MS Flight Sim As a Training Tool

It's not a matter of logged or not... the reality is that MSFS on your
everyday home computer will cost you 50 bucks... (or 5 bucks if you buy
the previous one) and the overall introduction that you get to seeing
how the instruments work and trying things that you're told about from
your instructor at home can save you thousands on flight training.

Can you log it? No, for one the flight models are rubbish.

Is it worth paying 5 bucks to a student who can take flight simulator
and see what they can do about flying approaches, especially DME arcs
etc on a sim, which they can pause and see whats going on, instead of
doing it cold turkey in an airplane the first time burning valuable
time and too busy doing the next thing before they grasp the last
thing? Yeah, the 5 bucks goes a long way.

Personally, I've been saving some money (in the line of several
thousands) to make a complete mock-up of a stationary flight simulator
for an ATR-42 and ATR-72.

Why? Pure fun I guess, plus it's a great way to get people interested
in aviation. If you are interested in seeing what can be done using
just flight simulator as a tool take a look at a company called project
magenta (google it to find their website), if you were to add a
hydraulic system to what they do it could be considered the same sort
of full motion simulator I did my Dash-8 training on.

Can you log it? No, for one the flight models are rubbish.

Actually, I've found this is NOT true. What I *thought* were bad
flight models was actually the computer lagging just a split
millisecond behind my control inputs. It was imperceptible, and
everything *looked* smooth -- but it was obviously there.

When we hooked everything up to a truly world-class computer, the
impact was immediate and everyone noticed it. Suddenly, the "flight
models" were dead-on, because the controls were finally responding in
real time.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Really?

Spin the plane, stall it and put it in a spin... the models are not
full, it won't do a spin.

wrote:
Really?

Spin the plane, stall it and put it in a spin... the models are not
full, it won't do a spin.


I'm not a pilot, but there add-on aircraft that according to their
developers will spin. The description for the (free) RealAir Cessna 172
specifically states that "it will side-slip and spin".

writes:

Really?

Spin the plane, stall it and put it in a spin... the models are not
full, it won't do a spin.

Add-ons will spin. I don't know about the built-in planes.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Really?

Spin the plane, stall it and put it in a spin... the models are not
full, it won't do a spin.

Interesting statement. I've stalled and spun the AOPA Cherokee Six in
half a dozen times, trying to return to the runway after the engine
stalled.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

wrote in message
ps.com...
Really?

Spin the plane, stall it and put it in a spin... the models are not
full, it won't do a spin.

Neither will the Arrow II that I fly. At least, it's not approved for
spins. So what's the difference?

-c

wrote:
Really?

Spin the plane, stall it and put it in a spin... the models are not
full, it won't do a spin.


The Maule in FSX spins like a champ (not to be confused with "like a
Champ", though they may in fact spin in a similar manner). I think spins
have been possible since FS98 in fact. I've been flying since MS95, and
I get some of the previous versions mixed up in my head.

MSFS was a great tool for helping me knock out my private ticket
quickly. I've heard some simmers transition to *real* airplanes and have
a problem looking out the window (they get gauge fixation). I've always
been a big fan of the hat switch on my joystick and like looking outside
as much as scanning the gauges.

Here are a few screenshots I've taken:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pixelra...7594322710096/

Happy landings,

Randy
KSTS, Sonoma County CA
PPSEL

Jay Honeck writes:

Actually, I've found this is NOT true. What I *thought* were bad
flight models was actually the computer lagging just a split
millisecond behind my control inputs. It was imperceptible, and
everything *looked* smooth -- but it was obviously there.

The sensitivity adjustments in MSFS produce a lag. That is, when you
set the control sensitivity low, what MSFS actually does is lag the
response to controls, so they seem less "sensitive." If you want
instant response, dial the sensitivity up to maximum on all controls.

When we hooked everything up to a truly world-class computer, the
impact was immediate and everyone noticed it. Suddenly, the "flight
models" were dead-on, because the controls were finally responding in
real time.

I suppose that's a factor, too. If you are getting less than 25
frames per second, the controls are probably lagging to some extent,
although the frame lag is worse.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.