Re: Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004

[Steve House]

2004 is due to be released next week
The MS Force Feedback joystick works well with it.

"TripFarmer" > wrote in message
...
> Does anyone own this? I was thinking of using it at home as I start my
> instrument training for help with repetative proceedures.
>
> If you own it do you have a recommendation for a Yoke or Joystick?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
>
>
> Trip
>

[Cub Driver]

>Does anyone own this? I was thinking of using it at home as I start my
>instrument training for help with repetative proceedures.

It gets a rave review in the current issue of AOPA pilot.

I have always scoffed at Flight Sim, because what I saw on the screen
didn't resemble what I see when I drive my Cub along at 2900 ft AGL.
But that review made me feel wistful that my puter isn't up to the
demands of this edition of MS Flight Sim.

The reviewer, by the way, was talking about its use as a
flight-training tool. The conclusion in short was: yes yes yes!

all the best -- Dan Ford
email: www.danford.net/letters.htm#9

see the Warbird's Forum at http://www.danford.net/index.htm
Vietnam | Flying Tigers | Pacific War | Brewster Buffalo | Piper Cub

[Yossarian]

While I'm sure FS2004 is great and all, that wasn't much of a review
considering Rod Machado was paid by Microsoft for the training materials he
added to the game. I was a little irritated that AOPA put what was
essentially an advertisement in as a product review.


"Cub Driver" > wrote in message
...
>
> >Does anyone own this? I was thinking of using it at home as I start my
> >instrument training for help with repetative proceedures.
>
> It gets a rave review in the current issue of AOPA pilot.
>
> I have always scoffed at Flight Sim, because what I saw on the screen
> didn't resemble what I see when I drive my Cub along at 2900 ft AGL.
> But that review made me feel wistful that my puter isn't up to the
> demands of this edition of MS Flight Sim.
>
> The reviewer, by the way, was talking about its use as a
> flight-training tool. The conclusion in short was: yes yes yes!
>
> all the best -- Dan Ford
> email: www.danford.net/letters.htm#9
>
> see the Warbird's Forum at http://www.danford.net/index.htm
> Vietnam | Flying Tigers | Pacific War | Brewster Buffalo | Piper Cub

[Maule Driver]

"Yossarian" > wrote in message
t...
> While I'm sure FS2004 is great and all, that wasn't much of a review
> considering Rod Machado was paid by Microsoft for the training materials
he
> added to the game. I was a little irritated that AOPA put what was
> essentially an advertisement in as a product review.
>

I'm not surprised. I read the article several days ago and discounted it
because it sounded like Machado had a relationship w/MSFS or at least was
just doing a product announce in exchange for something. A nice job by MS -
now for some objective assessments.

[Icebound]

TripFarmer wrote:
> Does anyone own this? I was thinking of using it at home as I start my
> instrument training for help with repetative proceedures.
>
> If you own it do you have a recommendation for a Yoke or Joystick?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>

You might want to peruse the MSFS forum at www.avsim.com. (you have to
register free to post, but not to read).

Quite a few real-world pilots hang out there, and they would be able to
give you the perspective of someone who both flies real-world and sims.

From what I have seen there in the past, my guess is that their overall
opinion will be positive re use of sims for instrument training.

Be cautioned that, although formal Microsoft requirements are somewhat
lower, you will need a fairly powerful computer to make good use of the
sim.... with cpu probably in the 2.gHz-plus range, and one of the newer
AGP video cards. And if you find a difference of opinion about the
usefulness of sims, it may be as much because of shortcomings in the
users' hardware configuration as because of shortcomings in the sim...
.... be aware of the computer power that the proponent (or critic) is using.

I do agree with the other posters that you have to take reviews with
some skepticism, and that most are, in fact, little more than a
disguised ad. Machado has provided the "flight training" parts of the
Flight simulator manuals for the last several versions, and obviously
has had a tight relationship with MS for years. Nevertheless, I
understand his Flight-instruction credentials stand well on their own,
so his involvement and opinions on the sim ought to count for something.


--
"The Final 20 percent of the Project... requires 80 percent of the Effort"
---- paraphrased from Vilfredo Pareto (1848-1923)

[Ben Jackson]

In article >,
TripFarmer > wrote:
>Does anyone own this? I was thinking of using it at home as I start my
>instrument training for help with repetative proceedures.
>
>If you own it do you have a recommendation for a Yoke or Joystick?

I have 2000 and 2002. The latter has a lot of nice features for
actual pilots, especially the virtual cockpit with working gauges.

The CH Products Yoke and Pedals are great, though I don't actually
use the rudders as often as the yoke. Someone recommended the
MS Force Feedback stick. That didn't work well at all with 2000,
so I returned it. At least buy it locally so you can try it. 2k2
came with a rebate coupon for it, maybe 2k4 will too.

--
Ben Jackson
>
http://www.ben.com/

[Neal]

On 26 Jul 2003 05:36:09 -0500, "Steve House"
> wrote:

>2004 is due to be released next week

[sarcasm, disbelief, and contempuous attitude mode = ON]

Did they make sure and remove Meigs Field from its database?

[sarcasm, disbelief, and contempuous attitude mode = OFF]

[Peter Duniho]

"Neal" > wrote in message
...
> Did they make sure and remove Meigs Field from its database?

I dunno what the "sarcasm, disbelief, and contempous [sic] attitude mode"
business is all about but...

What I read in the r.a.simulators newsgroup was that Meigs Field is still
there, but no longer the default starting point for the game.

Pete

[Icebound]

Peter Duniho wrote:
> "Neal" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Did they make sure and remove Meigs Field from its database?
>
>
> I dunno what the "sarcasm, disbelief, and contempous [sic] attitude mode"
> business is all about but...
>
> What I read in the r.a.simulators newsgroup was that Meigs Field is still
> there, but no longer the default starting point for the game.
>
> Pete
>
>

Pictures:

http://forums.avsim.com/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=147&topic_id=60866&mesg_id=60866&listing_type=search

Of course, it will not take an enterprising 3rd-party scenery designer
long to make things right.


--
"The Final 20 percent of the Project... requires 80 percent of the Effort"
---- paraphrased from Vilfredo Pareto (1848-1923)

[Steve House]

We'll know next week. I think it's still there. The scenery is digitized
from real world nav data, most Jepp, sectionals and WAC charts, and good
amount of satellite imagery, but it has to be locked down at some point and
I think that was done before Meigs was vandalized. As a side note, there's
a huge amount of real world flying in the "game" both from MS and from third
parties For example, there's a company called "Reality XP" that publishes an
add-in for the panel to allow you to install Garmin 530 GPS, GTX 327
transponder, etc and another package that installs a UPS Apollo GL50 GPS,
FL70 Xpndr, FL30 NavCom, and FL15 audio panel. But not just pretty
pictures - fully functional in the sim. Both packages feature the real Jepp
database. The Garmin's is the Sept 2002 edition and the software behind it
actually driving the sim is Garmin'sown training simulator package for the
real McCoy. Want to fly your 182 with a glass cockpit? Replace some of the
steam gauges with a Sandel 3308 HSI. Real weather? One of the add-ins
available is a package called ActiveSky that accesses the NOA and NavCanada
weather systems via the Internet in real time and downloads current
METARS/TAFS/WindAloft data for the reporting stations in the

Realistically it is not a substititute for real flying but especially for
instrument flying and navigation training it's mighty damn close. Toss out
the documentation and use your real world charts and approach plates. Most
of the landmarks on the sectionals are there, virtually all the VOR and ADF
navaids are there in the right locations and on the right frequencies, the
airports are accurate as to runway and taxiway locations and orientations,
even a lot of the on field buildings, all the ILS frequencies are correct,
the ATC frequencies are correct and ATC will complain if you deviate from
your clearance or otherwise misbehave. Tune the radios to your local tower
frequency with your speakers on, taxi to the active and just roll across the
hold line and into position and start your run and your speakers immediately
come to life with "Cessna Seven Mike Sierra you are NOT cleared for takeoff,
turn left at the next taxiway and clear the runway immediately!" Events
happen in real time at the same pace they do in the real world. The
aircraft flight models are extremely close to the real thing, speeds are
correct, fuel burn is correct, heck, leave the master switch on with the
engine shut down for a little while and you're going to find a dead battery
when your try to start up. Going on a trip into an unfamiliar airport?
Pre-fly the trip in MSFS as an orientation flight.

Not trying to shill for MS - as a long time flight simmer and current PPL
student I'm painfully aware of it's limitations. Even with only 10 hours
under my belt my CFI has me flying partial panel for a while almost every
lesson to help break the Flight Sim habit of focussing on the instruments
instead of the horizon picture, engine and wind noises, etc. It's certainly
not the same thing as going down to Flight Safety for a course in their full
motion sims. OTOH, it's 50 bucks, not 100 or 1000 or 1000000 time's that.
I'm just amazed that they've done so much real world aviation in a $50
program and I do see it as a potentially valuable (and incredibly
inexpensive) tool in the kit of a pilot at any level, IF used within its
limits. Take the Mooney Bravo, say, from Boston down to Miami using your
real charts etc and it's going to go pretty much the same as if you're doing
it for real.

"Neal" > wrote in message
...
> On 26 Jul 2003 05:36:09 -0500, "Steve House"
> > wrote:
>
> >2004 is due to be released next week
>
> [sarcasm, disbelief, and contempuous attitude mode = ON]
>
> Did they make sure and remove Meigs Field from its database?
>
> [sarcasm, disbelief, and contempuous attitude mode = OFF]

[Icebound]

Steve House wrote:
> We'll know next week. I think it's still there. ...

it is.

> For example, there's a company called "Reality XP" that publishes an
> add-in for the panel to allow you to install Garmin 530 GPS, GTX 327
> transponder, etc and another package that installs a UPS Apollo GL50 GPS,
> FL70 Xpndr, FL30 NavCom, and FL15 audio panel.

FS2004 will have the Garmin 500 and 295 built in, supposedly with the
fully approach database.

> Real weather? One of the add-ins
> available is a package called ActiveSky that accesses the NOA and NavCanada
> weather systems via the Internet

FS2004 will have its own 15 minute updates to realtime weather, if you
want it.

>
> ...
> Not trying to shill for MS - as a long time flight simmer and current PPL
> student I'm painfully aware of it's limitations. Even with only 10 hours
> under my belt my CFI has me flying partial panel for a while almost every
> lesson to help break the Flight Sim habit of focussing on the instruments
> instead of the horizon picture, engine and wind noises, etc.

Number 1 problem for all who sim before real-world flying. If a simmer
knows that up front, (s)he can sim more intelligently for initial
training by focussing more on the outside views.



--
"The Final 20 percent of the Project... requires 80 percent of the Effort"
---- paraphrased from Vilfredo Pareto (1848-1923)

[Steve House]

"Icebound" > wrote in message
le.rogers.com...
>
.....> > Real weather? One of the add-ins
> > available is a package called ActiveSky that accesses the NOA and
NavCanada
> > weather systems via the Internet
>
> FS2004 will have its own 15 minute updates to realtime weather, if you
> want it.

So I hear - there was real world weather in 2000 as well but it used a
server dedicated to flight sim, alas not updated as often as it could have
been nor with as complete info as it could have had. I'm not sure if
they're still using that server system in 2004 or are going with a real time
link to NOAA, ActiveSky was different from FS's stock weather in that it
was going straight to the horse's mouth, as it were, getting its info direct
from NOAA's own servers for the reporting stations closest to the airplane's
current position. Was amazing to turn on my scanner and listen to ATIS from
the airport, then tune the ATIS frequency on Flight Sim's radio and hear
essentially the same info minus the NOTAMS. About the only difference was
FS always made the longest runway active with wind only affecting the
direction of takeoff but I've heard that's been fixed in 2004 to pick the
runway heading closest to the wind when there's more than one and making it
the active.

[Icebound]

Steve House wrote:
.... About the only difference was
> FS always made the longest runway active with wind only affecting the
> direction of takeoff but I've heard that's been fixed in 2004 to pick the
> runway heading closest to the wind when there's more than one and making it
> the active.
>
>
>

Apparently they have improved that even further where multiple runways
can be in use... the actual feature-quote is that you can...:
"Request a different runway at airports with multiple active runways."
whatever that means exactly.

And they have apparently partnered with Jeppesson to be able to use the
entire database of published instrument approaches, and allow them to be
flown as part of the ATC clearance (FS2002 would just vector you to
intercept ils... FS2004 will still try to do that, but now you can
decline and request (and be granted) a published approach).

And users have commented that although FS2004 does not follow published
SIDs, you can add the waypoints of the SID into your flight plan and
then FS2004 will vector you to the first point after departure after
which you can fly the SID unassisted.

Overall, there seems to be a rising chorus of positives from the group
that had official beta and gold test versions before release, plus those
who have had their ordered copies delivered already.

Again, it should be remembered that some (but not all) of these guys
operate with multiple monitors, yokes and pedals instead of
joysticks..., etc. ...to make the sim experience more realistic.




--
"The Final 20 percent of the Project... requires 80 percent of the Effort"
---- paraphrased from Vilfredo Pareto (1848-1923)

[Raul Ruiz]

I just bought the simulator yesterday. Meigs is there, but the default
airport is Evergreen (Tacoma)? I just remember it's in Washington State,
somewhere near the Redmond campus I used to work at.


"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "Neal" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Did they make sure and remove Meigs Field from its database?
>
> I dunno what the "sarcasm, disbelief, and contempous [sic] attitude mode"
> business is all about but...
>
> What I read in the r.a.simulators newsgroup was that Meigs Field is still
> there, but no longer the default starting point for the game.
>
> Pete
>
>

[Tune2828]

what's the retail on this? sorry if question's been asked already

anyone ever use vatsim?

http://www.vatsim.net/

let's you link up with other sim pilots, and some play controller. -so if you
fly from DEN-LAX, you have real people vectoring you / sequencing finals, etc
the whole trip. i've perused their site but never have time to learn and
download whatever i needed - but i like i think the concept's pretty cool

[Marty Ross]

Yea, I played around with VATSIM while practicing for my IFR practical test.
Several times I found it helpful for practicing my radio work/phraseology,
vectoring/navigating, holds, and approaches. However, more often than not,
I found it frustrating and a waste of time.

It was interesting and sort of helpful -- several times I got controllers
that were on the ball and handled me in a realistic way (I asked them to
assign me a hold and for practice approach clearances), yet some were
interrupted by phone calls, their children, etc. so often that it was just
not worth the time. It's a forum for simulator pilots and controllers in
training, so you find all sorts of levels of competency. Also, the
controllers in my area don't come on at regular times, so it's really a "hit
or miss" proposition for me to find one that will give me what I want. By
the time I got myself organized for the flight, often times the
controller(s) I wanted to speak with had logged off...

It's indeed a cute idea, and it CAN work pretty good. But, "I've been there
and done that" just about describes it for me after a week or two of trying
it out...

"Tune2828" > wrote in message
...
> what's the retail on this? sorry if question's been asked already
>
> anyone ever use vatsim?
>
> http://www.vatsim.net/
>
> let's you link up with other sim pilots, and some play controller. -so if
you
> fly from DEN-LAX, you have real people vectoring you / sequencing finals,
etc
> the whole trip. i've perused their site but never have time to learn and
> download whatever i needed - but i like i think the concept's pretty cool