Realistic Instrument Training using MSFS 2004

"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" wrote:
wrote:
... 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.

Absolutely the real aircraft is easier. You can feel the pressure against your
hand in the real airplane. MSFS has never duplicated that accurately.

Neither X-Plane. As Steve, I tried using both X-Plane and MSFS 2002 to
reinforce the procedures while getting my SEL private rating.
Specially landing procedures. (Here I slow down, here I open the flaps
one notch, etc.)
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.
(And I also got a CH yoke & pedals, not via a joystick.)



Roberto Waltman

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

On Feb 14, 11:12 am, Roberto Waltman wrote:
"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" wrote:
wrote:
... 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.

Absolutely the real aircraft is easier. You can feel the pressure against your
hand in the real airplane. MSFS has never duplicated that accurately.

Neither X-Plane. As Steve, I tried using both X-Plane and MSFS 2002 to
reinforce the procedures while getting my SEL private rating.
Specially landing procedures. (Here I slow down, here I open the flaps
one notch, etc.)
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.
(And I also got a CH yoke & pedals, not via a joystick.)

Roberto Waltman

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

I having using MSFS from way back. I had many simulator hours years
before I finally got my private ticket in '99. Contrary to popular
opinion, I think it helped immensely (even with stick and rudder
skills) when I finally got around to flying for "real".

The one thing I didn't like on the simulator was crosswind landings, a
concept which took longer for me to get through my thick skull than it
should have!

You are right about holding a stable approach on the simulator. It
seems especially hard for me during an ILS approach. With a real
airplane it I have never have seen a full deflection of the needles;
it's common on the simulator!

Thanks Roberto.

wrote:
The one thing I didn't like on the simulator was crosswind landings, a
concept which took longer for me to get through my thick skull than it
should have!

You are right about holding a stable approach on the simulator. It
seems especially hard for me during an ILS approach. With a real
airplane it I have never have seen a full deflection of the needles;
it's common on the simulator!


I couldn't care less about landing the airplane in the sim, crosswind or
otherwise. I already know how to do that and I can't remember the last time I
made a hard landing. OTOH, almost every landing I've made in the sim has been
little better than a controlled crash. Sometimes it's an uncontrolled crash...
but WTH. I don't worry about it be cause I have the skills necessary to land
smoothly in real life.

I use the sim for the instrument practice: no scenery, panel in 2-D... it's all
about procedures and keeping my scan speed up to snuff. That's the stuff I work
on with the sim.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

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).

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

VFR flying is different than IMC - when using VFR rules your eyes should
be outside the cockpit - not inside on the instruments. In many ways an
instrument approach - even partial panel - is simpler - there are fewer
things to look at/be aware of.

Of course, if your flying experience is limited to MSFS then it is all
the same.

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).

Tim writes:

VFR flying is different than IMC - when using VFR rules your eyes should
be outside the cockpit - not inside on the instruments.

The manipulation of controls required to fly the plane is identical for both
IFR and VFR.

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

How would you know? You happen to be correct in the staqtement below,
but the generalization you made prior was silly. Visual cues are
different in IMC and VFR.


The manipulation of controls required to fly the plane is identical for both
IFR and VFR.

Tim writes:

How would you know?

It's so self-evident that I'm surprised you ask the question.

Why would the controls of an airplane behave _differently_ just because of
changing visibility outside the cockpit? It's the same atmosphere, the same
control surfaces, the same airframe, the same powerplants ... obviously they
will operate exactly the same in both VMC and IMC. One need not be a genius
to figure this out, and certainly one need not be a pilot (although it appears
that some pilots _haven't_ figured it out).

You happen to be correct in the staqtement below,
but the generalization you made prior was silly. Visual cues are
different in IMC and VFR.

There are no visual cues in IMC.

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

Mxsmanic wrote:

Tim writes:


How would you know?


It's so self-evident that I'm surprised you ask the question.

Why would the controls of an airplane behave _differently_ just because of
changing visibility outside the cockpit? It's the same atmosphere, the same
control surfaces, the same airframe, the same powerplants ... obviously they
will operate exactly the same in both VMC and IMC. One need not be a genius
to figure this out, and certainly one need not be a pilot (although it appears
that some pilots _haven't_ figured it out).


You happen to be correct in the staqtement below,
but the generalization you made prior was silly. Visual cues are
different in IMC and VFR.


There are no visual cues in IMC.


The controls don't behave differently (unless the airframe is iced up),
but you are neglecting the fact that the pilot is part of the control
loop. In VMC the input to the pilot is far different, with considerably
more information and lots of subtle cues than it is when in IMC. In
IMC, the total input to the pilot is through a few instruments.
Peripheral vision won't help you keep the wings level like it does in
VMC. Because there is much less information available to the pilot, and
his sense of balance can betray that information, it is far more
difficult to maintain the control of an aircraft without the visual cues
you get in VMC. This isn't about basic aircraft control, it is learning
to correctly interpret the instruments to replace the visual cues.
Furthermore, it takes a certain degree of concentration as well as
practice to do it. Now add in turbulent air, having to navigate, having
to set up for an approach, and talking with ATC. Unless you are
proficient on interpreting the instruments, you won't be able to
simultaneously keep control of the aircraft and also accomplish those
peripheral tasks without relying on an autopilot. COnsider the average
lifespan of a non-instrument rated pilot in an inadvertent IMC
encounter. There were studies done where the average time from entry
into IMC to a non-recoverable graveyard spin for non-instrument rated
pilots come out to something like 180 seconds.

I suspect when you are flying your MSFS you are relying more on the
instruments than a real pilot does in VMC, because simply put you don't
have the visual cues on a 2D screen that you get when sitting in a real
cockpit. You are most likely compensating by using the instruments more
than you would in a real airplane, probably without even realizing it.
As a result, when you go IMC on the sim, it isn't as big a shift for you
as it is for a pilot in a real airplane. Try this: cover up or turn off
the instrument display while flying VMC on the computer. See how well
you fare compared to when the instruments are there. Now try flying
into a simulated cloud with the instruments still covered. Tell me how
long you last before you hit the ground.

There are no visual cues in IMC.

Like Hell there aren't!