![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Okay, I know this one has been beaten up before -- but my eyes are now
wide open to the possibilities a sim can provide. Here are a few data points for discussion: 1. IFR Flight Today I visited a friend (and fellow pilot) who heard about our new flight sim, and has set up MS Flight Sim 2004 (not the new version) to serve as an advanced instrument flight trainer. He owns an Aerostar, and has downloaded add-ons to the original program that precisely recreate his panel equipment, as well as the flight model of the Aerostar itself. He has installed this on a very fast computer, with a very nice 22" wide screen monitor. The results are quite amazing. I shot a full approach into Cedar Rapids (CID) terminating in an ILS to Rwy 9 at minimums. By the time I broke out, after flying the published procedure, I was sweating! This thing was just plain as real as it gets, and (in my rusty, haven't practiced instrument flight in a long while) I was working my butt off. He has it programmed to start with the aircraft out of trim, and with variable crosswinds throughout the approach. It's diabolically difficult, and authentic as hell. He says he uses it all the time to maintain proficiency -- and I think it would be helpful for any pilot. 2. Formation Flying He then showed me a scenario he has created with a second aircraft, the task being to fly formation with it throughout the various phases of flight. Again, the experience was as real as it could get, and quite difficult. He has attended formation school, and says that this program and scenario are dead on. Inspired, I went back to the hotel, fired up our "Kiwi" (see it he http://alexisparkinn.com/the_kiwi_is_born.htm ) and started downloading various enhancements. First was an enhanced terrain mesh that brings the detail down to 38 meters, nationwide. (This is double the detail of the default program's terrain.) Then I added another program that corrects and enhances bodies of water, roads, and lights, which are often inadequately rendered in FS2004. These two programs have allowed me to kick up the realism even higher, to the point where I can quite literally taxi to my own hangar, or fly through realistic mountain passes. Runway markings, wind socks, rotating beacons, radar (if applicable) -- it's all there now, and with a frame rate of over 55 frames per second (thanks to the new computer), the flight model is absolutely seamless and realistic. 3. Emergency Procedures I have downloaded the AOPA Cherokee Six sim model (which utilizes an exact flight model replica of a Cherokee Six), and have been using it (in lieu of a Pathfinder, which I haven't yet found on the net) to practice emergency procedures. Wow, what an amazing eye-opener THAT is. With full cockpit controls, a photo-realistic panel (on a dedicated monitor), and butter-smooth control response, it is possible to perfectly simulate engine-out scenarios that you would NEVER be able to practice in your real airplane. Specifically, I've been practicing the dreaded "return to the airport after engine failure" on takeoff, killing the engine completely at various heights and in different wind conditions. The results are truly stunning, and anyone who has flown this scenario will never, EVER try to initiate the 180-degree-turn to land that has killed so many. I'm here to tell you that it will result in a stall-spin scenario, every time... What's great is that you can actually turn the engine off -- something you can never do in a real plane -- and it's astounding the difference that makes. That idling engine is still making some power, and it's enough to completely throw off your perception of flight. Same goes with how far you THINK you can stretch your glide, with an engine out. With the engine at flight idle, you can glide MUCH farther than you can with the engine off -- and this is something that can only be demonstrated in the sim. 4. Primary Flight Training Here's where many pilots object, and I used to agree -- until we set up the Kiwi. With the 104" projection of the world, a second monitor of the panel, and authentic flight controls, I'm now prepared to say that this thing is valuable for showing newbies what flying is all about. I've been using our hotel's night manager (a fellow we've taken flying a couple of times, but who has no flight training experience) as a guinea pig, and he has really progressed nicely in just a few days of practice. Not only is he now able to land the sim reliably, but he has learned an awful lot about basic flight procedures and conditions during various portions of flight -- without burning a gallon of avgas. I think you could probably shave several hours off of your Private by practicing in the Kiwi -- and it will be invaluable to me as an instrument procedures trainer. Besides just being a helluva lot of fun, of course! -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jay Honeck writes:
Okay, I know this one has been beaten up before -- but my eyes are now wide open to the possibilities a sim can provide. Careful ... those are fighting words in this newsgroup. I shot a full approach into Cedar Rapids (CID) terminating in an ILS to Rwy 9 at minimums. I collapsed the nose gear landing at KCID just last night, after an ILS approach to runway 27. The winds were incredibly gusty. I kept getting pushed up and down as I landed. I touched down but a gust picked me back up a few feet. I got down again, landing rather hard on the main gear, but the nose gear hit a lot harder and collapsed. Only a few days earlier, in similarly gusty weather, I lost all the gear landing in fog at Logan International. I'm beginning to wonder if all the East and Midwest have winds like this all the time, or if I've just had bad luck with the weather, or if there is some mystery setting in MSFS that I've accidentally turned on that is creating unrealistic gusts of substantial strength. The weather was otherwise clear with scattered clouds at around 2600 feet last night, and a 9-knot wind from the west. Maybe with practice I'll get better. Specifically, I've been practicing the dreaded "return to the airport after engine failure" on takeoff, killing the engine completely at various heights and in different wind conditions. The results are truly stunning, and anyone who has flown this scenario will never, EVER try to initiate the 180-degree-turn to land that has killed so many. I'm here to tell you that it will result in a stall-spin scenario, every time... I've tried engine failures on a number of occasions, although mostly in the Baron. That and attempts with failures in a single-engine plane have taught me that engine failures need to be avoided at all costs. Particularly with just one engine, there's a good chance that you won't make it, period. At least that what simulations have told me. 4. Primary Flight Training Now you are definitely training on dangerous ground. I think you could probably shave several hours off of your Private by practicing in the Kiwi -- and it will be invaluable to me as an instrument procedures trainer. Oh dear. But as long as I'm here to attract most of the fire, you'll probably be moderately safe. Besides just being a helluva lot of fun, of course! That's the worst part. You're not supposed to say it's fun. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com... I've been using our hotel's night manager (a fellow we've taken flying a couple of times, but who has no flight training experience) as a guinea pig, and he has really progressed nicely in just a few days of practice. Not only is he now able to land the sim reliably, but he has learned an awful lot about basic flight procedures and conditions during various portions of flight -- without burning a gallon of avgas. What would it cost to duplicate the kiwi? How much gas could one buy for that? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
What would it cost to duplicate the kiwi? How much gas could one buy for
that? Good question. Since this is a prototype for the sim(s) we're planning to build at the Iowa Children's Museum (Google for the Big Kids Toy Show that I helped organize last spring, and you'll see why), I've been trying to keep costs as rock-bottom as possible. I haven't come to a final figure yet, but it really depends on how you slice it. For example, the projection system was something we needed for our meeting room. If that was something you bought for your home theater, would you count it as part of the sim price? Same goes for the computer -- if you've got one in your home now, should you count *that* as part of the sim? And the stereo system? I don't think so, for the purpose of this discussion. So, if we eliminate those three (admittedly big) items, we're down to the "fuselage", the flight controls, and the various extra cables (which are NOT insignificant, BTW). The flight controls are around $200. The fuselage...is anyone's guess. My A&P thinks he can build one a day, when the time comes, so figure eight hours at his shop rate, so call it $480. I scavenged the seat out of my Mustang, but any seat will do, really, and I had the 12 volt power supply (for the electric seat) sitting in my workshop for a decade. Figure an extra $100 for cables, and various other stuff I'm not thinking about. So, for around $780, you can build yourself a world-class flight sim. Eliminate the "fuselage" (you *can* sit at a desk) and you're down to $200 - $300. Add everything in, including computer, projection system, etc, and you're probably over $3500, cheapest. Basically, for 2/3rds the price of installing a GNS-430, you've recreated the world, and every aircraft in it. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Oh really. Have you flown in any clouds so you can make that statement
honestly? In my always humble opinion there is a huge difference between flying IMC for real and playing a computer game. If MSFS were "as real as it gets" then why can't your time playing be logged? Jon Jay Honeck wrote: This thing was just plain as real as it gets, and (in my rusty, haven't practiced instrument flight in a long while) I was working my butt off. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Oh really. Have you flown in any clouds so you can make that statement
honestly? In my always humble opinion there is a huge difference between flying IMC for real and playing a computer game. If MSFS were "as real as it gets" then why can't your time playing be logged? I'm not really sure, but I think it's because the sim set-up is too widely variable from person to person. For example, flying MSFS on my laptop at work using a mouse would *NOT* recreate flight in a way that would be truly meaningful. Flying the Kiwi (and some step in between) is. Since the FAA can't delineate between the two experiences, they simply disallow it. Makes sense to me, really. Basically the only way I will ever convince you is for you to come fly the damned thing. You'll be amazed, I think. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Basically the only way I will ever convince you is for you to come fly
the damned thing. You'll be amazed, I think. I'd like to see what Mx would think. ![]() Jose -- "There are 3 secrets to the perfect landing. Unfortunately, nobody knows what they are." - (mike). for Email, make the obvious change in the address. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() I think I have to agree with Jon. Flying a non precision approach in heavy rain, down to minimums, knowing that every decision you make might kill you and your passenger... that's real. Flying a simulator in your conference room is just helpful for learning procedures, not matter how "real" you try and make it. That said, practicing the procedures is probably well worth it. Jay Honeck wrote: Oh really. Have you flown in any clouds so you can make that statement honestly? In my always humble opinion there is a huge difference between flying IMC for real and playing a computer game. If MSFS were "as real as it gets" then why can't your time playing be logged? I'm not really sure, but I think it's because the sim set-up is too widely variable from person to person. For example, flying MSFS on my laptop at work using a mouse would *NOT* recreate flight in a way that would be truly meaningful. Flying the Kiwi (and some step in between) is. Since the FAA can't delineate between the two experiences, they simply disallow it. Makes sense to me, really. Basically the only way I will ever convince you is for you to come fly the damned thing. You'll be amazed, I think. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" -- Jay Masino "Home is where My critters are" http://www.JayMasino.com http://www.OceanCityAirport.com http://www.oc-Adolfos.com |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jay Masino writes:
I think I have to agree with Jon. Flying a non precision approach in heavy rain, down to minimums, knowing that every decision you make might kill you and your passenger... that's real. Spoken like someone who hasn't been in a good simulator. Someone who has actually done this in a simulator a few times will be a lot better equipped to face it in real life, should he ever have to. Someone who shuns simulators because he thinks the experience doesn't count unless he's sick with fear is going to be caught completely off guard when bad things happen, and not only will he be terrified of making the wrong move, he won't know what the right move is supposed to be. Besides, as I've already said, the best pilots are the least emotional pilots. If you're frothing at the mouth with emotion in some delicate situation aloft, you're going to make mistakes no matter how good you are. Contrary to what you might think from watching movies or reading novels, the more emotional you are in an emergency, the more likely you are to die. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Mxsmanic" wrote in message ... Jay Masino writes: I think I have to agree with Jon. Flying a non precision approach in heavy rain, down to minimums, knowing that every decision you make might kill you and your passenger... that's real. Spoken like someone who hasn't been in a good simulator. Tell us Anthony, Have you EVER been in a certified flight training device or is your personal experience limited to PC flight simulators? |
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 |
FLIGHT SIMULATOR X DELUXE 2006-2007 (SIMULATION) 1DVD,Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004, and Addons, FLITESTAR V8.51 - JEPPESEN, MapInfo StreetPro U.S.A. [11 CDs], Rand McNally StreetFinder & TripMaker Deluxe 2004 [3 CDs], other | T.E.L. | Simulators | 0 | October 14th 06 09:08 PM |
CRS: V-22 Osprey Tilt-Rotor Aircraft | Mike | Naval Aviation | 0 | August 30th 06 02:11 PM |
Mini-500 Accident Analysis | Dennis Fetters | Rotorcraft | 16 | September 3rd 05 11:35 AM |
Washington DC airspace closing for good? | tony roberts | Piloting | 153 | August 11th 05 12:56 AM |