Realistic Instrument Training using MSFS 2004

Mxsmanic wrote:
Roberto Waltman writes:

In the final stages, when I was getting consistently good comments on
my landings from my flight instructors (on three planes: C152, C172,
Cherokees) I still couldn't hold a stable approach on a simulator.

You're probably depending a great deal on physical sensations. You can
probably get away with that on the aircraft you've been flying, but not all
aircraft (it's hard to fly by the seat of one's pants in an Airbus).

Without (re)opening a discussion on the validity / goodness of
simulator time vs. actual-in-the-air time, and/or what flying means to
you or others, I would like to state that (talking for myself only):

(a) I have no intention, plans or desires to fly an Airbus (as a
pilot. I will continue to fly them as cargo.)

(b) I have no intention, plans or desires to pilot a jet airplane.

(c) I have no intention, plans or desires to pilot a multi-engine
airplane.

(d) I have no intention, plans or desires to pilot a complex airplane.
(Except to get a commercial rating)

(e) I have no intention, plans or desires to pilot a "modern" GA
airplane with it's increasingly complex avionics. (*)
(In some flights, while getting my private rating, I carried with me a
hand held GPS - For emergencies. I had it on for a few minutes to
verify it was working OK, and then it was switched off and went back
to the flight bag for the rest of the flight. Working with a sectional
is much more interesting.)

(f) I do have intentions of flying a couple of homebuilts airplanes
(both are restoration projects at these moment.) One is a "Nordo", (no
'lectrics), both have the simplest instrumentation you can get away
with, neither one is IFR equipped, or even night flying equipped.
(Why these? Because I can not afford a Stinson Reliant or a Stearman.)

(g) I do have intentions of getting IFR and commercial ratings, to
become a better pilot, to keep myself challenged, (maybe to become a
CFI after retirement?), but not to start a career in aviation.

(h) I do have intentions of flying gliders again some day.
For both (f) and (h) the thing immediately above the seat is a very
useful instrument, second only to the yaw-string. (When properly
calibrated, of course. )

(i) I have invested a small sum of money in flight simulator related
materials: Software, yoke, pedals, a faster computer for the sim, etc.
I will continue to do so, I am even thinking of building a Cessna
152'ish cockpit with a believable panel.
And while I consider the simulator a valuable training aid for flying,
after having "slipped the surly bonds of Earth", I do not consider,
even for a second, that any amount of time spend in a simulator
qualifies as "Flying".

(YMMV, of course. And I am aware the of the FAA regulations regarding
simulator time for currency, ratings, etc.)


(*) Before somebody calls me a Luddite, at work I am currently trying
to debug a new system based on one of the latest-and-greatest,
"screaming-edge" Digital Signal Processor, hooked to a rat's nest of
wires leading to a 1Ghz Lecroy sampling oscilloscope and other
instruments, blah, blah, blah.
I am getting all the high-tech fixes I need here. Flying is for
something else ...

Roberto Waltman

[ Please reply to the group,
return address is invalid ]