A real life pilot's first sim experience

The deal is this: I wanted to fly a loop in my M20J for a long time,
but it's hard to get around the 30 degree pitch limitation
certifications and do a loop. isn't it?

MSFS2004 offers an M20M Bravo! And Comp USA is selling that program
for less than $20.

So the four disks came in a couple of days ago, and got loaded into my
laptop. Problem 1: no number pad for pitch and bank. I messed around
with the C172 model and found the up down, left and right arrows did
all of that, although I did not locate a key for return to neutral.

OK, so I played student pilot and F3ed full throttle in a 172, figured
out how to take off and land. TT maybe 15 minutes, and not an
enriching experience.

Loaded in the M20M Bravo. This beast gets yanked around the sky with a
IO 540, my 201 does it with a IO 360. Lots more fuel usage, and a lot
more airplane than I can afford in RL. Never the less, I called up
KBED RR 29, and there I was, at the controls, position and hold!

Neat. No checklist at hand, so I did the best I could with cowl flaps,
wing flaps, trim, fuel pump, and the like, so it looked like this
airplane just might fly. Hold down F3, RPMs came up nicely, and
nothing happened! Message flashed -- parking brake is set, press . to
release.

What frigging pilot pulls onto the active and sets the parking brake?

OK, I put a period to the program, and started to roll, feet twitching
because with an IO 540 this thing should want to turn really badly --
in the M20J I used rudder mostly to keep it on centerline during the
early part of the takeoff roll, figured my little left and right
arrows would have to do the job here.

The Bravo tracked straight down the centerline without any help from
me! This is supposed to be an accurate simulation, with no P effects?
Gimme a break.

OK, I down arrowed at 70 kts -- this takes a lot more rotation (read
that as down arrow) than did the 172, I don't think I broke free until
about 90, way too fast!

Set up a straight ahead climb right out the 11 localizer, my memory
claimed the student practice area was a bit to the north of the 11 29
extended centerline.

Is there anything more boring than watching a simulated climb to 7000
feet? Like watching grass grow.

My plan was to reach altitude, dive the thing down at 45 degrees, let
the speed climb to top of the green, then hold down the down arrow,
and when I was at the top of the loop close the throttle, pray a
little, and try to recover smoothly at the bottom. Guys who have flown
aerobatics know the way you do them is look at the horizon to the
side. I worried about that a little, since the side image was going to
be in front of me, but it turned out to be a non issue. I couldn't
figure out how to get that side view.

The hell with it. I pushed over, and the speed went up really fast!
Mooneys are aerodynamicly clean GA airplanes. I downarrowed (which
means yoke in my lap, I think) and watched the windscreen view change
from ground to sky, saw the AH tumble, saw the ground in the top half
of the windscreen, closed the throttle, and somewhere near the bottom
went forward stick. It was NOT pretty. I didn't have that side view I
wanted. I still don't know how at one point I wound up in a 60 degree
bank! Never the less, I got back to straight and level, and remember
having started the dive from 7000 feet was more than a little suprised
to find the airplane was at a simulated altitude of 5500.

The guy who showed me some things in a 150 Aerobat would have been
ashamed of me. Never the less, I did a loop.

About then the phone rang, and a friend suggested I meet with him and
a few others for lunch. That sounded good.

The sim was paused 30 miles or so from BED, After I got back to my
home office there were some other matters that needed attention and
computer memory. Exit sim

That's it. It was as fulfilling an experience for me as eating cotton
candy -- there just wasn't much there. It simply didn't provide the
kinds of feedback I'd want, and I'm not going to buy a yoke with force
feedback and rudder peddles (sims who use a joystick instead of a yoke
in airplanes that come with yokes are another step removed from at
least what is my reality.

For those of you who get pleasure from the MSFS, more power to you. It
did not work for me. There is a possiblity my mind has been poisoned
to the sim experience, but probably not, I hoped it might be fun ro do
on late nights. Oh well, it was a $20 experiment. The good news is,
that was cheap. Most of my 'experiments' cost a lot more than that.
Want to know how to burn some VC's couple million in a startup
venture? Talk to me!

On 2/28/2007 4:18:20 PM, "Tony" wrote:


The Bravo tracked straight down the centerline without any help from
me! This is supposed to be an accurate simulation, with no P effects?
Gimme a break.

You need to set the aircraft realism settings to "difficult" for the P effect
for the aircraft to require hard right rudder on takeoff. I believe out of
the box that these settings are set to "easy" since the typical non-pilot sim
pilot is unaware of many aspects of real life flying.

--
Peter

Peter R. writes:

You need to set the aircraft realism settings to "difficult" for the P effect
for the aircraft to require hard right rudder on takeoff. I believe out of
the box that these settings are set to "easy" since the typical non-pilot sim
pilot is unaware of many aspects of real life flying.

Yes, and I've heard that the simulator actually exaggerates these effects if
you set the realism all the way up. Most of the add-ons for the sim recommend
high settings for all the realism parameters except P force and torque, which
are set about mid-way to the maximum.

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

"Tony" wrote

For those of you who get pleasure from the MSFS, more power to you. It
did not work for me. There is a possiblity my mind has been poisoned
to the sim experience, but probably not, I hoped it might be fun ro do
on late nights. Oh well, it was a $20 experiment. The good news is,
that was cheap. Most of my 'experiments' cost a lot more than that.
Want to know how to burn some VC's couple million in a startup
venture? Talk to me!

Mx is a mentally disturbed person; I think most can agree with that.

My question is, why in h*ll did you post that whole sim garbage post? You,
as a real pilot, should know that this is not the correct place for it, and
all it can possibly do is to attract more sim nuts and sim discussion, that
most of us very strongly do NOT want HERE!

Please think, next time.
--
Jim in NC

On 2/28/2007 4:42:05 PM, "Morgans" wrote:

and
all it can possibly do is to attract more sim nuts and sim discussion, that
most of us very strongly do NOT want HERE!

Am I a sim nut for answering his post? Uh, oh.

--
Peter

"Peter R." wrote in message
...
On 2/28/2007 4:42:05 PM, "Morgans" wrote:

and
all it can possibly do is to attract more sim nuts and sim discussion,
that
most of us very strongly do NOT want HERE!

Am I a sim nut for answering his post? Uh, oh.

I had rather you not, and that's just me; one out of hundreds, but what the
heck - so much of that is going on - who can tell! g

I guess that is my point. I don't think that either of you are sim nuts, or
have difficulty understanding the difference (and reality issues) between
real flying and simming. That title is very secure in another's holding.

We need (IMHO) to try and get away from the sim postings. This group is
losing their identity - and fast.

A long post entirely about simming belongs in the sim group. That's all.
Simple concept.
--
Jim in NC

On Wed, 28 Feb 2007 21:21:05 -0500, "Morgans"
wrote:


"Peter R." wrote in message
m...
On 2/28/2007 4:42:05 PM, "Morgans" wrote:

and
all it can possibly do is to attract more sim nuts and sim discussion,
that
most of us very strongly do NOT want HERE!

Am I a sim nut for answering his post? Uh, oh.

I had rather you not, and that's just me; one out of hundreds, but what the
heck - so much of that is going on - who can tell! g

I guess that is my point. I don't think that either of you are sim nuts, or
have difficulty understanding the difference (and reality issues) between
real flying and simming. That title is very secure in another's holding.

We need (IMHO) to try and get away from the sim postings. This group is
losing their identity - and fast.

A long post entirely about simming belongs in the sim group. That's all.
Simple concept.
Hey! With the weather we've been having the Deb hasn't been out of the
hangar in 6 weeks and I've been suffering withdrawal for 5 1/2.

I have been working on the elevator for the G-III, but keep finding
reasons (procrastinating) for not closing one side.

Then I had to replace the HD in my wife's computer which was supposed
to be simple. Just take the one out of the shop being replaced by the
new one, but things are never as simple as they should be. Two weeks
later, her's is working, and I've rebuilt the new one in the shop
twice. Now I only have to repair the OS on this machine and the one
beside it.

The thing about working on the shop computer is its next to the G-III
making the G-III difficult to ignore which is slowly, oh so slowly
causing me to get some work done on the G-III. Of course there are the
plugs that need cleaning on the Deb ...Maybe I'd better call the guy
who cleans the ramp. We are supposed to have some warm weather coming
and I gotta put some hours on the engine before the annual. I gotta
put some hours on me!


Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Tony writes:

What frigging pilot pulls onto the active and sets the parking brake?

What pilot misses it during the checklist?

The Bravo tracked straight down the centerline without any help from
me! This is supposed to be an accurate simulation, with no P effects?

What realism settings did you use? By default they are set very low, and P
forces are absent. This allows inexperienced pilots to fly without too much
disappointing failure.

That's it. It was as fulfilling an experience for me as eating cotton
candy -- there just wasn't much there.

You sound eerily like that reporter who blew off flying after one exaggerated
report of an introductory ride with an instructor.

I guess if you've decided before you start, you're unlikely to change your
mind.

But if you like the sensations and feedback of a real aircraft, you might not
be very happy with simulation overall. Still, given the choice between a sim
and nothing at all, I suspect you'd choose the sim, as many pilots do when a
real aircraft is not readily at hand.

... sims who use a joystick instead of a yoke
in airplanes that come with yokes are another step removed from at
least what is my reality.

But not from a fighter aircraft, Cirrus, or Airbus.

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

On Feb 28, 4:48 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

But if you like the sensations and feedback of a real aircraft, you might not
be very happy with simulation overall. Still, given the choice between a sim
and nothing at all, I suspect you'd choose the sim, as many pilots do when a
real aircraft is not readily at hand.

Yes, I use MSFS as an occasional substitute for my Cherokee 180 when I
can't fly for real. I use the default Cessna 172, it's not bad,
except that no matter how I adjust the sensitivity settings, the
rudder is WAY too sensitive compared to my Cherokee or 172s that I've
flown. Is there anything else to try?

wrote in message
oups.com...
Yes, I use MSFS as an occasional substitute for my Cherokee 180 when I
can't fly for real. I use the default Cessna 172, it's not bad,
except that no matter how I adjust the sensitivity settings, the
rudder is WAY too sensitive compared to my Cherokee or 172s that I've
flown. Is there anything else to try?

Try the RealAir 172. It's freeware, and is supposed to be about as close to
realistic dynamics as is possible with the program. I have it and fly it
often. I can't fly a real 172, so I can't say if it's real or not, but
certainly seems better than the default.
Oz Lander