If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#291
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't voice radio communications use FM?
Dave Stadt writes:
Thanks for providing that information. Guess I'll sell the airplane and go play with my simulator. It's a personal choice, and a matter of economics. If you have lots of money and time, being a real pilot becomes more practical, if that interests you. Believe what you want but MSFS is a toy and nothing more. Believe what you want, but MSFS is a simulator. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#292
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't voice radio communications use FM?
RK Henry writes:
No, you can't. Feeling the movement is entirely the point. That's a matter of individual preference. For instrument flight, feeling the movement is not only unnecessary, but potentially hazardous, if it distracts attention from what the instruments are saying. If you could fly the airplane by reference to the instruments without feeling movement, then instrument training would be easy. It is. But it doesn't work like that in the real world. The airplane inherently imparts accelerations that are inconsistent with the indications of the instruments. Which ones? Part of the training process is learning to ignore the sensations and trust the instruments. That rather conflicts with the preceding statement, doesn't it? If the instruments don't accurately indicate accelerations, why trust them? It can be very difficult for the untrained pilot to make this mental adjustment in the seconds before making a crater in the ground, which is why getting the training beforehand is so important. Like I said, the idea is to trust the instruments. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#293
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't voice radio communications use FM?
"Grumman-581" writes:
No, real instrument flying is learning to believe what the instruments are telling you even though your body is telling you something completely different... I remember in one of my first instrument lessons (in actual solid IMC) that even though I had the instruments perfectly centered for straight and level flight, my butt was telling that I was in a turn... If I had followed my feelings, I would have probably ended up in a descending spiral... The opposite can also happen. I have heard that people who have spent years in simulation and then decide to go for a pilot's license tend to spend too much time watching the instruments (although that depends to some extent on what type of simulation they've been doing). -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#294
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't voice radio communications use FM?
Roger (K8RI) writes:
Although the sim can do a very nice job of ... well... simulating an IFR cross country and even approach there are a number of things missing, part of which are psychological and part physical. I love rolling into a steep turn and feeling 2Gs pulling me down. I can understand that, but I usually hate strong physical sensations, so it probably would not please me at all. I stay off roller-coasters, for example. I love doing a loop (not in the Deb) while maintaining positive G forces all the way around. It's almost as if the earth makes a loop around me. That is definitely not on my list of desired experiences--although I've done it in simulation (while watching from a safe distance). I have a great respect for the airplane, the weather, ATC, and a certain amount of unpredictability in all. I've had ATC give me a vector for traffic avoidance and then forget me. I've had them clear me for a circle to land right in front of departing traffic, and I've had them tell me to follow the plane ahead when I couldn't see the wingtips on the Deb. I've also flown directly over automated stations reporting clear and I was in solid IMC. That's another reason why I don't feel a need for real-world flight. Too much room for human error (besides my own). It's difficult to describe the feeling of breaking out of the clouds just above MDA in rain to find the runway right where the instruments said it would be after a long cross country. That much can be largely simulated, and I like that experience. Sometimes I fly for hours in zero visibility, just to see if the instruments can be trusted, and they always can. If I'm not where I expect, I did something wrong. Of course, my life is not at stake in a simulator, but I don't need that kind of risk to make the experience enjoyable. The knowledge that if the runway isn't visible at the MAP I will have to "go around" and either try again, or go to some other airport is a part of the challenge I find exhilarating. Which is good, because you cannot simply stop the simulation if you are landing for real. Even if you are tired or frustrated or not feeling well. Also IRL (for those who don't sim that is sim language for "In real life") ATC makes mistakes, pilots make mistakes and it's up to you to maintain situational awareness. You have to know if what ATC just told you is correct, or what you just told ATC is going to tell them what they want and need to know. ATC makes mistakes in simulation, but it's a bug in the software, not a simulation of the real world, so you have to try to ignore it. It seems like every other aircraft is told to "go around" in MSFS, but I doubt that ATC would be that careless in real life. I love flying VFR on clear days when it seems you can see forever, but those days are rare here in the central Great Lakes. One of the most beautiful trips I ever took was IFR where I ended up between layers. It looked like a scene out of a sci-fi movie with the clouds above and below tied together with randomly spaced columns of cloud, Then there were the random small clouds floating around while the whole scene was lit with a fluorescent green light. Some scenes are interesting to see. Recent versions of simulators have become very good at producing convincing skies and weather. In some cases, the sim sky can easily be mistaken for the real thing. The same cannot be said of ground detail, which is manifestly computer generated on close examination (photo realism is possible but expensive, and it's not really necessary for most sim applications). I guess the easiest way to sum it up: I like siming, but I love flying IRL. You must be independently wealthy and retired if you can actually afford to fly in real life. And even then, it's unlikely that you have your own 737 that you can fly around whenever you're in the mood. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#295
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't voice radio communications use FM?
Larry Dighera writes:
If you want to fly military aircraft, you're out of luck unless you started at age 20 and ... Not really ... I was thinking mainly of state-of-the-art fighters and bombers, or other expensive and sensitive aircraft. I've been told by several military pilots that they really like trainers, though, and would choose those for their personal aircraft if they could. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#296
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't voice radio communications use FM?
B A R R Y writes:
Explain how you can tell the difference on the telephone. The telephone is often better than 4 kHz, and you can also infer from surrounding sounds; sick is a word, but fick is not. If it's only 4 kHz, there are some sounds that you won't hear, period. -- Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail. |
#297
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't voice radio communications use FM?
Mxsmanic,
If you could fly the airplane by reference to the instruments without feeling movement, then instrument training would be easy. It is. Listen. For the past week or so people have constantly tried to tell you that you might want to be more careful talking about things you have no clue about. Why don't you take a hint? How dare you judge how difficult instrument training is right after having explained that you have never flown? You must be truly dense. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#298
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't voice radio communications use FM?
Mxsmanic,
It's also the most frustrating. Hours to get to the airport, hours to get past the paranoia of incompetent security staff, another hour to get aboard, another hour waiting to leave the gate, a short period in the air with tons of traffic all around, above, and below you, and then another couple of hours at the other end. Coudln't agree less. If, after that "short period in the air", I arrive 6000 miles from where I usually live, the exitment is all worth it. But I take it you're not much into real life. All of this is avoided in simulation. You start the engines and go. When you are done, you stop. What's simulation got to do with flying? Do you drive? Not if I can avoid it. Well, what can I say. You live a weird life. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#299
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't voice radio communications use FM?
Mxsmanic,
You must be independently wealthy and retired if you can actually afford to fly in real life. That's just more bull****. Try visiting your local airport and have a look around. -- Thomas Borchert (EDDH) |
#300
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't voice radio communications use FM?
On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 00:37:41 GMT, Jose
wrote: What ever happened to the old distinction that was made between Gliders and Sail planes? What is the distinction? Way back and it may have been just here in the states, but gliders were un powered planes that were towed behind others and then cut loose to "glide" back to earth as in the troop gliders at Normandy. Sail planes on the other hand had the ability to "sail" in the air. They, like sail boats could turn on a dime, and use the wind and updrafts to their advantage. IOW sail planes could make use of thermals, and ridge currents to stay aloft for a long time while gliders could not., Some times I still see the distinction made even in news reports, but to most people sail planes are just gliders. I think it has been a good 20 to 30 years since that distinction was commonly used. It was pretty common when I started flying, but that was in 63. Jose Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder | John Doe | Piloting | 145 | March 31st 06 06:58 PM |
Air Force One Had to Intercept Some Inadvertent Flyers / How? | Rick Umali | Piloting | 29 | February 15th 06 04:40 AM |
terminology questions: turtledeck? cantilever wing? | Ric | Home Built | 2 | September 13th 05 09:39 PM |
I Hate Radios | Ron Wanttaja | Home Built | 9 | June 6th 05 05:39 PM |
AirCraft Radio Communications | [email protected] | Rotorcraft | 0 | November 13th 03 12:48 AM |