Simulators

wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Only for a subset of things that do not require actual flight to teach,
such as how to do real flight planning.

Hardly anything requires actual flight to teach.

If that nonsense were true the US Air Force wouldn't have a fleet of
primary trainers.

Irrelevant to your contention that hardly anything requires actual flight
to teach.

Teaching actual flight obviously requires actual flight to teach or the
US Air Force wouldn't be using actual flight to teach actual flight.

The leaders of the Air Force aren't delusional like you are.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Nope.

Yup. Different aircraft taxi in different ways, and this is simulated,
particularly by add-on aircraft.

That wasn't what the nope was about.

The nope was nope, MSFS doesn't taxi in any airplane like a real airplane.

Irrelevant; that the C-172 doesn't is sufficient to prove the point.

I'm afraid not. You would know this if you had flown a large selection of
aircraft in the sim.

I'm afraid so. You would know this if you had ever actually done anything
at the controls of a real airplane.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

What part of "tends to sharpen attention, and increase the heart rate" do
you not understand?

As I've explaind, if you need a risk of death to sharpen your attention,
there's something wrong. A disciplined pilot pays careful attention whether
his life is on the line or not, and he does it without tachycardia.

As usual the point goes right over your delusional head, much like a real
airplane.

Very carefully, obviously.

How do you determine which is riskier: actually doing a dangerous maneuver in
order to learn how to recover from it, or learning to avoid it and/or learning
something else in its place?

Statistics from real life, obviously, though you are starting from the
false premise that there is such a thing as "a dangerous maneuver" that
requires training to perform.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On May 16, 8:29*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
WRONG.

I'm sure the NTSB will mention this in its report.

They say the last words of many private pilots before an accident are often
"Watch this!"

It is unfortunate that even when you have something of value to
contribute to these endless argumentative threads involving you, your
glaringly obvious bias against pilots takes control over your comment.
Some of what you have said concerning the value of simulation in
teaching emergency procedures holds truth but your argument is
weakened by your bias.
Dudley Henriques

"birdog" wrote

To MX: Son, you're way too defensive. And (in my humble opinion) taking
this MS simulator much too seriously. There's absolutely nothing wrong
with sim-flying as a harmless hobby. But you're trying to interlace it
with the real thing too rigidly, and thin out the dividing line.

That's nothing, but the tip of the "reality is lost" iceberg.

Ever hear about all the planes he pretends to own, or all of the flights he
takes for his customers?
How about how he waits at the airport for his customers to show up, and
sometimes he has to wait for the customer to arrive late?
How about bloging about all of this stuff, and about how he flies the entire
trip in real time, even in hours long flights?
Think I'm making all of this up? Not at all. It is out there in e world.
What I have put down here is just a couple of many things that show the loss
of reality. Perhaps 2% of it. It goes on and on.

How about how he always ends up a thread telling a pilot how the pilot had
handled a situation wrongly, and that his way was the correct way. Wait and
see. Every thread ends up going that way, eventually.

Your response to him was a waste of your time. He will not take any of
your advice, admit that you may be correct, or learn anything. After all,
his intellect is superior to yours, and to anyone else's intellect falls
short of his. If you don't believe him, just ask him. He will be glad to
tell you how much better he is, and how much smarter he is than you, or
anyone else that posts here, or that doesn't post here. That really narrows
it down, doesn't it?

Now I have wasted way too much time. I hope you go look up some of what I
have sent here, to confirm it for yourself. Perhaps then you will agree
that responding to him is a waste of time, any you and others will spend
your energy on other posters and other endeavors.

Have a good one!
--
Jim in NC

writes:

Irrelevant to your contention that hardly anything requires actual flight
to teach.

Teaching actual flight obviously requires actual flight to teach or the
US Air Force wouldn't be using actual flight to teach actual flight.

Hardly anything isn't the same as not at all.

So how much time do they spend in class, and how much time do they spend in
the air?

writes:

The nope was nope, MSFS doesn't taxi in any airplane like a real airplane.

You've tried every single airplane available for MSFS to verify this?

I'm afraid so. You would know this if you had ever actually done anything
at the controls of a real airplane.

Real pilots disagree with you, at least a number of them whom I've talked to.
Sometimes having a large and heavy chip on the shoulder can distort the
perception of simulated realism.

Dudley Henriques writes:

It is unfortunate that even when you have something of value to
contribute to these endless argumentative threads involving you, your
glaringly obvious bias against pilots takes control over your comment.

I have no bias against pilots. I just know that many of them aren't nearly as
expert in aviation as they'd like to believe, especially the low-time PPLs
that seem to haunt this group (or at least seem to be the most prolific
posters).

writes:

Statistics from real life, obviously, though you are starting from the
false premise that there is such a thing as "a dangerous maneuver" that
requires training to perform.

What would you call a spin?

Morgans writes:

Ever hear about all the planes he pretends to own, or all of the flights he
takes for his customers?
How about how he waits at the airport for his customers to show up, and
sometimes he has to wait for the customer to arrive late?
How about bloging about all of this stuff, and about how he flies the entire
trip in real time, even in hours long flights?

You seem surprised. What do you think simulation is all about, exactly?

How about how he always ends up a thread telling a pilot how the pilot had
handled a situation wrongly, and that his way was the correct way. Wait and
see. Every thread ends up going that way, eventually.

That is not true.

Your response to him was a waste of your time. He will not take any of
your advice, admit that you may be correct, or learn anything. After all,
his intellect is superior to yours, and to anyone else's intellect falls
short of his. If you don't believe him, just ask him. He will be glad to
tell you how much better he is, and how much smarter he is than you, or
anyone else that posts here, or that doesn't post here.

That isn't true, either.

Now I have wasted way too much time.

How many times will you say that before you stop "wasting your time"?

I hope you go look up some of what I
have sent here, to confirm it for yourself. Perhaps then you will agree
that responding to him is a waste of time, any you and others will spend
your energy on other posters and other endeavors.

You've wasted a staggering amount of time, by your own definition.