Realistic Instrument Training using MSFS 2004

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.

Mxsmanic wrote:

I have to disagree with you here. If you rely on autopilot all the
time, the day will come when the autopilot goes on strike in the soup.
Good luck keeping the shiny side up, staying ahead of the airplane, and
keeping your situational awareness if you aren't proficient at
hand-flying on instruments. There's no way to maintain that proficiency
without doing it. There are many pilots who've perished when George
went on strike in the soup and the pilot wasn't proficient with
hand-flying in the soup.

I use the auto-pilot to reduce my workload when I am attending to other
tasks, and for that it is a gread load reducer. In a cross country
flight, there is a lot of time spent when you are not particularly busy,
and that is a good time to pull the plug on George and get some good old
hand flying time in.

Mxmanic, do you have an instrument rating? Your posts regarding user
fees make it sound to me like you don't even have a PPL.

"Ray Andraka" wrote in message ...
Mxsmanic wrote:


Mxmanic, do you have an instrument rating? Your posts regarding user
fees make it sound to me like you don't even have a PPL.

Ray, I think you deciphered the code! :-)

Ray Andraka writes:

I have to disagree with you here. If you rely on autopilot all the
time, the day will come when the autopilot goes on strike in the soup.

If you don't use the autopilot, why have it? Everything fails sooner or
later; that doesn't mean that you shouldn't use anything.

Good luck keeping the shiny side up, staying ahead of the airplane, and
keeping your situational awareness if you aren't proficient at
hand-flying on instruments.

Or, more specifically, if you aren't proficient at reading instruments and
flying by hand.

There's no way to maintain that proficiency
without doing it. There are many pilots who've perished when George
went on strike in the soup and the pilot wasn't proficient with
hand-flying in the soup.

How much practice do you need? Are you just going to let the autopilot gather
dust because you're afraid it might fail someday?

I use the auto-pilot to reduce my workload when I am attending to other
tasks, and for that it is a gread load reducer.

And this is all the more true if you are IFR.

In a cross country
flight, there is a lot of time spent when you are not particularly busy,
and that is a good time to pull the plug on George and get some good old
hand flying time in.

That's a matter of personal preference.

Mxmanic, do you have an instrument rating? Your posts regarding user
fees make it sound to me like you don't even have a PPL.

Correct. I only fly in simulation.

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

On Feb 14, 5:29 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
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 have nothing at all against autopilots; I think they are great. In
fact I love all technology which makes life easier and safer. Since I
won't be flying a commercial airline with redundant everything, I want
a way to mitigate the effects of single points of failure. Some non-
redundant items I can't do anything about (one fuel supply, one
engine, one pilot), but the ones I can I will. I have used the
autopilot flying VMC, and plan to become proficient flying with it in
IMC as well. Autopilots (at least the single axis one in the Dakota)
are just not that hard to use. I don't want to have to depend on
it. I think I will be a better and safer pilot if I can fly safely
and proficiently without all but the very basics.

My comments about the use of the autopilot are for my training, not
for actual use (especially when my family is on board).

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.

I have 250+ hours in VMC. I know how to control an aircraft. In VMC
you have this big horizon out the window available to judge your
attitude. In IMC, you just have the instruments. You have to learn
to ignore all physical sensations (no flying by the seat of your pants
here), and trust your instruments. The first part of every instrument
training syllabus I've ever seen emphasizes the ability to control the
airplane first and foremost. An autopilot will do this for you, but
that's no excuse for not knowing how to do it yourself. I don't want
to die from stupidity!


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.

I think both are important. In fact if you can't control the
airplane, but you know everything else about your situational
awareness and what exact procedures to follow, you will die knowing
exactly where you are buried.

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.

The PIC is always responsible for the safety on his/her ship, and of
course that includes monitoring the gauges to make sure the autopilot
is doing it's job. But what happens when you notice it isn't behaving
properly and you have to pull the breaker? That's why it's important
to have a backup plan.

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.

Different skill sets are required to control the airplane precisely
using instrument reference alone, versus looking out the window.

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

I would not be ashamed to use the autopilot. I'm just talking about
training here. I would be ashamed to have earned my instrument rating
and have to be dependent on the autopilot to be safe. But I doubt
there are any CFII's out there that would let that happen.


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.

It's a 5 second (or so) flash(?) animation at http://www.reality-
xp.com/products/FLNT/index.htm. Very impressive.
--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

wrote in message oups.com...


I have 250+ hours in VMC. I know how to control an aircraft. In VMC
you have this big horizon out the window available to judge your
attitude. In IMC, you just have the instruments. You have to learn
to ignore all physical sensations (no flying by the seat of your pants
here), and trust your instruments. The first part of every instrument
training syllabus I've ever seen emphasizes the ability to control the
airplane first and foremost. An autopilot will do this for you, but
that's no excuse for not knowing how to do it yourself. I don't want
to die from stupidity!


I learned to fly before private pilots received any instrument instruction.
Few of our airplanes had any gyros at all.
In those days, it was drilled into us that a non-instrument pilot,
trapped in IMC, had a life expectancy measured in minutes.
Sounds like you understand that.

On Feb 14, 8:14 pm, "John R. Copeland"
wrote:
wrote in ooglegroups.com...

I have 250+ hours in VMC. I know how to control an aircraft. In VMC
you have this big horizon out the window available to judge your
attitude. In IMC, you just have the instruments. You have to learn
to ignore all physical sensations (no flying by the seat of your pants
here), and trust your instruments. The first part of every instrument
training syllabus I've ever seen emphasizes the ability to control the
airplane first and foremost. An autopilot will do this for you, but
that's no excuse for not knowing how to do it yourself. I don't want
to die from stupidity!

I learned to fly before private pilots received any instrument instruction.
Few of our airplanes had any gyros at all.
In those days, it was drilled into us that a non-instrument pilot,
trapped in IMC, had a life expectancy measured in minutes.
Sounds like you understand that.

I've heard the audio tapes of hapless VFR pilots losing control in the
clouds. I don't want to contribute my name to that list!

writes:

The first part of every instrument
training syllabus I've ever seen emphasizes the ability to control the
airplane first and foremost.

Does that mean that you can fly VFR without the ability to control the
airplane?

Are you sure you are not confusing the need to know your situation with the
need to control the airplane? The latter is required for any type of flying;
the former is a task that is always required but is achieved differently in
IFR versus VFR.

I think both are important.

They are. But controlling the aircraft is something you _always_ do, in _any_
type of flying--IFR is no different from VFR in this respect, as all the same
techniques are used. Knowing your situation, on the other hand, requires
vastly different techniques in IFR versus VFR, and that's what you have to
learn for an instrument rating.

In fact if you can't control the
airplane, but you know everything else about your situational
awareness and what exact procedures to follow, you will die knowing
exactly where you are buried.

Yes, but that's just as true in VFR.

The PIC is always responsible for the safety on his/her ship, and of
course that includes monitoring the gauges to make sure the autopilot
is doing it's job. But what happens when you notice it isn't behaving
properly and you have to pull the breaker? That's why it's important
to have a backup plan.

I'd start by turning it off rather than pulling a breaker.

You need backup plans, but the fear of something failing shouldn't prevent you
from using it for normal flights.

Different skill sets are required to control the airplane precisely
using instrument reference alone, versus looking out the window.

No. Different skill sets are required for _situational awareness_ in
instrument flight. Controlling the airplane works in exactly the same way in
all types of flight. The rudder and yoke still work the same way, even in
IMC. The aircraft doesn't know or care whether you are in VMC or IMC.

I would not be ashamed to use the autopilot. I'm just talking about
training here. I would be ashamed to have earned my instrument rating
and have to be dependent on the autopilot to be safe. But I doubt
there are any CFII's out there that would let that happen.

Nobody says that you have to be dependent on an autopilot. But you can
certainly be accustomed to using it. Having an autopilot and not knowing how
to use it can be just as bad as depending on an autopilot and having it fail.

It's a 5 second (or so) flash(?) animation at http://www.reality-
xp.com/products/FLNT/index.htm. Very impressive.

Ah, I'm not able to view Flash, but if it convinces you, so much the better.
They are nice gauges.

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