Reccomend a PC Simulator....

I am just starting my Instrument rating,
and I believe that a good PC based flight simulator would
help shorten the learning curve.

What simulators would this group reccomend?

I hava older versions of X-plane (V6) and MSFS2002.
I have a high performance PC so I should be able to run whatever is
availible.
I've tried the C172 in both sims.

MSFS2002 the VSI is way too fast and the plane is way too stable.

XPlane, the plane feels about right, the only complaint is the turn
gyro is way too twitchy.

Anyone have comments on later version of either of these sims?


Paul

(Yes I know that a PC based simulator time can not be logged)

I haven't used some of the more modern software, but I did
use MSFS-98 to train on procedure and situational awareness.

Having achieved my instrument rating, I feel that the most important
part of my simulated training involved commiting the scan and situational
awareness to "muscle memory". This frees up a great deal of cycles for
looking at charts, pacifying the toddler in my lap, answer questions
from my wife in the next room, etc. without interfering with my ability
to conduct an approach down to minimums.

Additionally, achieving the ability to inject the appropriate control
input to the airplane as an automatic response to what I saw on the
instruments (even on partial panel) was also easily accomplished on
neanderthal technology given enough hours spent in front of the screen.

As such, I wouldn't get too hung-up on what you use as a "simulator".
I bought some other software (which has more accurate flight models
and better lateral/vertical recording capabilities, and cost more than
MSFS) and that software really didn't augment my basic abilities. The
critical skills, in my opinion, boiled down to using the minimal amount
of cycles to control the airplane and use the remaining cycles to talk on
the radio, read charts, change the baby's diaper, etc. (yes, I did that
while configured for a stabilized approach on the sim.) Not realistic,
as I used the entire room which is substantially larger than the cockpit
of a C172.

My $0.02 ...

--Don


wrote:
I am just starting my Instrument rating,
and I believe that a good PC based flight simulator would
help shorten the learning curve.

What simulators would this group reccomend?

I hava older versions of X-plane (V6) and MSFS2002.
I have a high performance PC so I should be able to run whatever is
availible.
I've tried the C172 in both sims.

MSFS2002 the VSI is way too fast and the plane is way too stable.

XPlane, the plane feels about right, the only complaint is the turn
gyro is way too twitchy.

Anyone have comments on later version of either of these sims?


Paul

(Yes I know that a PC based simulator time can not be logged)

I have MSFS2002 and I'll ask you a question. You say the plane is too
stable and your next line says the VSI is too sensitive and fast? This
means the plane is NOT stable. Stability means the plane oscillates gently
in pitch and after a few oscillations stabilizes on it's own and returns to
level flight.

On my computer I can't keep the damn thing on heading or altitude. I don't
care how I trim it or adjust my joystick (and once owned the CH Products
Yoke and Pro Pedals), it always wants to turn left or right. You are
correct that the pitch is WAY too sensitive and the VSI make wild
fluctuations. I tried adjusting the sensitivities and no joy on
improvement.

Anyone else have other experiences.

Kobra




wrote in message
...
I am just starting my Instrument rating,
and I believe that a good PC based flight simulator would
help shorten the learning curve.

What simulators would this group reccomend?

I hava older versions of X-plane (V6) and MSFS2002.
I have a high performance PC so I should be able to run whatever is
availible.
I've tried the C172 in both sims.

MSFS2002 the VSI is way too fast and the plane is way too stable.

XPlane, the plane feels about right, the only complaint is the turn
gyro is way too twitchy.

Anyone have comments on later version of either of these sims?


Paul

(Yes I know that a PC based simulator time can not be logged)

On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 20:50:35 -0700, Pau wrote:

I am just starting my Instrument rating,
and I believe that a good PC based flight simulator would
help shorten the learning curve.

What simulators would this group reccomend?



I have been pretty happy with Flight Simulator. I requires a much
faster scan than in most planes, but that is a good thing.

jerry

Hi there

FS2004 (as all previous incarnations) have been a good BASE for
working..2004 is a great improvement on previous , particularly weather and
graphics....as for flight models
It is the addons that make it....

For flight models , try Dreamfleets Archer , http://www.dreamfleet2000.com/
and Kangan's real air 172. http://www.realairsimulations.com/ ..both VERY
accurate models and panels
For IFR work , try Enrico Schirattis IFR panel...which can also be run on a
second machine....SUPERB..
http://www.projectmagenta.com/products/ifrpanel.html
I use this all the time to practice currency for IFR

Hope that helps..

Bill Padley
London

The good stuff IS there....you just need to find it
"Jerry Kurata" wrote in message
news
On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 20:50:35 -0700, Pau wrote:

I am just starting my Instrument rating,
and I believe that a good PC based flight simulator would
help shorten the learning curve.

What simulators would this group reccomend?



I have been pretty happy with Flight Simulator. I requires a much
faster scan than in most planes, but that is a good thing.

jerry

So how important is the input device, then? Did you use yoke/pedals or a joystick or the dreaded keyboard/mouse?

Donald Ramsey wrote:


I haven't used some of the more modern software, but I did
use MSFS-98 to train on procedure and situational awareness.

Having achieved my instrument rating, I feel that the most important
part of my simulated training involved commiting the scan and situational
awareness to "muscle memory". This frees up a great deal of cycles for
looking at charts, pacifying the toddler in my lap, answer questions
from my wife in the next room, etc. without interfering with my ability
to conduct an approach down to minimums.

Additionally, achieving the ability to inject the appropriate control
input to the airplane as an automatic response to what I saw on the
instruments (even on partial panel) was also easily accomplished on
neanderthal technology given enough hours spent in front of the screen.

As such, I wouldn't get too hung-up on what you use as a "simulator".
I bought some other software (which has more accurate flight models
and better lateral/vertical recording capabilities, and cost more than
MSFS) and that software really didn't augment my basic abilities. The
critical skills, in my opinion, boiled down to using the minimal amount
of cycles to control the airplane and use the remaining cycles to talk on
the radio, read charts, change the baby's diaper, etc. (yes, I did that
while configured for a stabilized approach on the sim.) Not realistic,
as I used the entire room which is substantially larger than the cockpit
of a C172.

My $0.02 ...

--Don

It depends what you want to practice. If it's instrument scan and aircraft
control, then you'll want two things in a PC simulator: 1) good flight model
and 2) good instrument frame rates. For this, the X-Plane series is great.
ASA's OnTop and Intrument Trainer are good too. They also all have realistic
turbulence effects. Most people who've flown in IMC can atest that bumps in
the clouds are more of a rule than an exception. I have tried Jeppesen's sim
as well as Elite and I like ASA's for their simplicity, frame rates, price
and turbulence effect. Jepp's turbulence is unusable.

Flight Simulator 2004 is good for the ATC practice. It also gives you a good
idea of what an approach to minimums actually looks like. X-Plane does too.

None of the PC sims let you practice radio operations while bumping around
in turbulence while barreling down an approach which (for me) creates a
challenge in my own plane. You can spend a few (OK a lot) extra dollars on
the PCATD hardware to get that practice but that's up to you. Most models in
ASA's sims require you to click on a button to get the radio stack up and
that makes the drawback even worse. They do have a good playback feature
that let's you review your track with a convenient view of what your
instruments looked like during the approach.

Lotsa good stuff out there. I would download the available demos and take a
look-see for yourself. YMMV

Marco




wrote in message
...
I am just starting my Instrument rating,
and I believe that a good PC based flight simulator would
help shorten the learning curve.

What simulators would this group reccomend?

I hava older versions of X-plane (V6) and MSFS2002.
I have a high performance PC so I should be able to run whatever is
availible.
I've tried the C172 in both sims.

MSFS2002 the VSI is way too fast and the plane is way too stable.

XPlane, the plane feels about right, the only complaint is the turn
gyro is way too twitchy.

Anyone have comments on later version of either of these sims?


Paul

(Yes I know that a PC based simulator time can not be logged)



Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com

I did use a CH yoke and pedals -- the yoke was pretty important IMO
as it helped ingrain the proper muscle action.

For IFR stuff, I didn't find the pedals all that important.

--Don

Fred E. Pate wrote:
So how important is the input device, then? Did you use yoke/pedals or a joystick or the dreaded keyboard/mouse?

Donald Ramsey wrote:


I haven't used some of the more modern software, but I did
use MSFS-98 to train on procedure and situational awareness.

Having achieved my instrument rating, I feel that the most important
part of my simulated training involved commiting the scan and situational
awareness to "muscle memory". This frees up a great deal of cycles for
looking at charts, pacifying the toddler in my lap, answer questions

from my wife in the next room, etc. without interfering with my ability

to conduct an approach down to minimums.

Additionally, achieving the ability to inject the appropriate control
input to the airplane as an automatic response to what I saw on the
instruments (even on partial panel) was also easily accomplished on
neanderthal technology given enough hours spent in front of the screen.

As such, I wouldn't get too hung-up on what you use as a "simulator".
I bought some other software (which has more accurate flight models
and better lateral/vertical recording capabilities, and cost more than
MSFS) and that software really didn't augment my basic abilities. The
critical skills, in my opinion, boiled down to using the minimal amount
of cycles to control the airplane and use the remaining cycles to talk on
the radio, read charts, change the baby's diaper, etc. (yes, I did that
while configured for a stabilized approach on the sim.) Not realistic,
as I used the entire room which is substantially larger than the cockpit
of a C172.

My $0.02 ...

--Don

Any simulator that allows you to practice your procedures is good - I
wouldn't expect any of the pc based sims to be anything like a plane or a
device that you can count toward flight sim time.

I just got FS2004 and borrowed a yoke - it seems to be ok - the bells and
whistles are more than I need for practicing and ingraining the procedures I
have been taught. However, either there are problems with the software or I
haven't figured out how to use it the way I want.

For example, I try to file from an airport to another using VOR/airways, but
when I start flying, the program always tries to give me direct. I can use
the VORs, but it is unclear to me how to see the desired route as airways.

I also have to keep telling the controllers that I want to fly the entire
procedures - they always try to give me vectors to an approach.

Also, and this is definitely a defect in the software, but I caught the
problem and it reinforced good habits of what I was taught...

I was given ILS 24 to KISP. I did not have that approach in front of me so
I asked for ILS 6 (or vice versa). I was cleared for the full approach that
I asked for. however, when I tuned in the ILS (both are the same freq) I
got the identifier for the one that I refused and the color sector/needle
was all wrong. Seems to me a problem with the software, but maybe not -
maybe they wanted it that way.


wrote in message
...
I am just starting my Instrument rating,
and I believe that a good PC based flight simulator would
help shorten the learning curve.

What simulators would this group reccomend?

I hava older versions of X-plane (V6) and MSFS2002.
I have a high performance PC so I should be able to run whatever is
availible.
I've tried the C172 in both sims.

MSFS2002 the VSI is way too fast and the plane is way too stable.

XPlane, the plane feels about right, the only complaint is the turn
gyro is way too twitchy.

Anyone have comments on later version of either of these sims?


Paul

(Yes I know that a PC based simulator time can not be logged)

FWIW, if the airport is using ILS24, then you can't get ILS6. If you look at
the charts, you'll note that the frequencies for both approaches are the same
but the identifier is different to match the antenna in use. I doubt Islip is
going to switch the localizers for you just because you don't have a chart
handy, unless you declare an emergency that is.

Tim J wrote:

Any simulator that allows you to practice your procedures is good - I
wouldn't expect any of the pc based sims to be anything like a plane or a
device that you can count toward flight sim time.

I just got FS2004 and borrowed a yoke - it seems to be ok - the bells and
whistles are more than I need for practicing and ingraining the procedures I
have been taught. However, either there are problems with the software or I
haven't figured out how to use it the way I want.

For example, I try to file from an airport to another using VOR/airways, but
when I start flying, the program always tries to give me direct. I can use
the VORs, but it is unclear to me how to see the desired route as airways.

I also have to keep telling the controllers that I want to fly the entire
procedures - they always try to give me vectors to an approach.

Also, and this is definitely a defect in the software, but I caught the
problem and it reinforced good habits of what I was taught...

I was given ILS 24 to KISP. I did not have that approach in front of me so
I asked for ILS 6 (or vice versa). I was cleared for the full approach that
I asked for. however, when I tuned in the ILS (both are the same freq) I
got the identifier for the one that I refused and the color sector/needle
was all wrong. Seems to me a problem with the software, but maybe not -
maybe they wanted it that way.

wrote in message
...
I am just starting my Instrument rating,
and I believe that a good PC based flight simulator would
help shorten the learning curve.

What simulators would this group reccomend?

I hava older versions of X-plane (V6) and MSFS2002.
I have a high performance PC so I should be able to run whatever is
availible.
I've tried the C172 in both sims.

MSFS2002 the VSI is way too fast and the plane is way too stable.

XPlane, the plane feels about right, the only complaint is the turn
gyro is way too twitchy.

Anyone have comments on later version of either of these sims?


Paul

(Yes I know that a PC based simulator time can not be logged)

--
--Ray Andraka, P.E.
President, the Andraka Consulting Group, Inc.
401/884-7930 Fax 401/884-7950
email
http://www.andraka.com

"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-Benjamin Franklin, 1759