There's something else going on here. Real flying has a physical aspect:
it's sensuous in the same way that sports are sensuous. You use depth
perception, proprioception, "seat of the pants." That's why the world's
best fighter pilots are athletes -- yes, I'm thinking of Ted Williams. If a
computer nerd kid has no interest in doing sports, the sim is going to be a
lot more interesting -- it's a broader range of challenges than he'd ever
get in a real airplane, thus it's a better intellectual challenge and more
fun. But if he's a physical guy, he'll want to fly for real.

Let's not forget that the Wright brothers and Glenn Curtiss started as
bicycle racers. There's a lesson in that.

Seth
Comanche N8100R
"Gig 601XL Builder" wr.giacona@coxDOTnet wrote in message
news:VToOe.2865$Ix4.2257@okepread03...

wrote in message
oups.com...
I don't mean to psychoanalyze, but your son's friend's statement seems
suspect. He apparently has spent some time practicing simulated ILSes
into JFK (not to mention paying for and assembling a spiffy flight
simulator), so he must have found it somewhat entertaining on the
computer. How could it have been less entertaining in a real aircraft?

I guess the cost benefit of fun/effort may be better on a computer sim
than in a real aircraft, but that doesn't make it boring, just not the
best "investment."

If that's the case, the GA needs to understand that equation, and start
to tweak it.


You're right he has several hundred hours of simulator time. Basically he
learned to fly in a 747. I think it is all a matter of instant
gratification he has no interest in spending the time in the "little
planes" as he calls them even if it meant he would later get to fly 747s
for AA.