Realistic Instrument Training using MSFS 2004

On Feb 13, 11:48 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
I'm a longtime lurker here, but now I have a question I hope the group
can help me with. I am working toward my instrument rating (21 hours
so far), and want to use MSFS to practice (cheaply). I do fine with
holding a heading, but I find it very difficult to maintain an
altitude. The real plane is much much easier.

Difficult in what way?

If you have an autopilot, use it. Flying by instruments concerns the
method(s) through which you obtain situational awareness, not the methods you
use to control the aircraft.

I guess I have to disagree with you there. The first priority should
be keeping the airplane from stalling/spinning/spiraling into the
ground (AVIATE, navigate, communicate). This is easy when using an
autopilot, but unfortunately autopilots aren't as common on light
single engine aircraft as one would hope. And if there is one, it's
usually just a single axis (heading only). Failure to Aviate seems
to be the most popular method of killing yourself in instrument
conditions.

The second priority is navigation. This is where you need situation
awareness so you don't fly into mountains, and can find the runways.
Navigating can also kill you (CFIT, midairs). .

Finally, it's important to let ATC know what you are doing
(communication). Not too many people have died by failing to
communicate.

Trimming the aircraft is time-consuming in MSFS because it's hard to tell when
you have the trim just right. You can save time by using the autopilot to
hold altitude and set trim, at which point you can turn off the AP and fly by
hand, if you wish.

I also noticed that even when the scenery flies by smoothly (when I'm
in VMC!) the instruments seem to update at a slower rate.

To some extent, that depends on the aircraft model. There's a setting in MSFS
that controls gauge quality that might help. Add-ons sometimes have a
separate setting for gauge update speeds (which are independent of scenery
update speeds).

The only setting I saw in MSFS for gauge quality is for 3D. I don't
use that mode when flying instruments, but maybe there's another
setting I haven't found yet.

In any case, if you are using the simulator for instrument practice rather
than flying practice, frame rates are a bit less important, unless you are
taking off or landing.

Set the weather to a constant heavy fog, and frame rates should improve all
around.

I've been using the advanced weather to set 200 ft ceilings 8/8
overcast stratus with 10,000ft tops, and 1/2 mile visibility. Will
heavy fog be present at 5000 ft? I'll try it.

The default aircraft on MSFS don't have the resolution of some add-ons, so you
may see them snap from one degree to the next on a dial, instead of moving
smoothly. Instruments such as those from Reality XP behave as smoothly as in
real life, but they cost extra (some aircraft include them).

I've seen those advertised before, but I haven't met anyone who has
tried one. If they are that much better, I would be very willing to
buy one.

Thanks.


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

writes:

I guess I have to disagree with you there. The first priority should
be keeping the airplane from stalling/spinning/spiraling into the
ground (AVIATE, navigate, communicate).

That is situational awareness. As long as you know the aircraft's attitude
and condition, you can avoid stalls, spins, and spirals. To know that in IMC,
you need to read the instruments.

How you actually fly the aircraft once you know your situation is irrelevant
to IFR. You can use the autopilot if you want, and in fact doing so will give
you more freedom to worry about other things. The actual flying of the
aircraft is no different in IFR from in VFR--the aircraft behaves the same way
and responds the same way. So you don't need to worry about that if you
already know how to fly in VFR. What you need to worry about is keeping
tracking of your position, altitude, attitude, and so on, so that you know
what control inputs to make.

This being so, it's not "cheating" to use an autopilot for IFR.

This is easy when using an autopilot, but unfortunately autopilots aren't
as common on light single engine aircraft as one would hope.

I personally would question the wisdom of flying anywhere IFR without an
autopilot, but it's not a regulatory requirement (at least in the U.S.).

Failure to Aviate seems to be the most popular method of killing yourself
in instrument conditions.

Yes. But still, if you have an autopilot, use it. In IFR the difficulty is
determining what to do--not actually doing it (which is the same as in VFR).

Put another way, "aviating" is the same in IFR as in VFR, when it comes to
controlling the aircraft.

The only setting I saw in MSFS for gauge quality is for 3D. I don't
use that mode when flying instruments, but maybe there's another
setting I haven't found yet.

There's that one, but there must be other internal settings because add-ons
often give more options. You can control the update rates for scenery and
instruments separately inside the simulator.

I've seen those advertised before, but I haven't met anyone who has
tried one. If they are that much better, I would be very willing to
buy one.

The Reality XP add-on instruments are astonishingly realistic--absolutely
smooth, photographically real in appearance, and they also do _everything_
that the real-world instrument does--all the buttons work, etc.

The Garmin GPS units from Reality XP use the same Garmin software as Garmin's
own simulations, so they are guaranteed to behave exactly like the real thing.
You can step away from the sim and into the cockpit and continue using the GPS
unit without skipping a beat.

The built-in GPS units are lame by comparison. The same holds true for quite
a few other instruments.

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

On Feb 14, 1:28 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
I guess I have to disagree with you there. The first priority should
be keeping the airplane from stalling/spinning/spiraling into the
ground (AVIATE, navigate, communicate).

That is situational awareness. As long as you know the aircraft's attitude
and condition, you can avoid stalls, spins, and spirals. To know that in IMC,
you need to read the instruments.

How you actually fly the aircraft once you know your situation is irrelevant
to IFR. You can use the autopilot if you want, and in fact doing so will give
you more freedom to worry about other things. The actual flying of the
aircraft is no different in IFR from in VFR--the aircraft behaves the same way
and responds the same way. So you don't need to worry about that if you
already know how to fly in VFR. What you need to worry about is keeping
tracking of your position, altitude, attitude, and so on, so that you know
what control inputs to make.

This being so, it's not "cheating" to use an autopilot for IFR.


I don't want to have my life dependent on a working autopilot, so I am
purposely avoiding it for now I understand that the airplane doesn't
know if it's in the clouds, but I can sure tell. Being able to fly
without an autopilot, and using only the instruments as a reference is
a HUGE part of my training.

That said, once I have my rating I will take advantage of everything
(autopilot, handheld GPS) at my disposal. But I still intend to
practice partial panel, no autopilot, no GPS so I don't get too rusty.


This is easy when using an autopilot, but unfortunately autopilots aren't
as common on light single engine aircraft as one would hope.

I personally would question the wisdom of flying anywhere IFR without an
autopilot, but it's not a regulatory requirement (at least in the U.S.).

It sure is a lot more interesting when all you have are the "steam
gauges". But I agree with you that autopilots do make life easier
(and safer).


Failure to Aviate seems to be the most popular method of killing yourself
in instrument conditions.

Yes. But still, if you have an autopilot, use it. In IFR the difficulty is
determining what to do--not actually doing it (which is the same as in VFR).

When your autopilot breaks, there is also difficulty in actually doing
it.


Put another way, "aviating" is the same in IFR as in VFR, when it comes to
controlling the aircraft.

The only setting I saw in MSFS for gauge quality is for 3D. I don't
use that mode when flying instruments, but maybe there's another
setting I haven't found yet.

There's that one, but there must be other internal settings because add-ons
often give more options. You can control the update rates for scenery and
instruments separately inside the simulator.

I've seen those advertised before, but I haven't met anyone who has
tried one. If they are that much better, I would be very willing to
buy one.

The Reality XP add-on instruments are astonishingly realistic--absolutely
smooth, photographically real in appearance, and they also do _everything_
that the real-world instrument does--all the buttons work, etc.

The Garmin GPS units from Reality XP use the same Garmin software as Garmin's
own simulations, so they are guaranteed to behave exactly like the real thing.
You can step away from the sim and into the cockpit and continue using the GPS
unit without skipping a beat.

The built-in GPS units are lame by comparison. The same holds true for quite
a few other instruments.

I went to Reality XP's website, and they had a side by side comparison
of the "stock" gauges, and their product. Amazing. One of the planes
I fly (and will be training in) has the Garmin 430, so I might be
downloading that as well. Thanks for the tip.

Steve


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

On 02/14/07 11:57, wrote:
On Feb 14, 1:28 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
I guess I have to disagree with you there. The first priority should
be keeping the airplane from stalling/spinning/spiraling into the
ground (AVIATE, navigate, communicate).

That is situational awareness. As long as you know the aircraft's attitude
and condition, you can avoid stalls, spins, and spirals. To know that in IMC,
you need to read the instruments.

How you actually fly the aircraft once you know your situation is irrelevant
to IFR. You can use the autopilot if you want, and in fact doing so will give
you more freedom to worry about other things. The actual flying of the
aircraft is no different in IFR from in VFR--the aircraft behaves the same way
and responds the same way. So you don't need to worry about that if you
already know how to fly in VFR. What you need to worry about is keeping
tracking of your position, altitude, attitude, and so on, so that you know
what control inputs to make.

This being so, it's not "cheating" to use an autopilot for IFR.


I don't want to have my life dependent on a working autopilot, so I am
purposely avoiding it for now I understand that the airplane doesn't
know if it's in the clouds, but I can sure tell. Being able to fly
without an autopilot, and using only the instruments as a reference is
a HUGE part of my training.

Steve,

I sent you a message off-line. Please let me know whether or not you've
received it. If your e-mail address is spam-proofed, just send me an
e-mail so I can get your actual address.

Thanks,


That said, once I have my rating I will take advantage of everything
(autopilot, handheld GPS) at my disposal. But I still intend to
practice partial panel, no autopilot, no GPS so I don't get too rusty.



--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

writes:

I don't want to have my life dependent on a working autopilot, so I am
purposely avoiding it for now.

If you have a choice between a working autopilot and nothing, the working
autopilot is generally preferable.

Your life depends on an autopilot each time you board a commercial flight,
particularly if it's not a U.S. airline.

In IMC, you use all the resources you have in order to not get killed.
Eschewing the autopilot because you resent automation will put you at a
disadvantage if you are stuck in IMC and the autopilot can save you but you
can't remember how to use it.

I understand that the airplane doesn't
know if it's in the clouds, but I can sure tell. Being able to fly
without an autopilot, and using only the instruments as a reference is
a HUGE part of my training.

Perhaps I've not made myself clear. You use the instruments to assess your
situation. You use your autopilot to carry out your commands. The autopilot
is not a reference or a source of information; it is a work-saving device.
When you have lots of complex instruments to scan, it's very handy to have
something that will fly the aircraft for you based on your instructions.
There's no advantage to flying the plane by hand IFR if you have an autopilot.
And flying IFR is not the time to practice controlling the aircraft; if you
don't already know how to do that, trying to learn in IMC will lead to your
premature demise.

That said, once I have my rating I will take advantage of everything
(autopilot, handheld GPS) at my disposal. But I still intend to
practice partial panel, no autopilot, no GPS so I don't get too rusty.

Try to make the distinction between sources of information and control
mechanisms. IFR is all about getting the right information; it's not about
controlling the aircraft.

It sure is a lot more interesting when all you have are the "steam
gauges". But I agree with you that autopilots do make life easier
(and safer).

Autopilots and gauges are two different things. See above. Flying on
autopilot doesn't relieve you of the need to watch your instruments, it just
relieves you of the need to continually fly the airplane. Turning the
autopilot off doesn't make you any better at reading the instruments, either.

When your autopilot breaks, there is also difficulty in actually doing
it.

If you can control the aircraft in VFR, you can control it in IFR. If you
can't control the aircraft, you belong on the ground.

If your autopilot is not broken, there's no shame in using it. That's what it
is there for.

I went to Reality XP's website, and they had a side by side comparison
of the "stock" gauges, and their product. Amazing. One of the planes
I fly (and will be training in) has the Garmin 430, so I might be
downloading that as well. Thanks for the tip.

They were still photos, no? They are really impressive when they are actually
operating. Silky smooth action, behavior just like the real thing, and no
buttons or knobs that do not work.

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

I do fine with
holding a heading, but I find it very difficult to maintain an
altitude.


That's not really what you can practice with MSFS. It's just not close
enough to the real thing.

What you CAN practice, is procedures. The whole timing, cockpit
organisation and everything. Figuring out hold entries, setting up
stuff, how much time is there from IAF to FAF to touchdown, those
things. You need to really sit down with the kneeboard and approach
charts. I wouldn't/didn't bother with radio work, since it is so
unrealistic.

If you do this with approached you actually use during training, that
helps quite a bit.

If you want the sim to be smoother, try dialing back on the graphics
settings. You don't need dynamic scenery, you don't need cloud detail
or scenery detail. That helps a lot.


--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Thomas Borchert writes:

That's not really what you can practice with MSFS. It's just not close
enough to the real thing.

That depends on the aircraft, and the situation.

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

On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 05:06:59 -0800, Thomas Borchert wrote
(in article ):

I do fine with
holding a heading, but I find it very difficult to maintain an
altitude.


That's not really what you can practice with MSFS. It's just not close
enough to the real thing.

What you CAN practice, is procedures. The whole timing, cockpit
organisation and everything. Figuring out hold entries, setting up
stuff, how much time is there from IAF to FAF to touchdown, those
things. You need to really sit down with the kneeboard and approach
charts. I wouldn't/didn't bother with radio work, since it is so
unrealistic.


Truly. MSFS can be an invaluable aid for these things.



--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

I noticed all the comments on holding altitude.
I ,too, found it nearly impossible until I used the add on realtrim
free from avsim lib
http://library.avsim.net/

File Description:
RealTrim is a Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004(tm) module that makes trimming
aircrafts
more realistic and resemble real-life. It can be activated via key-press
when the
sim-pilot moves the joystick from deflection to neutral,
hence converting the movement of the joystick into movement of the trim
wheel.
This matches real-life where back/forward pressure on the elevator applied
by the pilot
is trimmed out by ONE operation: moving the trim-wheel. As the sim-pilot
smoothly moves
the joystick into neutral position RealTrim automatically adjusts the
elevator trim by a
corresponding amount. The airplane keeps its current pitch configuration -
only ONE
control input is required instead of the pilots having to move the joystick
into neutral
WHILE tapping the trim-key at the same time. RealTrim also comes with an
option to reduce
trim increments making it more precise to adjust trim in flight with the
trim up/down keys.

Its not exactly like trimming off control presssure but close and it sure
beats playing
with the trim wheel

wrote in message
oups.com...
Hi All,

I'm a longtime lurker here, but now I have a question I hope the group
can help me with. I am working toward my instrument rating (21 hours
so far), and want to use MSFS to practice (cheaply). I do fine with
holding a heading, but I find it very difficult to maintain an
altitude. The real plane is much much easier. I also noticed that
even when the scenery flies by smoothly (when I'm in VMC!) the
instruments seem to update at a slower rate. Not quite a slide show,
but harder than it should be to control. I've tried fiddling with
the realism and sensitivity settings to no avail. I have noticed a
number of folks posting on this group use this simulator to maintain
proficiency, and I was just wondering how you have it set up.

FYI...I'm using the CH products USB Flight Sim yolk, and the CH USB
rudder pedals. The computer seems plenty fast enough with a 256MB
graphics card. Like I mentioned before, everything is very smooth
except for the instruments refreshing.

Thanks everyone!

Steve

On Feb 14, 8:22 am, "john hawkins" wrote:
I noticed all the comments on holding altitude.
I ,too, found it nearly impossible until I used the add on realtrim
free from avsim libhttp://library.avsim.net/

File Description:
RealTrim is a Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004(tm) module that makes trimming
aircrafts
more realistic and resemble real-life. It can be activated via key-press
when the
sim-pilot moves the joystick from deflection to neutral,
hence converting the movement of the joystick into movement of the trim
wheel.
This matches real-life where back/forward pressure on the elevator applied
by the pilot
is trimmed out by ONE operation: moving the trim-wheel. As the sim-pilot
smoothly moves
the joystick into neutral position RealTrim automatically adjusts the
elevator trim by a
corresponding amount. The airplane keeps its current pitch configuration -
only ONE
control input is required instead of the pilots having to move the joystick
into neutral
WHILE tapping the trim-key at the same time. RealTrim also comes with an
option to reduce
trim increments making it more precise to adjust trim in flight with the
trim up/down keys.

Its not exactly like trimming off control presssure but close and it sure
beats playing
with the trim wheel

Another great idea.

Thanks

wrote in message

oups.com...

Hi All,

I'm a longtime lurker here, but now I have a question I hope the group
can help me with. I am working toward my instrument rating (21 hours
so far), and want to use MSFS to practice (cheaply). I do fine with
holding a heading, but I find it very difficult to maintain an
altitude. The real plane is much much easier. I also noticed that
even when the scenery flies by smoothly (when I'm in VMC!) the
instruments seem to update at a slower rate. Not quite a slide show,
but harder than it should be to control. I've tried fiddling with
the realism and sensitivity settings to no avail. I have noticed a
number of folks posting on this group use this simulator to maintain
proficiency, and I was just wondering how you have it set up.

FYI...I'm using the CH products USB Flight Sim yolk, and the CH USB
rudder pedals. The computer seems plenty fast enough with a 256MB
graphics card. Like I mentioned before, everything is very smooth
except for the instruments refreshing.

Thanks everyone!

Steve