as a training tool, MS Flt Sim is a farce!!!

""David G. Bell"" wrote in message
.. .
On Thursday, in article bmXsb.333$%b2.8@lakeread05
"mrhct" wrote:

A couple of years ago, my wife's boss's husband called to see if I
wanted to
fly up to N.H. with him for lunch. I'd been doing the F.S. deal since
MS98
so I jumped at the chance. I was amazed when I got in the cockpit of the
rented 172. I knew what everything was. Tom was using a handheld Garmin
GPS,
a really neat unit. I asked why he wasn't using the installed GPS. He
said
he really didn't know how it worked, but I did. During the flight up I
shot
radials. He asked how the hell I knew all this stuff, I'd never been in
a
plane before, I'm sure you all know the answer. So on the flight home, I
took the controls during climbout, flew the radials while he watched on
his
Garmin, and flew the approach to the thresh hold. He was shocked and so
was
I. Was it the same as F.S.and vice versa? No way. Could I have done what
I
did without F.S.? No way. If he had become ill during our flights could
I
have kept us from crashing? More than likely! And no it's not a game!

My own suspicion is that one of the big differences is that FS
experience tends to discourage head movement. It's certainly a factor
in such as CFS, and the other flight combat products which try for
realism.

Good IFR training for the VFR pilot who ventures into IMC.

Dashi

I disagree with anyone who says FS cant be a useful training tool. I learned
@least 1/2 I know about flying on the Sim. You can pratice approches,
manuveres, etc.
+ it looks real! It might not handel real but you can get to understand how
stuff workes the fun and cheap way!

Our local community college has contracted with a small local airline to
provide flight training for people who want to be pilots. It was featured
on a local TV news show and when they went into the classroom to show all
the snazzy computers that were being used for flight training, what did I
see; you guessed it: they were all running FS2002.

JK

"Tlewis95" wrote in message
...
I disagree with anyone who says FS cant be a useful training tool. I
learned
@least 1/2 I know about flying on the Sim. You can pratice approches,
manuveres, etc.
+ it looks real! It might not handel real but you can get to understand
how
stuff workes the fun and cheap way!

It's possible that a community college might offer such a course and call it
"flight training," but even if they did, it would be a poor recommendation.
Never mind about whether the course was related to primary or instrument
flight, FS2002 would be inappropriate for either one. However, a small
local airline receives a contract and some publicity, a community college
fills a classroom with students who pay to be entertained by computer games
and everybody concerned feels good for a while. Your community college at
work!

The originator of this thread was right. MS flight simulators are worse
than useless in primary contact (VFR) flight training and can only be made
useful for IFR practice by eliminating their prime attraction: The external
view. This kind of simulator is a toy, not a real-world flight training
device. Those of you who deny and protest the most are the ones most firmly
and irrevocably deluded.

Kalijaa

"John Hall" wrote in message
ble.rogers.com...
Our local community college has contracted with a small local airline to
provide flight training for people who want to be pilots. It was featured
on a local TV news show and when they went into the classroom to show all
the snazzy computers that were being used for flight training, what did I
see; you guessed it: they were all running FS2002.

JK

"Tlewis95" wrote in message
...
I disagree with anyone who says FS cant be a useful training tool. I
learned
@least 1/2 I know about flying on the Sim. You can pratice approches,
manuveres, etc.
+ it looks real! It might not handel real but you can get to understand
how
stuff workes the fun and cheap way!

As a "real" pilot, I enjoy flight sim very much. To be honest, it
keeps me from getting a divorce (by helping remove the temptation to
go and buy a real plane, which would probably make my wife leave me!)
For less than the price of 1 rented hour in a real cessna or piper, I
can buy the sim, and for a little bit more, have realistic controls as
well. Now, that's not a bad deal.

I personally think that the sim is HARDER to fly than a real airplane.
I'd venture to even go so far to say that MOST of the flight training
I undertook was what to do if something went wrong. Flying it is
really pretty easy, it's when something goes wrong that you've got to
react quick and do the right thing.

I personally would have LOVED to have a sim back when I started
learning to fly. I actually got my airplane ride when I was 12 (1977
time frame, Beech 18) and I knew what everything was except the VORs.
That was just from a love of flying and being interested in it - had I
had a sim back then, it would have been so much better. I would have
had a better understanding of things I knew nothing about at the time.

When I took ground school in 1986, there was the Commodore 64 flight
sim version and it was pretty hard to control, and I have to admit it
pretty much wasn't very much help at all. But today's flight sims are
pretty good and while I don't believe that most people that mess with
flight sims will be able to walk into the airport and fly a Boeing
747, I do feel that it WILL help those curious about flying take that
next step, and go into the FBO and take a first flight introduction
and possibly enter flight training, bringing another pilot into
general aviation, and we can never have enough of those!

Also, ground school information retention should be much better, and I
would think that instructors who utilize flight sim as a cheap
alternative for some instruction, could help students visualize what
they are going to do for real in a simulated environment that will
help keep the costs down.

Like I said before, flying the MS flight sims in my opinion, are
HARDER to fly than the real thing - my reasons for this are many - you
don't have frame rate issues in real life, and you can feel the
pressure on the yoke when trimming the aircraft, you can see all
around you and you don't have the ridiculous panel/vision issues like
you have in the sim. The VR cockpit is helping this though, and in
FS9, you can actually set your view and it will stay there when you
look left or right. not perfect, but it's a start.

With all that said, you have your opinion, I have mine. You won't
change my position no matter what you say, nor will any words from me
will change yours.

On 13 Nov 2003 01:26:16 -0800, (mike popken)
wrote:

The following was the original comment in this thread:

"See Wired magazine:

http://www.wired.com/news/technology...w=wn_tophead_6

People have criticized me in the past for suggesting that someone
could
learn much of the skills of piloting with FS, but it seems that I'm in
good company."
==============

If the poster is suggesting a wanna-be pilot could gain some insight
into ATC, he would be right. And ditto for a little background on
using VOR navigation, and with fs2004, the Garmin GPS. I would agree.
It is also helpful for a wanna-be pilot to experience how fast things
happen when you fly, how mentally quick one must be in order to safely
fly a plane. Here I agree again, but as one who has flown real planes,
I cound not disagree more if the poster is suggesting Microsoft
simulator planes fly like the REAL THING. Microsof FS is an eye candy
entertainment GAME. Got that word the:: G A M E!!!!!!!!
That's all it is, an eye candy game, to entertain people, to keep
their minds off the sewer society we are (and have) slid off into, to
keep people preoccupied with utter nonsense so they won't have time to
write or call their congressmen about what a mess the world is
becoming, so they won't have time to organize war demonstrations, etc.
That is the only purpose of this product. MS airplaines do NOT even
remotely fly like the real thing, and all one need do to prove it for
themselves is go fly a real plane and you'll see for yourself. Then if
you still believe MS simulator planes fly like the real thing, then
you are probably a devoute religious person that belives all those
wierd stories about God destroying His own creations, causing fire n
brimstone, hell, devils, etc. And just think, there are a couple
billion people who believe all this crap, so it does not surprise me
that millions of Flt Sim fans believe Microsoft's simulator planes fly
like the real thing.
BETWEEN EVERY MAN AND REALITY LIE HIS MOST CHERISHED ILLUSIONS.
M.P. Hall

Hope this helps
Mike

I know that I have learned an incredible amount from FS9.

Dashi

"George Lewis" wrote in message
...
As a "real" pilot, I enjoy flight sim very much. To be honest, it
keeps me from getting a divorce (by helping remove the temptation to
go and buy a real plane, which would probably make my wife leave me!)
For less than the price of 1 rented hour in a real cessna or piper, I
can buy the sim, and for a little bit more, have realistic controls as
well. Now, that's not a bad deal.

Mike ever the Asshole!

Henry

"mike popken" wrote in message
om...
The following was the original comment in this thread:

"See Wired magazine:

http://www.wired.com/news/technology...w=wn_tophead_6

People have criticized me in the past for suggesting that someone
could
learn much of the skills of piloting with FS, but it seems that I'm in
good company."
==============

If the poster is suggesting a wanna-be pilot could gain some insight

On 13 Nov 2003 01:26:16 -0800, mike popken wrote:

Microsof FS is an eye candy entertainment GAME. Got that word
the:: G A M E!!!!!!!!

So what?


--
Paul.

mailtoaulh_logicsquad_net (make the obvious substitutions)

mike popken wrote:
The following was the original comment in this thread:

"See Wired magazine:

http://www.wired.com/news/technology...w=wn_tophead_6

People have criticized me in the past for suggesting that someone
could
learn much of the skills of piloting with FS, but it seems that I'm in
good company."
==============

If the poster is suggesting a wanna-be pilot could gain some insight
into ATC, he would be right. And ditto for a little background on
using VOR navigation, and with fs2004, the Garmin GPS. I would agree.
It is also helpful for a wanna-be pilot to experience how fast things
happen when you fly, how mentally quick one must be in order to safely
fly a plane. Here I agree again, but as one who has flown real planes,
I cound not disagree more if the poster is suggesting Microsoft
simulator planes fly like the REAL THING. Microsof FS is an eye candy
entertainment GAME. Got that word the:: G A M E!!!!!!!!
That's all it is, an eye candy game, to entertain people, to keep
their minds off the sewer society we are (and have) slid off into, to
keep people preoccupied with utter nonsense so they won't have time to
write or call their congressmen about what a mess the world is
becoming, so they won't have time to organize war demonstrations, etc.
That is the only purpose of this product. MS airplaines do NOT even
remotely fly like the real thing, and all one need do to prove it for
themselves is go fly a real plane and you'll see for yourself. Then if
you still believe MS simulator planes fly like the real thing, then
you are probably a devoute religious person that belives all those
wierd stories about God destroying His own creations, causing fire n
brimstone, hell, devils, etc. And just think, there are a couple
billion people who believe all this crap, so it does not surprise me
that millions of Flt Sim fans believe Microsoft's simulator planes fly
like the real thing.
BETWEEN EVERY MAN AND REALITY LIE HIS MOST CHERISHED ILLUSIONS.
M.P. Hall

Hope this helps
Mike


Hmmm. It also could be said that his/her most cherished 'learning
experiences' are decidedly in that mix! It's always been my view that
the flight simulators PER SE are an excellent 'adjunct' to the real
McCoy and I also believe that this fact has been well established!
Neither the military nor the civilian ATP brethren [et al] are strangers
to the simulator although I'd be the first to admit the obvious
differences between the desk sim and the multi-legged, multi-million
dollar hydraulic varieties. However, they both serve a purpose!
Instruction and direct practical applications that enhances the real thing!

Let's consider a few things: Even on the hydraulic legged multi-million
dollar sims..what is THE essential purpose? Think about it! Is the thing
being used to 'teach' ATP types how to fly? Hardly, because it's de
facto assumed that the ATP taking his/her REQUIRED sim training can fly
and thus the bottom line becomes the adjunct recurrent training in
emergency procedures! This is indeed a beneficial control environment
that can hurl all manner of 'emergencies' at the sim pilot and hence
train and be aware of [Murphy's Law inclusive] for the expected
reaction(s) should it occur in the real thing! It works!

Now...more practical and every day stuff...how many of us have ever
needed or used or hey, rented [Sidebar: Don't ask! My Windstar...profuse
white smoke, water out of the exhaust...yep...blown head gaskets and a
$1600 tab for the fix! :-( ...] ----anyway, a vehicle 'other' than our
own and what happens...the fumbling...where is everything? From the door
latch to the lights to the wipers to the heater/AC controls to whatever
and you-name-it. Get my drift? Familiarity of the controls and gauges!
Simplistic example perhaps but modify same in re the real thing versus
the easily applicable electronic counterparts on the sim! The sim can
duplicate same very nicely and, as a bonus, can be set to just as
UNFORGIVING as the real thing!

This too..the matter of adjunct confidence. Ohhh yes. What, are those
ads in the real McCoy av magazines for commo training or, indeed, SIM
training [other than the MSFS series] any more or less sophisticated
that what we can get from the MSFS series? Last time I looked the
multi-thousand 'fancy' sim stuff was just as DESK-FIXED, if you will, as
the MSFS varieties! This too, am I supposed to suddenly be a better sim
or real McCoy pilot if I use a $850 sim yoke versus a $100 CH ABS
material yoke? Think about it!

In my view, anything that serves as a reasonable learning experience
'adjunct' to the real thing only serves to enhance overall av training
and savvy! It lastly can not be denied that the level of flight sim
sophistication has risen 'dramatically' from the days of Bruce Artwick
and machines to run the sims that are now considered literal dinosaurs!
Now we've reached the point where 'actual' electronic reproduction of
'actual' real thing flight avionics is a reality....and with the
blessings and permissions of the manufacturers because, hey, it's good
business! Do you not think that Garmin ET AL 'welcomes' their avionics
as models for flight sim use? It only helps them commercially while
concurrently serving as the adjunct to learn the proper function of the
avionics in question! It's no secret that some GA types have equipment
in the real McCoy that they don't necessarily savvy 100% ....as they
should...but they don't! Sim training can help that too.

Need I mention additional ad hoc SIM practice with avoiding 'needle
chasing' or simply shooting precision landings. I can't see where it
hurts or detracts from the real thing. And finally---bottom line--- in
the absence of the BIG bucks for one's own plane and the associated BIG
costs to maintain same or those high rental fees, hey, for some folks,
the sim is the closest 'feasible' reality due to pure economics! What's
the old joke or indeed av enthusiast [for the real thong] lament, to
wit, ".... my family has a very bad habit...they like to eat!" ;-)

Doc Tony
[Cessna 150/152/172 vintage]

Dr. Anthony J. Lomenzo wrote:


mike popken wrote:

The following was the original comment in this thread:

"See Wired magazine:

http://www.wired.com/news/technology...w=wn_tophead_6

People have criticized me in the past for suggesting that someone
could
learn much of the skills of piloting with FS, but it seems that I'm in
good company."
==============

If the poster is suggesting a wanna-be pilot could gain some insight
into ATC, he would be right. And ditto for a little background on
using VOR navigation, and with fs2004, the Garmin GPS. I would agree.
It is also helpful for a wanna-be pilot to experience how fast things
happen when you fly, how mentally quick one must be in order to safely
fly a plane. Here I agree again, but as one who has flown real planes,
I cound not disagree more if the poster is suggesting Microsoft
simulator planes fly like the REAL THING. Microsof FS is an eye candy
entertainment GAME. Got that word the:: G A M E!!!!!!!!
That's all it is, an eye candy game, to entertain people, to keep
their minds off the sewer society we are (and have) slid off into, to
keep people preoccupied with utter nonsense so they won't have time to
write or call their congressmen about what a mess the world is
becoming, so they won't have time to organize war demonstrations, etc.
That is the only purpose of this product. MS airplaines do NOT even
remotely fly like the real thing, and all one need do to prove it for
themselves is go fly a real plane and you'll see for yourself. Then if
you still believe MS simulator planes fly like the real thing, then
you are probably a devoute religious person that belives all those
wierd stories about God destroying His own creations, causing fire n
brimstone, hell, devils, etc. And just think, there are a couple
billion people who believe all this crap, so it does not surprise me
that millions of Flt Sim fans believe Microsoft's simulator planes fly
like the real thing.
BETWEEN EVERY MAN AND REALITY LIE HIS MOST CHERISHED ILLUSIONS. M.P. Hall

Hope this helps
Mike



Hmmm. It also could be said that his/her most cherished 'learning
experiences' are decidedly in that mix! It's always been my view that
the flight simulators PER SE are an excellent 'adjunct' to the real
McCoy and I also believe that this fact has been well established!
Neither the military nor the civilian ATP brethren [et al] are strangers
to the simulator although I'd be the first to admit the obvious
differences between the desk sim and the multi-legged, multi-million
dollar hydraulic varieties. However, they both serve a purpose!
Instruction and direct practical applications that enhances the real thing!

Let's consider a few things: Even on the hydraulic legged multi-million
dollar sims..what is THE essential purpose? Think about it! Is the thing
being used to 'teach' ATP types how to fly? Hardly, because it's de
facto assumed that the ATP taking his/her REQUIRED sim training can fly
and thus the bottom line becomes the adjunct recurrent training in
emergency procedures! This is indeed a beneficial control environment
that can hurl all manner of 'emergencies' at the sim pilot and hence
train and be aware of [Murphy's Law inclusive] for the expected
reaction(s) should it occur in the real thing! It works!

Now...more practical and every day stuff...how many of us have ever
needed or used or hey, rented [Sidebar: Don't ask! My Windstar...profuse
white smoke, water out of the exhaust...yep...blown head gaskets and a
$1600 tab for the fix! :-( ...] ----anyway, a vehicle 'other' than our
own and what happens...the fumbling...where is everything? From the door
latch to the lights to the wipers to the heater/AC controls to whatever
and you-name-it. Get my drift? Familiarity of the controls and gauges!
Simplistic example perhaps but modify same in re the real thing versus
the easily applicable electronic counterparts on the sim! The sim can
duplicate same very nicely and, as a bonus, can be set to just as
UNFORGIVING as the real thing!

This too..the matter of adjunct confidence. Ohhh yes. What, are those
ads in the real McCoy av magazines for commo training or, indeed, SIM
training [other than the MSFS series] any more or less sophisticated
that what we can get from the MSFS series? Last time I looked the
multi-thousand 'fancy' sim stuff was just as DESK-FIXED, if you will, as
the MSFS varieties! This too, am I supposed to suddenly be a better sim
or real McCoy pilot if I use a $850 sim yoke versus a $100 CH ABS
material yoke? Think about it!

In my view, anything that serves as a reasonable learning experience
'adjunct' to the real thing only serves to enhance overall av training
and savvy! It lastly can not be denied that the level of flight sim
sophistication has risen 'dramatically' from the days of Bruce Artwick
and machines to run the sims that are now considered literal dinosaurs!
Now we've reached the point where 'actual' electronic reproduction of
'actual' real thing flight avionics is a reality....and with the
blessings and permissions of the manufacturers because, hey, it's good
business! Do you not think that Garmin ET AL 'welcomes' their avionics
as models for flight sim use? It only helps them commercially while
concurrently serving as the adjunct to learn the proper function of the
avionics in question! It's no secret that some GA types have equipment
in the real McCoy that they don't necessarily savvy 100% ....as they
should...but they don't! Sim training can help that too.

Need I mention additional ad hoc SIM practice with avoiding 'needle
chasing' or simply shooting precision landings. I can't see where it
hurts or detracts from the real thing. And finally---bottom line--- in
the absence of the BIG bucks for one's own plane and the associated BIG
costs to maintain same or those high rental fees, hey, for some folks,
the sim is the closest 'feasible' reality due to pure economics! What's
the old joke or indeed av enthusiast [for the real thong] lament,

Whoops! Did I really type that real 'thong' [!] typo? Hmmmm. Let's
change that quickly to 'real THING'. Done. What's that? So I was looking
at the Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition... the ladies looked, shall
we say, 'revealing' in their outfits ... what, a problem? ;-)


to
wit, ".... my family has a very bad habit...they like to eat!" ;-)

Doc Tony
[Cessna 150/152/172 vintage]