Enhancing Pilot Training with Virtual Reality: Evaluating Skill Acquisition and Student Perceptions

Enhancing Pilot Training with Virtual Reality: Evaluating Skill Acquisition and Student Perceptions | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Enhancing Pilot Training with Virtual Reality: Evaluating Skill Acquisition and Student Perceptions Toni Vallès-Català, Jordi Mogas, Carlos Navarro-Morali, Ramon Palau This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-6440952/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Virtual Reality (VR) has emerged as a promising tool for pilot training. Some aviation companies have started incorporating VR into their training programs, but more research is needed to prove its efficiency as a learning tool. This study has two aims: to determine to what extent the use of VR improves pilot learning skills before a student’s first real flight, and to explore the vision of the students and instructors. A quasi-experimental design is implemented, with participants divided into a control group (traditional classroom training) and an experimental group (VR-based training), along with a focus group to explore the second objective. The results indicate that students who trained with VR achieved significantly higher scores in their first real flight compared to the control group, supporting the hypothesis that VR enhances practical skill acquisition. However, VR training was less effective in improving theoretical knowledge, as the traditional classroom group showed greater gains in post-test scores. Qualitative data revealed that students and instructors recognized the potential of VR for pilot training, highlighting benefits such as increased immersion, spatial awareness, and confidence. Despite these advantages, limitations such as the lack of physical feedback, occasional technical issues, and minor ergonomic challenges were noted. Findings suggest that while VR cannot replace real-world flight experience, it serves as a valuable supplementary tool for enhancing flight skills and procedural training. Future research should explore long-term retention of VR-trained skills, refine VR learning experiences to better support theoretical knowledge, and examine its integration with traditional training programs. Virtual Reality Pilot Training Flight Simulation Aviation Education Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 1. Introduction To obtain a commercial pilot license, all aspiring pilots must complete both real flight hours and simulated flight hours. The demand for airline pilots is increasing, projections for 2041 suggest this number could rise to around 600,000 to meet industry needs (Airbus 2022 ; Boeing 2022 ). This growing demand is creating a significant challenge in training capacity, particularly in the availability of flight simulation resources. Virtual reality (VR) technologies could play a crucial role in addressing this challenge by providing accessible and cost-effective simulation options to supplement traditional training methods. VR is not a new tool, but its implementation in the education field was hindered by high costs until 2013. Then, the company Oculus Rift revolutionised the industry by making VR technology more affordable, thereby enabling its viability in education and training. Additionally, its technology has advanced considerably improving its capabilities (Jensen and Konradsen 2018 ). From there, VR has proven to be an effective learning tool in diverse disciplines, mainly health, sciences and engineering (Kavanagh et al. 2017 ). However, fewer investigations have studied its application in the aviation field (Ross and Gilbey 2023 ). In here, we want to introduce our virtual reality flight simulator during the initial stage of flight instruction in a university degree for professional pilots. Concretely, in second course student pilots just before their first real flight. Our objective is to test whether a Virtual Reality Flight Simulator (VRFS) improves the performance in the first real flight. 1.1. Virtual Reality in Education Virtual reality (VR) has demonstrated significant potential in enhancing learning outcomes in higher education by providing immersive and interactive experiences (Slavova and Mu 2018 ; Vats and Joshi 2024 ). Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have highlighted various benefits of VR, such as improved student engagement and understanding of complex concepts, facilitated through games, simulations, and virtual worlds (Merchant et al. 2014 ; Young et al. 2020 ; Xiaoning et al. 2024 ). These applications are predominantly seen in science, engineering, and medical fields, with limited implementation in humanities and social sciences (Ding and Li 2022 ). VR's ability to enhance student engagement, foster immersive learning experiences, and improve knowledge retention is influenced by factors such as feedback type, individual vs. group gameplay, and treatment session duration (Merchant et al. 2014 ; Slavova and Mu 2018 ; Vats and Joshi 2024 ). However, challenges remain, such as the need for more portable devices and better pre-class training for students (Ding and Li 2022 ). Researchers have proposed various guidelines and frameworks, including empathy mapping and heuristic principles for lesson planning, to support effective VR integration in higher education (Young et al. 2020 ). As VR technology evolves, its potential to transform teaching methods and offer diverse learning opportunities becomes increasingly evident (Xiaoning et al. 2024 ). Studies show VR's suitability for acquiring practical skills (Kavanagh et al. 2017 ; Jensen and Konradsen 2018 ). The immersive nature of VR facilitates active learning and concept assimilation. For instance, Chen et al. ( 2020 ) found that students using VR exhibited improved hands-on abilities and learning performances. On the other hand, studies suggest that VR is not more efficient than traditional learning in terms of knowledge retention, but significantly similar (Jensen and Konradsen 2018 ; Sichterman et al. 2023 ; Šikl et al. 2024 ). On the other hand, some concerns have been raised about using VR in education, such as cybersickness (Jensen and Konradsen 2018 ), the challenge of introducing new technologies for educators (Bower et al. 2020 ), and distractions from the main learning task (Mayer et al. 2023 ). Finally, Rebelo et al. ( 2012 ) identified three primary advantages of virtual environments for education and research: Availability : Teachers and researchers can create customized environments, replicable across various locations and scenarios. Safety : Students can learn specific skills in controlled hazardous scenarios safely. Researchers can manipulate factors affecting participants' performance, such as mental workload or induced stress, which can be precisely defined and replicated. Data Provision : The reproducibility of simulated experiences allows researchers to gather accurate and valid data, often inaccessible in real-life settings. 1.2. Virtual Reality in Aviation Training In aviation training, VR technology offers immersive and interactive experiences that can significantly enhance pilot training and safety procedures (Cross et al. 2023b ; Ross and Gilbey 2023 ; Shui et al. 2023 ). Moreover, VR technology's cost-effectiveness, accessibility, and sustainability present advantages over traditional simulators (Ziakkas et al. 2023 ). Therefore, studies were performed to validate its efficacy compared to traditional Flight Simulator Training Devices (FSTD) (Oberhauser and Dreyer 2017 ; van Weelden et al. 2021 ), where arousal and workload was found higher in students piloting a FSTD (Vallès-Català and Guerrero 2025 ). Studies byGuthridge and Clinton-Lisell ( 2023 ) andHight et al. ( 2022 ) have demonstrated that VR-trained participants achieve learning outcomes comparable to those using traditional simulators, often outperforming control groups. VR has been studied in military pilot training, where an increased level of perceived self-efficacy has been found (Pennington et al. 2019 ). Additionally, given the critical role of spatial visualization in pilot training, VR has been effectively used to administer the mental rotation test, a key predictor of pilots' spatial reasoning skills (Zhang et al. 2023 ). Moreover, VR’s personalized capabilities make it particularly well-suited for procedural training with adaptive feedback, as required in pilot instruction (Aguilar Reyes et al. 2023 ). Nevertheless, challenges such as adapting learning materials to technical requirements and optimizing exposure duration to prevent physiological issues remain (Dymora et al. 2021 ). VR is a promising tool for aviation training and many flight schools are adopting this technology. However, studies have provided only limited evidence of the effectiveness of learning in a VRFS and the transfer of skills to real-world settings and further studies are needed (Cross et al. 2023a ; Ross and Gilbey 2023 ; Shui et al. 2023 ). 1.3. Objectives and Hypothesis The overall objectives of this study were: GO1- to determine to what extent the use of VR improves pilot learning skills. GO2- to explore the vision of the students and instructors. Regarding these objectives, the following two hypotheses were posed: H1 The students in the VC group attain better results. H2 The participants recognize the potential and practicality of using virtual reality for developing pilot skills. 2. Materials and Methods For this study, 30 student pilots volunteered to participate in the experiment, with an age range of 18–21. The participants are enrolled in the Degree in Commercial Aviation Pilot and Air Operations at anonymised university , a university specializing in pilot training. The VR component is intended to be part of their second coursework, preparing them for their first real flight with the aircraft Diamond DA20. Among the final participants, only three were female, accounting for 10% of the total, a similar percentage to the current active female pilots (CAPA 2023). All of them provided written informed consent, in accordance with the guidelines approved by the ethical committee of the anonymised university under code CEIPSA-2023-PR-0029 . Finally, three participants decided to withdraw from the study, and their data were not included in the analysis. 2.1. Materials In this study, we employed the following components to create a VR flight simulator (see Fig. 1 ) like a previous study (Vallès-Català and Guerrero 2025 ), which, though not certified for official flight training, can be used as a supplementary tool: Oculus Quest 3 : A VR headset with a 110 ± 4-degree horizontal and 93 ± 5.1-degree vertical field of view, and a 120 Hz refresh rate. To prevent connectivity issues, it was connected to the PC via a cable. Previous studies have also used similar Oculus devices in VR research (Estupiñán et al. 2014 ; Egan et al. 2016 ; Alves Fernandes et al. 2016 ; Kakkos et al. 2019 ; Kritikos et al. 2019 ). PC : A Windows 10 system with an Intel Core i7-9700K processor and GeForce RTX 3080 10GB graphics card. The direct connection between the headset and PC ensured a low latency of 10–30 ms, which supports immersive experiences and reduces cybersickness (Oberhauser and Dreyer 2017 ). Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 Deluxe Edition : This software was chosen for its realistic visuals and flight dynamics, adequate for simulation and research (Vallès-Català and Guerrero 2025 ). Featuring the DA20-C1 aircraft from SimSolutions via the iniBuilds platform, along with the LERS airport. Both closely resemble the participants' real-world flight training environments. Flight Controls : The VPC WarBRD Grip joystick with a VPC MongoosT-50CM2 base was used to control the aircraft’s roll and pitch, while the Logitech G Flight Simulator Throttle Quadrant managed throttle and flaps. The Oculus Touch Controllers were only used for pointing instruments during the pre-flight checklist. Additionally, Logitech flight rudder pedals were used to control yaw via foot input. 2.2. Experimental Design This study is based on a quasi-experimental design exploring the effect of the type of training environment (virtual reality vs. control) on the improvement of learning skills and the participants’ view, by using post-test scores, student marks after real flight, observations by instructors, and interview data from both students and instructors. All pilot students must complete a specialized course focused on the DA20 aircraft—the model they would later use during their flight training. Once the course was successfully completed, participants who volunteered for the study were assigned to an additional training session, held before their first real flight. Participants were ranked by their final marks of the DA20 course, and those in odd positions were assigned to the control group, while those in even positions were assigned to the experimental group. This ensured that both groups had a similar range of prior knowledge and performance. Participants in the control group received a traditional, instructor-led classroom session lasting around 45 minutes. During this session, a flight instructor provided an overview of the DA20 aircraft's instrumentation and standard flight procedures. In contrast, participants in the experimental group completed a 45-minute VR session, where a flight instructor faithfully simulated their upcoming real flight. Additionally, the control group had a separate 45-minute VR flight simulation session after their real flight session, which is not considered for the study but provides an opportunity for all participants to experience VR, not creating a comparative disadvantage for the control group. Although all participants completed the DA20 course at the same time, their first real flights were scheduled on different dates over the following months. In this study, efforts were made to ensure that both the control and experimental training interventions occurred as close as possible to the participants' first flights, ideally within one week prior. However, due to factors such as instructor, aircraft, and airport availability, as well as meteorological conditions, the time between the training session and the first flight varied, with some participants receiving their intervention as early as one day or as late as one month before their real flight. 2.3. Instruments A questionnaire was developed to assess participants' understanding of key concepts necessary for a pilot's first real flight, all of which were covered in the DA20 course. The questionnaire included five questions in various formats, such as identifying instruments from cockpit images, sequencing a specific flight procedure, and completing a table with aircraft configuration data. The same questionnaire was delivered twice: as a pretest and then as a posttest (Tesch 2016 ). The pretest was conducted in person for all participants on the same date, days after the completion of the DA20 course. The posttest was provided individually to participants after they completed their respective control or experimental training sessions, on different dates. Each pilot's performance during their first real flight was assessed using a standardized rubric approved by Agencia Estatal de Seguridad Aérea (AESA) under regulation (UE) nº 1178/2011. The flight instructor evaluated 23 different aspects of the flight using a three-level rubric-based scale. These individual ratings were then automatically compiled into a single overall performance score. This data was collected for both the control and experimental groups to measure and compare their actual flight performance. The effective instruments for qualitative analysis of the sessions were the instructors' notebook, student interviews, and a focus group with representative students. During the VR experiments, the sessions were recorded to have a detailed account of everything that happened: the behaviour of both students and instructors, with a broad view of the room (Williams et al. 2014 ). Additionally, the computer screen showing what the students saw through the VR headset and documents with annotations were also recorded (Williams et al. 2014 ). However, these recordings were only used for occasional consultation in case other instruments required clarification on any specific detail. The instructors' notebook consisted of a set of questions that the instructors were asked to answer at the end of each session. Instructors were requested to register written evidence of the relevant topics using the technique of direct observation through a record of notes that condense answering some key questions (Creswell 2013 ). To reach responses aiming at a relevant synthesis to evaluate each experience, the posed questions were: Q1: Does the student follow the class well? Q2: How does the student perform the maneuvers? How do they read the instruments? Q3: What is the student's reaction to VR? Difficulties or admiration? Q4: Did the student experience any motion sickness? Q5: Were there any technical difficulties? Q6: Note any extraordinary events. In parallel, each student participating in the VR experiment was also required to respond to a structured interview (Williams et al. 2014 ; Creswell 2018 ) about their impressions of the experience. This information complements the students' perspectives and evaluations of the proposal. The questions posed were: Q1: How do you think using VR influenced your flight training preparation? Q2: What do you think are the advantages of VR in this type of training? Q3: What do you think are the disadvantages of VR in this type of training? Q4: How do you think this training could be improved using VR? Q6: Do you think VR can replace some real flights? Finally, to reach data saturation, a focus group was conducted with two participants interviewed together to delve deeper into the understanding of the results obtained with the other instruments. Considering that the volume of the data collected was not extensive, the analysis process involved a thorough reading and organization of the information. Patterns were identified, and connections between ideas were explored using both a text editor and a spreadsheet. The text editor allowed for structuring and annotating key findings, while the spreadsheet was used to categorize and cross-reference data points systematically. This method facilitated the identification of recurring themes and relationships within the dataset, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the qualitative information collected. All questionnaires were distributed via Microsoft Forms. Boxplots were generated via python 3.11. 3. Results 3.1. Applied skills The boxplot in Fig. 3 shows the distribution of marks for the real flight performed by students, categorized into control and experimental groups. Note that the experimental group, which used VR training, achieved higher marks than the control group. Instructors were not aware of the student’s group at the time of evaluation. Two students were excluded from this section of the results, one from each of the control and experimental groups, because they were late to the real flight session. In such cases, the instructor assigns a score of 5 regardless of performance. Normality was not assumed in the data, as indicated by the Shapiro-Wilk test results (experimental group: p = 0.65, control group: p = 0.26). However, homoscedasticity was assumed based on the Levene’s test result (p = 0.0077). Consequently, the Mann-Whitney U test was applied to compare the medians between the experimental and control groups. The test yielded a U statistic of 39 with a p-value of 0.019, confirming a significant difference between the groups. The effect size, calculated using the rank biserial correlation was 0.494, indicating a moderate effect. 3.2. Theoretical knowledge The pretest and posttest questionnaires, conducted before and after the intervention, will shed light on the theoretical knowledge gained from each method: VR in the experimental group and traditional classroom in the control group. In Fig. 4 , the pretest scores were similar for both groups. While both groups exhibited an increase in posttest means compared to their pretest scores (control group increase a 25.9% and experimental group increase a 15.3%), a paired t-test indicated that the increase in the control group was statistically significant (p = 0.001), whereas the increase in the experimental group was not significant (p = 0.145). 3.3. Instructors’ notebook Instructors consistently observed that students adapted quickly to the VR environment. Nearly all students required only a short familiarization period before effectively executing the flight maneuvers, which suggests that the VR is intuitive and accessible for most students. For instance, Instructor3, speaking about participant10, noted that “after a few minutes of exploration, the student was able to execute maneuvers smoothly.” This suggests that VR offers an accessible platform for training, even for those unfamiliar with the technology. Students showed positive attitude and perceptions. Overall, instructors informed that the students leave happy from the mission, feeling as if you were inside the plane, that students conveyed having enjoyed the experience, satisfaction, in seven cases "admiration" is communicated (a word that was mentioned in the question posed, which certainly have influenced in the responses), also two instructors highlight the realism, and one instructor remembered how an student emphasized that this experiment can be done from anywhere putting in value the geographical advantage. The overall performance of the students in the VR training showed a pattern of initial difficulty followed by significant improvement as they became more familiar with the controls. Most students struggled with maintaining altitude and speed at the beginning, as they adapted to the flight instruments and procedures. However, there was a notable improvement during the sessions, and by the end of the experiment, many were able to control essential flight parameters effectively. As Instructor1 noted about participant11: " The student took a little time to get to grips with the controls of the plane, which made it difficult for him to maintain altitudes and speeds at the beginning, but a considerable improvement was observed during the flight, which allowed him to finish the mission being able to control the parameters. " Other participants aligned with this evolution. Asked about how students do the maneuvers and how do they read the instruments, the instructors are mostly satisfied with the students’ performance, yet there is room for improvement in some cases: “ Attitude must be improved during the flight ” (Instructor2 about Participant15), “ sometimes he doesn't remember well the order to level up or down ” (Instructor3 about Participant18), “ he had to be reminded during the maneuver a certain step to follow (especially the TRIM aspect) ” (Instructor3 about Participant16), “ the student makes several errors both in reading and executing the maneuver, and on several occasions is not able to maintain the parameters ” (Instructor1 about Participant21), and “ it's a little difficult for him to do the scan flow ” (Instructor2 about Participant28). Such improvement needs are likely to be related to the fact that this is their first flight rather than the VR aspect. Instructors do not deny that the errors in VR could affect a better performance in the first real volume. When it comes to more complex flight scenarios faced by students, Instructors reported varied performance. Several instructors observed that students struggled with the absence of physical feedback during critical moments. For instance, difficulty managing an engine failure scenario, attributing the challenge to the lack of sensory input, such as the feeling of turbulence or changes in aircraft motion. This was a common issue among students handling high-stress tasks, which aligns with the students' feedback regarding the limitations of VR. The instructors observed occasional ergonomic and technical challenges that hindered student performance. For instance, Instructor4 observed that participant9 struggled with the pedal layout, which interrupted the flow of their session. In another case a little physical discomfort after having dressed the glasses for a long time was reported. These situations were exceptional and in future experiments could be easily addressed, not implying a potential limitation of this technology. On the other hand, problems with controls such as the ignition switch were reported in given cases. Instructor 2 comments that “ the biggest problem was the remote, having to press the buttons with the mouse on the part of the instructor and the position of the flaps under the gas .” Although these issues were not widespread, they did occur across multiple students, indicating that certain elements of the VR setup could be improved for better alignment with real cockpit ergonomics and technical quality. Looking at potential technical difficulties related to the software, in four cases the instructors confirm none. The rest reported varied technical issues during the VR training. The most remarkable is that the engine key was hard to use. It refers to the key to start the engine (we refer to the aircraft key, as we switch the key in a car to run the engine). VR works very well if you have the analogical buttons, as with the remotes you must force an imaginary movement and feels more unnatural. In the experiments they used real buttons and not remotes. Additionally, it was occasionally reported that the ignition switch was difficult to turn and using the mouse to operate buttons like the fuel pump increased reaction time during flight. Instructors are asked about any cases of dizziness, and they confirmed that there have been none. Only in one case is it reported that " At first it was difficult for him to see due to the use of glasses, which caused him a little dizziness, but then everything came fine " (Instructor1 about Participant19). Also, should be considered that the starting warning light and the TRIM could be improved. In some case it was said that the push-to-test lights and warning lights were either malfunctioning or poorly simulated. This is acknowledged because of the specific software, and the model of the plane offered. Other isolate technical issues refer to issues with the aircraft's power, which initially prevented take-off until the session was restarted. An instructor also remarks that a student noted difficulty in reading the instrument numbers clearly. Instructors held a generally positive view of VR as a training tool, though they emphasized the importance of integrating it with real-world flight practice. Most instructors noted that the realism of the simulations helped students feel more prepared for actual flights, but they also recognized the limitations. Instructor2, reflecting on participant7's session, commented that " the student appreciated how closely the VR cockpit matched the real one, but acknowledged that it doesn't fully replace the feel of actual flight ." This perspective reinforces the notion that VR serves as a valuable training tool, but always in a supplementary manner. Another relevant aspect to consider is that these experiments were designed to boost the practical part of the training. In this regard, previsible results related to the lack of memorisation and theoretical reinforcement were reached. Several impressions aligned to this situation, like Instructor1 reported stating that “[the student] shows difficulty understanding and applying the concepts, if the instructor is not constantly reminding them” , and Instructor2 pointing out that “[the student] lacks more background ”, among other comments in this line. In overall the impression is highly positive both from the instructors’ side and from what the instructors have seen from students’ reactions: “ There was surprise by the reality of the simulation, it is a perfect tool to improve the skills of students with more difficulties to face a specific mission ” because “allows you to get a familiarization before the flight” (Instructor2). Despite the challenges, both students and instructors reacted positively to the overall VR training experience. Many students left the sessions feeling more confident in their ability to perform in real-world scenarios. Instructor2, who observed participant7, noted that “the student expressed satisfaction with how closely the VR simulation resembled actual flight, especially in terms of cockpit layout and procedure repetition.” This enthusiasm was shared by many participants, instructors said. 3.4. Students’ interviews Students perceived VR as an effective and valuable tool for flight training, it has a positive impact on their flight preparation. 12 students (86%) believed that VR significantly enhanced their ability to perform flight maneuvers, and several emphasized how VR enhanced their spatial awareness and allowed them to practice procedures in a controlled, immersive environment. On the other hand, 8 students (57%) acknowledged the limitations of VR in replicating physical sensations or minor technical difficulties. Despite some technical issues and physical discomfort, the consensus was that VR serves as a critical bridge between theoretical knowledge and real-world flight experience, with the potential to greatly enhance training outcomes when used in conjunction with traditional flight practice. 3.4.1. Perceived advantages of VR in flight training Several advantages were frequently mentioned by students, most notably the realism of the VR environment. Thus, a key theme emerged from the interviews was the positive impact of VR on students' immersion and spatial awareness. Out of 14 students, 10 (71%) highlighted that the virtual environment helped them develop a better understanding of the cockpit layout and the spatial dynamics of flight. For instance, participant11 mentioned that " the VR training made it easier to visualize my position in the cockpit during maneuvers ", and participant11 remarked that VR provided a strong sense of being in a real scenario, which helped with understanding spatial orientation during complex movements. Most students echoed this sentiment, indicating that the immersive nature of VR contributed to their preparedness for real-world flight scenarios. The ability to repetitively practice specific flight procedures in a risk-free environment was another frequently mentioned benefit. 12 out of 14 students (86%) expressed that VR allowed them to focus on and perfect challenging maneuvers. Participant13 stated that " I was able to repeat the landing procedure multiple times until I felt confident " in “ a way to practice without distractions ”, a comment that reflects the overall value placed on repetition, the ability to repeat challenging movements in a safe, focused setting. Similarly, participant8 emphasized how VR enabled them to isolate and practice difficult sections of a flight, such as emergency scenarios, with an attention to detail that is harder to achieve in real-life training. Thus, this feature was seen as particularly useful for mastering emergency scenarios and developing procedural memory. Another highlighted theme was the safety of VR, allowing students to build confidence by practicing risky procedures in a virtual environment. Many students valued the ability to rehearse maneuvers without the potential consequences of real-world errors. This finding was consistent across most participants, reinforcing the perception that VR provides a crucial bridge between theoretical knowledge and practical skill. Students appreciated the potential of VR as a complementary tool to traditional flight training. However, they emphasized that it cannot replace actual flight experience. Both students and instructors consistently highlighted the importance of integrating VR with real-world practice to ensure well-rounded training. The combination of virtual and real flight practice was viewed as essential for developing both the cognitive and physical skills necessary for piloting an aircraft. 3.4.2. Disadvantages and limitations of VR Despite the widespread appreciation for VR, some disadvantages were reported across participants. One of the most noted limitations was the absence of physical sensations, which is considered a critical lack regarding the importance of the G-forces or vibrations during actual flight. 8 students (57%) mentioned that VR lacked important physical feedback, which they felt was necessary for a fully realistic training experience. Participant7 noted, " It’s hard to react naturally to flight situations without feeling the motion of the plane ", adding that “ While it feels real in many ways, I miss the physical sensation of movement, which is important when flying in the real world ”, and Participant15 noted that "without the feeling of movement, it’s hard to gauge certain aspects like the response to turbulence." This issue was reiterated by other participants, suggesting that while VR is highly immersive visually, it falls short in replicating the full sensory experience of flight. Another recurring issue was related to the resolution and clarity of the VR headsets. Participants found that certain instruments were difficult to read, especially during key phases of flight such as take-off and landing. Participant12 explained how “some of the instruments were blurry, making it harder to focus during critical moments.” This technical limitation was also noticed by the instructors, although students generally acknowledged that this did not outweigh the broader benefits of VR. While most students adapted well to VR training, 3 participants (21%) reported mild symptoms of motion sickness or discomfort during longer sessions. Participant5 noted feeling slightly dizzy after extended use, though they still appreciated the overall training experience. The discomfort experienced by a minority of students suggests that session duration may need to be optimized to maintain effectiveness without causing physical strain. This result only aligns partially with the instructors’ annotations, as they reported just one case of initial dizziness. Both students and instructors reported technical issues, although these were not severe enough to undermine the overall effectiveness of the training. Problems with certain controls and cockpit ergonomics were noted by multiple participants and instructors. For example (as already reported from the instructors’ notebooks), the ignition switch, lighting realism and pedal adjustments were problematic. Students talk about these issues but not as major problems. 3.5. Focus group The two instructors inform having observed significant improvement in students’ understanding of concepts related to aircraft, particularly in terms of instrument positioning and procedures. This allowed them to be better prepared for their first flights, reducing the need for repetition during briefing and flight. As the interviewees convey, VR enables students to experience visual flights with nearly 360º vision, improving their spatial awareness and ability to carry out procedures correctly, such as flap control. This is a remarkable improvement compared to traditional simulators, which focus more on instrumental flights. VR offers the ability to correct common mistakes in a safe environment, allowing students to improve their skills before flying in real conditions. This aspect was seen in previous data collection and the focus group reinforced its meaningfulness. Additionally, unlike traditional simulators, VR allows for much faster mission setup and start times, reducing waiting time and increasing efficiency during training sessions. As emerged from the focus group, instructors confirm good adaptability to the technology and a positive attitude, ending sessions with enthusiasm as already introduced in the notebooks. VR not only helps students learn but also motivates them to keep improving thanks to a highly enriching practical experience. As one interviewee stated: " The first thing you see in them when they take off the headset is a smile ". 4. Discussion We observed that the scores achieved by participants during their first real flight in the experimental group statistically outperformed those of the control group, with a moderate effect size. On the other hand, both VR and traditional classroom training led to an increase in flight knowledge. This increase was greater in the traditional classroom, with a 25.9% mean improvement compared to 15.3% after the VR flight session, and only the traditional classroom showed a statistically significant improvement. This finding indicates that VR training has enhanced the skills of student pilots more effectively than traditional classroom teaching, thereby confirming our expectations in H1. VR has been proven to be effective in training skills in non-aviation studies: Kennedy et al. ( 2023 ) found that the VR practical experience reduced errors among medical students compared to traditional training; Chen et al. ( 2020 ) demonstrated that integrating VR into STEAM teaching improved senior high school students' learning outcomes and practical skills. Conversely, Lui and Goel ( 2022 ) found no significant difference between real-world hospitality training and VR hospitality training. The fields in which VR training can effectively support real-world situations still need further study. As for aviation studies, a review by Ross and Gilbey ( 2023 ) highlights the limited research on VR in this field. Most existing studies have been presented at conferences and published as proceedings rather than journal articles. Additionally, most studies focus on military training, and research from flight schools appears to be limited. For example, Pennington et al. ( 2019 ) introduced VR in initial flight training, observing an increase in self-efficacy in military pilots. Dymora et al. ( 2021 ) demonstrated the effectiveness of VR technology in commercial pilot training, although their findings were based on an eight-question survey. Ross and Gilbey ( 2023 ) also conclude that VR could support traditional flight training, which aligns well with our findings, highlighting the need for more rigorous research with civil aviation as a priority. Aligning with our results, several studies highlight that the acquisition of knowledge through VR is not significatively different than through traditional classroom teaching (Jensen and Konradsen 2018 ; Sichterman et al. 2023 ; Šikl et al. 2024 ). Some studies find VR more effective than traditional teaching, while others find it less effective, depending on the field of application (Mayer et al. 2023 ). For instance, Rasheed et al. ( 2015 ) found that VR was less effective on factual questions, although this study focused specifically on history education in rural schools in India. Conversely, Ma et al. ( 2019 ) designed a VR teaching module to enhance understanding of queue theory; their 3D visuals enabled engineering students to gain more knowledge compared to traditional teaching methods. Our learning activity was primarily designed to improve flight skills, with the questions in the pretest and posttest questionnaires more focused on theoretical knowledge, because they were based on the theoretical exam students must pass before beginning flight training. Future work should be devoted toward designing VR learning experiences that effectively support the acquisition of aviation concepts. Even if “it is still unclear what the effectiveness of VR is in short- and long-term training of pilots” (van Weelden et al. 2021 ), we support in positive that the students in this study adapted quickly to the VR environment, they showed a positive attitude and perceptions, and they had to adapt to the new technology, but it was a quick process and became more familiar with the controls, as in other contexts (Arbués Garcia del Moral et al. 2024). Studying the performance in a qualitative manner, they managed the maneuvers successfully, but some aspects must be considered and remarked absence of physical feedback during critical moments as a lack from this experience. Other difficulties that have been identified and match with other studies are occasional ergonomic and technical challenges, technical difficulties related to the software, and the fact that the starting warning light and the TRIM could be improved. Even though, these have not been labelled as crucial and with better resources could be solved. We observed that a strong point for students was the immersion and spatial awareness, aligned with Cross et al. (Cross et al. 2023b ), as well as the VR provision of a strong sense of being in a real scenario. Other positive aspects reinforced the benefits reported in other experiences as it appears that participants highlight the importance of integrating it with real-world flight practice and participants in the experimental part left the session feeling more confident in their ability to perform in real-world scenarios (Chen et al. 2020 ). In our study, probably due to the limited number of participants, we found that none of them expressed dizziness. The literature refers cybersickness in the use of VR for educational purposes (Jensen and Konradsen 2018 ), but our finding aligns with the fact that pilots managing the VR aircraft tend to experience less cybersickness than VR passengers or instructors in passive roles (Rebelo et al. 2012 ). This topic has been dealt in previous studies (Patrão et al. 2020 ) with no concluding results but tending to agree little prevalence. At the end, it can be effective as an adaptive tool for pilot training (Aguilar Reyes et al. 2023 ). 5. Conclusion This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) in enhancing pilot learning skills and to explore the perspectives of both students and instructors regarding its use. Our findings provide strong evidence that VR training significantly improves student pilots' practical flight skills, confirming Hypothesis 1 (H1). The experimental group, which trained with VR, demonstrated superior performance during their first real flight compared to the control group, despite VR training showing a smaller improvement in theoretical knowledge than traditional classroom instruction. This aligns with prior research that suggests VR is particularly beneficial for skill acquisition but may be less effective for purely theoretical learning. Additionally, participants recognized the potential and practicality of VR in pilot training, supporting Hypothesis 2 (H2). They reported a high level of engagement, improved spatial awareness, and increased confidence in real-world scenarios after VR training. Although some limitations, such as the lack of physical feedback and occasional technical difficulties, were identified, these challenges were not deemed critical and could be mitigated with improved resources and design. Importantly, cybersickness, a common concern in VR applications, was not significantly reported among our participants, possibly due to the nature of flight training and the immersive qualities of the VR system used. Based on the advantages defined by Rebelo et al. ( 2012 ), the adaptability and safety of VR enable flight instructors to design lessons allowing student pilots to practice approach procedures at different airports worldwide. This provides a controlled and safe environment for repeated practice, such as emergency procedures, an interesting future line of investigation. Several studies have highlighted the limitations of VR in educational settings. For instance, research has shown that cybersickness remains a significant barrier (Rebelo et al. 2012 ; Jensen and Konradsen 2018 ; Ross and Gilbey 2023 ), although in the case of aviation, it is reduced when seated (Kim et al. 2023 ). Only one participant reported an initial sense of dizziness, but the flight session was ultimately carried out normally. VR can result in breaks in presence (Ross and Gilbey 2023 ), but the high latency provided by the high-quality computer probably reduced this issue. Other studies suggest that VR can distract form the learning task, hindering the acquisition of concepts (Mayer et al. 2023 ), but in our case VR must reliably simulate reality, then a simulated flight with VR cannot be more distracting than a real flight. Finally, the introduction of a novel technology can be challenging for teachers (Bower et al. 2020 ). In this study, the flight sessions were carried out under the supervision of an investigator who resolved all technical issues. We suggest creating a tutorial for instructors if VR is to be used by a novice instructor alone. While VR cannot replace actual flight experience, it serves as a valuable supplementary tool for pilot training, offering a safe and adaptable environment for repeated practice, including emergency procedures and airport approach training. Future research should focus on optimizing VR-based learning experiences for aviation concepts and addressing the integration of VR with traditional flight instruction. Given the promising results observed in this study, further investigation with larger participant groups and more diverse training scenarios is recommended to solidify VR's role in pilot education. 5.1. Limitations: Despite the promising results, this study has limitations. First, the sample size was relatively small, which may limit the generalizability of the findings. A larger participant pool could provide more robust statistical validation of VR’s effectiveness in pilot training. Nevertheless, the scores in this initial flight session were generally high, with a mean score of 8.82 out of 10. These high values leave little room for significant improvement in scores, but it potentially can in underlying skills, then we suggest further experiments to quantify the extent of this skill enhancement. Second, the study primarily focused on short-term skill acquisition and immediate performance improvements. Long-term retention of skills and knowledge gained through VR training remains an open question. Additionally, technical issues such as occasional software glitches and ergonomic discomfort were noted. While these did not critically impact the training, they highlight the need for continuous improvement in VR hardware and software to enhance user experience and reliability. 5.2. Implications: The findings of this study have several important implications for pilot training programs and aviation education. The demonstrated effectiveness of VR in improving flight skills suggests that integrating VR into existing pilot training program could provide students with additional practice opportunities in a safe and controlled environment. This could be particularly useful for mastering maneuvers, emergency procedures, and airport approach scenarios before actual flight sessions. Additionally, the positive reception from students and instructors highlights VR’s potential as a motivational and engaging tool for flight training. From a broader perspective, the study supports the growing body of evidence that VR can be an effective training tool across various fields requiring practical skill development. The aviation industry, regulatory bodies, and training institutions should consider expanding their investment in VR-based training solutions, particularly for early-stage pilot education. However, while VR enhances skill acquisition, its limitations in theoretical knowledge retention suggest that it should complement, rather than replace, traditional classroom instruction. 5.3. Further research: From this research different lines can be point: Assess whether the benefits observed in VR training persist over time and translate into sustained performance in real-world flight scenarios. Studies should investigate whether the skills gained through VR training are retained over extended periods and how they translate into actual flight performance over time. Research with larger and more diverse groups of participants, including pilots at different training stages and from different training institutions, would provide more generalizable insights. Declarations Ethical approval Research involving Human Participants and/or Animals, in accordance with the guidelines approved by the ethical committee under code CEIPSA-2023-PR-0029 Author Contributions Statement The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article. All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by T.V.-C. and C.N.-M.. Analysis was performed by T.V.-C., J.M. and R.P. The manuscript was written by T.V.-C., J.M. and R.P. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Funding Partial financial support was received from Fundació Rego. Author Contribution All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by T.V.-C. and C.N.-M.. Analysis was performed by T.V.-C., J.M. and R.P. The manuscript was written by T.V.-C., J.M. and R.P. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Data Availability Data that support the findings of this study have been published in the Figshare dataset repository:Vallès-Català, T., Navarro-Morali, C., Palau, R., & Mogas, J. (2025). VR vs Traditional Training: A Comparative Dataset on Student Pilot Performance. Figshare. http://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28730915.v1 References Aguilar Reyes CI, Wozniak D, Ham A, Zahabi M (2023) Design and evaluation of an adaptive virtual reality training system. Virtual Real 27:2509–2528. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10055-023-00827-7/METRICS Airbus (2022) Global Services Forecast (GSF) | 2024-2043. https://aircraft.airbus.com/en/global-services-forecast-gsf-2024-2043. Alves Fernandes LM, Cruz Matos G, Azevedo D, et al (2016) Exploring educational immersive videogames: an empirical study with a 3D multimodal interaction prototype. Behav & Inf Tech 35:907–918. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2016.1232754 Arbués Garcia del Moral J, Codesal Patiño MB, Cuadrado Sáez ML, et al (2024) La realitat augmentada, la realitat virtual i el metavers en la societat. Impacte a l’educació. Universitat de Barcelona Institut de Desenvolupament Professional-ICE Boeing (2022) Pilot and technician outlook 2022–2041 Bower M, DeWitt D, Lai JWM (2020) Reasons associated with preservice teachers’ intention to use immersive virtual reality in education. Br J of Educ Tech 51:2215–2233. https://doi.org/10.1111/BJET.13009 Chen JC, Huang Y, Lin KY, et al (2020) Developing a hands-on activity using virtual reality to help students learn by doing. J Comput Assist Learn 36:46–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/JCAL.12389 Creswell JW (2013) Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches, 3rd edn. SAGE Publications Creswell JW (2018) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 5th edn. SAGE Publications Cross J, Boag-Hodgson C, Ryley T, et al (2023a) Using Extended Reality in Flight Simulators: A Literature Review. In: IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph, pp 3961–3975 Cross JI, Boag-Hodgson CC, Mavin TJ (2023b) Measuring Presence and Situational Awareness in a Virtual Reality Flight Simulator. Aviat Psycho and Appl Human Fact 13:83–94. https://doi.org/10.1027/2192-0923/a000250 Ding X, Li Z (2022) A review of the application of virtual reality technology in higher education based on Web of Science literature data as an example. Front Educ (Lausanne) 7:1048816. https://doi.org/10.3389/FEDUC.2022.1048816/BIBTEX Dymora P, Kowal B, Mazurek M, Śliwa R (2021) The effects of Virtual Reality technology application in the aircraft pilot training process. In: IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. IOP Publishing, p 012099 Egan D, Brennan S, Barrett J, et al (2016) An evaluation of Heart Rate and ElectroDermal Activity as an objective QoE evaluation method for immersive virtual reality environments. 2016 8th International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience, QoMEX 2016. https://doi.org/10.1109/QOMEX.2016.7498964 Estupiñán S, Rebelo F, Noriega P, et al (2014) Can Virtual Reality Increase Emotional Responses (Arousal and Valence)? A Pilot Study. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) 8518 LNCS:541–549. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07626-3_51 Guthridge R, Clinton-Lisell V (2023) Evaluating the Efficacy of Virtual Reality (VR) Training Devices for Pilot Training. J of Aviat Tech and Eng 12:1. https://doi.org/10.7771/2159-6670.1286 Hight MPH, Fussell SG, Kurkchubasche MA, Hummell IJ (2022) Effectiveness of Virtual Reality Simulations for Civilian, Ab Initio Pilot Training. J of Aviat/Aerospace Educ & Research 31:1. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15394/jaaer.2022.1903 Jensen L, Konradsen F (2018) A review of the use of virtual reality head-mounted displays in education and training. Educ Inf Technol (Dordr) 23:1515–1529. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10639-017-9676-0/METRICS Kakkos I, Dimitrakopoulos GN, Gao L, et al (2019) Mental Workload Drives Different Reorganizations of Functional Cortical Connectivity Between 2D and 3D Simulated Flight Experiment. In: IEEE Journals & Magazine. IEEE Xplore Kavanagh S, Luxton-Reilly A, Wuensche B, Plimmer B (2017) A systematic review of Virtual Reality in education. Themes in Sci Tech Educ 10:85–119 Kennedy GAL, Pedram S, Sanzone S (2023) Improving safety outcomes through medical error reduction via virtual reality-based clinical skills training. Saf Sci 165:106200. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SSCI.2023.106200 Kim A, Lee JE, Lee KM (2023) Exploring the Relative Effects of Body Position and Locomotion Method on Presence and Cybersickness when Navigating a Virtual Environment. ACM Trans Appl Percept 21:. https://doi.org/10.1145/3627706 Kritikos J, Tzannetos G, Zoitaki C, et al (2019) Anxiety detection from Electrodermal Activity Sensor with movement interaction during Virtual Reality Simulation. International IEEE/EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering, NER 2019-March:571–576. https://doi.org/10.1109/NER.2019.8717170 Lui TW, Goel L (2022) Learning effectiveness of 3D virtual reality in hospitality training: a situated cognitive perspective. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology 13:441–460. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTT-03-2021-0091/FULL/XML Ma J, Jaradat R, Ashour O, et al (2019) Efficacy investigation of virtual reality teaching module in manufacturing system design course. J of Mech Design 141:. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4041428/367791 Mayer RE, Makransky G, Parong J (2023) The Promise and Pitfalls of Learning in Immersive Virtual Reality. Int J Hum Comput Interact 39:2229–2238. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2108563 Merchant Z, Goetz ET, Cifuentes L, et al (2014) Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students’ learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: A meta-analysis. Comput Educ 70:29–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPEDU.2013.07.033 Oberhauser M, Dreyer D (2017) A virtual reality flight simulator for human factors engineering. Cognition, Technology and Work 19:263–277. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10111-017-0421-7/METRICS Patrão B, Pedro S, Menezes P (2020) How to Deal with Motion Sickness in Virtual Reality. In: Communities & Collections, 22o Encontro Português de Computação Gráfica e Interação. pp 40–46 Pennington E, Hafer R, Nistler E, et al (2019) Integration of Advanced Technology in Initial Flight Training. In: 2019 Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium (SIEDS) Rasheed F, Prasad O, Marisha N (2015) Immersive virtual reality to enhance the spatial awareness of students. In: Proceedings of the 7th Indian Conference on Human-Computer Interaction Rebelo F, Noriega P, Duarte E, Soares M (2012) Using Virtual Reality to Assess User Experience. Hum Factors 54:964–982. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720812465006 Ross G, Gilbey A (2023) Extended reality (xR) flight simulators as an adjunct to traditional flight training methods: a scoping review. CEAS Aeronaut J 14:799–815. https://doi.org/10.1007/S13272-023-00688-5/FIGURES/1 Shui L, Wang F, Wei Z (2023) Review on the Applications of Virtual Reality in Civil Aviation. In: Proceedings of the 2023 3rd International Conference on Big Data, Artificial Intelligence and Risk Management. Assoc for Comp Mach, pp 615–619 Sichterman B, Ginkel S van, Halteren M van, et al (2023) The Effects of a Constructively Aligned Virtual Reality Setting on Professionals’ Knowledge, Motivation and Perceptions. Int J of Tech in Educ 6:561–582. https://doi.org/10.46328/IJTE.462 Šikl R, Brücknerová K, Švedová H, et al (2024) Who benefits and who doesn’t in virtual reality learning: An experimental study comparing two types of school. J Comput Assist Learn 40:1591–1604. https://doi.org/10.1111/JCAL.12973 Slavova Y, Mu M (2018) A Comparative Study of the Learning Outcomes and Experience of VR in Education. 25th IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces, VR 2018 - Proceedings 685–686. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2018.8446486 Tesch A (2016) Implementing Pre-Post Test Designs in Higher Education Evaluations. New Dir Eval 151:85–96. https://doi.org/10.1002/EV.20195 Vallès-Català T, Guerrero I (2025) Comparing Arousal and Workload During an Emergency Landing in a Virtual Reality and a Conventional Flight Simulator. Int J Hum Comput Interact 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2025.2474464 Vallès-Català T, Navarro-Morali C, Palau R, Mogas J (2025) VR vs Traditional Training: A Comparative Dataset on Student Pilot Performance. Figshare. http://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28730915.v1 van Weelden E, Alimardani M, Wiltshire TJ, Louwerse MM (2021) Advancing the Adoption of Virtual Reality and Neurotechnology to Improve Flight Training. In: Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Human-Machine Systems, ICHMS 2021. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc. Vats S, Joshi R (2024) The Impact of Virtual Reality in Education: A Comprehensive Research Study. Transfer, Diffusion and Adoption of Next-Generation Digital Technologies TDIT 2023 IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, vol 699 Springer 699 AICT:126–136. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-50204-0_11 Williams KW, Christopher B, Drechsler G, et al (2014) Aviation Human-in-the-Loop Simulation Studies: Experimental Planning, Design, and Data Management. United States. Office of Aerosp Med Xiaoning X, Yunus MM, Rafiq KRM (2024) Use of VR in Higher Education: A Systematic Review (2014-2023). International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development 13:1765–1783. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v13-i1/20659 Young GW, Stehle S, Walsh BY, Tiri E (2020) Exploring Virtual Reality in the Higher Education Classroom: Using VR to Build Knowledge and Understanding, 26(8): 904-928. J of Univ Comp Sci, pp 904–928 Zhang M, Wang M, Feng H, et al (2023) Pilots’ Spatial Visualization Ability Assessment Based on Virtual Reality. Aerosp Med Hum Perform 94:422–428. https://doi.org/10.3357/AMHP.6198.2023 Ziakkas D, Flores ADC, Suckow MW (2023) Human Factors in Aviation and Artificial Systems: The Purdue Aviation Virtual Reality case study. In: Ahram T, Karwowski W, Di Bucchianico P, et al. (eds) Intelligent Human Systems Integration (IHSI 2023): Integrating People and Intelligent Systems. AHFE Open Acces Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-6440952","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":508565665,"identity":"7e056914-9e95-4015-9fd4-7004d03670fb","order_by":0,"name":"Toni Vallès-Català","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Centre d’Estudis Superiors De l’Aviació (CESDA)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Toni","middleName":"","lastName":"Vallès-Català","suffix":""},{"id":508565666,"identity":"ddaffdb4-6990-49be-83f1-a75205a2f679","order_by":1,"name":"Jordi Mogas","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Rovira i Virgili University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Jordi","middleName":"","lastName":"Mogas","suffix":""},{"id":508565667,"identity":"bda1add1-bdc7-46b5-8c08-b41d659acd26","order_by":2,"name":"Carlos Navarro-Morali","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Centre d’Estudis Superiors De l’Aviació (CESDA)","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Carlos","middleName":"","lastName":"Navarro-Morali","suffix":""},{"id":508565668,"identity":"c66c72b1-950c-4b8b-b1a7-27df6cbaf399","order_by":3,"name":"Ramon Palau","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Rovira i Virgili University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ramon","middleName":"","lastName":"Palau","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-04-13 20:08:16","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6440952/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6440952/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":90543560,"identity":"53b152f7-a638-4c5c-afce-1f286f6a9ca4","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-04 00:13:19","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":427996,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eVirtual Reality Flight Simulator (VRFS) setup. The VRFS is based on a Oculus Quest 3 head mounted device, connected to a high-performance PC computer to enable a fluent and realistic experience. To avoid the use of the Oculus Touch Controllers, to enhance the flight simulation, several flight instruments are used: VIRPIL joystick, Logitech throttle and Logitech flight rudder pedals.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6440952/v1/e1b4ef088fa967bffd449922.png"},{"id":90543557,"identity":"5377ee90-28a4-491c-b567-a0d620a4ee7a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-04 00:13:19","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":60082,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eControl and Experimental group treatment. All participants completed a knowledge pretest prior to the intervention. Participants in the control group attended a 45-minute instructor-led classroom session covering the DA20 aircraft's instrumentation and flight procedures. The experimental group, however, completed a 45-minute VR session simulating their upcoming flight with a flight instructor. Immediately after the intervention, all participants completed a posttest, followed by a real flight several days later.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6440952/v1/fe8e9d080acb8f0eb93855c8.png"},{"id":90543564,"identity":"518ed74c-d10c-427f-ae18-3d7e7f667c85","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-04 00:13:19","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":45732,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eBoxplot of the marks for real flights performed by students in control and experimental groups. The experimental group, which used VR training, achieved higher marks than the control group. A Mann-Whitney test resulted in a p-value of 0.0194.\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6440952/v1/ac76f0f35ef57f1e3881e034.png"},{"id":90544848,"identity":"e7d750d2-7454-4c1c-aea9-e080330112ce","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-09-04 00:21:19","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":45868,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eBoxplot of the pretest and posttest scores by students in control and experimental groups\u003cstrong\u003e.\u003c/strong\u003e Pretest scores were similar for both groups. Although both groups exhibited higher posttest means, a paired t-test indicated that the increase in the experimental group, which used VR training, was not significant (p = 0.145), whereas the increase in the control group, under a traditional classroom, was statistically significant (p = 0.001).\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"floatimage4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6440952/v1/58d4c64d613d92c8b2d0bf7a.png"},{"id":96906351,"identity":"b1c7acf2-d41e-48c3-bb31-a3e77707e76c","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-11-27 12:23:46","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1236841,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-6440952/v1/14a6d2bd-70aa-4c1d-bd2f-7e79a14f8f59.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Enhancing Pilot Training with Virtual Reality: Evaluating Skill Acquisition and Student Perceptions","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eTo obtain a commercial pilot license, all aspiring pilots must complete both real flight hours and simulated flight hours. The demand for airline pilots is increasing, projections for 2041 suggest this number could rise to around 600,000 to meet industry needs (Airbus \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Boeing \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). This growing demand is creating a significant challenge in training capacity, particularly in the availability of flight simulation resources. Virtual reality (VR) technologies could play a crucial role in addressing this challenge by providing accessible and cost-effective simulation options to supplement traditional training methods.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eVR is not a new tool, but its implementation in the education field was hindered by high costs until 2013. Then, the company Oculus Rift revolutionised the industry by making VR technology more affordable, thereby enabling its viability in education and training. Additionally, its technology has advanced considerably improving its capabilities (Jensen and Konradsen \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). From there, VR has proven to be an effective learning tool in diverse disciplines, mainly health, sciences and engineering (Kavanagh et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). However, fewer investigations have studied its application in the aviation field (Ross and Gilbey \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn here, we want to introduce our virtual reality flight simulator during the initial stage of flight instruction in a university degree for professional pilots. Concretely, in second course student pilots just before their first real flight. Our objective is to test whether a Virtual Reality Flight Simulator (VRFS) improves the performance in the first real flight.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec2\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e1.1. Virtual Reality in Education\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eVirtual reality (VR) has demonstrated significant potential in enhancing learning outcomes in higher education by providing immersive and interactive experiences (Slavova and Mu \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Vats and Joshi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have highlighted various benefits of VR, such as improved student engagement and understanding of complex concepts, facilitated through games, simulations, and virtual worlds (Merchant et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Young et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Xiaoning et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). These applications are predominantly seen in science, engineering, and medical fields, with limited implementation in humanities and social sciences (Ding and Li \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eVR's ability to enhance student engagement, foster immersive learning experiences, and improve knowledge retention is influenced by factors such as feedback type, individual vs. group gameplay, and treatment session duration (Merchant et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Slavova and Mu \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Vats and Joshi \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). However, challenges remain, such as the need for more portable devices and better pre-class training for students (Ding and Li \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Researchers have proposed various guidelines and frameworks, including empathy mapping and heuristic principles for lesson planning, to support effective VR integration in higher education (Young et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). As VR technology evolves, its potential to transform teaching methods and offer diverse learning opportunities becomes increasingly evident (Xiaoning et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eStudies show VR's suitability for acquiring practical skills (Kavanagh et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Jensen and Konradsen \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). The immersive nature of VR facilitates active learning and concept assimilation. For instance, Chen et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) found that students using VR exhibited improved hands-on abilities and learning performances. On the other hand, studies suggest that VR is not more efficient than traditional learning in terms of knowledge retention, but significantly similar (Jensen and Konradsen \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Sichterman et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Šikl et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eOn the other hand, some concerns have been raised about using VR in education, such as cybersickness (Jensen and Konradsen \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), the challenge of introducing new technologies for educators (Bower et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), and distractions from the main learning task (Mayer et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFinally, Rebelo et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e) identified three primary advantages of virtual environments for education and research:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003col\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eAvailability\u003c/em\u003e: Teachers and researchers can create customized environments, replicable across various locations and scenarios.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSafety\u003c/em\u003e: Students can learn specific skills in controlled hazardous scenarios safely. Researchers can manipulate factors affecting participants' performance, such as mental workload or induced stress, which can be precisely defined and replicated.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eData Provision\u003c/em\u003e: The reproducibility of simulated experiences allows researchers to gather accurate and valid data, often inaccessible in real-life settings.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e1.2. Virtual Reality in Aviation Training\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn aviation training, VR technology offers immersive and interactive experiences that can significantly enhance pilot training and safety procedures (Cross et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023b\u003c/span\u003e; Ross and Gilbey \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Shui et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, VR technology's cost-effectiveness, accessibility, and sustainability present advantages over traditional simulators (Ziakkas et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Therefore, studies were performed to validate its efficacy compared to traditional Flight Simulator Training Devices (FSTD) (Oberhauser and Dreyer \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; van Weelden et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), where arousal and workload was found higher in students piloting a FSTD (Vall\u0026egrave;s-Catal\u0026agrave; and Guerrero \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eStudies byGuthridge and Clinton-Lisell (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) andHight et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) have demonstrated that VR-trained participants achieve learning outcomes comparable to those using traditional simulators, often outperforming control groups. VR has been studied in military pilot training, where an increased level of perceived self-efficacy has been found (Pennington et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, given the critical role of spatial visualization in pilot training, VR has been effectively used to administer the mental rotation test, a key predictor of pilots' spatial reasoning skills (Zhang et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Moreover, VR\u0026rsquo;s personalized capabilities make it particularly well-suited for procedural training with adaptive feedback, as required in pilot instruction (Aguilar Reyes et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eNevertheless, challenges such as adapting learning materials to technical requirements and optimizing exposure duration to prevent physiological issues remain (Dymora et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eVR is a promising tool for aviation training and many flight schools are adopting this technology. However, studies have provided only limited evidence of the effectiveness of learning in a VRFS and the transfer of skills to real-world settings and further studies are needed (Cross et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023a\u003c/span\u003e; Ross and Gilbey \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Shui et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e1.3. Objectives and Hypothesis\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe overall objectives of this study were:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGO1-\u003c/em\u003e to determine to what extent the use of VR improves pilot learning skills.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGO2-\u003c/em\u003e to explore the vision of the students and instructors.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eRegarding these objectives, the following two hypotheses were posed:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH1\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe students in the VC group attain better results.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH2\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe participants recognize the potential and practicality of using virtual reality for developing pilot skills.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"2. Materials and Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003eFor this study, 30 student pilots volunteered to participate in the experiment, with an age range of 18\u0026ndash;21. The participants are enrolled in the Degree in Commercial Aviation Pilot and Air Operations at \u003cem\u003eanonymised university\u003c/em\u003e, a university specializing in pilot training. The VR component is intended to be part of their second coursework, preparing them for their first real flight with the aircraft Diamond DA20. Among the final participants, only three were female, accounting for 10% of the total, a similar percentage to the current active female pilots (CAPA 2023). All of them provided written informed consent, in accordance with the guidelines approved by the ethical committee of the \u003cem\u003eanonymised university\u003c/em\u003e under code \u003cem\u003eCEIPSA-2023-PR-0029\u003c/em\u003e. Finally, three participants decided to withdraw from the study, and their data were not included in the analysis.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.1. Materials\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn this study, we employed the following components to create a VR flight simulator (see Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e) like a previous study (Vall\u0026egrave;s-Catal\u0026agrave; and Guerrero \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e), which, though not certified for official flight training, can be used as a supplementary tool:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eOculus Quest 3\u003c/b\u003e: A VR headset with a 110\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;4-degree horizontal and 93\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;5.1-degree vertical field of view, and a 120 Hz refresh rate. To prevent connectivity issues, it was connected to the PC via a cable. Previous studies have also used similar Oculus devices in VR research (Estupi\u0026ntilde;\u0026aacute;n et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Egan et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Alves Fernandes et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Kakkos et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Kritikos et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003ePC\u003c/b\u003e: A Windows 10 system with an Intel Core i7-9700K processor and GeForce RTX 3080 10GB graphics card. The direct connection between the headset and PC ensured a low latency of 10\u0026ndash;30 ms, which supports immersive experiences and reduces cybersickness (Oberhauser and Dreyer \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eMicrosoft Flight Simulator 2020 Deluxe Edition\u003c/b\u003e: This software was chosen for its realistic visuals and flight dynamics, adequate for simulation and research (Vall\u0026egrave;s-Catal\u0026agrave; and Guerrero \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Featuring the DA20-C1 aircraft from SimSolutions via the iniBuilds platform, along with the LERS airport. Both closely resemble the participants' real-world flight training environments.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003eFlight Controls\u003c/b\u003e: The VPC WarBRD Grip joystick with a VPC MongoosT-50CM2 base was used to control the aircraft\u0026rsquo;s roll and pitch, while the Logitech G Flight Simulator Throttle Quadrant managed throttle and flaps. The Oculus Touch Controllers were only used for pointing instruments during the pre-flight checklist. Additionally, Logitech flight rudder pedals were used to control yaw via foot input.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.2. Experimental Design\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study is based on a quasi-experimental design exploring the effect of the type of training environment (virtual reality vs. control) on the improvement of learning skills and the participants\u0026rsquo; view, by using post-test scores, student marks after real flight, observations by instructors, and interview data from both students and instructors.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll pilot students must complete a specialized course focused on the DA20 aircraft\u0026mdash;the model they would later use during their flight training. Once the course was successfully completed, participants who volunteered for the study were assigned to an additional training session, held before their first real flight. Participants were ranked by their final marks of the DA20 course, and those in odd positions were assigned to the control group, while those in even positions were assigned to the experimental group. This ensured that both groups had a similar range of prior knowledge and performance.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eParticipants in the control group received a traditional, instructor-led classroom session lasting around 45 minutes. During this session, a flight instructor provided an overview of the DA20 aircraft's instrumentation and standard flight procedures. In contrast, participants in the experimental group completed a 45-minute VR session, where a flight instructor faithfully simulated their upcoming real flight.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAdditionally, the control group had a separate 45-minute VR flight simulation session after their real flight session, which is not considered for the study but provides an opportunity for all participants to experience VR, not creating a comparative disadvantage for the control group.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAlthough all participants completed the DA20 course at the same time, their first real flights were scheduled on different dates over the following months. In this study, efforts were made to ensure that both the control and experimental training interventions occurred as close as possible to the participants' first flights, ideally within one week prior. However, due to factors such as instructor, aircraft, and airport availability, as well as meteorological conditions, the time between the training session and the first flight varied, with some participants receiving their intervention as early as one day or as late as one month before their real flight.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e2.3. Instruments\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eA questionnaire was developed to assess participants' understanding of key concepts necessary for a pilot's first real flight, all of which were covered in the DA20 course. The questionnaire included five questions in various formats, such as identifying instruments from cockpit images, sequencing a specific flight procedure, and completing a table with aircraft configuration data.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe same questionnaire was delivered twice: as a pretest and then as a posttest (Tesch \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). The pretest was conducted in person for all participants on the same date, days after the completion of the DA20 course. The posttest was provided individually to participants after they completed their respective control or experimental training sessions, on different dates.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEach pilot's performance during their first real flight was assessed using a standardized rubric approved by Agencia Estatal de Seguridad A\u0026eacute;rea (AESA) under regulation (UE) n\u0026ordm; 1178/2011. The flight instructor evaluated 23 different aspects of the flight using a three-level rubric-based scale. These individual ratings were then automatically compiled into a single overall performance score. This data was collected for both the control and experimental groups to measure and compare their actual flight performance.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe effective instruments for qualitative analysis of the sessions were the instructors' notebook, student interviews, and a focus group with representative students. During the VR experiments, the sessions were recorded to have a detailed account of everything that happened: the behaviour of both students and instructors, with a broad view of the room (Williams et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, the computer screen showing what the students saw through the VR headset and documents with annotations were also recorded (Williams et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). However, these recordings were only used for occasional consultation in case other instruments required clarification on any specific detail.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe instructors' \u003cem\u003enotebook\u003c/em\u003e consisted of a set of questions that the instructors were asked to answer at the end of each session. Instructors were requested to register written evidence of the relevant topics using the technique of direct observation through a record of notes that condense answering some key questions (Creswell \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e). To reach responses aiming at a relevant synthesis to evaluate each experience, the posed questions were: Q1: Does the student follow the class well? Q2: How does the student perform the maneuvers? How do they read the instruments? Q3: What is the student's reaction to VR? Difficulties or admiration? Q4: Did the student experience any motion sickness? Q5: Were there any technical difficulties? Q6: Note any extraordinary events.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn parallel, each student participating in the VR experiment was also required to respond to a structured \u003cem\u003einterview\u003c/em\u003e (Williams et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e; Creswell \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) about their impressions of the experience. This information complements the students' perspectives and evaluations of the proposal. The questions posed were: Q1: How do you think using VR influenced your flight training preparation? Q2: What do you think are the advantages of VR in this type of training? Q3: What do you think are the disadvantages of VR in this type of training? Q4: How do you think this training could be improved using VR? Q6: Do you think VR can replace some real flights?\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFinally, to reach data saturation, a \u003cem\u003efocus group\u003c/em\u003e was conducted with two participants interviewed together to delve deeper into the understanding of the results obtained with the other instruments.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eConsidering that the volume of the data collected was not extensive, the analysis process involved a thorough reading and organization of the information. Patterns were identified, and connections between ideas were explored using both a text editor and a spreadsheet. The text editor allowed for structuring and annotating key findings, while the spreadsheet was used to categorize and cross-reference data points systematically. This method facilitated the identification of recurring themes and relationships within the dataset, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the qualitative information collected.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll questionnaires were distributed via Microsoft Forms. Boxplots were generated via python 3.11.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.1. Applied skills\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe boxplot in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e shows the distribution of marks for the real flight performed by students, categorized into control and experimental groups. Note that the experimental group, which used VR training, achieved higher marks than the control group. Instructors were not aware of the student\u0026rsquo;s group at the time of evaluation. Two students were excluded from this section of the results, one from each of the control and experimental groups, because they were late to the real flight session. In such cases, the instructor assigns a score of 5 regardless of performance.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eNormality was not assumed in the data, as indicated by the Shapiro-Wilk test results (experimental group: p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.65, control group: p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.26). However, homoscedasticity was assumed based on the Levene\u0026rsquo;s test result (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.0077). Consequently, the Mann-Whitney U test was applied to compare the medians between the experimental and control groups. The test yielded a U statistic of 39 with a p-value of 0.019, confirming a significant difference between the groups. The effect size, calculated using the rank biserial correlation was 0.494, indicating a moderate effect.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.2. Theoretical knowledge\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe pretest and posttest questionnaires, conducted before and after the intervention, will shed light on the theoretical knowledge gained from each method: VR in the experimental group and traditional classroom in the control group.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e, the pretest scores were similar for both groups. While both groups exhibited an increase in posttest means compared to their pretest scores (control group increase a 25.9% and experimental group increase a 15.3%), a paired t-test indicated that the increase in the control group was statistically significant (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.001), whereas the increase in the experimental group was not significant (p\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;0.145).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.3. Instructors\u0026rsquo; notebook\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eInstructors consistently observed that students adapted quickly to the VR environment. Nearly all students required only a short familiarization period before effectively executing the flight maneuvers, which suggests that the VR is intuitive and accessible for most students. For instance, Instructor3, speaking about participant10, noted that \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;after a few minutes of exploration, the student was able to execute maneuvers smoothly.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e This suggests that VR offers an accessible platform for training, even for those unfamiliar with the technology.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eStudents showed positive attitude and perceptions. Overall, instructors informed that the students leave happy from the mission, feeling as if you were inside the plane, that students conveyed having enjoyed the experience, satisfaction, in seven cases \"admiration\" is communicated (a word that was mentioned in the question posed, which certainly have influenced in the responses), also two instructors highlight the realism, and one instructor remembered how an student emphasized that this experiment can be done from anywhere putting in value the geographical advantage.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe overall performance of the students in the VR training showed a pattern of initial difficulty followed by significant improvement as they became more familiar with the controls. Most students struggled with maintaining altitude and speed at the beginning, as they adapted to the flight instruments and procedures. However, there was a notable improvement during the sessions, and by the end of the experiment, many were able to control essential flight parameters effectively. As Instructor1 noted about participant11: \" \u003cem\u003eThe student took a little time to get to grips with the controls of the plane, which made it difficult for him to maintain altitudes and speeds at the beginning, but a considerable improvement was observed during the flight, which allowed him to finish the mission being able to control the parameters.\u003c/em\u003e\" Other participants aligned with this evolution.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAsked about how students do the maneuvers and how do they read the instruments, the instructors are mostly satisfied with the students\u0026rsquo; performance, yet there is room for improvement in some cases: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eAttitude must be improved during the flight\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; (Instructor2 about Participant15), \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003esometimes he doesn't remember well the order to level up or down\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; (Instructor3 about Participant18), \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ehe had to be reminded during the maneuver a certain step to follow (especially the TRIM aspect)\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; (Instructor3 about Participant16), \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ethe student makes several errors both in reading and executing the maneuver, and on several occasions is not able to maintain the parameters\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; (Instructor1 about Participant21), and \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eit's a little difficult for him to do the scan flow\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; (Instructor2 about Participant28). Such improvement needs are likely to be related to the fact that this is their first flight rather than the VR aspect. Instructors do not deny that the errors in VR could affect a better performance in the first real volume.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhen it comes to more complex flight scenarios faced by students, Instructors reported varied performance. Several instructors observed that students struggled with the absence of physical feedback during critical moments. For instance, difficulty managing an engine failure scenario, attributing the challenge to the lack of sensory input, such as the feeling of turbulence or changes in aircraft motion. This was a common issue among students handling high-stress tasks, which aligns with the students' feedback regarding the limitations of VR.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe instructors observed occasional ergonomic and technical challenges that hindered student performance. For instance, Instructor4 observed that participant9 struggled with the pedal layout, which interrupted the flow of their session. In another case a little physical discomfort after having dressed the glasses for a long time was reported. These situations were exceptional and in future experiments could be easily addressed, not implying a potential limitation of this technology. On the other hand, problems with controls such as the ignition switch were reported in given cases. Instructor 2 comments that \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ethe biggest problem was the remote, having to press the buttons with the mouse on the part of the instructor and the position of the flaps under the gas\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo; Although these issues were not widespread, they did occur across multiple students, indicating that certain elements of the VR setup could be improved for better alignment with real cockpit ergonomics and technical quality.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eLooking at potential technical difficulties related to the software, in four cases the instructors confirm none. The rest reported varied technical issues during the VR training. The most remarkable is that the engine key was hard to use. It refers to the key to start the engine (we refer to the aircraft key, as we switch the key in a car to run the engine). VR works very well if you have the analogical buttons, as with the remotes you must force an imaginary movement and feels more unnatural. In the experiments they used real buttons and not remotes. Additionally, it was occasionally reported that the ignition switch was difficult to turn and using the mouse to operate buttons like the fuel pump increased reaction time during flight.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eInstructors are asked about any cases of dizziness, and they confirmed that there have been none. Only in one case is it reported that \"\u003cem\u003eAt first it was difficult for him to see due to the use of glasses, which caused him a little dizziness, but then everything came fine\u003c/em\u003e\" (Instructor1 about Participant19).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAlso, should be considered that the starting warning light and the TRIM could be improved. In some case it was said that the push-to-test lights and warning lights were either malfunctioning or poorly simulated. This is acknowledged because of the specific software, and the model of the plane offered. Other isolate technical issues refer to issues with the aircraft's power, which initially prevented take-off until the session was restarted. An instructor also remarks that a student noted difficulty in reading the instrument numbers clearly.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eInstructors held a generally positive view of VR as a training tool, though they emphasized the importance of integrating it with real-world flight practice. Most instructors noted that the realism of the simulations helped students feel more prepared for actual flights, but they also recognized the limitations. Instructor2, reflecting on participant7's session, commented that \"\u003cem\u003ethe student appreciated how closely the VR cockpit matched the real one, but acknowledged that it doesn't fully replace the feel of actual flight\u003c/em\u003e.\" This perspective reinforces the notion that VR serves as a valuable training tool, but always in a supplementary manner.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnother relevant aspect to consider is that these experiments were designed to boost the practical part of the training. In this regard, previsible results related to the lack of memorisation and theoretical reinforcement were reached. Several impressions aligned to this situation, like Instructor1 reported stating that \u0026ldquo;[the student] \u003cem\u003eshows difficulty understanding and applying the concepts, if the instructor is not constantly reminding them\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e, and Instructor2 pointing out that \u0026ldquo;[the student] \u003cem\u003elacks more background\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;, among other comments in this line.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn overall the impression is highly positive both from the instructors\u0026rsquo; side and from what the instructors have seen from students\u0026rsquo; reactions: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eThere was surprise by the reality of the simulation, it is a perfect tool to improve the skills of students with more difficulties to face a specific mission\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo; because \u0026ldquo;allows you to get a familiarization before the flight\u0026rdquo; (Instructor2). Despite the challenges, both students and instructors reacted positively to the overall VR training experience. Many students left the sessions feeling more confident in their ability to perform in real-world scenarios. Instructor2, who observed participant7, noted that \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;the student expressed satisfaction with how closely the VR simulation resembled actual flight, especially in terms of cockpit layout and procedure repetition.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e This enthusiasm was shared by many participants, instructors said.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.4. Students\u0026rsquo; interviews\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eStudents perceived VR as an effective and valuable tool for flight training, it has a positive impact on their flight preparation. 12 students (86%) believed that VR significantly enhanced their ability to perform flight maneuvers, and several emphasized how VR enhanced their spatial awareness and allowed them to practice procedures in a controlled, immersive environment. On the other hand, 8 students (57%) acknowledged the limitations of VR in replicating physical sensations or minor technical difficulties. Despite some technical issues and physical discomfort, the consensus was that VR serves as a critical bridge between theoretical knowledge and real-world flight experience, with the potential to greatly enhance training outcomes when used in conjunction with traditional flight practice.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec14\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.4.1. Perceived advantages of VR in flight training\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eSeveral advantages were frequently mentioned by students, most notably the realism of the VR environment. Thus, a key theme emerged from the interviews was the positive impact of VR on students' immersion and spatial awareness. Out of 14 students, 10 (71%) highlighted that the virtual environment helped them develop a better understanding of the cockpit layout and the spatial dynamics of flight. For instance, participant11 mentioned that \"\u003cem\u003ethe VR training made it easier to visualize my position in the cockpit during maneuvers\u003c/em\u003e\", and participant11 remarked that VR provided a strong sense of being in a real scenario, which helped with understanding spatial orientation during complex movements. Most students echoed this sentiment, indicating that the immersive nature of VR contributed to their preparedness for real-world flight scenarios.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe ability to repetitively practice specific flight procedures in a risk-free environment was another frequently mentioned benefit. 12 out of 14 students (86%) expressed that VR allowed them to focus on and perfect challenging maneuvers. Participant13 stated that \"\u003cem\u003eI was able to repeat the landing procedure multiple times until I felt confident\u003c/em\u003e\" in \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003ea way to practice without distractions\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;, a comment that reflects the overall value placed on repetition, the ability to repeat challenging movements in a safe, focused setting. Similarly, participant8 emphasized how VR enabled them to isolate and practice difficult sections of a flight, such as emergency scenarios, with an attention to detail that is harder to achieve in real-life training. Thus, this feature was seen as particularly useful for mastering emergency scenarios and developing procedural memory.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnother highlighted theme was the safety of VR, allowing students to build confidence by practicing risky procedures in a virtual environment. Many students valued the ability to rehearse maneuvers without the potential consequences of real-world errors. This finding was consistent across most participants, reinforcing the perception that VR provides a crucial bridge between theoretical knowledge and practical skill.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eStudents appreciated the potential of VR as a complementary tool to traditional flight training. However, they emphasized that it cannot replace actual flight experience. Both students and instructors consistently highlighted the importance of integrating VR with real-world practice to ensure well-rounded training. The combination of virtual and real flight practice was viewed as essential for developing both the cognitive and physical skills necessary for piloting an aircraft.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.4.2. Disadvantages and limitations of VR\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite the widespread appreciation for VR, some disadvantages were reported across participants. One of the most noted limitations was the absence of physical sensations, which is considered a critical lack regarding the importance of the G-forces or vibrations during actual flight. 8 students (57%) mentioned that VR lacked important physical feedback, which they felt was necessary for a fully realistic training experience. Participant7 noted, \"\u003cem\u003eIt\u0026rsquo;s hard to react naturally to flight situations without feeling the motion of the plane\u003c/em\u003e\", adding that \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eWhile it feels real in many ways, I miss the physical sensation of movement, which is important when flying in the real world\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;, and Participant15 noted that \u003cem\u003e\"without the feeling of movement, it\u0026rsquo;s hard to gauge certain aspects like the response to turbulence.\"\u003c/em\u003e This issue was reiterated by other participants, suggesting that while VR is highly immersive visually, it falls short in replicating the full sensory experience of flight.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAnother recurring issue was related to the resolution and clarity of the VR headsets. Participants found that certain instruments were difficult to read, especially during key phases of flight such as take-off and landing. Participant12 explained how \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;some of the instruments were blurry, making it harder to focus during critical moments.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e This technical limitation was also noticed by the instructors, although students generally acknowledged that this did not outweigh the broader benefits of VR.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhile most students adapted well to VR training, 3 participants (21%) reported mild symptoms of motion sickness or discomfort during longer sessions. Participant5 noted feeling slightly dizzy after extended use, though they still appreciated the overall training experience. The discomfort experienced by a minority of students suggests that session duration may need to be optimized to maintain effectiveness without causing physical strain. This result only aligns partially with the instructors\u0026rsquo; annotations, as they reported just one case of initial dizziness.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBoth students and instructors reported technical issues, although these were not severe enough to undermine the overall effectiveness of the training. Problems with certain controls and cockpit ergonomics were noted by multiple participants and instructors. For example (as already reported from the instructors\u0026rsquo; notebooks), the ignition switch, lighting realism and pedal adjustments were problematic. Students talk about these issues but not as major problems.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e3.5. Focus group\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe two instructors inform having observed significant improvement in students\u0026rsquo; understanding of concepts related to aircraft, particularly in terms of instrument positioning and procedures. This allowed them to be better prepared for their first flights, reducing the need for repetition during briefing and flight.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs the interviewees convey, VR enables students to experience visual flights with nearly 360\u0026ordm; vision, improving their spatial awareness and ability to carry out procedures correctly, such as flap control. This is a remarkable improvement compared to traditional simulators, which focus more on instrumental flights.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eVR offers the ability to correct common mistakes in a safe environment, allowing students to improve their skills before flying in real conditions. This aspect was seen in previous data collection and the focus group reinforced its meaningfulness. Additionally, unlike traditional simulators, VR allows for much faster mission setup and start times, reducing waiting time and increasing efficiency during training sessions.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs emerged from the focus group, instructors confirm good adaptability to the technology and a positive attitude, ending sessions with enthusiasm as already introduced in the notebooks. VR not only helps students learn but also motivates them to keep improving thanks to a highly enriching practical experience. As one interviewee stated: \"\u003cem\u003eThe first thing you see in them when they take off the headset is a smile\u003c/em\u003e\".\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4. Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eWe observed that the scores achieved by participants during their first real flight in the experimental group statistically outperformed those of the control group, with a moderate effect size. On the other hand, both VR and traditional classroom training led to an increase in flight knowledge. This increase was greater in the traditional classroom, with a 25.9% mean improvement compared to 15.3% after the VR flight session, and only the traditional classroom showed a statistically significant improvement.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis finding indicates that VR training has enhanced the skills of student pilots more effectively than traditional classroom teaching, thereby confirming our expectations in H1. VR has been proven to be effective in training skills in non-aviation studies: Kennedy et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) found that the VR practical experience reduced errors among medical students compared to traditional training; Chen et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrated that integrating VR into STEAM teaching improved senior high school students' learning outcomes and practical skills. Conversely, Lui and Goel (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) found no significant difference between real-world hospitality training and VR hospitality training. The fields in which VR training can effectively support real-world situations still need further study.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAs for aviation studies, a review by Ross and Gilbey (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) highlights the limited research on VR in this field. Most existing studies have been presented at conferences and published as proceedings rather than journal articles. Additionally, most studies focus on military training, and research from flight schools appears to be limited. For example, Pennington et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) introduced VR in initial flight training, observing an increase in self-efficacy in military pilots. Dymora et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrated the effectiveness of VR technology in commercial pilot training, although their findings were based on an eight-question survey. Ross and Gilbey (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) also conclude that VR could support traditional flight training, which aligns well with our findings, highlighting the need for more rigorous research with civil aviation as a priority.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAligning with our results, several studies highlight that the acquisition of knowledge through VR is not significatively different than through traditional classroom teaching (Jensen and Konradsen \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Sichterman et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Šikl et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Some studies find VR more effective than traditional teaching, while others find it less effective, depending on the field of application (Mayer et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). For instance, Rasheed et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) found that VR was less effective on factual questions, although this study focused specifically on history education in rural schools in India. Conversely, Ma et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) designed a VR teaching module to enhance understanding of queue theory; their 3D visuals enabled engineering students to gain more knowledge compared to traditional teaching methods. Our learning activity was primarily designed to improve flight skills, with the questions in the pretest and posttest questionnaires more focused on theoretical knowledge, because they were based on the theoretical exam students must pass before beginning flight training. Future work should be devoted toward designing VR learning experiences that effectively support the acquisition of aviation concepts.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eEven if \u0026ldquo;it is still unclear what the effectiveness of VR is in short- and long-term training of pilots\u0026rdquo; (van Weelden et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), we support in positive that the students in this study adapted quickly to the VR environment, they showed a positive attitude and perceptions, and they had to adapt to the new technology, but it was a quick process and became more familiar with the controls, as in other contexts (Arbu\u0026eacute;s Garcia del Moral et al. 2024). Studying the performance in a qualitative manner, they managed the maneuvers successfully, but some aspects must be considered and remarked absence of physical feedback during critical moments as a lack from this experience. Other difficulties that have been identified and match with other studies are occasional ergonomic and technical challenges, technical difficulties related to the software, and the fact that the starting warning light and the TRIM could be improved. Even though, these have not been labelled as crucial and with better resources could be solved.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWe observed that a strong point for students was the immersion and spatial awareness, aligned with Cross et al. (Cross et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023b\u003c/span\u003e), as well as the VR provision of a strong sense of being in a real scenario. Other positive aspects reinforced the benefits reported in other experiences as it appears that participants highlight the importance of integrating it with real-world flight practice and participants in the experimental part left the session feeling more confident in their ability to perform in real-world scenarios (Chen et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn our study, probably due to the limited number of participants, we found that none of them expressed dizziness. The literature refers cybersickness in the use of VR for educational purposes (Jensen and Konradsen \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), but our finding aligns with the fact that pilots managing the VR aircraft tend to experience less cybersickness than VR passengers or instructors in passive roles (Rebelo et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). This topic has been dealt in previous studies (Patr\u0026atilde;o et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) with no concluding results but tending to agree little prevalence. At the end, it can be effective as an adaptive tool for pilot training (Aguilar Reyes et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of virtual reality (VR) in enhancing pilot learning skills and to explore the perspectives of both students and instructors regarding its use. Our findings provide strong evidence that VR training significantly improves student pilots' practical flight skills, confirming Hypothesis 1 (H1). The experimental group, which trained with VR, demonstrated superior performance during their first real flight compared to the control group, despite VR training showing a smaller improvement in theoretical knowledge than traditional classroom instruction. This aligns with prior research that suggests VR is particularly beneficial for skill acquisition but may be less effective for purely theoretical learning.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAdditionally, participants recognized the potential and practicality of VR in pilot training, supporting Hypothesis 2 (H2). They reported a high level of engagement, improved spatial awareness, and increased confidence in real-world scenarios after VR training. Although some limitations, such as the lack of physical feedback and occasional technical difficulties, were identified, these challenges were not deemed critical and could be mitigated with improved resources and design. Importantly, cybersickness, a common concern in VR applications, was not significantly reported among our participants, possibly due to the nature of flight training and the immersive qualities of the VR system used.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eBased on the advantages defined by Rebelo et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e), the adaptability and safety of VR enable flight instructors to design lessons allowing student pilots to practice approach procedures at different airports worldwide. This provides a controlled and safe environment for repeated practice, such as emergency procedures, an interesting future line of investigation.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSeveral studies have highlighted the limitations of VR in educational settings. For instance, research has shown that cybersickness remains a significant barrier (Rebelo et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e; Jensen and Konradsen \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Ross and Gilbey \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), although in the case of aviation, it is reduced when seated (Kim et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Only one participant reported an initial sense of dizziness, but the flight session was ultimately carried out normally. VR can result in breaks in presence (Ross and Gilbey \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), but the high latency provided by the high-quality computer probably reduced this issue. Other studies suggest that VR can distract form the learning task, hindering the acquisition of concepts (Mayer et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), but in our case VR must reliably simulate reality, then a simulated flight with VR cannot be more distracting than a real flight. Finally, the introduction of a novel technology can be challenging for teachers (Bower et al. \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). In this study, the flight sessions were carried out under the supervision of an investigator who resolved all technical issues. We suggest creating a tutorial for instructors if VR is to be used by a novice instructor alone.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eWhile VR cannot replace actual flight experience, it serves as a valuable supplementary tool for pilot training, offering a safe and adaptable environment for repeated practice, including emergency procedures and airport approach training. Future research should focus on optimizing VR-based learning experiences for aviation concepts and addressing the integration of VR with traditional flight instruction. Given the promising results observed in this study, further investigation with larger participant groups and more diverse training scenarios is recommended to solidify VR's role in pilot education.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.1. Limitations:\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eDespite the promising results, this study has limitations. First, the sample size was relatively small, which may limit the generalizability of the findings. A larger participant pool could provide more robust statistical validation of VR\u0026rsquo;s effectiveness in pilot training. Nevertheless, the scores in this initial flight session were generally high, with a mean score of 8.82 out of 10. These high values leave little room for significant improvement in scores, but it potentially can in underlying skills, then we suggest further experiments to quantify the extent of this skill enhancement.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSecond, the study primarily focused on short-term skill acquisition and immediate performance improvements. Long-term retention of skills and knowledge gained through VR training remains an open question. Additionally, technical issues such as occasional software glitches and ergonomic discomfort were noted. While these did not critically impact the training, they highlight the need for continuous improvement in VR hardware and software to enhance user experience and reliability.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.2. Implications:\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe findings of this study have several important implications for pilot training programs and aviation education. The demonstrated effectiveness of VR in improving flight skills suggests that integrating VR into existing pilot training program could provide students with additional practice opportunities in a safe and controlled environment. This could be particularly useful for mastering maneuvers, emergency procedures, and airport approach scenarios before actual flight sessions. Additionally, the positive reception from students and instructors highlights VR\u0026rsquo;s potential as a motivational and engaging tool for flight training.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eFrom a broader perspective, the study supports the growing body of evidence that VR can be an effective training tool across various fields requiring practical skill development. The aviation industry, regulatory bodies, and training institutions should consider expanding their investment in VR-based training solutions, particularly for early-stage pilot education. However, while VR enhances skill acquisition, its limitations in theoretical knowledge retention suggest that it should complement, rather than replace, traditional classroom instruction.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\u003ch2\u003e5.3. Further research:\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eFrom this research different lines can be point:\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003cul\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eAssess whether the benefits observed in VR training persist over time and translate into sustained performance in real-world flight scenarios.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eStudies should investigate whether the skills gained through VR training are retained over extended periods and how they translate into actual flight performance over time.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cp\u003eResearch with larger and more diverse groups of participants, including pilots at different training stages and from different training institutions, would provide more generalizable insights.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ul\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003ch2\u003eEthical approval\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003e Research involving Human Participants and/or Animals, in accordance with the guidelines approved by the ethical committee under code CEIPSA-2023-PR-0029\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contributions Statement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by T.V.-C. and C.N.-M.. Analysis was performed by T.V.-C., J.M. and R.P. The manuscript was written by T.V.-C., J.M. and R.P. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003ePartial financial support was received from Fundaci\u0026oacute; Rego.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eAll authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation and data collection were performed by T.V.-C. and C.N.-M.. Analysis was performed by T.V.-C., J.M. and R.P. The manuscript was written by T.V.-C., J.M. and R.P. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eData that support the findings of this study have been published in the Figshare dataset repository:Vall\u0026egrave;s-Catal\u0026agrave;, T., Navarro-Morali, C., Palau, R., \u0026amp; Mogas, J. (2025). VR vs Traditional Training: A Comparative Dataset on Student Pilot Performance. Figshare. http://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28730915.v1\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAguilar Reyes CI, Wozniak D, Ham A, Zahabi M (2023) Design and evaluation of an adaptive virtual reality training system. Virtual Real 27:2509\u0026ndash;2528. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10055-023-00827-7/METRICS\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAirbus (2022) Global Services Forecast (GSF) | 2024-2043. https://aircraft.airbus.com/en/global-services-forecast-gsf-2024-2043.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAlves Fernandes LM, Cruz Matos G, Azevedo D, et al (2016) Exploring educational immersive videogames: an empirical study with a 3D multimodal interaction prototype. Behav \u0026amp; Inf Tech 35:907\u0026ndash;918. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2016.1232754\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eArbu\u0026eacute;s Garcia del Moral J, Codesal Pati\u0026ntilde;o MB, Cuadrado S\u0026aacute;ez ML, et al (2024) La realitat augmentada, la realitat virtual i el metavers en la societat. Impacte a l\u0026rsquo;educaci\u0026oacute;. Universitat de Barcelona Institut de Desenvolupament Professional-ICE\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBoeing (2022) Pilot and technician outlook 2022\u0026ndash;2041\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBower M, DeWitt D, Lai JWM (2020) Reasons associated with preservice teachers\u0026rsquo; intention to use immersive virtual reality in education. Br J of Educ Tech 51:2215\u0026ndash;2233. https://doi.org/10.1111/BJET.13009\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChen JC, Huang Y, Lin KY, et al (2020) Developing a hands-on activity using virtual reality to help students learn by doing. J Comput Assist Learn 36:46\u0026ndash;60. https://doi.org/10.1111/JCAL.12389\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCreswell JW (2013) Qualitative Inquiry \u0026amp; Research Design: Choosing Among Five Approaches, 3rd edn. SAGE Publications\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCreswell JW (2018) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches, 5th edn. SAGE Publications\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCross J, Boag-Hodgson C, Ryley T, et al (2023a) Using Extended Reality in Flight Simulators: A Literature Review. In: IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph, pp 3961\u0026ndash;3975\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCross JI, Boag-Hodgson CC, Mavin TJ (2023b) Measuring Presence and Situational Awareness in a Virtual Reality Flight Simulator. Aviat Psycho and Appl Human Fact 13:83\u0026ndash;94. https://doi.org/10.1027/2192-0923/a000250\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDing X, Li Z (2022) A review of the application of virtual reality technology in higher education based on Web of Science literature data as an example. Front Educ (Lausanne) 7:1048816. https://doi.org/10.3389/FEDUC.2022.1048816/BIBTEX\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDymora P, Kowal B, Mazurek M, Śliwa R (2021) The effects of Virtual Reality technology application in the aircraft pilot training process. In: IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. IOP Publishing, p 012099\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEgan D, Brennan S, Barrett J, et al (2016) An evaluation of Heart Rate and ElectroDermal Activity as an objective QoE evaluation method for immersive virtual reality environments. 2016 8th International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience, QoMEX 2016. https://doi.org/10.1109/QOMEX.2016.7498964\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEstupi\u0026ntilde;\u0026aacute;n S, Rebelo F, Noriega P, et al (2014) Can Virtual Reality Increase Emotional Responses (Arousal and Valence)? A Pilot Study. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) 8518 LNCS:541\u0026ndash;549. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07626-3_51\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGuthridge R, Clinton-Lisell V (2023) Evaluating the Efficacy of Virtual Reality (VR) Training Devices for Pilot Training. J of Aviat Tech and Eng 12:1. https://doi.org/10.7771/2159-6670.1286\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHight MPH, Fussell SG, Kurkchubasche MA, Hummell IJ (2022) Effectiveness of Virtual Reality Simulations for Civilian, Ab Initio Pilot Training. J of Aviat/Aerospace Educ \u0026amp; Research 31:1. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15394/jaaer.2022.1903\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJensen L, Konradsen F (2018) A review of the use of virtual reality head-mounted displays in education and training. Educ Inf Technol (Dordr) 23:1515\u0026ndash;1529. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10639-017-9676-0/METRICS\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKakkos I, Dimitrakopoulos GN, Gao L, et al (2019) Mental Workload Drives Different Reorganizations of Functional Cortical Connectivity Between 2D and 3D Simulated Flight Experiment. In: IEEE Journals \u0026amp; Magazine. IEEE Xplore\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKavanagh S, Luxton-Reilly A, Wuensche B, Plimmer B (2017) A systematic review of Virtual Reality in education. Themes in Sci Tech Educ 10:85\u0026ndash;119\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKennedy GAL, Pedram S, Sanzone S (2023) Improving safety outcomes through medical error reduction via virtual reality-based clinical skills training. Saf Sci 165:106200. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SSCI.2023.106200\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKim A, Lee JE, Lee KM (2023) Exploring the Relative Effects of Body Position and Locomotion Method on Presence and Cybersickness when Navigating a Virtual Environment. ACM Trans Appl Percept 21:. https://doi.org/10.1145/3627706\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKritikos J, Tzannetos G, Zoitaki C, et al (2019) Anxiety detection from Electrodermal Activity Sensor with movement interaction during Virtual Reality Simulation. International IEEE/EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering, NER 2019-March:571\u0026ndash;576. https://doi.org/10.1109/NER.2019.8717170\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLui TW, Goel L (2022) Learning effectiveness of 3D virtual reality in hospitality training: a situated cognitive perspective. Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Technology 13:441\u0026ndash;460. https://doi.org/10.1108/JHTT-03-2021-0091/FULL/XML\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMa J, Jaradat R, Ashour O, et al (2019) Efficacy investigation of virtual reality teaching module in manufacturing system design course. J of Mech Design 141:. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4041428/367791\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMayer RE, Makransky G, Parong J (2023) The Promise and Pitfalls of Learning in Immersive Virtual Reality. Int J Hum Comput Interact 39:2229\u0026ndash;2238. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2108563\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMerchant Z, Goetz ET, Cifuentes L, et al (2014) Effectiveness of virtual reality-based instruction on students\u0026rsquo; learning outcomes in K-12 and higher education: A meta-analysis. Comput Educ 70:29\u0026ndash;40. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMPEDU.2013.07.033\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOberhauser M, Dreyer D (2017) A virtual reality flight simulator for human factors engineering. Cognition, Technology and Work 19:263\u0026ndash;277. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10111-017-0421-7/METRICS\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePatr\u0026atilde;o B, Pedro S, Menezes P (2020) How to Deal with Motion Sickness in Virtual Reality. In: Communities \u0026amp; Collections, 22o Encontro Portugu\u0026ecirc;s de Computa\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o Gr\u0026aacute;fica e Intera\u0026ccedil;\u0026atilde;o. pp 40\u0026ndash;46\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePennington E, Hafer R, Nistler E, et al (2019) Integration of Advanced Technology in Initial Flight Training. In: 2019 Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium (SIEDS)\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRasheed F, Prasad O, Marisha N (2015) Immersive virtual reality to enhance the spatial awareness of students. In: Proceedings of the 7th Indian Conference on Human-Computer Interaction\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRebelo F, Noriega P, Duarte E, Soares M (2012) Using Virtual Reality to Assess User Experience. Hum Factors 54:964\u0026ndash;982. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720812465006\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRoss G, Gilbey A (2023) Extended reality (xR) flight simulators as an adjunct to traditional flight training methods: a scoping review. CEAS Aeronaut J 14:799\u0026ndash;815. https://doi.org/10.1007/S13272-023-00688-5/FIGURES/1\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShui L, Wang F, Wei Z (2023) Review on the Applications of Virtual Reality in Civil Aviation. In: Proceedings of the 2023 3rd International Conference on Big Data, Artificial Intelligence and Risk Management. Assoc for Comp Mach, pp 615\u0026ndash;619\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSichterman B, Ginkel S van, Halteren M van, et al (2023) The Effects of a Constructively Aligned Virtual Reality Setting on Professionals\u0026rsquo; Knowledge, Motivation and Perceptions. Int J of Tech in Educ 6:561\u0026ndash;582. https://doi.org/10.46328/IJTE.462\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003e\u0026Scaron;ikl R, Br\u0026uuml;cknerov\u0026aacute; K, \u0026Scaron;vedov\u0026aacute; H, et al (2024) Who benefits and who doesn\u0026rsquo;t in virtual reality learning: An experimental study comparing two types of school. J Comput Assist Learn 40:1591\u0026ndash;1604. https://doi.org/10.1111/JCAL.12973\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSlavova Y, Mu M (2018) A Comparative Study of the Learning Outcomes and Experience of VR in Education. 25th IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces, VR 2018 - Proceedings 685\u0026ndash;686. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2018.8446486\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTesch A (2016) Implementing Pre-Post Test Designs in Higher Education Evaluations. New Dir Eval 151:85\u0026ndash;96. https://doi.org/10.1002/EV.20195\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVall\u0026egrave;s-Catal\u0026agrave; T, Guerrero I (2025) Comparing Arousal and Workload During an Emergency Landing in a Virtual Reality and a Conventional Flight Simulator. Int J Hum Comput Interact 1\u0026ndash;13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2025.2474464\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVall\u0026egrave;s-Catal\u0026agrave; T, Navarro-Morali C, Palau R, Mogas J (2025) VR vs Traditional Training: A Comparative Dataset on Student Pilot Performance. Figshare. http://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28730915.v1 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003evan Weelden E, Alimardani M, Wiltshire TJ, Louwerse MM (2021) Advancing the Adoption of Virtual Reality and Neurotechnology to Improve Flight Training. In: Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Human-Machine Systems, ICHMS 2021. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eVats S, Joshi R (2024) The Impact of Virtual Reality in Education: A Comprehensive Research Study. Transfer, Diffusion and Adoption of Next-Generation Digital Technologies TDIT 2023 IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology, vol 699 Springer 699 AICT:126\u0026ndash;136. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-50204-0_11\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWilliams KW, Christopher B, Drechsler G, et al (2014) Aviation Human-in-the-Loop Simulation Studies: Experimental Planning, Design, and Data Management. United States. Office of Aerosp Med\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eXiaoning X, Yunus MM, Rafiq KRM (2024) Use of VR in Higher Education: A Systematic Review (2014-2023). International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development 13:1765\u0026ndash;1783. https://doi.org/10.6007/IJARPED/v13-i1/20659\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYoung GW, Stehle S, Walsh BY, Tiri E (2020) Exploring Virtual Reality in the Higher Education Classroom: Using VR to Build Knowledge and Understanding, 26(8): 904-928. J of Univ Comp Sci, pp 904\u0026ndash;928\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang M, Wang M, Feng H, et al (2023) Pilots\u0026rsquo; Spatial Visualization Ability Assessment Based on Virtual Reality. Aerosp Med Hum Perform 94:422\u0026ndash;428. https://doi.org/10.3357/AMHP.6198.2023\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZiakkas D, Flores ADC, Suckow MW (2023) Human Factors in Aviation and Artificial Systems: The Purdue Aviation Virtual Reality case study. In: Ahram T, Karwowski W, Di Bucchianico P, et al. (eds) Intelligent Human Systems Integration (IHSI 2023): Integrating People and Intelligent Systems. AHFE Open Acces\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"Virtual Reality, Pilot Training, Flight Simulation, Aviation Education","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6440952/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-6440952/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eVirtual Reality (VR) has emerged as a promising tool for pilot training. Some aviation companies have started incorporating VR into their training programs, but more research is needed to prove its efficiency as a learning tool. This study has two aims: to determine to what extent the use of VR improves pilot learning skills before a student’s first real flight, and to explore the vision of the students and instructors. A quasi-experimental design is implemented, with participants divided into a control group (traditional classroom training) and an experimental group (VR-based training), along with a focus group to explore the second objective.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results indicate that students who trained with VR achieved significantly higher scores in their first real flight compared to the control group, supporting the hypothesis that VR enhances practical skill acquisition. However, VR training was less effective in improving theoretical knowledge, as the traditional classroom group showed greater gains in post-test scores. Qualitative data revealed that students and instructors recognized the potential of VR for pilot training, highlighting benefits such as increased immersion, spatial awareness, and confidence. Despite these advantages, limitations such as the lack of physical feedback, occasional technical issues, and minor ergonomic challenges were noted.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFindings suggest that while VR cannot replace real-world flight experience, it serves as a valuable supplementary tool for enhancing flight skills and procedural training. Future research should explore long-term retention of VR-trained skills, refine VR learning experiences to better support theoretical knowledge, and examine its integration with traditional training programs.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Enhancing Pilot Training with Virtual Reality: Evaluating Skill Acquisition and Student Perceptions","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-09-04 00:13:14","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-6440952/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"1e6c68eb-e404-44ac-a3ad-1c870f344902","owner":[],"postedDate":"September 4th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-11-27T12:23:21+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-09-04 00:13:14","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-6440952","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-6440952","identity":"rs-6440952","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}