![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I am just starting my Instrument rating,
and I believe that a good PC based flight simulator would help shorten the learning curve. What simulators would this group reccomend? I hava older versions of X-plane (V6) and MSFS2002. I have a high performance PC so I should be able to run whatever is availible. I've tried the C172 in both sims. MSFS2002 the VSI is way too fast and the plane is way too stable. XPlane, the plane feels about right, the only complaint is the turn gyro is way too twitchy. Anyone have comments on later version of either of these sims? Paul (Yes I know that a PC based simulator time can not be logged) |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I haven't used some of the more modern software, but I did
use MSFS-98 to train on procedure and situational awareness. Having achieved my instrument rating, I feel that the most important part of my simulated training involved commiting the scan and situational awareness to "muscle memory". This frees up a great deal of cycles for looking at charts, pacifying the toddler in my lap, answer questions from my wife in the next room, etc. without interfering with my ability to conduct an approach down to minimums. Additionally, achieving the ability to inject the appropriate control input to the airplane as an automatic response to what I saw on the instruments (even on partial panel) was also easily accomplished on neanderthal technology given enough hours spent in front of the screen. As such, I wouldn't get too hung-up on what you use as a "simulator". I bought some other software (which has more accurate flight models and better lateral/vertical recording capabilities, and cost more than MSFS) and that software really didn't augment my basic abilities. The critical skills, in my opinion, boiled down to using the minimal amount of cycles to control the airplane and use the remaining cycles to talk on the radio, read charts, change the baby's diaper, etc. (yes, I did that while configured for a stabilized approach on the sim.) Not realistic, as I used the entire room which is substantially larger than the cockpit of a C172. My $0.02 ... --Don wrote: I am just starting my Instrument rating, and I believe that a good PC based flight simulator would help shorten the learning curve. What simulators would this group reccomend? I hava older versions of X-plane (V6) and MSFS2002. I have a high performance PC so I should be able to run whatever is availible. I've tried the C172 in both sims. MSFS2002 the VSI is way too fast and the plane is way too stable. XPlane, the plane feels about right, the only complaint is the turn gyro is way too twitchy. Anyone have comments on later version of either of these sims? Paul (Yes I know that a PC based simulator time can not be logged) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
So how important is the input device, then? Did you use yoke/pedals or a joystick or the dreaded keyboard/mouse?
Donald Ramsey wrote: I haven't used some of the more modern software, but I did use MSFS-98 to train on procedure and situational awareness. Having achieved my instrument rating, I feel that the most important part of my simulated training involved commiting the scan and situational awareness to "muscle memory". This frees up a great deal of cycles for looking at charts, pacifying the toddler in my lap, answer questions from my wife in the next room, etc. without interfering with my ability to conduct an approach down to minimums. Additionally, achieving the ability to inject the appropriate control input to the airplane as an automatic response to what I saw on the instruments (even on partial panel) was also easily accomplished on neanderthal technology given enough hours spent in front of the screen. As such, I wouldn't get too hung-up on what you use as a "simulator". I bought some other software (which has more accurate flight models and better lateral/vertical recording capabilities, and cost more than MSFS) and that software really didn't augment my basic abilities. The critical skills, in my opinion, boiled down to using the minimal amount of cycles to control the airplane and use the remaining cycles to talk on the radio, read charts, change the baby's diaper, etc. (yes, I did that while configured for a stabilized approach on the sim.) Not realistic, as I used the entire room which is substantially larger than the cockpit of a C172. My $0.02 ... --Don |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I did use a CH yoke and pedals -- the yoke was pretty important IMO
as it helped ingrain the proper muscle action. For IFR stuff, I didn't find the pedals all that important. --Don Fred E. Pate wrote: So how important is the input device, then? Did you use yoke/pedals or a joystick or the dreaded keyboard/mouse? Donald Ramsey wrote: I haven't used some of the more modern software, but I did use MSFS-98 to train on procedure and situational awareness. Having achieved my instrument rating, I feel that the most important part of my simulated training involved commiting the scan and situational awareness to "muscle memory". This frees up a great deal of cycles for looking at charts, pacifying the toddler in my lap, answer questions from my wife in the next room, etc. without interfering with my ability to conduct an approach down to minimums. Additionally, achieving the ability to inject the appropriate control input to the airplane as an automatic response to what I saw on the instruments (even on partial panel) was also easily accomplished on neanderthal technology given enough hours spent in front of the screen. As such, I wouldn't get too hung-up on what you use as a "simulator". I bought some other software (which has more accurate flight models and better lateral/vertical recording capabilities, and cost more than MSFS) and that software really didn't augment my basic abilities. The critical skills, in my opinion, boiled down to using the minimal amount of cycles to control the airplane and use the remaining cycles to talk on the radio, read charts, change the baby's diaper, etc. (yes, I did that while configured for a stabilized approach on the sim.) Not realistic, as I used the entire room which is substantially larger than the cockpit of a C172. My $0.02 ... --Don |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I have MSFS2002 and I'll ask you a question. You say the plane is too
stable and your next line says the VSI is too sensitive and fast? This means the plane is NOT stable. Stability means the plane oscillates gently in pitch and after a few oscillations stabilizes on it's own and returns to level flight. On my computer I can't keep the damn thing on heading or altitude. I don't care how I trim it or adjust my joystick (and once owned the CH Products Yoke and Pro Pedals), it always wants to turn left or right. You are correct that the pitch is WAY too sensitive and the VSI make wild fluctuations. I tried adjusting the sensitivities and no joy on improvement. Anyone else have other experiences. Kobra wrote in message ... I am just starting my Instrument rating, and I believe that a good PC based flight simulator would help shorten the learning curve. What simulators would this group reccomend? I hava older versions of X-plane (V6) and MSFS2002. I have a high performance PC so I should be able to run whatever is availible. I've tried the C172 in both sims. MSFS2002 the VSI is way too fast and the plane is way too stable. XPlane, the plane feels about right, the only complaint is the turn gyro is way too twitchy. Anyone have comments on later version of either of these sims? Paul (Yes I know that a PC based simulator time can not be logged) |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Kobra" said:
I have MSFS2002 and I'll ask you a question. You say the plane is too stable and your next line says the VSI is too sensitive and fast? The VSI needle in FS04 is much more responsive than the real thing - too responsive. It seems to translate pitch changes instantly into vertical speed. A real 172 VSI lags for about 5-7 seconds before stabilizing on vertical speed indication. Not a huge deal if you pay due attention to the altimeter, but it can be distracting. I don't think the original poster was connecting the stability of the model with the overly sensitive VSI. Two separate issues. On my computer I can't keep the damn thing on heading or altitude. I don't care how I trim it or adjust my joystick (and once owned the CH Products Yoke and Pro Pedals), it always wants to turn left or right. You are correct that the pitch is WAY too sensitive and the VSI make wild fluctuations. I tried adjusting the sensitivities and no joy on improvement. I agree. Occasionally, I've ben able to get into a groove and stabilize nicely but not very often. I use the CH pedals and rudder and have played with the sensitivity and null zone settings to no avail. Can't find anything that satisfies me. The other night I tried flying the Baron and all surfaces - elevator especially - seemed ridiculously sensitive to control input. -Scott |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 20:50:35 -0700, Pau wrote:
I am just starting my Instrument rating, and I believe that a good PC based flight simulator would help shorten the learning curve. What simulators would this group reccomend? I have been pretty happy with Flight Simulator. I requires a much faster scan than in most planes, but that is a good thing. jerry |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi there
FS2004 (as all previous incarnations) have been a good BASE for working..2004 is a great improvement on previous , particularly weather and graphics....as for flight models It is the addons that make it.... For flight models , try Dreamfleets Archer , http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/ and Kangan's real air 172. http://www.realairsimulations.com/ ..both VERY accurate models and panels For IFR work , try Enrico Schirattis IFR panel...which can also be run on a second machine....SUPERB.. http://www.projectmagenta.com/products/ifrpanel.html I use this all the time to practice currency for IFR Hope that helps.. Bill Padley London The good stuff IS there....you just need to find it "Jerry Kurata" wrote in message news ![]() On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 20:50:35 -0700, Pau wrote: I am just starting my Instrument rating, and I believe that a good PC based flight simulator would help shorten the learning curve. What simulators would this group reccomend? I have been pretty happy with Flight Simulator. I requires a much faster scan than in most planes, but that is a good thing. jerry |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
It depends what you want to practice. If it's instrument scan and aircraft
control, then you'll want two things in a PC simulator: 1) good flight model and 2) good instrument frame rates. For this, the X-Plane series is great. ASA's OnTop and Intrument Trainer are good too. They also all have realistic turbulence effects. Most people who've flown in IMC can atest that bumps in the clouds are more of a rule than an exception. I have tried Jeppesen's sim as well as Elite and I like ASA's for their simplicity, frame rates, price and turbulence effect. Jepp's turbulence is unusable. Flight Simulator 2004 is good for the ATC practice. It also gives you a good idea of what an approach to minimums actually looks like. X-Plane does too. None of the PC sims let you practice radio operations while bumping around in turbulence while barreling down an approach which (for me) creates a challenge in my own plane. You can spend a few (OK a lot) extra dollars on the PCATD hardware to get that practice but that's up to you. Most models in ASA's sims require you to click on a button to get the radio stack up and that makes the drawback even worse. They do have a good playback feature that let's you review your track with a convenient view of what your instruments looked like during the approach. Lotsa good stuff out there. I would download the available demos and take a look-see for yourself. YMMV Marco wrote in message ... I am just starting my Instrument rating, and I believe that a good PC based flight simulator would help shorten the learning curve. What simulators would this group reccomend? I hava older versions of X-plane (V6) and MSFS2002. I have a high performance PC so I should be able to run whatever is availible. I've tried the C172 in both sims. MSFS2002 the VSI is way too fast and the plane is way too stable. XPlane, the plane feels about right, the only complaint is the turn gyro is way too twitchy. Anyone have comments on later version of either of these sims? Paul (Yes I know that a PC based simulator time can not be logged) Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services ---------------------------------------------------------- ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY ** ---------------------------------------------------------- http://www.usenet.com |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Any simulator that allows you to practice your procedures is good - I
wouldn't expect any of the pc based sims to be anything like a plane or a device that you can count toward flight sim time. I just got FS2004 and borrowed a yoke - it seems to be ok - the bells and whistles are more than I need for practicing and ingraining the procedures I have been taught. However, either there are problems with the software or I haven't figured out how to use it the way I want. For example, I try to file from an airport to another using VOR/airways, but when I start flying, the program always tries to give me direct. I can use the VORs, but it is unclear to me how to see the desired route as airways. I also have to keep telling the controllers that I want to fly the entire procedures - they always try to give me vectors to an approach. Also, and this is definitely a defect in the software, but I caught the problem and it reinforced good habits of what I was taught... I was given ILS 24 to KISP. I did not have that approach in front of me so I asked for ILS 6 (or vice versa). I was cleared for the full approach that I asked for. however, when I tuned in the ILS (both are the same freq) I got the identifier for the one that I refused and the color sector/needle was all wrong. Seems to me a problem with the software, but maybe not - maybe they wanted it that way. wrote in message ... I am just starting my Instrument rating, and I believe that a good PC based flight simulator would help shorten the learning curve. What simulators would this group reccomend? I hava older versions of X-plane (V6) and MSFS2002. I have a high performance PC so I should be able to run whatever is availible. I've tried the C172 in both sims. MSFS2002 the VSI is way too fast and the plane is way too stable. XPlane, the plane feels about right, the only complaint is the turn gyro is way too twitchy. Anyone have comments on later version of either of these sims? Paul (Yes I know that a PC based simulator time can not be logged) |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
MS Flight Simulator for $4.99 | Rich S. | Home Built | 0 | November 4th 04 04:50 PM |
Boeing 747 Simulator plans - help? | Nippoo | Home Built | 9 | September 29th 04 05:19 PM |
Flight Simulator 2004 pro 4CDs, Eurowings 2004, Sea Plane Adventures, Concorde, HONG KONG 2004, World Airlines, other Addons, Sky Ranch, Jumbo 747, Greece 2000 [include El.Venizelos], Polynesia 2000, Real Airports, Private Wings, FLITESTAR V8.5 - JEP | vvcd | Home Built | 0 | September 22nd 04 07:16 PM |
IPC in a Simulator? Phoenix area.. | Anonymous | Instrument Flight Rules | 5 | August 28th 03 11:31 PM |
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004 | TripFarmer | Instrument Flight Rules | 7 | August 8th 03 05:19 PM |