Originally Posted by
Ewfflyer
While I agree scenario's are good, I think the whole FITS concept is a load of crap. It works out well for those going into the TAA aircraft that have all the gee-whiz avionics and panels, whom will use the Auto-pilot 99% of the time after they get their license, etc... but for the rest of the world, I really think it hinders real-world experience in manuevering the aircraft, and truly knowing it's capabilities, as well as the students. But as Woodfinx mentioned, and I agree, that commercial applicants can most benefit from this type of teaching, and honestly probably should be the only ones that get this type of teaching.
This also fits in with the change in progression. Used to be everyone trained in C150/152's, cherokee 140's, cubs, etc... Now we're not only going to the TAA's in new and traditional aircraft, these people aren't taking the baby-step approach to new planes, hence moving 172/182/arrow to something more complex, straight to 180KTAS planes that move faster than their brains.
Just my opinion, I need to get off this soapbox.
I don't necessarily believe that at all, it depends on the student. I did Private/Instrument combined FITS with most of my time in a Diamond DA-40 G1000 but I can fly round dials no problem, I actually prefer them. Partial panel in the G1000 usually entails losing your PFD and having to fly with the MFD and the backup Altimeter, Attitude, and Airspeed gauges, much worse than anything I was given while flying round dials.
As for the FITS approach as a whole, we are maintaining the 80% required to keep our 141 certificate and on average students are finishing in less time than Part 61 and our old 141 syllabus. Most people complain about lack of experience but in all honesty despite the time, its the same ticket, same ride that everyone takes.