![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
OK, your patience please. I'm a very novice simmer.
I'm a pilot trying to clean more rust off her instrument skills than I have flight time for, since the birth of my daughter. I'm trying to use MSFS '98 to fly instrument approaches. My husband has it configured with CH products yoke and rudder pedals. I've been flying a Grumman Cheetah someone else modeled and I found on the net, since IRL I fly a Grumman Tiger and it's nice to have the power settings etc etc be fairly close to real life. The questions. 1) Allowing for my sim inexperience, the aerodynamic behavior appears to suck great big rocks. My hat is off to people who have hundreds of hours flying instrument approaches in MSFS to 2/20 standards. In particular, the pitch axis is way too twitchy. A small yoke movement will produce 1000 ft rate on the VSI without large airspeed excursions. IRL, such a rate requires 1) a larger yoke movement 2) the airspeed will be winding up (or down) fast. I thought it might just be the plane, but I tried the stock C182 and it was the same where IRL "way haul away" is the yoke MO in a C182. I tape my wrists when I'm flying one at forward CG. Are there any settings I'm missing which could "tweak" this? Any advice about setting the yoke controls to minimize this? 2) We are missing many local airports from our database (St. Louis area). The big Class D and B airports are there, but the smaller GA airports aren't. Is there a freeware or shareware source for smaller airports for FS '98 3) I would like to look at my ground track and flight profile to see how it compares to the track of the instrument approach. I found the "flight analysis" "course tracking", which is a start. But is there a way to scan back along the course? Or to compare it to a specified ground track? Is there a freeware or shareware product which will do this? (ie allow one to specify a flight path or procedure to be flown, then compare what was flown)? Or at least to display ground-based navaids and features (like runway) at a map height which will allow a decent amount of the track to be displayed? I heard mention of a product called "Nav" by Tim Wright, will this do it? If so what version do we want for FS '98 and where do we obtain it? 4) Slewing. Often where I want to be is a couple miles from a ground-based navaid which I can specify easily as a lat-long. But when I type "y" for slewing, the plane just spins around and around. Doesn't seem to respond to keyboard controls specified for slewing in different directions. Anyone else have this problem and what's the cure? Basically one thing all these questions might amount to is, should we upgrade? We skipped FS 2000 because we heard it was such a system hog. We have a pretty fast, large-memory system now, we just haven't bothered to upgrade. Should we invest in a newer sim and if so, which one? I'd like: 1) realistic flight modeling of a small GA plane, preferably a 4-place Grumman 2) a reasonably realistic and easy to set instrument panel (ie I want to be able to set radios while I'm flying, it's part of what I need to practice, not switch to a different view which blocks the instruments) 3) decent wind modeling 4) a good database of airports and navaids 5) the ability to analyse my ground track and flight profile after the flight. I could care less about "eye candy" scenery or flying fancy planes right now. But, I don't want to pay hundreds of bucks for an IFR sim which doesn't model a plane of similar performance and settings to mine and no chance of a shareware or freeware model, either. And I gotta admit, the spouse is more into "eye candy" and fancy planes when he has time to sit down at the sim. We could upgrade to MSFS 2002 or 2004 but I'd hate to do it if it would mean more airports and better scenery, but the same flight model inaccuracies. The VSI (pitch excursion) aspect of the flight modeling in particular is driving me fairly wild. Thanks for any help, Sydney |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
NAS and associated computer system | Newps | Instrument Flight Rules | 8 | August 12th 04 05:12 AM |
us air force us air force academy us air force bases air force museum us us air force rank us air force reserve adfunk | Jehad Internet | Military Aviation | 0 | February 7th 04 04:24 AM |
PC flight simulators | Bjørnar Bolsøy | Military Aviation | 178 | December 14th 03 12:14 PM |
USAF = US Amphetamine Fools | RT | Military Aviation | 104 | September 25th 03 03:17 PM |