[Tinkicker]

Tango’s observations relating to flight simulator ‘fidelity’ are spot on!  There is no doubt that flight simulators have become an indispensable tool for tech crew training.  The down side, is that certain modelling limitations exist, and must be taken into account when attempting to use flight simulators as a ‘proving ground’ in investigations.  From much of the chit-chat I’ve observed on social media and elsewhere, I’m not convinced that those limitations are widely known or understood.

While simulation sets out to ‘model’ the flight deck layout and behavior of an aircraft, the reality is that the aircraft doesn’t actually exist.  Instead, it’s represented by groups of interrelated mathematical models, designed in an attempt to mimic systems functions and aircraft handling characteristics.  They provide tech crews with the impression that they’re operating the real thing.

Flight simulators are constructed using design data from airframe manufacturers and equipment vendors.  Their performance is later compared with flight test data (to the extent it’s available) with a view to demonstrating performance that’s in accordance with the aircraft.  Designing models outside that flight test data ‘envelope’ is problematic, since it can only be viewed as an estimation of how the aircraft will respond.  It’s not a guarantee.