Realistic Instrument Training using MSFS 2004

Mxsmanic wrote:
Roberto Waltman writes:

In the final stages, when I was getting consistently good comments on
my landings from my flight instructors (on three planes: C152, C172,
Cherokees) I still couldn't hold a stable approach on a simulator.

You're probably depending a great deal on physical sensations. You can
probably get away with that on the aircraft you've been flying, but not all
aircraft (it's hard to fly by the seat of one's pants in an Airbus).

Without (re)opening a discussion on the validity / goodness of
simulator time vs. actual-in-the-air time, and/or what flying means to
you or others, I would like to state that (talking for myself only):

(a) I have no intention, plans or desires to fly an Airbus (as a
pilot. I will continue to fly them as cargo.)

(b) I have no intention, plans or desires to pilot a jet airplane.

(c) I have no intention, plans or desires to pilot a multi-engine
airplane.

(d) I have no intention, plans or desires to pilot a complex airplane.
(Except to get a commercial rating)

(e) I have no intention, plans or desires to pilot a "modern" GA
airplane with it's increasingly complex avionics. (*)
(In some flights, while getting my private rating, I carried with me a
hand held GPS - For emergencies. I had it on for a few minutes to
verify it was working OK, and then it was switched off and went back
to the flight bag for the rest of the flight. Working with a sectional
is much more interesting.)

(f) I do have intentions of flying a couple of homebuilts airplanes
(both are restoration projects at these moment.) One is a "Nordo", (no
'lectrics), both have the simplest instrumentation you can get away
with, neither one is IFR equipped, or even night flying equipped.
(Why these? Because I can not afford a Stinson Reliant or a Stearman.)

(g) I do have intentions of getting IFR and commercial ratings, to
become a better pilot, to keep myself challenged, (maybe to become a
CFI after retirement?), but not to start a career in aviation.

(h) I do have intentions of flying gliders again some day.
For both (f) and (h) the thing immediately above the seat is a very
useful instrument, second only to the yaw-string. (When properly
calibrated, of course. )

(i) I have invested a small sum of money in flight simulator related
materials: Software, yoke, pedals, a faster computer for the sim, etc.
I will continue to do so, I am even thinking of building a Cessna
152'ish cockpit with a believable panel.
And while I consider the simulator a valuable training aid for flying,
after having "slipped the surly bonds of Earth", I do not consider,
even for a second, that any amount of time spend in a simulator
qualifies as "Flying".

(YMMV, of course. And I am aware the of the FAA regulations regarding
simulator time for currency, ratings, etc.)


(*) Before somebody calls me a Luddite, at work I am currently trying
to debug a new system based on one of the latest-and-greatest,
"screaming-edge" Digital Signal Processor, hooked to a rat's nest of
wires leading to a 1Ghz Lecroy sampling oscilloscope and other
instruments, blah, blah, blah.
I am getting all the high-tech fixes I need here. Flying is for
something else ...

Roberto Waltman

[ Please reply to the group,
return address is invalid ]

On 02/14/07 11:57, wrote:
On Feb 14, 1:28 pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
I guess I have to disagree with you there. The first priority should
be keeping the airplane from stalling/spinning/spiraling into the
ground (AVIATE, navigate, communicate).

That is situational awareness. As long as you know the aircraft's attitude
and condition, you can avoid stalls, spins, and spirals. To know that in IMC,
you need to read the instruments.

How you actually fly the aircraft once you know your situation is irrelevant
to IFR. You can use the autopilot if you want, and in fact doing so will give
you more freedom to worry about other things. The actual flying of the
aircraft is no different in IFR from in VFR--the aircraft behaves the same way
and responds the same way. So you don't need to worry about that if you
already know how to fly in VFR. What you need to worry about is keeping
tracking of your position, altitude, attitude, and so on, so that you know
what control inputs to make.

This being so, it's not "cheating" to use an autopilot for IFR.


I don't want to have my life dependent on a working autopilot, so I am
purposely avoiding it for now I understand that the airplane doesn't
know if it's in the clouds, but I can sure tell. Being able to fly
without an autopilot, and using only the instruments as a reference is
a HUGE part of my training.

Steve,

I sent you a message off-line. Please let me know whether or not you've
received it. If your e-mail address is spam-proofed, just send me an
e-mail so I can get your actual address.

Thanks,


That said, once I have my rating I will take advantage of everything
(autopilot, handheld GPS) at my disposal. But I still intend to
practice partial panel, no autopilot, no GPS so I don't get too rusty.



--
Mark Hansen, PP-ASEL, Instrument Airplane
Cal Aggie Flying Farmers
Sacramento, CA

wrote:
The one thing I didn't like on the simulator was crosswind landings, a
concept which took longer for me to get through my thick skull than it
should have!

You are right about holding a stable approach on the simulator. It
seems especially hard for me during an ILS approach. With a real
airplane it I have never have seen a full deflection of the needles;
it's common on the simulator!


I couldn't care less about landing the airplane in the sim, crosswind or
otherwise. I already know how to do that and I can't remember the last time I
made a hard landing. OTOH, almost every landing I've made in the sim has been
little better than a controlled crash. Sometimes it's an uncontrolled crash...
but WTH. I don't worry about it be cause I have the skills necessary to land
smoothly in real life.

I use the sim for the instrument practice: no scenery, panel in 2-D... it's all
about procedures and keeping my scan speed up to snuff. That's the stuff I work
on with the sim.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN
mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com

On Feb 13, 7:43 pm, wrote:
Hi All,

I'm a longtime lurker here, but now I have a question I hope the group
can help me with. I am working toward my instrument rating (21 hours
so far), and want to use MSFS to practice (cheaply). I do fine with

Steve,
For my instrument training, I used the Elite program and followed
their Instrument Training Syllabus. I completed this self-taught
course along with actual simulated instrument practice with my husband
as safety pilot before we took the accelerated instrument training
with Bill Zaleski in Schenecdaty NY. Bill told us that we were ready
for the checkrides after 5 days. My logbook showed that I only had
the 'minimum' dual instrument training time so the $150 I spent on the
core Elite program + $50 for the IFR training manual were well spent.
I highly recommend you giving it a try. We 'played' with MS Flight
Simulator for years mainly for the scenery but did not find it
realistic enough for control inputs/feedbacks. I also purchased X-
plane but did not spent a lot of time with it to compare with other
programs. By the way, we even bought the Dream Fleet Cardinal addon
for MS FS to 'simulate' our flying experience with our Cardinal. The
look was there but not the feel of the control. I have not used MS FS
for the last 2 years but my recollection was that the control
adjustments were not fine enough (with both my old Thrustmaster
Joystick/CH pedal or my new CH yolk/pedal). With Elite, I was able
to adjust the sensitivities to get pretty close to real life
flying. If you are interested in Elite but don't want to spend alot
of money, you may want to check ebay. A friend of mine just bought
the program for $100. I plan to loan him my IFR training manual to
practice in preparation for his IFR checkride. You can also download
Elite trial program. It allows you 5 minutes of 'practice'.

Hai Longworth

On Feb 14, 3:09 pm, "Longworth" wrote:
On Feb 13, 7:43 pm, wrote:

Hi All,

I'm a longtime lurker here, but now I have a question I hope the group
can help me with. I am working toward my instrument rating (21 hours
so far), and want to use MSFS to practice (cheaply). I do fine with

Steve,
For my instrument training, I used the Elite program and followed
their Instrument Training Syllabus. I completed this self-taught
course along with actual simulated instrument practice with my husband
as safety pilot before we took the accelerated instrument training
with Bill Zaleski in Schenecdaty NY. Bill told us that we were ready
for the checkrides after 5 days. My logbook showed that I only had
the 'minimum' dual instrument training time so the $150 I spent on the
core Elite program + $50 for the IFR training manual were well spent.
I highly recommend you giving it a try. We 'played' with MS Flight
Simulator for years mainly for the scenery but did not find it
realistic enough for control inputs/feedbacks. I also purchased X-
plane but did not spent a lot of time with it to compare with other
programs. By the way, we even bought the Dream Fleet Cardinal addon
for MS FS to 'simulate' our flying experience with our Cardinal. The
look was there but not the feel of the control. I have not used MS FS
for the last 2 years but my recollection was that the control
adjustments were not fine enough (with both my old Thrustmaster
Joystick/CH pedal or my new CH yolk/pedal). With Elite, I was able
to adjust the sensitivities to get pretty close to real life
flying. If you are interested in Elite but don't want to spend alot
of money, you may want to check ebay. A friend of mine just bought
the program for $100. I plan to loan him my IFR training manual to
practice in preparation for his IFR checkride. You can also download
Elite trial program. It allows you 5 minutes of 'practice'.

Hai Longworth

I downloaded the Elite demo (it's up to $200 now for the core
package), and it looks very nice. I didn't see any deals on Ebay
today, so it looks like $250 total if you include the book.

It still could be well worth the money considering what it costs to
learn in a real airplane. If I can't make MSFS happy using the
suggestions provided in this thread, I may very well buy it.

If I just stick to procedures training, and don't worry about actually
trying to fly by hand, I'm probably there already.

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

Steve

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 17:40:31 -0800, wrote
(in article .com):

On Feb 13, 7:22 pm, Mark Hansen wrote:



You know using the autopilot in the simulator to just hold altitude is
one thing I haven't thought about. The only autopilot I have in the
'real' plane is a single axis (heading only) which I'm not using while
learning the rating. Very good idea!

I would recommend becoming at least familiar with using it IFR. The examiner
might expect you to use it, even. A little practice wouldn't hurt.


--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On Tue, 13 Feb 2007 20:53:10 -0800, wrote
(in article .com):



My biggest issue right now is that when (in a real airplane) I'm only
focusing on the instruments, things go very well. When I have to look
up a procedure or find an intersection and take my attention away from
the instruments: that's when the worms can come out of the ground!

Thanks for your time.


It does get a lot easier with experience. You just need to get to the point
where you are controlling the airplane with a very light touch most of the
time.

A good practice is to take your hands and off the controls and see how long
the airplane stays where you put it. If it starts to drift immediately, you
might want to check your trim.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

On Wed, 14 Feb 2007 05:06:59 -0800, Thomas Borchert wrote
(in article ):

I do fine with
holding a heading, but I find it very difficult to maintain an
altitude.


That's not really what you can practice with MSFS. It's just not close
enough to the real thing.

What you CAN practice, is procedures. The whole timing, cockpit
organisation and everything. Figuring out hold entries, setting up
stuff, how much time is there from IAF to FAF to touchdown, those
things. You need to really sit down with the kneeboard and approach
charts. I wouldn't/didn't bother with radio work, since it is so
unrealistic.


Truly. MSFS can be an invaluable aid for these things.



--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor

Tim writes:

VFR flying is different than IMC - when using VFR rules your eyes should
be outside the cockpit - not inside on the instruments.

The manipulation of controls required to fly the plane is identical for both
IFR and VFR.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

writes:

I don't want to have my life dependent on a working autopilot, so I am
purposely avoiding it for now.

If you have a choice between a working autopilot and nothing, the working
autopilot is generally preferable.

Your life depends on an autopilot each time you board a commercial flight,
particularly if it's not a U.S. airline.

In IMC, you use all the resources you have in order to not get killed.
Eschewing the autopilot because you resent automation will put you at a
disadvantage if you are stuck in IMC and the autopilot can save you but you
can't remember how to use it.

I understand that the airplane doesn't
know if it's in the clouds, but I can sure tell. Being able to fly
without an autopilot, and using only the instruments as a reference is
a HUGE part of my training.

Perhaps I've not made myself clear. You use the instruments to assess your
situation. You use your autopilot to carry out your commands. The autopilot
is not a reference or a source of information; it is a work-saving device.
When you have lots of complex instruments to scan, it's very handy to have
something that will fly the aircraft for you based on your instructions.
There's no advantage to flying the plane by hand IFR if you have an autopilot.
And flying IFR is not the time to practice controlling the aircraft; if you
don't already know how to do that, trying to learn in IMC will lead to your
premature demise.

That said, once I have my rating I will take advantage of everything
(autopilot, handheld GPS) at my disposal. But I still intend to
practice partial panel, no autopilot, no GPS so I don't get too rusty.

Try to make the distinction between sources of information and control
mechanisms. IFR is all about getting the right information; it's not about
controlling the aircraft.

It sure is a lot more interesting when all you have are the "steam
gauges". But I agree with you that autopilots do make life easier
(and safer).

Autopilots and gauges are two different things. See above. Flying on
autopilot doesn't relieve you of the need to watch your instruments, it just
relieves you of the need to continually fly the airplane. Turning the
autopilot off doesn't make you any better at reading the instruments, either.

When your autopilot breaks, there is also difficulty in actually doing
it.

If you can control the aircraft in VFR, you can control it in IFR. If you
can't control the aircraft, you belong on the ground.

If your autopilot is not broken, there's no shame in using it. That's what it
is there for.

I went to Reality XP's website, and they had a side by side comparison
of the "stock" gauges, and their product. Amazing. One of the planes
I fly (and will be training in) has the Garmin 430, so I might be
downloading that as well. Thanks for the tip.

They were still photos, no? They are really impressive when they are actually
operating. Silky smooth action, behavior just like the real thing, and no
buttons or knobs that do not work.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.