Why don't voice radio communications use FM?

B A R R Y writes:

As someone who's done both, I totally disagree about 100% accuracy of
simulators ...

I said "the parts of flying I like," not "everything."

... outside of the $50+ million dollar jobbies used in
professional training.

I would like to have one of those.

Even the best PC based simulators are simply games.

No more so than the best $50-million simulators. The "games" on PCs
are better than the very best simulators available not so many years
ago.

I'm truly sorry that you don't realize what you're missing.

I realize what I'm missing, and it doesn't justify the time or money
that would be required to enjoy it. As I've said, a simulator can
provide most of what I like about aviation. Of course, the better the
simulator, the more fun it is, although there is a point of
diminishing returns where it becomes just as awkward as a real
aircraft in terms of time and money.

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

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
As a pilot, only in simulation. As a passenger, only when absolutely
necessary.

In other words, because magnetic navigation is too difficult for you to
understand, you expect the rest of us to accomodate you... Did you perhaps
used to be a WebTV user?

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
The parts of flying that I like can be mostly simulated with 100%
accuracy, at much lower cost and much higher convenience than a real
aircraft. For example, I like to fly IFR, and I scarcely need a real
aircraft for that; even a full-motion simulator isn't required,
although it would be nice.

And how many times have you crashed your little simulator game? Guess
what... You don't usually get multiple attempts at life when you're flying a
REAL aircraft...

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
B A R R Y writes:

Sorry, but you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. The
ability to pull in a signal is important enough that radios
incorporate a squelch defeat feature to open the squelch all the way.

That is common for all sorts of radios.

If you ever decide to learn to fly an actual airplane, which is much
more fun than any simulation, you'd see what I mean.

I prefer simulation, for a number of reasons.

Real flying is fantastic, exponentially better than simulations (real
is better than virtual in everything I've ever done), so I genuinely hope
that you will!

The parts of flying that I like can be mostly simulated with 100%
accuracy, at much lower cost and much higher convenience than a real
aircraft. For example, I like to fly IFR, and I scarcely need a real
aircraft for that; even a full-motion simulator isn't required,
although it would be nice.

The only way to fly IFR or VFRfor hat matter is in an airplane. You are
simulating IFR, you are not by the longest stretch of the imagination flying
IFR.

"Grumman-581" writes:

And how many times have you crashed your little simulator game?

Occasionally.

Guess what... You don't usually get multiple attempts at life when
you're flying a REAL aircraft...

That's one reason why I don't fly real aircraft.

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

Dave Stadt writes:

The only way to fly IFR or VFRfor hat matter is in an airplane. You are
simulating IFR, you are not by the longest stretch of the imagination flying
IFR.

The I in IFR stands for instruments. You fly just by reading
instruments. In fact, using a simulator that has no motion or scenery
is a good test for IFR flight; if you can't fly without feeling
movement or looking out the window, you don't know how to fly IFR.

The deficiencies of most popular simulation programs are in their lack
of "feel," and to a lesser extent in many of the compromises made for
practical and other reasons. However, instrument flight is something
that MSFS does particularly well.

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

"Grumman-581" writes:

In other words, because magnetic navigation is too difficult for you to
understand, you expect the rest of us to accomodate you ...

No, I understand magnetic navigation very easily; I just find it a bit
anachronistic.

Did you perhaps used to be a WebTV user?

No.

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

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Dave Stadt writes:

The only way to fly IFR or VFRfor hat matter is in an airplane. You are
simulating IFR, you are not by the longest stretch of the imagination
flying
IFR.

The I in IFR stands for instruments. You fly just by reading
instruments. In fact, using a simulator that has no motion or scenery
is a good test for IFR flight; if you can't fly without feeling
movement or looking out the window, you don't know how to fly IFR.

Thanks for providing that information. Guess I'll sell the airplane and go
play with my simulator.

The deficiencies of most popular simulation programs are in their lack
of "feel," and to a lesser extent in many of the compromises made for
practical and other reasons. However, instrument flight is something
that MSFS does particularly well.

Believe what you want but MSFS is a toy and nothing more.

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

On Sat, 09 Sep 2006 17:03:04 +0200, Stefan
wrote:

Mxsmanic schrieb:

I was wondering about gliders not long ago. I take it they don't have
radios? Wouldn't it be safer to have a radio powered by a battery or
something, just in case? Radios can be made very light so weight
would not be an issue.

Not only would it be safer, but much more convenient, too. That's why
pretty much all gliders actually *do* have radios. Along with GPS
navigation, speed optimizing and glide range computers and a couple more
of such gadgets.

You should *really* get some basic knowledge before commenting.


What ever happened to the old distinction that was made between
Gliders and Sail planes?


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

"Mxsmanic" wrote:

The only way to fly IFR or VFRfor hat matter is in an airplane. You are
simulating IFR, you are not by the longest stretch of the imagination
flying
IFR.

The I in IFR stands for instruments. You fly just by reading
instruments. In fact, using a simulator that has no motion or scenery
is a good test for IFR flight; if you can't fly without feeling
movement or looking out the window, you don't know how to fly IFR.

Another item added to the long list of things about which you have opinions
but almost no knowledge.

Do you have a job after school?

--
Dan

"Did you just have a stroke and not tell me?"
- Jiminy Glick