Simulators

On May 17, 4:29*am, Mxsmanic wrote:

Not really. The fact that I simulate isn't necessarily relevant to the
conversation.

YES IT IS.

Remember, virtually all aspects of simulation work just as the
real world does ... that's the point. *Pull back on the yoke and pitch
increases. Extend the gear and drag increases. It doesn't really matter if
it's simulated or real.

WRONG. Much to your chagrin, there is MUCH more to flying a real
plane then MSFS. As stated before, ONLY one example is inner ear
balance. I never got leans in front of my computer. I never reached
over to tune a radio in IMC on MSFS. I have never had anything bad
happened to me when I crashed in MSFS. I won't test that in real
life.

I talk from experience in both the sim and real world. What is your
experience in a REAL plane (NOT MSFS or desktop computer) on an IFR
flight plan in IMC????

Let me guess, you won't answer the last question above.

On May 16, 10:27*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Lets see just how much PIC time you can stack up against
the majority of the posters in the group.

Why?

Demonstrates you are not proficient in flying real planes. In fact,
you can't even say you are a proficient pilot. Maybe a proficient
MSFS pilot, but not a pilot of a real plane. As stated in another
thread, the two are not the same (MSFS and real life piloting an
airplane)

Let me guess, you are not even a CGI either are you?

No. So what?

Demonstrates you are not a credible source for flying real airplanes.

Anyway, if I talk about my simulation and people think I'm flying a real
airplane, then my simulation must be pretty good (it fooled the FAA once).. On
the other hand, if it's obvious that I'm simulating, then it doesn't matter if
I don't mention the fact, does it?

Demonstrates you are not a credible source for flying real airplanes.
Demonstrates you are not an honest person
Demonstrates you pretend you are something you are not.

Many PPLs don't know anything about any airplane except the one
they usually fly. *

Which is more then what you know. You don't fly a real airplane do
you?

I flew a Beech Sundowner. I don't need to know anything about Beech
Barons, Sieras, Lears, Citations do I? All I need to know is what a
Beech Sundowner does in the real world.

Nothing bad happens to me with my Beech Sundowner add in on MSFS.
Worst thing that happens is I restart MSFS.

I can't say the same in my real life Beech Sundowner or something
really bad will happen. What part of that do you not
understand???????????

On Mon, 17 May 2010 05:20:47 -0700 (PDT), Dudley Henriques wrote:

Never getting upset with you is a tool not a positive trait. In my
opinion it's simply part and parcel of your carefully chosen Usenet
"persona". I've watched this coming from you now for a long enough
period to more than get a positive read on you. By not "getting
upset", you simply wade through the virtual tons of negative responses
you carefully generate and achieve what you apparently view as a
"victory" against your antagonists.

At least one of many /gets it/.

The rest of you are either bored ****less or total fools...or both.
--
A fireside chat not with Ari!
http://tr.im/holj
Motto: Live To Spooge It!

In article
In a few more posts, I'll tire of you as I always have done in the
past and move on, simply one more "pilot" who has your number has had
enough of you for one day.
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Dudley Henriques



You are correct. The only thing that could be a greater waste of time than
getting into a tit-for-tat semantic thumb-twiddling competition with this
contributor is to try to have a serious conversation with him. Did you ever
try agreeing with him? I am the first to recognize the things he does know
about aviation, and to post agreement when I actually do agree, but these
posts never elicit a response, and never go further, because he is not here to
share. He is here to pick at people, to belittle others who have far greater
experience than he. If you make an argument he cannot counter, he hides behind
an insipid ruse, _Explain what you mean by_... trying to get something else to
dig into. He understands that pilots have worked hard to achieve what they
have, and they have far greater motivation than he could ever muster, so he
sees them as easy targets for belittlement, and takes a truly perverse
pleasure in the outrage he is able to inspire by insulting unsuspecting
targets.

It is a safe bet that this contributor is playing similar vindictive games on
other sites where professionals congregate, telling doctors, lawyers,
investors or other experts they do not know what they are talking about.

In article ,
says...


Not really. The fact that I simulate isn't necessarily relevant to the
conversation. Remember, virtually all aspects of simulation work just as the
real world does ... that's the point. Pull back on the yoke and pitch
increases. Extend the gear and drag increases. It doesn't really matter if
it's simulated or real.

However, if the Yeager-wannabe cannot tell that I'm talking about simulation,
either the simulation is very good or the Real Pilot is pretty bad. Usually
I
think it's the former.


Let's just try; Most people are not as dishonest as yourself. You can fool
someone for a short time, but it won't last long.

If you tell a real pilot you fly a Citation X, he has no reason to doubt it.
Lots of people fly this airplane. But when you tell him you fly it alone, and
you are "not interested" in CRM or flying with others, he will understand you
are full of it. By the time it gets to where you REALLY don't know whether a
Beech Baron has an ejection seat, well then he's the one having fun at your
expense. Not that you would notice.

On May 17, 1:10*pm, VOR-DME wrote:
In article

In a few more posts, I'll tire of you as I always have done in the
past and move on, simply one more "pilot" who has your number has had
enough of you for one day.
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Dudley Henriques

You are correct. The only thing that could be a greater waste of time than
getting into a tit-for-tat *semantic thumb-twiddling competition with this
contributor is to try to have a serious conversation with him. Did you ever
try agreeing with him? I am the first to recognize the things he does know
about aviation, and to post agreement when I actually do agree, but these
posts never elicit a response, and never go further, because he is not here to
share. He is here to pick at people, to belittle others who have far greater
experience than he. If you make an argument he cannot counter, he hides behind
an insipid ruse, _Explain what you mean by_... trying to get something else to
dig into. He understands that pilots have worked hard to achieve what they
have, and they have far greater motivation than he could ever muster, so he
sees them as easy targets for belittlement, and takes a truly perverse
pleasure in the outrage he is able to inspire by insulting unsuspecting
targets.

It is a safe bet that this contributor is playing similar vindictive games on
other sites where professionals congregate, telling doctors, lawyers,
investors or other experts they do not know what they are talking about.

If you examine the history of MX, you'll learn in real life he seems
to be a 40 something year old scraping together a living in Paris. He
some time ago indicated he spent something the order of a kilohour
using MSFS in a year.

The picture that develops is of an ex-patriot American living in a not
very attractive part part of Paris, spending much of his time seeking
to establish himself as a peer or better here. I doubt exchanging text
with him will alter his on-line persona.

This is unlikely, but funny to think about. "MX" could be a precocious
(by now an older) teenager who gets off on successfully getting
attention, or quite an accomplished pilot playing at being this
character. The reality is probably the one mentioned earlier. I don't
know any real life pilot who denies enjoying the visceral sensations
of flight: those are not felt in a desk chair.

On May 17, 12:10*pm, VOR-DME wrote:

It is a safe bet that this contributor is playing similar vindictive games on
other sites where professionals congregate, telling doctors, lawyers,
investors or other experts they do not know what they are talking about.

http://groups.google.com/groups/prof...l47z4AZhN98BFg
should fill the bill in supporting what you say above..

And these are what hit google groups, can't imagine what's floating
out there in Usenet land.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

So you are changing your mind that your contention that flying an aircraft
can be totally taught in a simulator?

It can still be taught entirely in a simulator

Since it isn't being done, it seems the entire world disagrees with you.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Nope, just most of the GA aircraft.

Which ones? And were they default or add-on aircraft? Which add-on vendors?

However the fact that they don't throws your contention that MSFS is realistic
out the window.

Answer the above questions first.

You are grasping at straws and I have answered the question several times now.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

Mxsmanic wrote:

I never say that I fly a real airplane; I simply don't mention that it's
simulation.

The term for that is lying through ommision.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.