KCHD to KMYF

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.

writes:

Flight planning DOES NOT stop after starting the engine. But it's
obvious you don't know this.

How do you plan for clouds that you don't even know exist? And if you can
perform that magic, why can't you look up the frequencies for navaids as you
incorporate them into your flight plan?

writes:

What flight planner do you use????

I use NACO charts, ADDS weather, real-world filed flight plans, and other
sources of information.

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.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

What flight planner do you use????

I use NACO charts, ADDS weather, real-world filed flight plans, and other
sources of information.

Or, in other words, you don't use a flight planner.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

On May 6, 2:40*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
Flight planning DOES NOT stop after starting the engine. *But it's
obvious you don't know this.

How do you plan for clouds that you don't even know exist?

I gave you the answer above......

On May 6, 2:41*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
What flight planner do you use????

I use NACO charts, ADDS weather, real-world filed flight plans, and other
sources of information.

Then you would never make it in the real world. The above is not all
there is to flight planning.

On May 6, 2:40*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

why can't you look up the frequencies for navaids as you
incorporate them into your flight plan?

My flight planner does this.

On May 6, 8:37*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
VOR-DME writes:

A Cessna 152 is really easy to fly. I don't think it would be a problem for
me. However, it's too slow for my tastes (usually).

Riiiight.
And how many hours do you have on type ?