Confusion about when it's my navigation, and when it's ATC

Buck Murdock writes:

Until you have done more than one of the above, you ARE NOT QUALIFIED to
make comparisons amongst them.

Qualifications on USENET are never certain.

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

Rick Branch writes:

A friend of mine is a pilot for an international cargo carrier, and he
does play with MSFS. He just loves to fly a 747 off of a grass strip
that is about half a mile from his (real) house. The grass strip is in
the MSFS database, so he uses it. (I guess it beats pretending to drive
to the airport.)

I didn't think that 747s could be used with grass strips. I know some
other airliners can be used on unpaved strips, although it may require
special option packages.

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

TxSrv writes:

Brilliant. How do we get there in the first place?

If it's above the ceiling of the aircraft, you don't.

Barring extraordinary
ridge lift in winter-cold air, and maybe that would be
insufficient, how do we get to FL 300 like I've done in MSFS
in a 172?

You don't.

The point is that, since you cannot test the real aircraft at that
altitude, you don't really know how it would behave. And so you don't
necessarily know if the simulation is accurate or not. Simulation
allows you to magically place the aircraft at that altitude. In real
life, you'd have to climb to that altitude. The only exception might
be a drop from a larger aircraft, which would indeed allow you to test
it at high altitudes. It's hard to see any use for that, however,
beyond satisfaction of curiosity.

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

Newps writes:

BZZT, try again.

Which flight path is followed in a forward slip?

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

Newps writes:

Steeeeeerike two.

Why? The intended flight path is aligned with the centerline of the
runway, and in fact that is the flight path followed; there is no
deviation.

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

Sam Spade writes:

The King Air, on autopilot, will not maintain the set vertical speed if
the IAS drops below 120 knots or so. It will nose-dive and crash. Not
so with a real King Air.

Does the King Air allow you to set a vertical speed? What happens on
the real aircraft?

Cross winds on autopilot are not handled correctly on an RNAV approach.

Which autopilot? What does it do incorrectly?

Strong winds aloft dramatically affect IAS in a holding pattern, which
is wrong beyond belief.

I'll have to look.

That is my short list.

I don't recall ever flying the King Air, but I'll try to remember to
look at the other things the next time the opportunity arises.

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

Nomen Nescio writes:

Since you've never flown a real aircraft AT ALL, you have no way of
knowing whether the simulation is accurate or not.

The real aircraft cannot climb to that altitude, so _nobody_ knows
whether the simulation is accurate or not.

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

Mxsmanic wrote:

Three hundred feet seems generous for altitudes. I thought I read
somewhere that I was supposed to be within 100 feet, or was it 60
feet? Now I can't seem to find a specific tolerance in the FARs. Of
course this isn't normally a problem if I'm on autopilot, but when
flying by hand I still have trouble holding an altitude.

Autopilot does work quite well in MSFS, really. In real
flight under IFR, the bounds of permissible altitude
deviation as seen by ATC via our Mode C squawks are derived
from published FAA documents, not the FARs. Google is fun;
site:www.faa.gov. Knock yourself out. I also can hold
altitude quite well within 10's of feet in a real
no-autopilot airplane in even raucous meteorological
conditions. Years of MSFS sim weenie experience taught me
how, I must admit.

F--

Mxsmanic wrote:

The real aircraft cannot climb to that altitude, so _nobody_ knows
whether the simulation is accurate or not.

You are missing the point that MSFS does not model, nor need
it for the vast majority of sensible users, the forced
(slewed) behavior of a 172 in the high flight levels be
real. Any real pilot, who knows the feel/behavior of a 172
class airplane near sea level, verses say 12,000 feet, and
who understands the aerodynamics involved and the effect of
limited HP in really rarefied air, need not be a "rocket
surgeon" to be able to accurately extrapolate.

F--

Mxsmanic wrote:

What happens on the real aircraft?

They crash. Real airplanes easily crash, despite what even
a King Air pilot I know well tells me. Not exactly a
pussycat, but a solid, predictable machine. Heck, he's just
a "blowhard," to use your word. Please also ignore any
alleged pilot here who tells you anything. The Microsoft
Games Development Team are the real gurus; I though we
stipulated that hundreds of posts ago.

F--