Simulators

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 if the simulator is designed to
simulate everything that the aircraft will be called upon to do, as in the
case of large transport aircraft and small private aircraft flown for
transportation. Teaching aerobatics entirely in a simulator would be a
challenge, although I suppose a simulator suited to that purpose could be
built (NASA has built some very expensive simulators along these lines).

It is not being done very much now, but it could be done. The differences
between a full-motion simulator and normal flight in a real aircraft are small
enough to not worry about.

Look it up.

Because you don't know?

From what I understand, USAF training starts with about 25 hours of flying and
60 hours on the ground in class or in physical activities. That's the highest
flying ratio. Subsequent phases typically spend about 90% of time in class and
10% flying.

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.

VOR-DME writes:

That is a very revealing statement. If you talk about simulated flying
experience and you do not inform the listener your experience was simulated it
simply means you are faking.

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.

If some people do not call you on it immediately,
it is only because most of us are charitable enough not to assume we're being
lied to until it becomes obvious.

I never say that I fly a real airplane; I simply don't mention that it's
simulation. As I've said, it's usually irrelevant. IFR procedures are executed
in exactly the same way in simulation as they are in real life--so why mention
that it is simulation when discussing it? Especially when the treehouse club
starts hooting like a pack of apes every time they hear the word simulation.

It will not take long, based on your contributions here, for any real pilot to
understand you know far less than you imagine and have a poor grasp of the
fundamentals of flying.

Except that I do not have a poor grasp of the fundamentals of flying. That's
what irritates a lot of the junior pilots here who apparently got their PPLs
just to boost their egos, rather than for the purpose of flying.

You statement here indicates clearly you do not use simulation in its own
right, for edification and enjoyment, but that you spend your time trying to
fool people (including the FAA) into believing you are a pilot.

No, my statement indicates that I consider aviation to be the same subject
whether people simulate or fly a real airplane. As for the FAA, I never talked
to them at all.

Dudley Henriques writes:

I'm sure you see it this way, and there might even be some degree of
truth in what you're saying but after watching your posting on these
groups for a long time I unfortunately can't agree.

I'm sure you see it that way, and there might even be some degree of truth in
what you're saying, but after watching your posting on these groups for a long
time, I unfortunately cannot agree.

If, for example, you put forth in comment what you have said here in
this post about pilots as an isolated and pertinent comment and that
comment was backed up by enough experience flying to make your comment
viable, I could see that.

Maybe it's time to stop worrying about pilots and start talking about
aviation.

But you instead make these negative comments about pilots incessantly.

I see self-proclaimed pilots making negative comments about me all the time;
you don't seem too worried about that.

And I don't make negative comments about pilots in general, although I do make
unflattering observations about some of the losers who continually whine in
these aviation groups.

Anyone can put forth a generalization such as "there are pilots who
aren't as expert in aviation as they'd like to believe". Of course
there are, as there are as well pilots in aviation who are a great
deal MORE expert in aviation than they like to convey to others.

It seems that the ones who are less proficient tend to talk a lot louder and
longer than the ones who are more proficient. Unfortunately for them, I'm not
impressed or swayed by loud, long talkers.

I verify everything people tell me here. If other sources back up a poster, I
add points to his reputation in my book. If he's way off the mark, I scratch
him off the list. A lot of people here are consistently off the mark. They are
far more interested in shouting me down than in actually looking things up to
make sure they are right. But that's the way it usually goes in cyberspace.
It's always the low end of the curve that makes the most noise.

You seem a bit on the irritable side yourself. You get upset if people
disagree with you, although you are civil otherwise. Maybe you need to work on
anger management. I never get upset.

writes:

Says the MSFS game player that has no clue what is involved in flight
planning, one of the most basic and first tasks learned by real pilots,
by his own admission.

I'm not the one who plans to use a navaid with a chart without ever noticing
that the one he wants to use is missing a frequency.

writes:

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Statistics from real life, obviously, though you are starting from the
false premise that there is such a thing as "a dangerous maneuver" that
requires training to perform.

What would you call a spin?

An acrobatic maneuver; nothing more, nothing less.

Is it a dangerous maneuver? Does it require training?

writes:

For sane people it is a diversion from life like watching a movie or playing
checkers.

Yes.

For you it is a delusion that you are actually doing something you can never
actually do.

What leads you to believe that I am deluded? And what makes you think I could
never fly a real airplane?

On May 17, 5:29*am, Mxsmanic wrote:

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

LOL!

On May 17, 5:35*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
Dudley Henriques writes:
I'm sure you see it this way, and there might even be some degree of
truth in what you're saying but after watching your posting on these
groups for a long time I unfortunately can't agree.

I'm sure you see it that way, and there might even be some degree of truth in
what you're saying, but after watching your posting on these groups for a long
time, I unfortunately cannot agree.

If, for example, you put forth in comment what you have said here in
this post about pilots as an isolated and pertinent comment and that
comment was backed up by enough experience flying to make your comment
viable, I could see that.

Maybe it's time to stop worrying about pilots and start talking about
aviation.

But you instead make these negative comments about pilots incessantly.

I see self-proclaimed pilots making negative comments about me all the time;
you don't seem too worried about that.

And I don't make negative comments about pilots in general, although I do make
unflattering observations about some of the losers who continually whine in
these aviation groups.

Anyone can put forth a generalization such as "there are pilots who
aren't as expert in aviation as they'd like to believe". *Of course
there are, as there are as well pilots in aviation who are a great
deal MORE expert in aviation than they like to convey to others.

It seems that the ones who are less proficient tend to talk a lot louder and
longer than the ones who are more proficient. Unfortunately for them, I'm not
impressed or swayed by loud, long talkers.

I verify everything people tell me here. If other sources back up a poster, I
add points to his reputation in my book. If he's way off the mark, I scratch
him off the list. A lot of people here are consistently off the mark. They are
far more interested in shouting me down than in actually looking things up to
make sure they are right. But that's the way it usually goes in cyberspace.
It's always the low end of the curve that makes the most noise.

You seem a bit on the irritable side yourself. You get upset if people
disagree with you, although you are civil otherwise. Maybe you need to work on
anger management. I never get upset.

PLEASE! I wasn't born yesterday, and I didn't just fall off the end of
an apple cart :-))))))))))))))
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. By doing this you obviously
believe you are in your mind anyway demonstrating to the world your
complete superiority over your adversaries; the pilots you so
obviously believe are your intellectual inferiors. :-)

As I said, you are entitled to your opinions on Usenet. I pop up from
time to time here and give you a shot of my own opinion, but I'm
completely aware of it's uselessness.
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.ionso
:-)))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Dudley Henriques

On May 17, 5:35*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
Dudley Henriques writes:
I'm sure you see it this way, and there might even be some degree of
truth in what you're saying but after watching your posting on these
groups for a long time I unfortunately can't agree.

I'm sure you see it that way, and there might even be some degree of truth in
what you're saying, but after watching your posting on these groups for a long
time, I unfortunately cannot agree.

If, for example, you put forth in comment what you have said here in
this post about pilots as an isolated and pertinent comment and that
comment was backed up by enough experience flying to make your comment
viable, I could see that.

Maybe it's time to stop worrying about pilots and start talking about
aviation.

But you instead make these negative comments about pilots incessantly.

I see self-proclaimed pilots making negative comments about me all the time;
you don't seem too worried about that.

And I don't make negative comments about pilots in general, although I do make
unflattering observations about some of the losers who continually whine in
these aviation groups.

Anyone can put forth a generalization such as "there are pilots who
aren't as expert in aviation as they'd like to believe". *Of course
there are, as there are as well pilots in aviation who are a great
deal MORE expert in aviation than they like to convey to others.

It seems that the ones who are less proficient tend to talk a lot louder and
longer than the ones who are more proficient. Unfortunately for them, I'm not
impressed or swayed by loud, long talkers.

I verify everything people tell me here. If other sources back up a poster, I
add points to his reputation in my book. If he's way off the mark, I scratch
him off the list. A lot of people here are consistently off the mark. They are
far more interested in shouting me down than in actually looking things up to
make sure they are right. But that's the way it usually goes in cyberspace.
It's always the low end of the curve that makes the most noise.

You seem a bit on the irritable side yourself. You get upset if people
disagree with you, although you are civil otherwise. Maybe you need to work on
anger management. I never get upset.

PLEASE! I wasn't born yesterday, and I didn't just fall off the end of
an apple cart :-))))))))))))))
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. By doing this you obviously
believe you are in your mind anyway demonstrating to the world your
complete superiority over your adversaries; the pilots you so
obviously believe are your intellectual inferiors. :-)

As I said, you are entitled to your opinions on Usenet. I pop up from
time to time here and give you a shot of my own opinion, but I'm
completely aware of it's uselessness.
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