Return to home page
Searching: Muskingum library catalog
We are currently experiencing delivery delays for items requested from other institutions while transitioning to a new statewide delivery service. Please contact your library with questions or advice about alternative resources. Thank you for your patience!

LEADER 00000nam  2200457Ii 4500 
001    74244632 
003    OCoLC 
005    20101012132013.0 
006    m        d f       
007    cr bn||||||||| 
008    080513s2003    dcua    ob   f000 0 eng d 
040    DTICE|beng|erda|cDTICE|dGPO|dMvI 
074    0431-E-04 (online) 
086 0  TD 4.210:03/3 
086 0  TD 4.210:03/3 
245 00 Effectiveness of personal computers to meet recency of 
       experience requirements /|cH. L. Taylor, ... [and others].
264  1 Washington, D.C. :|bU.S. Dept. of Transportation, Federal 
       Aviation Administration, Office of Aerospace Medicine,
300    1 online resource (1 volumes (various pagings)) :|bdigital,
       PDF file 
336    text|btxt|2rdacontent 
337    computer|bc|2rdamedia 
338    online resource|bcr|2rdacarrier 
340    |gmonochrome|2rdacc|0
500    Title from title screen (viewed Oct. 5, 2010). 
500    "February 2003." 
500    Performed by the Aviation Research Laboratory of the 
       University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. 
504    Includes bibliographical references (p. 17-18). 
520    The purpose of the current study was to investigate the 
       effectiveness of Personal Computer Aviation Training 
       Devises (PCATDs) and Flight Training Devices (FTDs) to 
       meet FAA recency of experience requirements for instrument
       flight. Two types of training devices were tested: 1) an 
       FAA approved PCATD; and 2) a Frasca 141 FTD. An Instrument
       Proficiency Check (IPC) was given to all subjects in the 
       airplane to establish a performance baseline (IPC #1). 
       After the completion of IPC #1 in the airplane, the 
       subjects were randomly assigned to one of four groups: the
       PCATD, the FTD, the aircraft or the control group with a 
       balancing constraint so that the subjects successfully 
       completing IPC #1 were equally distributed among the four 
       groups. During the six-month period, each subject received
       two recency of experience flights of about 1.8 hours each 
       in either the PCATD, the FTD or the aircraft; the control 
       group received no recency training. These recency of 
       experience flights included three instrument approaches, 
       holding procedures, and intercepting and tracking 
       navigation radials and courses. After the six-month period,
       performance on an IPC in the airplane (IPC #2) compared 
       pilots who received recency of experience in the training 
       devices to a control group. The subjects in the PCATD and 
       FTD group were also compared to the aircraft group who 
       received recency of experience in the airplane. A 
       comparison of the three training groups with the control 
       group performance on the final instrument proficiency 
       check indicated that the training groups performed 
       significantly better than the control group. The study 
       also indicated that PCATDs are effective in maintaining 
       recency of experience for instrument rated pilots over a 
       period of six months. 
650  0 Flight training|0
       subjects/sh2002006576|zUnited States.|0
650  0 Instrument flying|0
       subjects/sh2002006576|zUnited States.|0
650  0 Microcomputers.|0
700 1  Taylor, H. L.|q(Henry L.)|0
710 1  United States.|bOffice of Aerospace Medicine.|0http:// 
710 2  University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.|bAviation 
       Research Laboratory.|0
776 08 |iPaper version:|tEffectiveness of personal computers to 
       meet recency of experience requirements.|h1 v. (various 
856 40 |u 

If you experience difficulty accessing or navigating this content, please contact the OPAL Support Team