Easa Form 19: Fill & Download for Free

First generation:The first jet fighters, developped at the end of WWII. Other than engine type they actually differ little from prop planes. Main factors:Jet enginesStraight wingsSubsonic speedsno avionics / radarExamples: Gloster Meteor, ME 262, P80, MiG-9Second generation:The fighters that dominated the Korean warMain factors:Swept wingsTransonic speedsEarly radar / gun targeting systemsFirst heatseeking missiles.Examples: F-86, MiG-15, Mig-17, F9F8, Hawker HunterThird generation jets:Main factors:More advanced radar systemsFirst radar guided missiles and better heat seeking missiles became the primary weapons, cannons became secondary. Limited BVRAfterburning engines for Mach 2 speedsExamples: Mig-19 and 21, F-4 Phantom, F-8 Crusader, Mirage 3, Electric LightningFourth Generation:Main factors:Better radar systems, including look down shoot downBetter missiles, both radar guided and heat seeking. BVRComputer assisted flight, fly by wire etc for better agility.Examples: Mirage 2000, F-14, F-15, F-16, F-18, Mig-29, SU-27Examples of gen 4.5, who push gen 4 even further with EASA radars, radar reflection reducing technology, networking etc: Eurofighter Typhoon , Dassault Rafalle, MiG-35, SU-30, F-18E Super Hornet.Fifth Generation:Main factors:StealthNetworking between different planesExamples: F-35, F-22, SU-57, J-20, J-31The generations are of course a bit blurry, an upgraded gen 3 jet can easily be considered a gen 4. An early gen 4 like a F-16 is no match for the latest Rafale.

Because those other much larger aircraft were originally certified under the FAA or EASA rules/regulations for an airliner (greater than 19 passengers).Whereas the G700 was only certified under the rules and regulations for business jets (19 passengers or fewer).There is a difference.An airliner can easily be converted to a “private business jet”, by a wealthy owner.Whereas it is extremely difficult and expensive for the manufacturer to convert a business jet into an airliner.

The Level D simulators used by the airlines are very capable. They are extremely reliable and give the pilots an adequate environment to train for possible emergency scenarios. Most of them are good enough to get landing recency if a pilot loses his landing currency. This happens to long haul pilots who do a few landings every month and specially to instructor pilots who has to give more of the landings to trainee Captains and First officers. The simulator flying is so accurate, the time spent in it are considered flight hours and are added to a pilot’s log book and count towards his/ her grand total hours.The A320 simulator I did my type rating on. As you can see, it looks exactly like a real A320. The back seat is the seat of the instructor, where he watches over the trainee and fail stuff through the touch screen computer system to the left of the seat.Simulators for fly by wire aircraft are a lot more accurate when compared to simulators for conventional aircraft. For example, in the A320 simulator I did my initial type conversion had the same flight computers as the actual aircraft inbuilt into it. This meant the simulator flying is on par to the real aircraft. The handling of the simulator and the actual A320 is exactly the same. My first aircraft was the Dash 8 which is a 50 seat conventional turboprop. The aircraft handled quite differently to the simulator. The simulator was good enough but it was not good enough to teach a pilot how to really fly the aircraft in a physical sense.Most of the answers here talk about pilots going from simulator training direct to flying passengers in line flying. This is partly true. ZFTT (Zero flight time training) is not something that every pilot or every simulator can do. When I did my initial type conversion in the Dash 8, back in Madrid, the simulator was not qualified for ZFTT and neither were me and and my training partner qualified for ZFTT (we were both fresh out of flight school). We both had to do our base training (6 take offs and landings) in the real aircraft with an airline examiner with no passengers on board.For a simulator to be able to do ZFTT training it needs a certain level of realism and needs a formal approval from the regulator. The pilot undergoing ZFTT also needs to meet a certain set of prerequisites. According to EASA regulations a pilot to meet the standards for a ZFTT needs at least 1500 hours of multi crew flight time in an a turbojet aircraft designed under CS-25 regulations or a turboprop aircraft with a weight exceeding 10 tonnes or a passenger carrying capacity higher than 19. When I came to A320 I had about 2000 hours in the Dash 8 which qualified me for ZFTT training in the A320. I still had to undergo 40 sectors of line training with instructor pilots until they signed me off for a line check. These flights were normal passenger flights. For the first three flights in the A320, I also had a safety pilot (a senior First officer) on the jump seat.