Force feedback versus real piloting?

Recently I was at a local airport talking to some pilots. One of
them (obviously a real pilot) said that doing a simulator with a
force feedback joystick and then flying a plane made for a smooth
transition.

I'm not a pilot so I didn't argue with that, but I was thinking
"huh?"

Isn't the general consensus here that force feedback is unrealistic?
Maybe I've read the wrong threads or those comments were from non-
pilots?

Partly curious, thanks.








--
I also posted this to a different group. I realize the force
feedback part is not necessarily for piloting, but the piloting part
is.

John Doe wrote in news:jR0Oi.2629$y21.1720
@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net:


Recently I was at a local airport talking to some pilots. One of
them (obviously a real pilot) said that doing a simulator with a
force feedback joystick and then flying a plane made for a smooth
transition.

I'm not a pilot so I didn't argue with that, but I was thinking
"huh?"

Isn't the general consensus here that force feedback is unrealistic?
Maybe I've read the wrong threads or those comments were from non-
pilots?

Partly curious, thanks.




Even the best sims are a very very poosr substitute for a real airplane,
and learning to fly using a sim is not a good idea.

Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

Even the best sims are a very very poosr substitute for a real airplane,
and learning to fly using a sim is not a good idea.

This is no longer true.

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip writes:

Even the best sims are a very very poosr substitute for a real
airplane, and learning to fly using a sim is not a good idea.

This is no longer true.


Yes, it is fjukkwit.

I use state of the art sims the doorknobs of shich cost more than the
bankruptcy that broke you and they don't even come close to the real thing.


Bertie

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Bertie the Bunyip writes:

Even the best sims are a very very poosr substitute for a real airplane,
and learning to fly using a sim is not a good idea.

This is no longer true.
..
We must distinguish between MSFS and commercial simulators

"The Old Bloke" wrote in
:

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Bertie the Bunyip writes:

Even the best sims are a very very poosr substitute for a real
airplane, and learning to fly using a sim is not a good idea.

This is no longer true.
.
We must distinguish between MSFS and commercial simulators




You can distinguish all you like. Even commercial ones aren't flying and
don't even come close to duplicating flight. They're good for practicing
procedures, emergencies etc, but none of them fly like an airplane.


Bertie

To all: Be advised that Anthony Atkielski is not a pilot, and only plays
MSFS on a computer. He has no basis for comparison between this game and
real flight.

If this is meant as a generic warning, it fails. A newbie here would
have no way of knowing who Anthony *is*, in this thread, without
further identification.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Isn't the general consensus here that force feedback is unrealistic?
Maybe I've read the wrong threads or those comments were from non-
pilots?

I've taken the flight sim thing as far as money will allow (see our
Kiwi at:
http://www.alexisparkinn.com/flight_simulator.htm ), and can tell you
that force-feedback sticks are cool, but not terribly helpful in a
flight sim -- mostly because (to my knowledge) no one makes a force-
feedback yoke/rudder pedal combination.

I have used Force-feedback sticks in combat sims, and they are very
cool -- but I don't fly fighters, and our Kiwi is set up to replicate
GA flying. (It's a prototype of sims we want to put in at the Iowa
Childrens Museum, as part of a major aviation exhibit...)

If someone were to come out with a Force-feedback yoke, I'd probably
buy it, though. The concept is a good one, but apparently it's MUCH
harder to incorporate in a yoke.

As for whether flying a sim is "real" -- our Kiwi is flown by real
pilots every day at our aviation theme-suite hotel. Pilots from all
over the world have checked it out, and -- although it has obvious
limitations -- it's as real as you can get without leaving the
ground.

The main limitations are (in order of importance):

- No peripheral vision. Even with a 104" projection screen, it's
still like flying a real plane whilst looking through 4" PVC pipes.

- No feedback. In a real plane, if you pull back on the yoke too hard
you know at once to release the back pressure because the G-forces
tell you. In the sim, newbie non-pilots routinely overstress the
planes, simply because they don't know how hard to pull. (Real
pilots, of course, have a built-in sense of what not to do. They,
therefore, don't ever run up against this limitation.)

- No motion. This is less important than you might believe, as your
brain substitutes for the lack of motion. That big screen has made
several people motion sick, without them ever moving an inch.

In the future I want to add a side window screen that will go a long
ways toward addressing the lack of peripheral vision. The other two
limitations are things that can't be addressed for less than a million
bucks...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Oct 7, 7:03 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"The Old Bloke" wrote :

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
.. .
Bertie the Bunyip writes:
You can distinguish all you like. Even commercial ones aren't flying and
don't even come close to duplicating flight. They're good for practicing
procedures, emergencies etc, but none of them fly like an airplane.

Bertie

State of the art, full motion sims do a credible job of replicating
flying. There are some things they can't do very well like high g
maneuvering flight, but things like landing, takeoff, instrument
procedures, even air refueling. are done very realistically. The FAA
awards type certificates in certain airframes without any "real"
airframe time based on the quality of the simulation. I used to do
threat validation for Air Force aircrew training devices and I've seen
many different sims--some of them would give you the leans and motion
sickness just like an aircraft. I am a pilot and flew fighters.

150flivver wrote in
ups.com:

On Oct 7, 7:03 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
"The Old Bloke" wrote
:

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
.. .
Bertie the Bunyip writes:
You can distinguish all you like. Even commercial ones aren't flying
and don't even come close to duplicating flight. They're good for
practicing procedures, emergencies etc, but none of them fly like an
airplane.

Bertie

State of the art, full motion sims do a credible job of replicating
flying. There are some things they can't do very well like high g
maneuvering flight, but things like landing, takeoff, instrument
procedures, even air refueling. are done very realistically. The FAA
awards type certificates in certain airframes without any "real"
airframe time based on the quality of the simulation. I used to do
threat validation for Air Force aircrew training devices and I've seen
many different sims--some of them would give you the leans and motion
sickness just like an aircraft. I am a pilot and flew fighters.



KI know all that and I' e flown those sims. I disagree, I don't think they
do a credible job. They do enough to get by, but that's about it,.


Bertie