KCHD to KMYF

VOR-DME writes:

It would floor you.

Believe what you will. Flying an airplane is not that difficult for me. I
suppose it might be difficult for others.

Sorry to hear about the "bad things" that happen. Must be very distressing.

It can be, if you take your flight simulation seriously, as I do.

Now you are challenging real pilots about their experience?

I'll take that as a "no."

As a matter of fact, I regularly fly single-pilot IFR.

In which jet?

My comments are from experience, which is why the inappropriateness
and incorrectness of your own jumped out at me.

Beware of experience. Good experience is valuable, bad experience is
dangerous.

Mxsmanic wrote:
VOR-DME writes:

It would floor you.

Believe what you will. Flying an airplane is not that difficult for me. I
suppose it might be difficult for others.

Sorry to hear about the "bad things" that happen. Must be very distressing.

It can be, if you take your flight simulation seriously, as I do.

If you really took it seriously you would put the same effort a real pilot
does in flight planning and not "fly" airplanes that require a crew solo.



--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

If you really took it seriously you would put the same effort a real pilot
does in flight planning and not "fly" airplanes that require a crew solo.

Sometimes I do put real effort into flight planning ... occasionally more than
many real pilots do (quite a few Sunday pilots are very poor planners).

The simulator doesn't give me the option of taking on a copilot, and I
wouldn't want to bother with that, anyway. The workload is higher with a
single pilot, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it can't be done.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

If you really took it seriously you would put the same effort a real pilot
does in flight planning and not "fly" airplanes that require a crew solo.

Sometimes I do put real effort into flight planning ...

That would be impossible as you have already said you don't use a flight
planner and you don't have to scale printed charts.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Rather than challenging real-world pilots about their own level of experience,
a bit more humility would have incited you to ask how many real pilots also
have experienced MSFS, and what their observations are. I’m sure there are
many present who have experienced this quirky simulation game, as I have. I
certainly cannot boast your own level of experience with it (wouldn’t admit it
if I could) but I have a huge advantage over you in that I had already been
flying airplanes (as well as real simulators) for years before I ever tried
MSFS, which allows me to discern what works and what doesn’t - something you
can only surmise or guess at.

MSFS is reasonably useful and fun for IFR recurrent training, tracking VOR’s
and airways, intercepts, etc. It is less useful for GPS navigation, as the
mock Garmin unit they propose is extremely feature-poor, and lacks many of the
pages and options pilots use every day. Perhaps these is why you resort
automatically to older VOR’s and airways, and consider ADS-B to be fiction,
because you have never seen what a real GPS does.

It is reasonably good at numbers flying, although the numbers are always "off"
a bit for any type of aircraft purportedly being flown, so you’ll just have to
learn the numbers for your MSFS install as if it were another plane. Probably
varies from one MSFS install to another, but then airplanes vary from one
another as well.

Landing MSFS is really hilarious, and is so far removed from landing any
airplane that it really only teaches you, well how to land MSFS. It is much
harder to land than any real plane, but not in any useful or constructive way.
What it is also really poor at is airplane control, particularly pitch
control. Flying a real King Air (or just about any other plane) in cruise and
rolling into a standard-rate turn, one rarely requires much pitch correction.
A quick glance at the VSI will tell you if you need some pitch input (or more
likely, whether you are already over-correcting) but unless you are holding
the turn for a long time very little input is needed. In the MSFS model of the
same plane (and other planes as well) as you roll into a standard rate turn
the airplane falls out of the sky! You have to haul back on it and add power
to maintain altitude. So it’s good for a laugh (games are made to have fun)
but it’s not a high-fidelity simulation.




In article ,
says...

Do you fly a lot of single-pilot IFR? Any time in jets?

On May 6, 11:53*am, VOR-DME wrote:
Rather than challenging real-world pilots about their own level of experience,
a bit more humility would have incited you to ask how many real pilots also
have experienced MSFS, and what their observations are. I’m sure there are
many present who have experienced this quirky simulation game, as I have.

Well stated VOR-DME but I have been there and done this with Mx for
many years.

He actually thinks that MSFS looks as real as my videos I have posted
these past few years (his words). I know from these past years he
has a severe disconnect with reality when he says stuff like this

Dunno about you but when simming, I really never did an approach
briefing and a few other steps required in a real plane in the clag
that simply is not replicated on a desktop simulator.

I stress desktop as a full motion sim is as real as it gets as you
have physical interaction based on your inputs. This is simply not
there with a joystick, keyboard and mouse as you brought you in your
King Air example..

I have said the same thing you have time over time with Mx, for
learning the procedures needed to operate in the IFR environment, MSFS
will do great, and I will even go as far as say it does great when you
simulate a vacuum or some other systems failure, but when the rubber
meets the road, MSFS is just exactly what you describe it as and that
is a game.

I have used MSFS to mentally get myself ready for an approach at an
airport I never been to so I can get the fixes stamped into my simple
mind but certainly it sure doesn't replace that approach briefing in
the plane.

Flying the skies as we do isn't as simple as escape and start over.
Bad things happen in the skies, not MSFS. Worst thing that happens in
MSFS is you push escape and start over (or even resume from a fix
where things didn't go as you expected)

My Sundowner did not have a undo feature. LOL

I asked Mx a direct question but he never answers. My lastest
question is what does he use for flight planning. If history repeats
itself, he won't answer.

Well, that's too bad, because he's not stupid at all.
Just a very non-constructive attitude that prevents him from acheiving any
in-depth understanding of aviation, or probably much else.
Perhaps it's just his fear of airplanes and flying that prevent him from going
any further...



In article ,
says...



Well stated VOR-DME but I have been there and done this with Mx for
many years.

He actually thinks that MSFS looks as real as my videos I have posted
these past few years (his words). I know from these past years he
has a severe disconnect with reality when he says stuff like this

Dunno about you but when simming, I really never did an approach
briefing and a few other steps required in a real plane in the clag
that simply is not replicated on a desktop simulator.

I stress desktop as a full motion sim is as real as it gets as you
have physical interaction based on your inputs. This is simply not
there with a joystick, keyboard and mouse as you brought you in your
King Air example..

I have said the same thing you have time over time with Mx, for
learning the procedures needed to operate in the IFR environment, MSFS
will do great, and I will even go as far as say it does great when you
simulate a vacuum or some other systems failure, but when the rubber
meets the road, MSFS is just exactly what you describe it as and that
is a game.

I have used MSFS to mentally get myself ready for an approach at an
airport I never been to so I can get the fixes stamped into my simple
mind but certainly it sure doesn't replace that approach briefing in
the plane.

Flying the skies as we do isn't as simple as escape and start over.
Bad things happen in the skies, not MSFS. Worst thing that happens in
MSFS is you push escape and start over (or even resume from a fix
where things didn't go as you expected)

My Sundowner did not have a undo feature. LOL

I asked Mx a direct question but he never answers. My lastest
question is what does he use for flight planning. If history repeats
itself, he won't answer.

VOR-DME writes:

Just a very non-constructive attitude that prevents him from acheiving any
in-depth understanding of aviation, or probably much else.

Actually just a refusal to submit to people who want to believe themselves
superior.

Perhaps it's just his fear of airplanes and flying that prevent him from going
any further...

But I don't have a fear of airplanes. It's more a question of money and time,
and for actually being a pilot, health.

In article ,
says...


VOR-DME writes:

Just a very non-constructive attitude that prevents him from acheiving any
in-depth understanding of aviation, or probably much else.

Actually just a refusal to submit to people who want to believe themselves
superior.

Perhaps it's just his fear of airplanes and flying that prevent him from
going
any further...

But I don't have a fear of airplanes. It's more a question of money and time,
and for actually being a pilot, health.



I'm sorry to hear it if there's a health issue involved in not flying, and I'm
sincere in that.

writes:

He actually thinks that MSFS looks as real as my videos I have posted
these past few years (his words).

I am regularly surprised by how real MSFS looks, given that it's just a
desktop simulator. And I don't use the scenery add-ons that some simmers use,
except for airports.

Dunno about you but when simming, I really never did an approach
briefing and a few other steps required in a real plane in the clag
that simply is not replicated on a desktop simulator.

I have. It improves the experience. Of course, the advantage to simulation is
that you can skip this if you're not in the mood.

I stress desktop as a full motion sim is as real as it gets as you
have physical interaction based on your inputs. This is simply not
there with a joystick, keyboard and mouse as you brought you in your
King Air example..

I know from your past posts that you depend a great deal on motion; apparently
that's an important part of the flying experience for you. You even rely on it
too much for IFR, as I recall, which may lead to unpleasantness one day.

I have said the same thing you have time over time with Mx, for
learning the procedures needed to operate in the IFR environment, MSFS
will do great, and I will even go as far as say it does great when you
simulate a vacuum or some other systems failure, but when the rubber
meets the road, MSFS is just exactly what you describe it as and that
is a game.

It's unfortunate that you have this attitude. You're depriving yourself of
much enjoyment.

Do you ever go to the movies or watch sports on TV?

I have used MSFS to mentally get myself ready for an approach at an
airport I never been to so I can get the fixes stamped into my simple
mind ...

Good!

Flying the skies as we do isn't as simple as escape and start over.
Bad things happen in the skies, not MSFS. Worst thing that happens in
MSFS is you push escape and start over (or even resume from a fix
where things didn't go as you expected)

As I've said, it depends on how seriously you take your simulation. If you're
not good at taking it seriously, or if you don't want to, you learn
considerably less from it.

I asked Mx a direct question but he never answers. My lastest
question is what does he use for flight planning. If history repeats
itself, he won't answer.

I believe I said that I use NACO charts and plates and online aviation weather
reports. That's good enough for simulation--I have no legal requirement to use
specially certified sources.