"Ricky" wrote in message
...

During my instrument training (early 90s) I spent a lot of time in a
simulator. It was not a new, modern simulator, but it did the job.
I remember going out to the C-172 for instrument training and thinking
how glad I was that I wasn't in the sim today. The plane was like a
breath of relief. Flying the sim was hard, I remember it being more
difficult than the airplane. Induced failures were frequent, things
happened faster, and the sim was not nearly as forgiving as the
airplane.

I have never flown a MS simulator but I do wonder if the thing has the
same level of difficulty that a non-motion sim from the early 90s may
have had? The MS sim I speak of would have a basic lightplane setup
with pedals, yoke, throttle, radios, etc, in other words; as close to
a light plane as is possible in MS. It would also mean the MS sim is
flown as a pilot would be doing in gaining hours & instruction or
recurrency toward his/her instrument rating.

This post is meant for those instrument rated pilots who've flown MS
and a real sim, too, not Anthony.

Ricky

It's fun shooting approaches to minimums in a 747 into O'Hare but I can't
say MSFS has significantly added to my aviation knowledge. I learn more
reading the posts on RAP (well before all the idiots moved in).