If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Simulators
|
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Simulators
|
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Simulators
I am dubitative of the pertinence of one’s expertise in simulation having
never experienced the genuine activity being simulated. However, we’ve explored the possibility that mitigating factors, be they medical, pecuniary or other could make this the only real option. This is fine, however to profess any sort of expertise in the matter this shortfall would have to be compensated by an even greater study of the subject. This does not appear to be the case with MX. Flight is flight. Most of the differences between simulation and the real world tend to be insignificant in the wide world of aviation. This statement is an open gate to a vast sea of ignorance. The topic of transfer of experience from simulation to real flight, the role of _realism_ and its subset of components (visual, motion, audio, cockpit resource management, I could go on and on) are the subject of a large number of published scholarly works and an even greater number of doctoral theses. All of this ongoing study is tacitly predicated on the assumption that the above statement is impertinent at best, and probably patently false. Things change from one aircraft to another. Lots and lots of things. Things also change between a sim and a real aircraft. The adaptation process is the same for both cases. Another statement that reveals a very shallow depth of inquiry and a superficial understanding of simulation, aside the fact that it is simply untrue. I do not contest the right of any enthusiast to delve into simulation to extract whatever pleasure and learning they may. It is a low-cost, zero-risk way of learning a lot about aviation and getting a lot of enjoyment out of it. This is perfectly legitimate, and I have no criticism of MX or any contributor her to put in and get out whatever they wish from these desktop simulators. There is a serious side to simulation though, and is clear that MX is not well versed in the subject. So while he is free to post his observations, based on his many hours of experience, we cannot consider his view to be that of one knowledgeable about simulation. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Simulators
On May 16, 12:17*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes: Yep, while some people are serious about simulation, there is nothing serious about simulation as you would think it would relate to the real world of flying. I don't understand. I know since I have real world experience AND MSFS experience. You don't since you don't fly a real plane. From what you've said in the past, it doesn't sound like you have any serious simulation experience, although I suppose you've toyed with MSFS from time to time. There's quite a broad spectrum of MSFS users, from kiddie gamers to people who spend more on their simulators than they would have to spend to get their ATPLs. So, why not post into the sim groups and say you fly a baron then rec.aviatoin.piloting. *You don't fly a baron, you simulate flying a baron. Flight is flight. Most of the differences between simulation and the real world tend to be insignificant in the wide world of aviation. Since my last post, I've flown three times: a round trip of only nine miles each way (which taught me that nine miles isn't far enough for a Bonanza), and a 48-minute trip from Phoenix to Palm Springs, which went well until SoCal Approach dragged its feet getting me below 11000 and forced me to go around. At least I got some hand-flying practice in the Citation from that latter flight. MX wrote Flight is flight. Most of the differences between simulation and the real world tend to be insignificant in the wide world of aviation. When my most important customer is having some difficulties, I do NOT simulate a flight to Rochester NY. I file an IFR flight plan, and go there. That is, at least to my pragmatic way of thinking, a significant difference. My guess is a significant number of us use are ability to fly to enhance our quality of life by going to interesting places, others do that by enjoying the aesthetics of soaring. And some play computer games. Perhaps to some the pleasures are equivalent. To some of us, they are not. For some of us, there's not an important overlap in learning opportunity, To be lectured by one who has experienced only one side as to its relevance is, well, you can fill in whatever word or phrase you choose. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Simulators
VOR-DME writes:
I am dubitative of the pertinence of one’s expertise in simulation having never experienced the genuine activity being simulated. However, we’ve explored the possibility that mitigating factors, be they medical, pecuniary or other could make this the only real option. This is fine, however to profess any sort of expertise in the matter this shortfall would have to be compensated by an even greater study of the subject. This does not appear to be the case with MX. My posts are too few on USENET to make any assessment possible. I've been interested in aviation and have studied it since childhood, and I recall reading my first ground-school textbook at the age of around six (it belonged to my father). This statement is an open gate to a vast sea of ignorance. The topic of transfer of experience from simulation to real flight, the role of _realism_ and its subset of components (visual, motion, audio, cockpit resource management, I could go on and on) are the subject of a large number of published scholarly works and an even greater number of doctoral theses. All of this ongoing study is tacitly predicated on the assumption that the above statement is impertinent at best, and probably patently false. The role of simulation in training and research continues to increase. If it were not realistic, this would not be the case. Some pilots have a great deal of their self-esteem invested in their pilot licenses. These pilots tend to reject simulation summarily because it dilutes the prestige they imagine to be associated with their licensing and thus dents their egos. Not all pilots have this type of mental block against simulation, however, and those who do not may enjoy simulation greatly (albeit not as much as flying in a real airplane). Most pilots cannot afford to fly a real airplane during all of their waking hours, so those who reject simulation are denying themselves considerable aviation-related enjoyment. Another statement that reveals a very shallow depth of inquiry and a superficial understanding of simulation, aside the fact that it is simply untrue. Some people adapt better than others. I note that those who refuse to take simulation seriously never enjoy it, whereas those who do take it seriously find it great fun and sometimes useful in practical ways that apply to their flights in real aircraft. There is a serious side to simulation though, and is clear that MX is not well versed in the subject. How so? |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Simulators
a writes:
When my most important customer is having some difficulties, I do NOT simulate a flight to Rochester NY. I file an IFR flight plan, and go there. That is, at least to my pragmatic way of thinking, a significant difference. If you regard flight as only transportation, then I agree. But if all you want is transportation, simulation is irrelevant. In fact, you can drive a car and avoid aviation entirely. My guess is a significant number of us use are ability to fly to enhance our quality of life by going to interesting places, others do that by enjoying the aesthetics of soaring. I don't think that someone who simply wants to get somewhere would decide to become a pilot and fly there himself. That's an incredibly awkward, expensive way to travel. People who become pilots usually have some intrinsic interest in flying. On rare occasions, a person might become a pilot because he has some extremely specific need for transportation that only an airplane can provide (as when he must travel to rural areas of Alaska, for example). For me, travel is a downside to real-world aviation. I hate travel. I don't want to go anywhere. In fact, having to actually go somewhere is an excellent reason to avoid flying for real in my book. A huge advantage of simulation for me is that I can fly without the need to step outside my room. Perhaps to some the pleasures are equivalent. To some of us, they are not. For some of us, there's not an important overlap in learning opportunity, To be lectured by one who has experienced only one side as to its relevance is, well, you can fill in whatever word or phrase you choose. I note that people who are hostile towards me here always resent being told anything by anyone else. They are very conscious of a semi-imaginary hierarchy, like a treehouse club. They lord it over people whom they consider inferior, and they grovel before people whom they consider superior (if any). And they worry a lot about what other people think of them in general. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Simulators
On May 15, 11:17*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes: Yep, while some people are serious about simulation, there is nothing serious about simulation as you would think it would relate to the real world of flying. I don't understand. FINALLY YOU ADMIT SOMETHING I AGREE WITH. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Simulators
On May 16, 8:47*am, Mxsmanic wrote:
a writes: When my most important customer is having some difficulties, I do NOT simulate a flight to Rochester NY. I file an IFR flight plan, and go there. That is, at least to my pragmatic way of thinking, a significant difference. If you regard flight as only transportation, then I agree. But if all you want is transportation, simulation is irrelevant. In fact, you can drive a car and avoid aviation entirely. My guess is a significant number of us use are ability to fly to enhance our quality of life by going to interesting places, others do that by enjoying the aesthetics of soaring. I don't think that someone who simply wants to get somewhere would decide to become a pilot and fly there himself. That's an incredibly awkward, expensive way to travel. People who become pilots usually have some intrinsic interest in flying. On rare occasions, a person might become a pilot because he has some extremely specific need for transportation that only an airplane can provide (as when he must travel to rural areas of Alaska, for example). For me, travel is a downside to real-world aviation. I hate travel. I don't want to go anywhere. In fact, having to actually go somewhere is an excellent reason to avoid flying for real in my book. A huge advantage of simulation for me is that I can fly without the need to step outside my room. Perhaps to some the pleasures are equivalent. To some of us, they are not. For some of us, there's not an important overlap in learning opportunity, *To be lectured by one who has experienced only one side as to its relevance is, well, you can fill in whatever word or phrase you choose. I note that people who are hostile towards me here always resent being told anything by anyone else. They are very conscious of a semi-imaginary hierarchy, like a treehouse club. They lord it over people whom they consider inferior, and they grovel before people whom they consider superior (if any). And they worry a lot about what other people think of them in general. MX wrote I note that people who are hostile towards me here always resent being told anything by anyone else. They are very conscious of a semi-imaginary hierarchy, like a treehouse club. They lord it over people whom they consider inferior, and they grovel before people whom they consider superior (if any). And they worry a lot about what other people think of them in general. Rather defensive, aren't you? I take pleasure in flying, and in driving. You, having no PIC (actual) have little real world aviation experience to draw on. "I read" or "I simulated" does not carry much credibility, and to those ignorant but eager to learn of the realities of general aviation would be prudent to consider the source of advice and/or teachings. Your pontifications are sometimes right, other times wrong. The reactions those statements draw help the inexperienced reader evaluate them. I've gotten useful ideas from this newsgroup, but not from you. Some suggestions I've posted have become part of other aviator's checklists, and that's a nice form of payback. I suspect it's a reward you don't often get, but I could be wrong. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Simulators
a writes:
Rather defensive, aren't you? Not at all. Just making an observation. You, having no PIC (actual) have little real world aviation experience to draw on. "I read" or "I simulated" does not carry much credibility, and to those ignorant but eager to learn of the realities of general aviation would be prudent to consider the source of advice and/or teachings. There are instructors who have never flown. You can become an instructor without flying, as I recall. Do you dismiss them as well? Your pontifications are sometimes right, other times wrong. How often right, and how often wrong? The reactions those statements draw help the inexperienced reader evaluate them. The smart reader always verifies everything he sees on USENET by some other means. I've gotten useful ideas from this newsgroup, but not from you. Some suggestions I've posted have become part of other aviator's checklists, and that's a nice form of payback. I suspect it's a reward you don't often get, but I could be wrong. Actually, I provide instruction in other venues, and that seems to work quite well. There are far fewer dorks when there's no anonymity. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Simulators
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Simulators | Birdog | Piloting | 33 | March 9th 09 10:46 PM |
PC IFR simulators | Nick Kliewer | Instrument Flight Rules | 20 | November 2nd 06 08:16 AM |
Simulators | [email protected] | Simulators | 1 | October 20th 04 09:12 PM |
IFR simulators | Tony | Owning | 8 | October 27th 03 08:42 PM |
IFR simulators | Richard Kaplan | Instrument Flight Rules | 3 | July 24th 03 03:53 AM |