Simulators

writes:

Only if previously briefed on things like which buttons to push if you
want to see out of the side window.

If necessary, but that's trivial.

On Sat, 15 May 2010 04:27:25 -0000, wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote:
vaughn writes:

One relevant sim test that I have been proposing for years is to simply do it
the other way around; go from the left seat to the sim! As an initial test of
any sim, simply have a real pilot (but one who does not fly sims) who is fully
qualified and current on the plane being simulated, sit down and attempt a
takeoff, pattern, and landing. If the "real" pilot can't do that simple task on
the first try, (as the pilot surely could in the real airplane) then the sim
fails .

Even a properly configured desktop simulator can often pass this test.

Only if previously briefed on things like which buttons to push if you
want to see out of the side window.

I recently had the opportunity to try an F-16 simulator at a Guard
base. The cockpit is entirely accurate and the view surrounds you to
the rear of the cockpit and accurately represents the surrounding
landscape. It is pretty spooky, and pretty touchy, but still lacks a
little of the real feel. You are, however about 15 miles behind the
damn thing from the moment you hit afterburner. I really enjoyed the
experience nevertheless.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Only if previously briefed on things like which buttons to push if you
want to see out of the side window.

If necessary, but that's trivial.

No, it is not.

The posters point was a simulator could be deemed realistic if a real
pilot could sit down and "fly" it.

Real pilots in real airplanes often look out the side windows and they
don't have to push any buttons to be able to do it.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

No, it is not.

Things like pushing a button can be learned in seconds and don't significantly
impact a simulation. Perhaps if these requirements existed in great profusion,
they would make a difference, but not when their number is limited.

The posters point was a simulator could be deemed realistic if a real
pilot could sit down and "fly" it.

Real pilots in real airplanes often look out the side windows and they
don't have to push any buttons to be able to do it.

You can set MSFS up that way, too, with things like TrackIR. You turn your
head, the image moves. Or you can do it the way I do it, with the twist axis
on the joy stick set to turn the view.

I will admit that flying patterns can be frustrating in MSFS because of the
limited view, but you can find workarounds. Sometimes I'll "turn my head"
(twist the joystick) to see where the runway is, then note some landmark on
the extended centerline, and when I reach that, I turn to final. That would
not be necessary in real life, but it's a very minor difference, something
that I'd instinctively discard if I had a full view out the windows.

The alternative is TrackIR, as I've said, but I haven't decided to spring for
that, yet, as the current set-up works well enough for VFR with the few
differences I've mentioned.

One thing that surprised me, when I actually first tried to navigate by
pilotage alone, is that it actually works in the sim. The terrain often
doesn't have much detail, but the developers (some of whom were pilots) put in
many of the details you see marked on sectionals. The roads don't religiously
follow their paths on the charts but they follow them closely enough to permit
navigation with them. It works well enough to be enjoyable.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

No, it is not.

Things like pushing a button can be learned in seconds and don't significantly
impact a simulation. Perhaps if these requirements existed in great profusion,
they would make a difference, but not when their number is limited.

The posters point was a simulator could be deemed realistic if a real
pilot could sit down and "fly" it.

Nope, not without being briefed on MSFS's button usage for things like
which button to push to look right, which button to push to look left,
which button to push to look ahead, which button to pust to turn on the
transponder, which button to push to ...

Real pilots in real airplanes often look out the side windows and they
don't have to push any buttons to be able to do it.

You can set MSFS up that way, too, with things like TrackIR. You turn your
head, the image moves. Or you can do it the way I do it, with the twist axis
on the joy stick set to turn the view.

The way you do it in a real airplane is turn your eyes.

And TrackIR sounds even more unrealistic. If you turn your head full left,
does the monitor more to your left?

I will admit that flying patterns can be frustrating in MSFS because of the
limited view, but you can find workarounds.

Which makes it VERY unrealistic.

One thing that surprised me, when I actually first tried to navigate by
pilotage alone, is that it actually works in the sim. The terrain often
doesn't have much detail, but the developers (some of whom were pilots) put in
many of the details you see marked on sectionals. The roads don't religiously
follow their paths on the charts but they follow them closely enough to permit
navigation with them. It works well enough to be enjoyable.

Yeah, it sorta works for ground referenced navigation as long as the landmarks
are in front of you.

I do not find MSFS to be enjoyable other than for doing things like buzzing
the Vegas strip.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

Nope, not without being briefed on MSFS's button usage for things like
which button to push to look right, which button to push to look left,
which button to push to look ahead, which button to pust to turn on the
transponder, which button to push to ...

A lot can be done by clicking with the mouse, and you just click on the things
that look like the controls you use in real life.

The way you do it in a real airplane is turn your eyes.

So?

And TrackIR sounds even more unrealistic. If you turn your head full left,
does the monitor more to your left?

You don't know how TrackIR works, do you? How do you know that it's
unrealistic, then?

Which makes it VERY unrealistic.

Field of view is only one tiny part of flying.

Yeah, it sorta works for ground referenced navigation as long as the landmarks
are in front of you.

Or anywhere, actually.

In fact, you can cheat in some aircraft with a 360-degree, unobstructed view
of your surroundings, which is not possible in real life.

When I fly by pilotage, typically the landmarks I'm looking for are in front
of me, or nearly so. If they are behind me, I'm going the wrong way (and I
wouldn't be able to see them in a real airplane, either).

I do not find MSFS to be enjoyable other than for doing things like buzzing
the Vegas strip.

Children who try out MSFS love to do that. Zooming around, crashing and
bouncing, and so on. They can't be bothered to learn how to fly.

Gamers are much the same way.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Nope, not without being briefed on MSFS's button usage for things like
which button to push to look right, which button to push to look left,
which button to push to look ahead, which button to pust to turn on the
transponder, which button to push to ...

A lot can be done by clicking with the mouse, and you just click on the things
that look like the controls you use in real life.

A real airplane doesn't have a mouse to click.

The way you do it in a real airplane is turn your eyes.

So?

So it isn't realistic.

And TrackIR sounds even more unrealistic. If you turn your head full left,
does the monitor more to your left?

You don't know how TrackIR works, do you? How do you know that it's
unrealistic, then?

If I turn my head full left in a real airplane I have a left hand view
directly in front of my face.

TrackIR moves the image on the monitor in front of you. To simulate reality,
TrackIR would have to physically move the monitor to my left to track my
head turning. TrackIR does not do that.

Which makes it VERY unrealistic.

Field of view is only one tiny part of flying.

The above has nothting to do with field of view and field of view is very
important to VFR flying, especially in operations on and around an airport.


Yeah, it sorta works for ground referenced navigation as long as the landmarks
are in front of you.

Or anywhere, actually.

No, because seeing things to your side and to your side and below is a
big pain in the ass pushing buttons to change the view.

In fact, you can cheat in some aircraft with a 360-degree, unobstructed view
of your surroundings, which is not possible in real life.

Not in MFSF and not anything else unless you have a 360 degree screen.

When I fly by pilotage, typically the landmarks I'm looking for are in front
of me, or nearly so. If they are behind me, I'm going the wrong way (and I
wouldn't be able to see them in a real airplane, either).

A lot of landmarks in real flying will be beside you.

I do not find MSFS to be enjoyable other than for doing things like buzzing
the Vegas strip.

Children who try out MSFS love to do that. Zooming around, crashing and
bouncing, and so on. They can't be bothered to learn how to fly.

I have a real airplane and already know how to fly.

MSFS is nothing like flying my airplane.


--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

writes:

A real airplane doesn't have a mouse to click.

So? A person would have to be quite impaired cognitively in order to be unable
to adapt between a mouse click and the turn of a knob or the flip of a switch.

So it isn't realistic.

Realism isn't a binary value. There are many degrees of realism. Every
simulation is realistic to some degree. No simulation is completely realistic
or unrealistic. The limits of realism can be a good thing or a bad thing,
depending on which aspects of realism are affected and the objectives of the
simulation.

If I turn my head full left in a real airplane I have a left hand view
directly in front of my face.

TrackIR moves the image on the monitor in front of you. To simulate reality,
TrackIR would have to physically move the monitor to my left to track my
head turning. TrackIR does not do that.

So?

The above has nothting to do with field of view and field of view is very
important to VFR flying, especially in operations on and around an airport.

Not everyone chooses to fly VFR.

No, because seeing things to your side and to your side and below is a
big pain in the ass pushing buttons to change the view.

I don't find it so.

Not in MFSF and not anything else unless you have a 360 degree screen.

The twist axis on my control stick allows me to look directly behind the
aircraft if I feel so inclined. I only use this capability on rare occasions
because it's not very realistic.

A lot of landmarks in real flying will be beside you.

If they are beside me, I look to the side.

I have a real airplane and already know how to fly.

MSFS is nothing like flying my airplane.

If you only use MSFS to buzz the Las Vegas strip, I can understand why you
might feel that way. But some people are serious about simulation.

On May 15, 9:43*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

But some people are serious about simulation.

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 know since I have real world experience AND MSFS experience. You
don't since you don't fly a real plane. .

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.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

A real airplane doesn't have a mouse to click.

So? A person would have to be quite impaired cognitively in order to be unable
to adapt between a mouse click and the turn of a knob or the flip of a switch.

A real airplane doesn't have a mouse to click or keyboard sequences to look
out the side windows.

So it isn't realistic.

Realism isn't a binary value. There are many degrees of realism. Every
simulation is realistic to some degree. No simulation is completely realistic
or unrealistic. The limits of realism can be a good thing or a bad thing,
depending on which aspects of realism are affected and the objectives of the
simulation.

If I turn my head full left in a real airplane I have a left hand view
directly in front of my face.

TrackIR moves the image on the monitor in front of you. To simulate reality,
TrackIR would have to physically move the monitor to my left to track my
head turning. TrackIR does not do that.

So?

So it is nowhere near a realistic simulation of flying a real airplane.

The above has nothting to do with field of view and field of view is very
important to VFR flying, especially in operations on and around an airport.

Not everyone chooses to fly VFR.

That comment has even less to do with the subject at hand than your previous
comment about field of view.

No, because seeing things to your side and to your side and below is a
big pain in the ass pushing buttons to change the view.

I don't find it so.

Of course not because you are playing a game, not flying a real airplane
with no clue how important side vision is in some phases of flight.

Not in MFSF and not anything else unless you have a 360 degree screen.

The twist axis on my control stick allows me to look directly behind the
aircraft if I feel so inclined. I only use this capability on rare occasions
because it's not very realistic.

Yet another comment that has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

A lot of landmarks in real flying will be beside you.

If they are beside me, I look to the side.

After pushing some buttons to look to the side than pushing buttons again
to look ahead again.

I have a real airplane and already know how to fly.

MSFS is nothing like flying my airplane.

If you only use MSFS to buzz the Las Vegas strip, I can understand why you
might feel that way. But some people are serious about simulation.

I feel that way because MSFS controls, even the expensive ones, feel nothing
like a real airplane, MSFS does not taxi like a real airplane, none of the
physical forces feel like a real airplane, none of the panel controls work
like a real airplane, and having a monitor in front of me looks nothing
like the view in a real airplane.

The people that are truely serious about simulation, like the Air Force and
airlines, don't use MSFS.



--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.