Roger Halstead wrote:
On Sat, 09 Aug 2003 22:35:39 -0400, "Dr. Anthony J. Lomenzo"
wrote:



Peter Duniho wrote:

"Michael Learner" wrote in message
...


Really? I've heard many real pilots say it is nothing like the real
thing and is not a suitable training tool. Come on, we are talking
about table based flight models here, FS series is just a game with
pretty graphics. A rather boring one too.


Depending on your view point that could describe flying as well if you
are not the pilot and took away the seat-of-the-pants feeling.

Not sure if I'd qualify as a real pilot. I only have about 1200 hours,
with all but the first 300 have been in high
performance/complex/retract singles and yes, I am instrument rated.
( My baby - http://www.rogerhalstead.com/833pics.htm with me at the
controls...)



Given the wording of your post, I'm guessing you're just trolling, but just
in case you're serious:

Just depends on what you're using it for. The flight models aren't
accurate, and without motion and a wrap-around view, it's missing a lot of


OTOH the flight models for the smaller planes seem to be pretty good.
If you set the airspeeds correctly the landings are pretty much like
the book as are most maneuvers.

OTOH...The realism of motion is missing as is the realistic view.
Both of which are very important for learning to fly.


what you get in the real thing. But as others have pointed out, it's
extremely useful for practicing procedures. Since the instruments all react
pretty much as they would in a real plane, it's especially useful for
instrument training, but even for visual stuff, just practicing pattern work


It's very handy as a supplement to instrument training.
I had a sim that was far better for IFR training some years ago. It
came on 6 floppies and worked very well. Not only were the flight
models realistic, but it had a an A-36 Bonanza. Unfortunately the
thing had to be reloaded a number of times and the floppies became
corrupted.


can get a student used to the concepts involved (full power for takeoff,
power reduction at pattern altitude and again to descend back to the runway,
proper flap settings, pattern legs, etc.).

Pete



Agree...and a 'thing' of mine for years. It [flight simulation] has a
decided ADJUNCT value to the real McCoy. I do both [as I know you do
Peter and various others in RAS who hold FAA tickets ...you too
Al!...the helo beckons!]--- let's not forget this too: pick up virtually
any av mag for the real deal and you'll see simulations ["On Top" et
al...] that are of decided benefit with regard to IFR procedures, indeed


I tried "On Top", not at all impressed.
Admittedly that was a couple years ago, but I saw a similar comment on
one of the aviation groups last week.


[proper] comm procedures when the ATC brethren are in your future and a
host of others real-time areas as the level of sim [and avionic
electronic reproduction --and-- true to life usage therein on the
monitor] sophistication steadily increases.


With a good video card and three 17 inch LCDs or 19 inch CRTs properly
spaced you can get a very realistic view and most sims become an
entirely different animal. For instance, when flying a cessna 150 or
172 most of your view is to the right and left quadrant due to the
high glare shield. Sure you can see over it, but it still blocks a
lot of major clues. I tell my wife I'd like two more NEC multi sync
to match this one. She can get my Christmas Present early. :-))


As learning tool...an adjunct...I believe it has a decided place in
conjunction with the real thing. Interesting in a recent satellite TV


"I believe" that the sims and yes even MS FS recent versions make a
good adjunct as well. They serve much better to reinforce the real
world than to learn on prior to the real world.


show, there were aircraft carrier military pilots practicing the
procedures on...you guessed it...flight sim programs [so too--how about
Oklahoma City and those budding ATC folks 'first' getting their feet wet
with Doc Wesson's ATC sims!?] and these were NOT the full motion
varieties either. Further, albeit admittedly with full motion, it is
'still' the standing ATP requirement that a sim session be passed yet
keep in mind the essential focus of the sim is to purposely simulate
'surprises' and hence 'procedures' because it is already assumed that a
left seat Captain already has the savvy with regard to basically flying
the plane! Think about it! Did I mention that moon landing sim when that
was all that was available since we had no prior moon landing
'experience', yes?

THEN, it's also a matter of cost and economic realities. I'd LOVE a
Cirrus SR 22 bird...love it...but, ehhhh, you got $375 thou' to spare?


That is why most of us are flying old birds. :-))

Hunt for an old F-33C Bonanza. Fast, comfortable, (as in like riding
in the first class section) you sit up high with one whale of a view.
They ride the bumps well, but are a bit more demanding than the
trainers and most fixed gear planes. For serious IFR work an
autopilot is virtually a necessity. NO, they don't have the new "all
glass" cockpit, but you can upgrade the instrument package, but it'll
cost. Even in a new aircraft you can get close to half the cost o f
the airplane just in the panel for full IFR capability.

You can pick up a whale of a nice 1974 or older F-33 for probably
$150,000 or less. If you are willing to settle for an old airplane
you can go all the way back through the Debonairs for a lot less
money.

However, almost any airplane that is going to give you plenty of
utility with speed is going to cost about $10,000 to $12,000 a year to
own and operate. That is where being in a club can really pay for
itself. There were 5 of us in a group that owned a Cherokee 180 (IFR
capable). The total cost per hour was running us about $37 including
gas, but all 5 were averaging over a 100 hours per year.

Even the Debonair ran only $79 per hour (all costs, fixed and
variable) when I was flying 130 hours per year. That was well less
than what several 172 owners were paying who flew a lot less.
One figured she was paying $125 an hour for her 172.

If you want fixed gear reliability you can pick up a Cherokee 180 or
Archer in really nice shape for $60,000 and less than half the age of
a Bo.

It's nice to own your own, but more often it's nicer to be a co owner
in a club where you can actually afford to fly. There is no sense
over extending to get something you can't afford to fly. A good
example are a lot of the twins on the market. You can hunt around and
find a newer and nicer twin for less money than many singles. Thing
is they can eat you out of house and home in a hurry.


Then we'll talk dual bangers and jets. And those damnable egg beaters!


As I said, you might actually be able to purchase a nice twin, or even
turboprop, but they'll eat you out of house and home. Jets? Once you
spend a fortune getting enough hours they add a new dimension to how
fast you can go through money. War birds? We'd all love to fly
one, but few pilots have the bank account to support one and of those
only a few have the reflexes to fly one.

In the real world there is a very big reason besides money that few
move beyond simple, fixed gear aircraft to high
performance/complex/retract singles. Still fewer move on into twins
and only a fraction of those into jets.

You don't notice it as much in sims, but in the real world there is a
huge difference between flying a simple fixed gear aircraft at 115 to
120 knots and flying high performance at 180 knots. Then an even
bigger difference moving to 300 knots and up.

There is an old saying about a 100 MPH mind in a 200 MPH airplane. It
applies to any basic step you choose.

As an example:
When coming home at 7000 feet just skimming the clouds, I have to know
when to start down and the most likely approach far enough ahead to
make the request to ATC.

Quite often it is up to you to know that you *will* have to start down
so many minutes, or miles out to be able to start the expected
approach with out having to be vectored around trying to slow down and
get organized. You *know* when, where, how fast, which charts (which
are out and opened to the proper areas). You know what t o expect
from ATC. You know what they are going to say and in what order.
*Anytime* something different comes up it rings an alarm bell. Over
the years I've been forgotten, sent in the wrong direction, and told
to follow the plane ahead when I couldn't see my own wing tips.

In the 7000 foot example, at 200 MPH ground speed I had to start my
descent well over 40 miles out. The entire descent was in the clouds
with torrential rain for the most part. I was down, leveled off and
at approach speed just prior to the FAF and I had to ask to start my
descent.

Actually I asked Minneapolis center, who immediately passed me off to
MBS approach.

The exchange went very much like....(what the winds and altimeter
setting were, I have no recollection)

Me: Minneapolis Center, Debonair Eight thirty three romeo would like
to start down for the approach into 3BS.
Center: Thirty three romeo, call MBS approach, one one eight four
five, good day.
Me: one one eight four five, good day
Me: MBS approach, thirty three romeo at seven thousand, we need to
start down for the approach into three bravo sierra.
MBS: Thirty three romeo, wind two zero zero at ten, altimeter two
niner six five, descend to and maintain three thousand until
established cleared for the approach. (3BS only had one approach and
I was within 30 degrees of it hence no heading in the clearance)
ME: two two zero at 10, two niner six five, three thousand, cleared
for the approach. (I could have omitted the wind. All instrument
approaches at 3Bs terminate in circle-to-land)

A couple minutes later:
Me: MBS approach, thirty three romeo had the airport in sight.
MBS: Frequency change approved, Cancel now or on the ground?
Me: Cancel now.
MS: Your flight plan is closed. Have a safe landing.
Me: Thanks guys, have a good day.
Me on 122.8: Midland Barstow Traffic, Debonair eight thirty three
romeo is three West north west at eleven eighty, this will be a low
approach with a circle to land on 24.

3BS does not have a tower and is served by MBS approach. When landing
at MBS closing the flight plan would not have been mentioned as it
would have been automatic.

Sorry for the small novel....


'I' should complain? ;-) Always a pleasure to read your stuff, Roger,
here in RAS or in the real-deal av groups which I [and others in RAS]
also frequent. Besides, I see that extra-class ARO ticket of yours
[K8RI] and I'm downright jealous! Alas, 'advanced class' was the end of
the line for me [KD2LP] because when they [still the FCC exams then and
not the later VE gang and advanced knowledge 'pool' books and CW tapes]
ran that extra-class CW tape, well, they may just as well have asked me
to do an ad hoc translation of the Rosetta Stone and/or provide the
definitive philosophical answers to both the origin of man and the
universe! :-( Whew!

Gave it two shots at the Extra code and finally threw in the towel and
remained duly content with Advanced Class. But then I can still do my
RTTY, CW and phone thing on the bands with decent space and sans
infringement therein because those extra-class types 'WILL' let you know
if you get in or near [QRM blues] their bandwidth! ;-)

Regards!

Doc Tony
KD2LP

What's the old chestnut sticker on the venerable 'needs TLC' 152-L, to
wit, "This is my temporary aircraft. My Bonanza is having its TBO! Ditto
my Citation II." Yeah, right!

No wonder John King is always smiling....and his very own Citation II!
Roger...speculation question...does Billy G. and MS actually 'pay' John
and Martha to do their how-do spiel for the MSFS sims --or-- is the
trade-off simply free commercial entity publicity?! Hmmmmmm.






Roger Halstead (K8RI EN73 & ARRL Life Member)
www.rogerhalstead.com
N833R World's oldest Debonair? (S# CD-2)

Doc Tony