Hi There,
Any Idea where can a person find real geographical data to down load and use
with the Microsoft flight sim 2004?
Ezra

What do you mean by "real geographical data"? FS2004 has (at least) two
scenery components - elevation data, and visual data. If you want more
accurate mountains and such - in terms of peaks and valleys - then
you're looking for elevation data with a higher resolution. If you want
to *see* more accurate landmarks (buildings, roads, etc.), then you want
something based on aerial and/or satellite photos.

What you can get for either depends on the area you're interested in.
For many areas, you can download free mesh (i.e. digital elevation
data). Some commercial products include both elevation mesh data and
photo-based visuals (e.g. Megascenery).

With more data on what you want, I (or someone else) can give you some
pointers on where to look and/or what to buy.

Dave Blevins


On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 19:24:43 GMT, "Ezra Bavly" > wrote:

>Hi There,
>Any Idea where can a person find real geographical data to down load and use
>with the Microsoft flight sim 2004?
>Ezra
>

"Ezra Bavly" > wrote in message
news:%tVbd.110800$a41.94245@pd7tw2no...
> Hi There,
> Any Idea where can a person find real geographical data to down load and
use
> with the Microsoft flight sim 2004?
> Ezra

Hi.

Why the subject "helicopter simulator"? MSFS can't simulate a helicopters.
Try X-Plane. Still rubbish but 1000 times closer than MSFS. Also, you're in
the wrong group for flight sims.

Regards
Andrew


--
Inweb Networks. Quality internet and telecoms services
Sales: 08000 612222 Support: 08704322222. http://www.inweb.co.uk
E1 call share. 0800, 0845 and 0870 numbers - best rates. Resellers welcome

"Ezra Bavly" > wrote in message
news:%tVbd.110800$a41.94245@pd7tw2no...
> Hi There,
> Any Idea where can a person find real geographical data to down load and
> use
> with the Microsoft flight sim 2004?

Twy www.flightsim.com and www.simflight.com


--
Beav


Please note my E-mail address is "beavis dot original at ntlworld dot com"
(with the obvious changes)

Beavisland now lives at
www.beavisoriginal.co.uk

"Andrew Crane" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ezra Bavly" > wrote in message
> news:%tVbd.110800$a41.94245@pd7tw2no...
>> Hi There,
>> Any Idea where can a person find real geographical data to down load and
> use
>> with the Microsoft flight sim 2004?
>> Ezra
>
> Hi.
>
> Why the subject "helicopter simulator"? MSFS can't simulate a helicopters.
> Try X-Plane. Still rubbish but 1000 times closer than MSFS. Also, you're
> in
> the wrong group for flight sims.

We regularly get flight simmers asking here Andy. Particularly the heli
simmers.


--
Beav


Please note my E-mail address is "beavis dot original at ntlworld dot com"
(with the obvious changes)

Beavisland now lives at
www.beavisoriginal.co.uk

"Beav" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Andrew Crane" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Ezra Bavly" > wrote in message
> > news:%tVbd.110800$a41.94245@pd7tw2no...
> >> Hi There,
> >> Any Idea where can a person find real geographical data to down load
and
> > use
> >> with the Microsoft flight sim 2004?
> >> Ezra
> >
> > Hi.
> >
> > Why the subject "helicopter simulator"? MSFS can't simulate a
helicopters.
> > Try X-Plane. Still rubbish but 1000 times closer than MSFS. Also, you're
> > in
> > the wrong group for flight sims.
>
> We regularly get flight simmers asking here Andy. Particularly the heli
> simmers.

Nice one -- so what's the collective's view on the most realistic sim at a
realistic price? I've tried MSFS which has a flight model similar to a fixed
wing and doesn't model, well, any characteristic peculiar to a helicopter.
Also I've tried v6 of X-Plane which lost a lot of its modelling of
heli-related aerodynamics in this version. Any ideas?

ta
Andrew


--
Inweb Networks. Quality internet and telecoms services
Sales: 08000 612222 Support: 08704322222. http://www.inweb.co.uk
E1 call share. 0800, 0845 and 0870 numbers - best rates. Resellers welcome

I sent by mistake a personal reply to Dave, so I will try again:
After Dave pointed out correctly that I am really looking for more accurate
landmarks to superimpose on that program, I
will rephrase my request : I will appreciate any information on products
that include both elevation mesh data and
photo-based visuals (e.g. Megascenery).
Thanks Ezra




What do you mean by "real geographical data"? FS2004 has (at least) two
scenery components - elevation data, and visual data. If you want more
accurate mountains and such - in terms of peaks and valleys - then
you're looking for elevation data with a higher resolution. If you want
to *see* more accurate landmarks (buildings, roads, etc.), then you want
something based on aerial and/or satellite photos.

What you can get for either depends on the area you're interested in.
For many areas, you can download free mesh (i.e. digital elevation
data). Some commercial products include both elevation mesh data and
photo-based visuals (e.g. Megascenery).

With more data on what you want, I (or someone else) can give you some
pointers on where to look and/or what to buy.

Dave Blevins

> wrote in message
...
> What do you mean by "real geographical data"? FS2004 has (at least) two
> scenery components - elevation data, and visual data. If you want more
> accurate mountains and such - in terms of peaks and valleys - then
> you're looking for elevation data with a higher resolution. If you want
> to *see* more accurate landmarks (buildings, roads, etc.), then you want
> something based on aerial and/or satellite photos.
>
> What you can get for either depends on the area you're interested in.
> For many areas, you can download free mesh (i.e. digital elevation
> data). Some commercial products include both elevation mesh data and
> photo-based visuals (e.g. Megascenery).
>
> With more data on what you want, I (or someone else) can give you some
> pointers on where to look and/or what to buy.
>
> Dave Blevins
>
>
> On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 19:24:43 GMT, "Ezra Bavly" > wrote:
>
>>Hi There,
>>Any Idea where can a person find real geographical data to down load and
>>use
>>with the Microsoft flight sim 2004?
>>Ezra
>>
>

Hi Andrew,
Can you offer a good group discussion site for the Flightsim 2004?
I am using that MicroSoft FlightSim 2004software to simulate a Bell
JetRanger 206 helicopter and it is working quite beautifuly.
I am not fammiliar with the X plane program it might be better, but after
setting everything up with flight sim
I will carry on and try to enhance the program.The 2 areas I find need to
work on are the Landmarks issue and the other
is bulding the actual Switchs, Circuit Breaker to control the engine
systems. Any information on that will be appreciated.
Thanks
Ezra


"Andrew Crane" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Ezra Bavly" > wrote in message
> news:%tVbd.110800$a41.94245@pd7tw2no...
>> Hi There,
>> Any Idea where can a person find real geographical data to down load and
> use
>> with the Microsoft flight sim 2004?
>> Ezra
>
> Hi.
>
> Why the subject "helicopter simulator"? MSFS can't simulate a helicopters.
> Try X-Plane. Still rubbish but 1000 times closer than MSFS. Also, you're
> in
> the wrong group for flight sims.
>
> Regards
> Andrew
>
>
> --
> Inweb Networks. Quality internet and telecoms services
> Sales: 08000 612222 Support: 08704322222. http://www.inweb.co.uk
> E1 call share. 0800, 0845 and 0870 numbers - best rates. Resellers welcome
>
>

"Andrew Crane" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Beav" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Andrew Crane" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >
>> > "Ezra Bavly" > wrote in message
>> > news:%tVbd.110800$a41.94245@pd7tw2no...
>> >> Hi There,
>> >> Any Idea where can a person find real geographical data to down load
> and
>> > use
>> >> with the Microsoft flight sim 2004?
>> >> Ezra
>> >
>> > Hi.
>> >
>> > Why the subject "helicopter simulator"? MSFS can't simulate a
> helicopters.
>> > Try X-Plane. Still rubbish but 1000 times closer than MSFS. Also,
>> > you're
>> > in
>> > the wrong group for flight sims.
>>
>> We regularly get flight simmers asking here Andy. Particularly the heli
>> simmers.
>
> Nice one -- so what's the collective's view on the most realistic sim at a
> realistic price?
I've tried MSFS which has a flight model similar to a fixed
> wing and doesn't model, well, any characteristic peculiar to a helicopter.
> Also I've tried v6 of X-Plane which lost a lot of its modelling of
> heli-related aerodynamics in this version. Any ideas?

There isn't one :-)) MSFS is total crap for a vareity of reasons, not least
the fact that there's NO relation between power changes and pedal
requirements and the cyclic response is so unreal it's not even funny. The
only other sim (to speak of) is X-Plane, but even that's not particularly
wonderous although it IS a bit better.

At least when you pull pitch, you need a legful of pedal and vice-versa.

I tried ver 6 and binned it in favour of keeping versions 2 to 5, but I've
not used any of those for a while now because they don't represent (in
particular) the R22b at all well.

I actually find it VERY strange that there isn't a decent heli sim, given
the progress made in the R/C heli sims. Some of the latest RC sims are
almost a direct copy of the real thing. A conspiracy I reckon:-)


Beav

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:47:10 GMT, "Ezra Bavly" > wrote:

>I sent by mistake a personal reply to Dave, so I will try again:
>After Dave pointed out correctly that I am really looking for more accurate
>landmarks to superimpose on that program, I
>will rephrase my request : I will appreciate any information on products
>that include both elevation mesh data and
>photo-based visuals (e.g. Megascenery).
>Thanks Ezra

Some notes:

1. another poster (actually perhaps it was two fellas) pronounced FS2004
to be unworthy as a helicopter sim. I've argued this point many times
before in various forums, and am loathe to type all of that in again,
but in a nutshell - I think it is useful for certain things. In
particular, "approaches to a pinnacle" (e.g. top of a building) is a
fairly challenging thing to do in FS, but I believe it is a useful
exercise in terms of energy management w.r.t. the real world. I've been
doing it for quite a while (in the sim) and it's still hard to arrive at
the point I want with zero airspeed.

My biggest beef is (as noted by another poster) the poor modeling of
required pedal input, but in most other aspects it feels more or less
correct, at least given that I'm looking at a 17.5" monitor with no
peripheral cues.

2. The R22 flight model is completely porked in the autorotation regime
- don't even go there. The JetRanger can be auto'd but you have to pull
a little bit of collective to keep RRPM up, which is totally wrong. This
was not the case in FS2002... Also, both versions give the '206 way too
much rotor inertia - I have to admit I haven't flown a real '206 but I
cannot imagine that any helicopter has that much inertia left after the
donkey has given it up.

2. I bought MegaScenery Northern California recently (at the Avsim
conference in Denver). It looks good "at altitude" (say, 5000 feet) but
it falls apart at helicopter altitudes. I am not aware of any add-on
that improves the visuals adequately for the helicopter pilot. The best
advice I can offer is to download some freeware mesh to increase the
accuracy of the elevation data, but that doesn't help the landmarks
aspect. I think we are waiting for the "next generation" in scenery
representation, and the amount of data that would be required to do this
well is HUGE. A very very fast PC will be required to render that data.

3. You mentioned hardware control of aircraft systems in another post.
There are several companies offering products in this field, and I own
three or four companies' toys. The most economical brand can be found at
http://www.goflightinc.com. I have several GoFlight products and in
general they work well. There's nothing like flipping a toggle switch to
control something that is controlled by a toggle switch in a real
aircraft 8^) .

4. I am a licensed user of X-Plane. In My Opinion the helicopter flight
model has been broken for over a year - maybe two. I keep on trying out
the new versions (and they come out almost weekly) but the helicopter
stuff just doesn't get fixed. I haven't tried any new X-Plane updates in
about two months given Real Life Commitments but given the history I
have with it, I'm not holding my breath. (for example: the R22 in
X-Plane is waaay harder to fly than the real thing, and the real thing
is a fair challenge to fly well.)

As another poster said, there really isn't a good or great PC-based
helicopter sim out there. That said - I have been "doing this" for
several years, and I keep coming back to Microsoft Flight Simulator for
my simming needs. I always hope and pray that they'll make the
helicopter side of things better - but we are a much smaller audience
than either the folks that want to fly airliners, and/or crash stuff
into prominent landmarks. So send those requests for better helicopter
modeling to Microsoft - believe it or not they DO listen.

Dave Blevins

The biggest problem with many helicopters in current versions of
X-Plane is simple - they were made for older versions & not updated
(including all that ship with it - I know, I built them). The
helicopter flight modeling has changed pretty dramatically during the
7.x run - for the better, but it neccesitates changes in the aircraft.

Of course, it's not perfect - but it's better than anything I've seen
in MSFS (any version).

Try a couple of the recent ones I've posted at x-plane.org, you may be
suprised...

> wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 17:47:10 GMT, "Ezra Bavly" > wrote:
> My biggest beef is (as noted by another poster) the poor modeling of
> required pedal input, but in most other aspects it feels more or less
> correct, at least given that I'm looking at a 17.5" monitor with no
> peripheral cues.

Is this pedal issue a model problem, or a control sensitivity one?

I find if I use the virtual cockpit and expand the view to 0.5 zoom I get a
much wider view that increases the peripheral awareness.

> 2. I bought MegaScenery Northern California recently (at the Avsim
> conference in Denver). It looks good "at altitude" (say, 5000 feet) but
> it falls apart at helicopter altitudes. I am not aware of any add-on
> that improves the visuals adequately for the helicopter pilot.

I bought FS Terrain by JustFlight. The terrain mesh is improved a great deal
over the standard stuff. It really brings it to life, and scenery I know
well suddenly looks like it should. It doesn't do anything for the
placement of landmarks or auto-gen buildings, but I think it's a vast
improvement. It covers virtually all of Europe and the USA.

Si

"Ezra Bavly" > wrote in message
news:hMSdd.791780$M95.84283@pd7tw1no...
> Hi Andrew,
> Can you offer a good group discussion site for the Flightsim 2004?
> I am using that MicroSoft FlightSim 2004software to simulate a Bell
> JetRanger 206 helicopter and it is working quite beautifuly.

It depends on what you mean by works beautifully. The thing just doesn't
handle like a helicopter. For instance, if you go shooting across the
airfield at low level and pull back for a wingover, you'd expect the thing
to go shooting up into the air. It doesn't. Also I'd challenge you to auto
the thing. Also, if you slow down beyond ETL, the thing starts oscillating
in yaw from a point way behind the tail.

X-Plane is way better, but still fails to model
- etl
- vrs
- rotor overspeeds
- rotor disc coning at low RPM
- in fact most effects of low RPM

You will find though that the flight model is much much better than MSFS,
although the eye candy doesn't touch that of MSFS. Whilst neither of them
will fly like a chopper, you can use MSFS for navigation exercises and to a
limited extent, VFR flight planning (I sometimes practice a flight using
MSFS before going out and doing it for real as navigation is not my strong
point).

> I am not fammiliar with the X plane program it might be better, but after
> setting everything up with flight sim
> I will carry on and try to enhance the program.

You can run both. X-Plane is a free download for a fully-functioning sim
which only differs from the real thing by offering limited scenery and
taking control away from you after about 5 minutes of operation.

Regards
Andrew

Andrew Crane wrote:
> "Ezra Bavly" > wrote in message
> news:hMSdd.791780$M95.84283@pd7tw1no...
>
>>Hi Andrew,
>>Can you offer a good group discussion site for the Flightsim 2004?
>>I am using that MicroSoft FlightSim 2004software to simulate a Bell
>>JetRanger 206 helicopter and it is working quite beautifuly.
>
> It depends on what you mean by works beautifully. The thing just doesn't
> handle like a helicopter. For instance, if you go shooting across the
> airfield at low level and pull back for a wingover, you'd expect the thing
> to go shooting up into the air. It doesn't. Also I'd challenge you to auto
> the thing. Also, if you slow down beyond ETL, the thing starts oscillating
> in yaw from a point way behind the tail.

Another gripe about MS flight sim is the collective pulls exactly to
100%, no more, and the response-droop feel is all wrong. Maybe the
sit-down sim I tried was incorrectly rigged, but in real lift, you
can pull WAAAY more than 100% torque in a 206, especially in transient.

If you think of it as procedures trainer or an expensive video game,
it doesn't seem so bad.

Actually, it models everything you've listed in current versions
(7.61/62) - some better than others though:
ETL isn't as abrupt in onset as it should be, but it's definitely
there.
VRS is there but is a hack & not truly calculated, it's a very generic
effect - it looks for vertical descents over a certain rate & then
kicks it in. You get a nasty rate of descent & some wobbling around,
recovery takes some airspeed.
It'll most definitely overspeed the rotor, and the disk does cone more
at low rpm. You can also droop the rpm by pulling pitch too fast, or
pull too much & bleed it off - which slows the tail rotor as it
should, you'll run out of yaw control pretty quick.

Most of this has been there for quite a while, although ETL was broken
in a few versions along the way...

On Tue, 26 Oct 2004 10:07:47 +0100, "Andrew Crane" >
wrote:


>X-Plane is way better, but still fails to model
> - etl
> - vrs
> - rotor overspeeds
> - rotor disc coning at low RPM
> - in fact most effects of low RPM