Why don't voice radio communications use FM?

Mxsmanic wrote:
Emily writes:

Uh, not many. We realize how DRASTICALLY different MSFS and real flying
area.

There's more than just MSFS out there. And even MSFS can be
engrossing to a greater extent than you seem willing to admit.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Have you ever been in a full size, full motion, transport catergory
aircraft simulator?

Didn't think so.

Mxsmanic wrote:
Emily writes:

Have you flown a real simulator?

Yes.

Do me a favor. Get an instructor and rent an airplane for an hour.
Have him let you fly some holds and approaches under the hood.

I can't afford it, unfortunately.

Oh, can't afford $150 for an hour of flight time?

Please. Your toy simulator and computer cost way more than that.

Roger (K8RI) writes:

I fly high performance. I've let a lot of other pilots fly the Deb.
It's a rare pilot who has been flying fixed gear planes that wont soon
have the Deb doing 2Gs out of the bottom and zero over the top in a
PIO. They are used to looking at the VSI. That doesn't work in
slippery airplanes. More than one has had me saying to my self: I will
not get sick in my own airplane... I..will.. not...get ... sick...
in... my ... own airrrr...plane....

What _do_ you do if you get sick, especially if you are flying on your
own?

Are there instruments that indicate the direction and magnitude of net
accelerations in the aircraft, so that you can visually see if you are
holding 1 G or more in a loop?

Anyway, these accelerations are another reason why I'm not too keen on
flying for real. Some are pleasant enough, such as standard movements
on take-off, but bouncing around in turbulence or certain unexpected
movements of the aircraft are quite unpleasant. I've only been queasy
once on a commercial aircraft, but that was mainly because I was very
tired but could not sleep (as a passenger, obviously). The statistics
I've seen show that less than 0.1% of passengers experience motion
sickness; I don't know what the figure is for pilots.

Sometimes I wonder if it wouldn't be useful to have a drug that
eliminates all sense of motion for instrument flying. That way you
could watch your instruments without being influenced by what your
semicircular canals are saying.

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

Emily writes:

You still need to feel the movement. The important part is IGNORING it,
something which you would not be able to do with MSFS experience.

Unfortunately, full-motion simulators are expensive (and anyone asking
to use them is likely to be considered a terrorist nowadays).

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

Roger (K8RI) writes:

I like something a bit more responsive than a 737:-))
http://www.rogerhalstead.com/833R/833R_frame.htm

But I _like_ the response of a 737. It offers challenges of its own.
It's all well and good to have an aircraft that immediately snaps to
whatever orientation you ask of it, but working with one that takes
several seconds to listen to you requires a certain amount of
anticipation.

I don't make any rapid movements in my aircraft, anyway. Proof of
this is that I flew in MSFS for fifteen years with just a keyboard to
control the aircraft.

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

Thomas Borchert writes:

Just for your information, since you mentioned the cost of flying in
another post as well: The certificate will cost you something like 4000
or 5000 dollars spread over 6 months or a year. Does spending that kind
of money over that period of time require wealth and retirement?

Yes.

No, it requires dedication. Have that?

I don't know. I have neither time nor money, so there's no point in
examining dedication.

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

Emily writes:

Just think, he could get rid of his internet access and fly about a half
hour to an hour a month. Worth it to me!

Right now I keep my Internet access and I sometimes fly for hours each
day.

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

Thomas Borchert writes:

Coudln't agree less. If, after that "short period in the air", I arrive
6000 miles from where I usually live, the exitment is all worth it.

That isn't going to happen in any aircraft you're likely to be able to
afford, nor even in any aircraft available if we are talking about
60-90 minutes of time in the air.

But I take it you're not much into real life.

I'm into simulation, which is very faithful to real life in some
respects and completely different from it in others.

What's simulation got to do with flying?

They both involve many of the same skills, perceptions, and
impressions.

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

B A R R Y writes:

Once fiber to the home becomes a reality, you're guaranteed to not get
over 3.5k, as the rest of the space will be used for other things, and
the demultiplexing device won't provide it.

Then you will lose part of speech if it is direct encoding of an audio
signal. With more creative encoding you can fit far better speech
quality into 3.5 kHz.

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

Roger (K8RI) writes:

Then you won't be able to tell them apart as communications in general
is tailored to operate between 200 to 300 Hz and about 2500 to 3000
Hz.

Yes, and that problem is quite common.

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