Microcomputer-Based Instrument Flight Simulation: Undergraduate Pilot Training Student Attitude Assessment

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to assess United States Air Force (USAF) Undergradate Pilot Training (UPT) student attitudes toward using a T-37 tailored personal computer (PC) or microcomputer-based simulation as an addition to the formal training syllabus. Eight student classes were surveyed in Phases I and II of the three phases of UPT. As hypothesized the UPT students were most receptive to using a microcomputer simulation for instrument training after having completed both instrument academics and the initial instrument simulator missions. only 36% of the students starting UPT were likely to use a microcomputer simulation to replace 75% or more of their chair-flying, compared to 51.4% of the students who had completed an instrument simulator sortie. On the average, UPT students having completed 12106 (two sorties prior to the instrument check ride) said they would use a microcomputer simulation on a daily basis to enhance their training. After attempting to learn the instrument procedures, students indicated they were eager to use a microcomputer simulation. It was demonstrated that, in general, UPT students are sensitive to their difficulties in learning instrument procedures and are willing to replace chair-flying with a microcomputer simulation.

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
Dec 01, 1991
Accession Number
ADA245449

Entities

People

  • Brian K. Rogers

Organizations

  • Armstrong Laboratory

Tags

Communities of Interest

  • Air Platforms

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Air Force
  • Cognition
  • Cognitive Workload
  • Computer-Aided Instruction
  • Computers
  • Curriculum
  • Flight Crews
  • Flight Simulations
  • Flight Simulators
  • Flight Training
  • Human Resources
  • Personal Computers
  • Pilots
  • Simulators
  • Students
  • Training
  • United States

Readers

  • Aviation Science / Aeronautics.
  • Instructional Design and Training Evaluation.