New student pilot

"David Kazdan" wrote in message
. net...
All true--but does anyone have a better Cessna 172 than the one included
with FS X? I'm instrument rated and like using the program to practice
approaches; my wife is working on her instrument rating and is doing the
same. The 172 included is so pitch sensitive we both have a hard time
with it. Or perhaps we're setting our yoke wrong in some way, but I
haven't been able to figure it out.

Please note that there is a simulator group, and this is not it.
--
Jim in NC

Morgans wrote:
"David Kazdan" wrote in message
. net...
All true--but does anyone have a better Cessna 172 than the one included
with FS X? I'm instrument rated and like using the program to practice
approaches; my wife is working on her instrument rating and is doing the
same. The 172 included is so pitch sensitive we both have a hard time
with it. Or perhaps we're setting our yoke wrong in some way, but I
haven't been able to figure it out.

Please note that there is a simulator group, and this is not it.
Jim;
I've been advising both Microsoft and software developers on the flight
simulator for some time now. The program does have some legitimate uses
related to actual flight training and as such certain questions posed on
the pilot forums are pertinent.
What I've been doing is separating posters who post about the simulator
into two categories. The first is like the poster you are answering who
has asked a question pertaining to actual flying vs the simulator. I
believe this type of question is within the forum boundaries and
deserves our attention.
The other type of post, the one I consider NOT within our forum
parameters, are posts asking about or talking about the sim itself.
These are the people I attempt to steer to the simulator forums.
Bottom line is that there are many of our own forum pilots using the
Microsoft program and as long as a newbie approaches us with something
directed at a real world pilot, I would answer that and treat it as a
legitimate question for the forum.
Naturally this is just my read on this, and I wouldn't fault you for
taking your own approach but at least some of the sim posters come here
seeking a friendly response from us and asking pertinent questions. I
try and cut them a break whenever possible.
Dudley


--
Dudley Henriques

"Dudley Henriques" wrote

I've been advising both Microsoft and software developers on the flight
simulator for some time now. The program does have some legitimate uses
related to actual flight training and as such certain questions posed on
the pilot forums are pertinent.

I try and cut them a break whenever possible.

Note that I made a simple statement, also, (without flames, so to speak) and
I genuinely thought that he would get better help when it comes to getting
the simulator set up, over there.

If it came to "how to make the VOR work like it would in real life", then I
would think that this is the place to be.
--
Jim in NC

"David Kazdan" wrote in message
. net...
All true--but does anyone have a better Cessna 172 than the one included
with FS X? I'm instrument rated and like using the program to practice
approaches; my wife is working on her instrument rating and is doing the
same. The 172 included is so pitch sensitive we both have a hard time
with it. Or perhaps we're setting our yoke wrong in some way, but I
haven't been able to figure it out.

Please note that there is a simulator group, and this is not it.
--
Jim in NC

Yea, the threads in here NEVER go off topic.

On Sun, 9 Sep 2007 19:28:25 -0400, Morgans wrote:

Please note that there is a simulator group, and this is not it.

I'm guessing that 70% of the pilots in this group have MSFS on their
computers and I'd bet most would say they use it to maintain proficiency.

I fail to see how this is off topic in any way.

Let's not let the troll whose name we shall not speak make us too sensitive
about the subject.

--
Dallas

"Dallas" wrote

I'm guessing that 70% of the pilots in this group have MSFS on their
computers and I'd bet most would say they use it to maintain proficiency.

I fail to see how this is off topic in any way.

Let's not let the troll whose name we shall not speak make us too
sensitive
about the subject.

You are correct, about being too sensitive, because of "you know who."

I suppose there was a little of that going on, with my response. I'll try
not to be so quick to jump, next time.
--
Jim in NC

Everyone, everyone lighten up! I responded privately and there was no
offense taken.

I've had my certificate eight years now and trust me--everything I know
(well, an awful lot of it) came from the community of these news groups.

David


Morgans wrote:
"Dallas" wrote

I'm guessing that 70% of the pilots in this group have MSFS on their
computers and I'd bet most would say they use it to maintain proficiency.

I fail to see how this is off topic in any way.

Let's not let the troll whose name we shall not speak make us too
sensitive
about the subject.

You are correct, about being too sensitive, because of "you know who."

I suppose there was a little of that going on, with my response. I'll try
not to be so quick to jump, next time.