View Single Post
  #21  
Old March 7th 07, 05:01 AM posted to alt.games.microsoft.flight-sim,rec.aviation.piloting,rec.aviation.student
Jim[_14_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 17
Default Tweaking the throttle on approach

On Tue, 06 Mar 2007 06:15:25 +0100, Mxsmanic
wrote:

Jim writes:

Excellent advice on all points. Only thing I would add is to use these
steps in basic trainer such as C172 until proficient, as in real life
you must crawl before you can walk. Flying a complex aircraft in
simulation is task intensive and frustrating.


Does a Baron 58 count as complex? It seems easy to fly compared to the big
iron.

Any plane with retractable gear and prop control is considered
complex.
I fly mostly the Baron 58 as Dreamfleet's simulation is rigorously accurate,
so it behaves just like the real thing. The C172 seems too easy, so either
this is the world's easiest plane to fly in real life, or the sim is not as
accurate as it could be.

The reason a C172 is used as a trainer in real life is because it is a
very easy and forgiving airplane to fly. It is a good plane for
landings because of the high wing. And because you don't have to worry
with the gear or prop control you can concentrate on the fundamentals
of a stabilized approach and then when mastered move on to more
complex aircraft. Maybe a single engine retractable. I don't remember
if the Baron 58 in a multi or single engine.
In real life, I'd want to fly the same thing I had flown in the sim, if I
could find a place that would give me instruction in a Baron (a new one, not
one of those WWII relics, but without the G1000 junk).

Be careful not to float or balloon
in ground effect. If you do balloon add a bit of power to stabilize
and cut the throttle again and flare to landing. Hope this helps.


I do seem to glide excessively just before touchdown. I have a phobia about
expensive damage to the gear. I've hardly ever crashed in a way that would
injure me in real life, but I've had a fair number of landings in which the
gear was damaged (on one occasion I damaged flaps as well, not sure how).

The gear on the 172 is very resilient. I really think if you use the
172 to master the pitch / power part of the stabilized approach you
will do better in the Baron. I have flown a real 172 and find FS2004's
172 to be very realistic. Hope this helps.
--

Jim in Houston
osPAm
Nurse's creed: Fill what's empty, empty what's full,
and scratch where it itches!! RN does NOT mean Real Nerd!