Realistic Instrument Training using MSFS 2004

On Feb 14, 5:02 pm, C J Campbell
wrote:
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:40:31 -0800, wrote
(in article .com):

On Feb 13, 7:22 pm, Mark Hansen wrote:

You know using the autopilot in the simulator to just hold altitude is
one thing I haven't thought about. The only autopilot I have in the
'real' plane is a single axis (heading only) which I'm not using while
learning the rating. Very good idea!

I would recommend becoming at least familiar with using it IFR. The examiner
might expect you to use it, even. A little practice wouldn't hurt.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

Actually I belong to a flying club. There are two planes that I will
be using. A Warrior (no autopilot, no ADF, no DME, no GPS, no backup
vacuum) and a Dakota (single axis autopilot, ADF, DME, Garmin 430 GPS,
with backup vacuum). I will be using the Warrior for the check ride
since no ADF means no ADF approaches ;-)

After getting the rating I will probably be using the Dakota on real
IFR trips just based on safety, but it's cheaper to practice in the
Warrior. Plus I won't get spoiled using all those sophisticated
avionics!

Steve,
I forgot to mention that I had heard of the Elite program before
but did not want to buy it because of the cost (I already own several
versions of MS FS and X-plane). After visiting a flight school and
got a chance to checkout their Elite program (with the avionic stacks
and a CFII, you can log sim time - the program is the same as the
'home' version), I decided it was worth the money and got it. It is
extremely useful when use in conjunction with Elite excellent training
syllabus which start from the basic instrument settings, scanning
practice, oscar pattern etc. to approaches. Once finish with the
lesson, you can compare your tracks with the program tracks (including
the vertical dimension) to evaluate your progress. Elite also sells
several different ATC scenarios which are very helpful for IFR ATC
communication. We had our instrument ratings in May 05 and each had
logged close to 100hrs of instrument time (actual and simulated) since
then in our Cardinal. We still use the Elite program every so often
to practice a new approach at a new airport or just to sharpen our
skills when the weather is too crappy to fly (we had just shoveled a
foot of snow today!).

Hai Longworth

"Longworth" wrote

we had just shoveled a foot of snow today!).

Dang! I know lots of people will want to shoot me for this, but it has been
several years since we have seen a real snow. Would you mind sending some
of that snow our way? g
--
Jim in NC

On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 15:31:36 -0800, wrote
(in article .com):

On Feb 14, 5:02 pm, C J Campbell
wrote:
On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:40:31 -0800, wrote
(in article .com):

On Feb 13, 7:22 pm, Mark Hansen wrote:

You know using the autopilot in the simulator to just hold altitude is
one thing I haven't thought about. The only autopilot I have in the
'real' plane is a single axis (heading only) which I'm not using while
learning the rating. Very good idea!

I would recommend becoming at least familiar with using it IFR. The examiner
might expect you to use it, even. A little practice wouldn't hurt.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

Actually I belong to a flying club. There are two planes that I will
be using. A Warrior (no autopilot, no ADF, no DME, no GPS, no backup
vacuum) and a Dakota (single axis autopilot, ADF, DME, Garmin 430 GPS,
with backup vacuum). I will be using the Warrior for the check ride
since no ADF means no ADF approaches ;-)

After getting the rating I will probably be using the Dakota on real
IFR trips just based on safety, but it's cheaper to practice in the
Warrior. Plus I won't get spoiled using all those sophisticated
avionics!



Sounds like a plan.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

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! :-)

I've been told that all sims have overly sensitive pitch. That has been
my
experience with a Frasca, ASA's Instrument Procedure Trainer, and Elite.
Hard
to understand why no one fixes it, but apparently they don't.


I haven't tried those simulators, just MSFS. I would be willing to
pay the bucks if it would help. It's a lot cheaper than an extra
lesson (or two or three).

I have read that the old Link Trainers were very sensitive in pitch, and
also much more slippery than the aircraft they were intended to train
for--such as B17's. In the case of the Link, I presume that was by design;
however I have difficulty believing that MSFS would have been done that way
deliberately.

I have no experience in the Link, or in any of the PC based sims. I am
simply curious and inviting comment.

Peter

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.

"Peter Dohm" wrote in message ...
I've been told that all sims have overly sensitive pitch. That has been
my
experience with a Frasca, ASA's Instrument Procedure Trainer, and Elite.
Hard
to understand why no one fixes it, but apparently they don't.


I haven't tried those simulators, just MSFS. I would be willing to
pay the bucks if it would help. It's a lot cheaper than an extra
lesson (or two or three).

I have read that the old Link Trainers were very sensitive in pitch, and
also much more slippery than the aircraft they were intended to train
for--such as B17's. In the case of the Link, I presume that was by design;
however I have difficulty believing that MSFS would have been done that way
deliberately.

I have no experience in the Link, or in any of the PC based sims. I am
simply curious and inviting comment.

Peter


Dunno what comments you're looking for, but I have Link time.
For flying, they were *at least* as bad as you said!
Stall/Spin events were an everyday occurrence.
But remember, their purpose was for procedures training,
not flight training. They were good for their purpose.

Keep the same attitude toward the PC sims, and you'll be OK.
Even FlightSafety's twin-Cessna full-motion simulator won't simulate landing.
FlightSafety instructors will issue a flight review in the simulator,
but only after the student certifies the required prior actual aircraft landings.

On Feb 14, 7:32 pm, "Morgans" wrote:
"Longworth" wrote

we had just shoveled a foot of snow today!).

Dang! I know lots of people will want to shoot me for this, but it has been
several years since we have seen a real snow. Would you mind sending some
of that snow our way? g
--
Jim in NC

Jim,
I'd be glad to send you several cubic feet of snow. The snow is
free. You just pay the shiping cost ;-)
Hai Longworth