Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Canadian Forces mine benefits of 3-D sims

MATTHEW TREVISAN

Globe and Mail Update

Latest comment posted at 10:48 PM EDT 11/05/08

Air force using NGRAIN software to reduce the time and money spent on training technicians ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Lowen Wrainger from Canada writes: There must be some mistake here. Something our Forces have that is actually working, beneficial, cost-effective, etc. Tell me it isn't so! Don't let the burrow-crats in Ottawa in on this or they'll 'avro' it.
  2. Steve Prime from Canada writes: Lowen ... you would be surprised what the Forces do well
  3. Montezuma 2006 from Canada writes: At least Canada has a leader in this space, CAE. This industry will continue to grow, with money from the Canadian Forces and the US Military new and old players in this space will grow.
  4. Brian Lowry from Fredericton, Canada writes: Simulations are great for initial stages of training, but forgive me if I say I wouldn't feel remotely safe on a plane that had been serviced by a technician whose 'experience' was not mostly hands-on. There's a tremendous difference between tightening something by hand and affixing it in a limited 3D simulation of the same action.

    Good PR, though -- that's something that our bureaucracy-laden Forces should be especially good at, given the number of people the employ who are doing nothing but desk work.
  5. bob saunders from Belleville, ON, Canada writes: The problem is the Military is trying to make each technician a master electrician/engine tech/ airframe/ hydraulic/ armament/ oxygen system expert in a short period of time. The exceptional person can be all that you can be, but the majority of people, mechanically inclined or not take a number of years to become proficient at their jobs. The simulators help but practical hands on is far more valuable. No amount of book learning is going to get automatically transferred to your hands. The reason I became an aircraft mechanic 30 years ago is because of the combination of mental stimulation involved in troubleshooting the sometimes difficult unserviceabilities of aircraft mechanical systems and the physical challenge of the actual work. And Brian having been at a desk job the past 4 years, it is hard, hard work. Far more mentally fatiguing that physical work.
  6. C C from Canada writes: I think this is great, it gives them a chance to practice in the 'risk-free' arena before graduating to real practice. Great way to learn the theory and the basics in a more practical way. Plus pilots put in a fair bit of sim time, seems reasonable to do the switch.

    I'm not worried that they won't be good enough, I mean it's not like they're just doing sims then going operational. And plus, with soon enough (fingers crossed!) I'll be flying what they're fixing, so I do have some stake in it!
  7. hossein hajiagha from Victoria, Canada writes: last times cost a million for each spy craft , and they never be use full in war , and wasted.....why we need all this have nice food in are table is more important as this 3D which i study and never get job as 3D artist

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top