It's possible that a community college might offer such a course and call it
"flight training," but even if they did, it would be a poor recommendation.
Never mind about whether the course was related to primary or instrument
flight, FS2002 would be inappropriate for either one. However, a small
local airline receives a contract and some publicity, a community college
fills a classroom with students who pay to be entertained by computer games
and everybody concerned feels good for a while. Your community college at
work!

The originator of this thread was right. MS flight simulators are worse
than useless in primary contact (VFR) flight training and can only be made
useful for IFR practice by eliminating their prime attraction: The external
view. This kind of simulator is a toy, not a real-world flight training
device. Those of you who deny and protest the most are the ones most firmly
and irrevocably deluded.

Kalijaa

"John Hall" wrote in message
ble.rogers.com...
Our local community college has contracted with a small local airline to
provide flight training for people who want to be pilots. It was featured
on a local TV news show and when they went into the classroom to show all
the snazzy computers that were being used for flight training, what did I
see; you guessed it: they were all running FS2002.

JK

"Tlewis95" wrote in message
...
I disagree with anyone who says FS cant be a useful training tool. I
learned
@least 1/2 I know about flying on the Sim. You can pratice approches,
manuveres, etc.
+ it looks real! It might not handel real but you can get to understand
how
stuff workes the fun and cheap way!