Redbird Flight Simulators

[UndauntedFlyer]

Does anyone have any experience training or teaching in the Redbird full motion simulator? If so I'd be interested to hear of your comments.

I had a chance to fly one recently and it was truly a POS.

The GARMIN's didn't act like real GARMIN's so that was a negative training experience. And when faults were introduced the motion went wild.

 

[Super 27]

You pretty much summed it up. Neither the G1000 nor the GNS430/530 behave anything like their real counterparts. No FPL mode, no AUX functions, improper approach sequencing, improper handling of missed approaches, etc, etc, etc. They're ok for currency or something for a student who is already proficient in the systems, but they are utterly USELESS for trying to teach Garmin ops.

After a few early quirks, we've actually had good luck with the failures and the motion platform.

 

[VW Pilot]

Guys it isn't a level D sim...we have on here in KPIE at CAMS flight school. Yeah it flies funny but name one simulator that you have been in that behaves like the real plane besides level D...... That is not the point. The point is to get the idea of how you should control the aircraft...small movements.. precise flying is what it is trying to teach you reguardless of how unlike the real thing it is. Plus you can save money by using it...at least here it only costs $85 per hr plus instruction....

 

[Super 27]

The issue isn't how the sim "flies". The issue is that the sim doesn't properly simulate the systems that it is purported to. So much of instrument training these days focuses on proper avionics management (per the new PTS), that it seems counter-productive to teach students how to use a Garmin GPS that doesn't actually behave anything like a Garmin GPS.

 

[Lynxman]

Your best bet is go and download Garmin's actual simulator for the equipment.

 

[AP2B]

Your best bet is go and download Garmin's actual simulator for the equipment.

:yeahthat:

The issue isn't how the sim "flies". The issue is that the sim doesn't properly simulate the systems that it is purported to. So much of instrument training these days focuses on proper avionics management (per the new PTS), that it seems counter-productive to teach students how to use a Garmin GPS that doesn't actually behave anything like a Garmin GPS.

:yeahthat:

We're slated to get one, and I think the Frasca 141 is supposed to be replaced with this thing. No Flight Plan function or AUX pages... I hope it never shows up where I'm at. I see negative transfer from the KAP 140 in MSFX.

 

[Lynxman]

I just saw a photo of it and it looks cheap as hell.

 

[VW Pilot]

It's just a simulator.... Thats what it does.... Simulate....
poorly but hey you always have the option to rent a G1000 or steam guage Cessna
and get some simulated yet real experience that way.

Dont like it, then dont use it. Its ur money. Do as you please.

 

[VW Pilot]

As far as the gps, well there may have been some
legal issues with portraying the use of a garmin gps. After all
i dont remember it saying anything anywhere about it being a garmin certified product.
Not factual but this might explain the gps woes.

 

[Super 27]

Or they could install an actual Garmin GPS unit in it like Frasca does rather than relying on software that is sold in the games aisle at Best Buy.

 

[Lynxman]

This is true.

 

[VW Pilot]

Then it is settled....Lets all write Redbird and tell them what improvements need to be made to make their simulator a better product. Also something else to keep in mind. I have never heard of Redbird simulators until my local flight school got one. This means they were either a small outfit or a new company right out of the box. When starting a new company, sometimes you have to sell your product in the "experimental stage" to see how it catches on.. If they experience a loss, they would loose what they put in because they didn't have all these high priced products like Garmin. Just their own developed means. If it catches on and lots of schools buy their product, then you can just about count on upgrades and getting better. If more schools buy, then they can make the profits to make a better simulator.

When using the simulator's GPS, try to think of the unlikeness as sort of a challenge or partial failure. Relying too much on the GPS instrument itself is just as bad as it is good. Remember your regulations. You may have GPS equipped in your airplane, but you must also have another source of navigation inside the plane should the GPS unit fail. I'm not saying that all you do is rely in the GPS, but the emphasis is on the GPS.

Yeah, yeah.... I know what the PTS says and that technology is constantly changing the way we pilots fly. But it was written for a reason. Redundancy.

 

[VW Pilot]

One more thing. Before we bust Redbird's balls, talk to your flight school. I'm not so sure that they can't order the Redbird with all the bells and whistles...If the flight schools are on a budget, or just don't want to spend for top dollar equipment, then you'll get generic programs in place of the more sophisticated Garmin products. That guys is the nature of business....And reguardless of what the PTS says, that is perfectly legal. And if some of you have been around flight schools long enough or have become instructors, then you know exactly what im talking about. Concerned? Voice your concerns to the flight school's management or Owners...see what you come up with. Send Redbird a letter. Call. Ask questions about their products. Compare your answers to what the flight school might tell you. This will give you an idea of who is actually giving you the "business end" of the stick...I said it before...it's your money...until you hand it over. Research before you ask the school.
ALWAYS Remember, a flight school is just a business.

 

[Lynxman]

Do you have stock in the company? You are really defending this pos to the point of taking it personal.

 

[VW Pilot]

Of course not...I don't have stock in the company. Honestly I've never liked ANY simulator used for flight training purposes. WHY? For the same reasons mentioned. I just try to use it the best way possible and you can learn from using them and save money in the process. Just trying to stay positive. But seems one always blames the company or the product and it may not even be the company's or products fault. It might be that the flight school does not wish to buy the best software to run the damn thing....I dunno but it is a posibility.
Blast Redbird...I don't care. Do as ya please. Feel like your money isn't well spent because of a sorry ass simulator? Find out why it's so sorry...or just dont use it.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

Really, motion is a myth as far as it's value for simulation at the lower levels of flight training. It's just not necessary at all for learning the important aspects of instrument training or even private pilot level training. What is important is procedures and cockpit management and that training doesn't need motion. So for what's important in flight training, any fixed base Frasca or other such FTD will do the job just fine. Adding motion is a waste.

It seems that what Redbird has done is create something that looks impressive because it's on stilts. Yes, with the stilts it has some kind of cheap motion system but who needs it? Yes, you can do visual takeoffs and landing and "fly" around the pattern but who needs simulations that are only partially as good at the real thing? Why not just use an airplane? Very rarely is the weather so bad that a person can't at least go around the patch in an airplane. So what's the point of the Redbird motion? I'll tell you, the truth is it's all just a marketing tool; to get the no-nothing beginners to sign up at a flight school because it looks impressive to have a simulator on stilts that is supposed to teach the students how to fly, and fly for less money than an airplane, plus fly on cloudy windy days. Of course that's all crap because the students would be paying for nothing of training value; but, they don't know that. Who cares anyway? The idea is to get the poor unsuspecting students in the door and charge them for the training. If they learn nothing or get negative training in the Redbird that's OK because the school can provide that much more expensive airplane time to unlearn the Redbird training.

It seems that Redbird simulators are not much more than marketing gimmicks that are mostly worthless as real training devices.

So in the end I expect we'll see lots of schools purchase a Redbird. It's cheap, it's on stilts and it brings in the customers.

 

[Super 27]

So what's the point of the Redbird motion? I'll tell you, the truth is it's all just a marketing tool; to get the no-nothing beginners to sign up at a flight school because it looks impressive to have a simulator on stilts that is supposed to teach the students how to fly, and fly for less money than an airplane, plus fly on cloudy windy days.

This pretty much hits the nail on the head. Sad part is, it actually works - people are fascinated by that thing and can't wait to spend their hard-earned money to go for a ride.

 

[UndauntedFlyer]

This pretty much hits the nail on the head. Sad part is, it actually works - people are fascinated by that thing and can't wait to spend their hard-earned money to go for a ride.

Yes, you're right, it brings them in. I would say the Redbird isn't much more than an expensive carnival ride; and since there are pleanty of people who love those rides, I expect the Redbird to be a success.

I see the King's are now marketing the Redbird. Some people will do anything for money; or, I really wonder if they have really even given the Redbird a true evaluation? I would guess not, so as to give them the benefit of any doubt on that score.

 

[VW Pilot]

Just like the big glossy ads of the Academies....Yay.