either public driving simulators or classes that you could use to improve your driving and response to erratic other drivers. I suspect that the lack of this deliberate training is one reason why driving is much more dangerous than flying. Back when I owned a car, it seemed like all of the classes on driving marketed themselves as either: 1) A totally unchallenging formality that will satis…

The UK driving test's "hazard perception" is a hugely watered-down version of this - you watch a video and press a button when you think you've encountered a hazard.

I think a lot of people would benefit from being able to practice their parking in VR rather than with a >£25/h driving instructor.

Re: Canadian pilots no longer have to fly real aircraft to keep valid licences

#38

Post by ghaff »

jcrawfordor wrote: post #31
afarrell wrote: post #8

It would be nice if we had either public driving simulators or classes that you could use to improve your driving and response to erratic other drivers. I suspect that the lack of this deliberate training is one reason why driving is much more dangerous than flying. Back when I owned a car, it seemed like all of the classes on driving marketed themselves as either: 1) A totally unchallenging formality that will satis…

Most racing schools offer courses that are intended to improve street driving skill - e.g. winter driving is a common one, often with a "skid car" rigged with casters that remove much of the car's weight from the tires so that it will go into slides easily (as if it were on ice). There are also often "defensive driving" courses that cover swerving and fast braking under control. I've taken one of these courses and th…

As I alluded to in another comment, one of the issues here is that, for most adults in the US, driving is pretty much part and parcel of working and functioning in society. And wishing that everyone lived in cities and that we had futuristic mass transit systems or 100% autonomous cars doesn't change today's reality.

Therefore, if we're going to require advanced multi-day driving schools and/or annual physical driving exams (or whatever), you're going to have to explain how that works in a world where many people can barely afford to keep their clunker running and are unemployed if they can't drive.

Driving may not be a "right" (whatever that means exactly as we place limits on lots of rights), but I wouldn't want to be the politician who decides to take that "privilege" away from 20% of the population because they missed their annual refresher course or recertification exam.

Re: Canadian pilots no longer have to fly real aircraft to keep valid licences

#39

Post by ghaff »

Dylan16807 wrote: post #34
drittich wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I strongly disagree that driving is a right. It is a privilege that should be validated as well as is practical to protect yourself and the rest of society. I don't think we are anywhere near the limits of what is practical. Because we don't currently do this doesn't make it right, or something we shouldn't think of ways to solve. See recent changes in North American society regarding smoking laws. Change can happen…

Doesn't matter if it's a birthright (and the use of "to have the right" in that sentence was more the meaning of "entitlement"). It's "an inherent part of most people working and participating in society". You need to change that if you want it to be reasonable to stop more than a few extreme cases from driving.

Exactly. When the day comes when there are 100% autonomous vehicles--which I don't expect to be particularly soon, but that's another discussion--I think it may be seen as [EDIT: wording] perfectly reasonable to impose stricter licensing requirements on manual vehicles operating on public streets.

I'd also add that fatalities are far more often caused by reckless young drivers than by the not so fit and young whose reflexes or eyesight may not be what they once were.

Re: Canadian pilots no longer have to fly real aircraft to keep valid licences

#40

Post by raverbashing »

drittich wrote: post #24
raverbashing wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see your point > The data that feeds in-flight automation is the same that feeds simulators The problem is when the data sources fail, like in AF447. Or when you have people crashing an airplane in perfect weather, like Asiana Airlines 214 in San Francisco Yes, automation makes things easier, but they fail eventually. And when it fails you have to fly it manually (or with a lower level of automation). But som…

Well, I am not arguing for or against automation (although ultimately as an optimistic programmer I land very much in the for camp.) What I am saying is that simulation time alone is not good enough. Nor is flying-only time. Both are needed, and for different reasons. Sure, time spent in automation mode in the air is not incredibly useful. But it is reality, and enduring that, only to have to take manual control in a…

You don't put the pilot in an 8h training flight. You train for specific failures in different situations in a simulator (take off/cruise/landing). And you're right, there's no training for "doing nothing" for 8h and then having an issue

Level of automation you're using has nothing to do with flying on a simulator or an actual plane.

Post reply on HN