Qantas Begins New Era In Simulation

This late delivery spelt out the usual problems, which Qantas is no stranger to. The airline has experienced similar difficulties in earlier days, such as when the first of its 747s were introduced. In both instances the delays meant that there was virtually no lead time between the flight simulator and the real aircraft. Not a desirable state-it creates a dilemma in Flight Operations of trying to juggle crews and training schedules to meet the imminent online requirements. Also quite a logistics problem in the present instance, when it is considered that about 200 pilots have initially been assigned to the -400s. One could wryly infer that Boeing’s delayed deliveries were almost fortuitous.

However, the delays in both flight simulators and real aircraft were not directly related. The reasons for Boeing’s delays have already been well documented; the flight simulator delays, however, were attributed to slightly more bizarre circumstances. Qantas, like other airlines set to operate the 747-400, found itself the unwitting victim of a controversial and cynical takeover of the Singer Corporation in the US, by a corporate raider who immediately began to sell off the former simulator manufacturing giant’s assets to service massive interest debts.

This resulted in the sale of the military side of the simulation business to the Canadian simulator manufacturer CAE. With this sale went production and other facilities which were jointly used by both military and commercial simulator operations, also resulting in loss of many highly experienced technical staff from the commercial operation.

One of Singer Link’s previous attributes as a commercial simulator manufacturer was access to technology and facilities developed for the massive military arena. Eventually, after government intervention, threats of expensive litigation and a number of complicated divisional mergers, the civil airline flight simulator program, was resurrected. Overnight the title of the world’s largest and most experienced simulator manufacturer shifted from Singer Link to CAE-Link.

There were other industry problems in the manufacture of the new flight simulators from Qantas’ point of view. ”All airlines had stipulated the use of the Collins integrated display system and a Honeywell Flight Management System, conforming completely with the actual aircraft,” Vern Cottee, Senior Simulator Development Engineer, elucidated. “This gives it a ‘black label’ nomination – that is, the final certified avionics are as per the actual aircraft.

“Unlike other operators who were prepared to accept the ‘red label’ avionics – that is, developmental avionics for simulators Qantas couldn’t, and wouldn’t, accept the alternative. This also would have affected the ability of gaining CAA Level 5. ‘Level 5′, incidentally, refer to a flight simulator accreditation which allows an airline to fully train pilots in aircraft operation without the necessity for time in the real aircraft. ” The new -400 flight simulator is housed in the recently completed multi-storied simulator building at Qantas’ Jet Base in Sydney. Here, it is being utilised 20 hours a day (with four hours of down-time for maintenance) in the following roles: conversions, licence renewals, recency, promotional training, cyclic and sector credits.

“Initially, there are approximately 57 captains, 46 F/Os and 75 S/Os, for the first six aircraft,” Roger Carmichael, Flight Operations Line Director, explained. “Of course only 747 people will immediately be valid for the six week course. ”

Like the 767, the 747-400 program will employ its own Flight Management System (FMS) trainer – an innovation by Qantas which allows novices to become familiar with the integrated Electronic Flight Instrumentation System (EFIS) and the FMS, in operation, outside of the flight simulator. These trainers are simply a large tabletop box of electronics with a Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) and a Control Display Unit (CDU) replicating those in the aircraft. Just as the flight simulator saves money in real aircraft time ($1,600 per hour as opposed to $40,000 per flight hour), so does the FMS trainer by not requiring the occupation of a flight simulator to master FMS operation. One could ask: “Well, if it’s only a mock-up, why not use an FMS trainer that can be converted from a 767 to a 747-400?” Considering each FMS trainer costs nearly $A1 million, why not indeed?

A glance at the -400 flight deck offers the most obvious reason immediately – the two outboard CRTs, directly in front of the pilots, function as the Captain’s and the First Officer’s Primary Flight Displays (PFDs). Each pilot can use the PFD as the single source for all the primary flight instruments found on a traditional instrument panel. This represents a departure from the 757/767 which utilises an electronic attitude indicator and separate round dial air data instruments.

Each pilot’s inner CRTis the navigation display; they are similar to the electronic horizontal situation indicators found on 757/767s, but incorporate many improvements, such as the new ‘Centre Map’ (CD). This feature presents a picture of the area surrounding the aircraft and is particularly useful in the terminal area, where the crew is interested in what is going on behind the aircraft as well as up ahead.

Clearly, this infers that the 7 47-400 requires its own dedicated FMS trainer – in much the same way as each aircraft variant requires its own flight simulator. (Yet another flight simulator would be required if Qantas decided to fit GE or P&W engines to part of its -400 fleet, for example. )

If these FMS trainers are a Qantas innovation (as indeed they are), why aren’t Qantas marketing them? The short answer is that they are, in a ‘soft’ sort of way-Singer and Boeing have both expressed interest. In reality, Qantas has been fully committed to getting its own training resources fully operational before seriously considering the concept. The marketing aspect may prove to be a viable offshoot in the foreseeable future.

Having witnessed the 747-400 in flight, then visiting the Flight Simulator Centre at Sydney, the writer was impressed by the similarities. The actual flight deck and the flight simulator both reflect the departure from a grey background to light brown. Apparently the new colour scheme is in line with Boeing’s ongoing philosophy to create a quiet, subdued cockpit. The overt simplicity of the design layout is immediately striking; no doubt, this same impression to the uninitiated will belie the covert wizardry which makes this seemingly simple cockpit possible. All of the innovations go beyond the scope of this article; suffice to say that the second generation digital avionics have replaced analogue avionics and, as a result, the flight deck is clean and uncluttered.

The new coloured daylight display in the flight simulator also deserves mention. One even notices the touchdown tyre markings around the 1,000′ markers on the runway; Tullamarine actually looks like Tullamarine and the greater horizontal visible span is sure to improve peripheral vision cues. Add to this the whine of the engines and the niggley little bumps during taxi and it becomes very convincing indeed.

Apart from the previously mentioned ‘black label’ avionics, the -400 flight simulator differs from those of other operators 1n another manner. Qantas stipulated in its order that the instructor’s panel be forward facing, instead of the traditional side facing panel. It was felt that the quality of training would be superior in this configuration, allowing the instructor merely to look up from his touch sensitive screens (rather than craning his neck) to follow the progress of the exercise. It will be interesting to see if other airlines stipulate this configuration in future.

Qantas’ new flagship and its associated flight simulator have been a Jong time in coming, and not without complications. With the airline now able to better assess its priorities, it is felt that the -400 is a superb aircraft to launch the international carrier well into the nineties.