Simulators

In article ,
Mxsmanic wrote:

Mike Ash writes:

... have you considered flying gliders? They're a lot of fun, and
no medical is required.

Really? (I've never looked.) That seems odd ... isn't an incapacitated pilot
in a glider in just as much danger as he would be in a powered aircraft? And
can't he still hit things and injure people and property on the ground? I
thought that was the whole idea behind requiring medicals.

Gliders are usually lighter than other small planes (my glider is about
average and weighs 800 pounds with me in it) so the potential for damage
is considerably less. Gliders carry no fuel, so there is essentially no
risk of fire. Gliders almost never fly over densely populated areas, so
the probability of crashing into something valuable is considerably
less. Glider pilots carry passengers much less frequently, and almost
always carry one at a time, so the risk to passengers is much less.

So no, an incapacitated glider pilot is much less of a danger.

Of course some people don't enjoy that sort of thing, and
nothing against them, as everybody has different tastes.

What do you think of glider simulations in MSFS?

I've heard that there are some add-on gliders for MSFS that are greatly
superior to the default (as there are for powered aircraft), but I haven't
looked into it as I've not felt very attracted to gliding. Gliding seems to
be mostly a visceral and visual experience, both of which are weak points of
desktop simulators.

The last time I used MSFS was version 4, I think, where everything was
still flat-shaded polygons and there were a grand total of three
airports available, one of which was Meigs Field where the default
start. So I have no direct experience with MSFS's glider simulation.

I do have some direct experience with X-Plane's glider simulation, and
it's total crap. I mean, it's OK for just flying around, but the
simulation of thermals is junk and the ridge lift doesn't work very
well. The tow simulation is ridiculous. The audio variometer, the single
most useful instrument in the plane, is completely broken.

And then there are generic simulator problems too, that MSFS will share
even if it fixes all of those (which it probably doesn't). The field of
view is ridiculously narrow, which makes everything difficult, but
especially screws up landing. (I spend the last third or so of my
downwind leg looking over my shoulder, for example, with quick glances
back at the instruments.) When thermalling, the jolts in the ass are
very helpful in finding the center and of course there's no way to get
those.

The most damning thing about it, though, is that it's just not any fun.
Being out over the countryside 30 miles from home, working lift so you
can make it back, is *fun*. Simulating being out over the countryside 30
miles from home is just boring.

If you're going to try glider sims, try one of the specialized ones such
as Silent Wings or Condor. While they can't fix the inherent poor field
of view or lack of kicks in the ass or the lack of fun, they at least
get the other stuff right.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

Mike Ash wrote:

If you're going to try glider sims, try one of the specialized ones such
as Silent Wings or Condor. While they can't fix the inherent poor field
of view or lack of kicks in the ass or the lack of fun, they at least
get the other stuff right.

While its not 100%, grab a old throwaway PC, put it on your left
and slightly behind you, and network it to the primary computer. You
can set it to slave off the forward PC, and set the view angle to
whatever you desire. It makes a world of difference in judging the
final, there is shareware to do it for MSFS, and it is built into
X=Plane. Its a kluge, but it works. I imagine the glider sims can
will support that or a Matrox TripleHead2Go setup as well.

Steve

In article
,
wrote:

Mike Ash wrote:

If you're going to try glider sims, try one of the specialized ones such
as Silent Wings or Condor. While they can't fix the inherent poor field
of view or lack of kicks in the ass or the lack of fun, they at least
get the other stuff right.

While its not 100%, grab a old throwaway PC, put it on your left
and slightly behind you, and network it to the primary computer. You
can set it to slave off the forward PC, and set the view angle to
whatever you desire. It makes a world of difference in judging the
final, there is shareware to do it for MSFS, and it is built into
X=Plane. Its a kluge, but it works. I imagine the glider sims can
will support that or a Matrox TripleHead2Go setup as well.

That'll help. Of course, I'd really need a third one, too, positioned a
bit higher so that I can see the runway in a turn. And then another pair
for the right side for right-hand patterns. And the whole works would
*still* be just a small fraction of the enormous field of view I get in
the real thing.

I'm sure that with the appropriate application of money you could make
things a lot better, but it'll still be a pale shadow of reality, and in
the end I'd rather spend the money on flying. Just getting a decent
realistic set of controls would probably cost a couple month's worth of
tows, let alone a whole new computer.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

Depends on how creative you are, one of my friends has 9 monitors and
9 computers from a university auction, arranged around a desk.
Its crazy, but a heck of improvement on a single monitor. If you dig,
cheap computers are out there by the skid loads from corporate and
government upgrades.

Steve

Mike Ash writes:

I'm sure that with the appropriate application of money you could make
things a lot better, but it'll still be a pale shadow of reality ...

The best simulators are much more than just a pale shadow, but as you surmise,
they are expensive.

Just getting a decent
realistic set of controls would probably cost a couple month's worth of
tows, let alone a whole new computer.

I can get the entire set-up for the cost of roughly three hours of rental of a
real aircraft.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Mike Ash writes:

I'm sure that with the appropriate application of money you could make
things a lot better, but it'll still be a pale shadow of reality ...

The best simulators are much more than just a pale shadow, but as you
surmise,
they are expensive.

Just getting a decent
realistic set of controls would probably cost a couple month's worth of
tows, let alone a whole new computer.

I can get the entire set-up for the cost of roughly three hours of rental
of a
real aircraft.

And a sex toy for half the cost of a real girlfriends dinner.

This is not a sim group, dumb ass. Find a group that give a ****.

In article ,
Mxsmanic wrote:

Mike Ash writes:

I'm sure that with the appropriate application of money you could make
things a lot better, but it'll still be a pale shadow of reality ...

The best simulators are much more than just a pale shadow, but as you surmise,
they are expensive.

I doubt any such "best simulators" exist for gliders. And if they did,
they'd cost more than the real thing.

Just getting a decent
realistic set of controls would probably cost a couple month's worth of
tows, let alone a whole new computer.

I can get the entire set-up for the cost of roughly three hours of rental of a
real aircraft.

The "entire thing" as in six monitors and computers to drive them all?
Which aircraft?

My marginal cost for flying is gas to drive to the airport and around
$32 for the tow. If I were renting a club plane instead of flying my own
I'd pay about $24/hour on top of those. As it is, the cost of ownership
is pretty much entirely fixed regardless of how much I fly. Lately,
amortizing the per-flight costs over the flight time, I've been paying
roughly $25/hour total.

Given the rental prices you've cited in the past, "three hours" is
probably around $600. That is several months of my flying budget, just
as I said.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

Mike Ash writes:

The "entire thing" as in six monitors and computers to drive them all?

You mentioned only a new computer and a decent set of controls.

My marginal cost for flying is gas to drive to the airport and around
$32 for the tow. If I were renting a club plane instead of flying my own
I'd pay about $24/hour on top of those. As it is, the cost of ownership
is pretty much entirely fixed regardless of how much I fly. Lately,
amortizing the per-flight costs over the flight time, I've been paying
roughly $25/hour total.

Sounds like gliders are a lot less expensive than powered aircraft.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Mike Ash writes:

The "entire thing" as in six monitors and computers to drive them all?

You mentioned only a new computer and a decent set of controls.

My marginal cost for flying is gas to drive to the airport and around
$32 for the tow. If I were renting a club plane instead of flying my own
I'd pay about $24/hour on top of those. As it is, the cost of ownership
is pretty much entirely fixed regardless of how much I fly. Lately,
amortizing the per-flight costs over the flight time, I've been paying
roughly $25/hour total.

Sounds like gliders are a lot less expensive than powered aircraft.

Gee, I wonder why. Must be some kind of Anti-Mxsmanic campaign.

In article ,
Mxsmanic wrote:

Mike Ash writes:

The "entire thing" as in six monitors and computers to drive them all?

You mentioned only a new computer and a decent set of controls.

That's not true. I also mentioned a more comprehensive setup. I asked
the question because I wasn't sure which one you were referring to.

My marginal cost for flying is gas to drive to the airport and around
$32 for the tow. If I were renting a club plane instead of flying my own
I'd pay about $24/hour on top of those. As it is, the cost of ownership
is pretty much entirely fixed regardless of how much I fly. Lately,
amortizing the per-flight costs over the flight time, I've been paying
roughly $25/hour total.

Sounds like gliders are a lot less expensive than powered aircraft.

Your powers of perception are truly astounding.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon