Logging Sim time

[boxcar]

flx757

Since you're successfully posting without my permission, it's obvious my approval is not required. However, it's really poor form to join in on a subject you clearly don't understand and then suggest all posts except your own are redundant. As avbug knows and you apparently don't, there's subtle differences in the qualification and use of training devices and FTDs. These differences are certainly known to the FAA and could well give the original poster a legal bite in the butt if misapplied. It was those differences that were being batted around when you declared the matter closed.

Good day to you.

 

[flx757]

Can someone let me know what columns in a log book that simulator time can go under.

can I also log PIC if rated for the category, or multi-time etc.?

Thanks

Boxcar....there you go. Knock yourself out.

See ya.

 

[boxcar]

flx757

You left out a key part of the original posters's question that led to the dispute over definitions:

"The sime we use is an AST 300 level 4 sim."

In order to answer his question, it was necessary to determine the underlying facts.

1. There's no such animal as a level 4 simulator. Simulators are level's A thru D.

2. FTD's are designated level 1 thru 7, so maybe that's what he meant.

3. But wait a minute, he said it was a level 4. If he meant level 4 FTD, there's no legal way to log anything other than ground training in it. A level 4 FTD is by definition an airplane-specific device that doesn't have the capability of being flown and doesn't have an aerodynamic model in it's software. Indeed, it isn't even required to have a yoke or throttles. An example you might be familar with is the stand alone FMS trainer some operators use for FMS familarization during B-757/767 ground training.

With the question about the qualification level of that particular AST-300 still open, there's no way anyone can provide a valid answer to the basic question of logging time in it. Therefore, I reject your assertion that the question has been correctly answered.

My point remains: Those with limited knowledge of a subject should read more and post less.

 

[trainerjet]

Apparently, boxcar just wants to argue...with anyone who will argue. In his first post, he points out that an AST 300 is not a simulator but a training device . In his next post, he tells avbug his definition is incorrect even though avbug has quoted verbatim the FAA's definiton. Avbug pointed this out, though it didn't satisfy boxcar, and avbug wisely bowed out of further debate. Flx 757 then enters to state that in his opinion, the original question of can you log this time as PIC or multi-engine time had been answered. Boxcar chimes in with what amounts to you don't know what you're talking about, so stay out of the discussion. In doing so, he apparently had a change of opinion about avbug's definition he earlier declared as incorrect by saying that avbug knows . Then feels the need to explain to flx 757 the different sim levels. I did a quidk search and found a previous post by flx 757 where he detailed the different sim levels and provided references. So he evidently does understand.

Like I said, it appears boxcar just wants to argue. So, after avbug and flx have bowed out, I'll give him the opportunity to argue some more...and to have the last word on the subject, since I guess he feels he is the last word.

 

[boxcar]

I almost feel like I'm trying to explain algebra to my neighbor's three year old. The first order of business is to understand just exactly what an FTD is and isn't. This is not that difficult to understand, but some need to abandon some preconceived notions. If you really think the term "flight training device" and "training device" are interchangable, you're mistaken. Take a look at AC120-45: If you think an AST-300 is automatically an FTD, read some more. If you still think an AST-300 could possibly be a level 4 FTD, start over at the beginning.