PC flight simulators

362436 (Ron) wrote:
(ArtKramr) wrote:

Alan, as you know, something happens when you are socked in with zero
vivsibility and on IFR that never happens on a computer in an easy chair. A
sense of mild discomfort and a bit of anxiety which if not kept under
control can lead to disaster. Pilots with long IFR hours can usually deal
with it in a routine matter. But MSFS will never give you the experience to walk
that IFR walk with ease and comfort. I think John John Kennedy spent long
hours on MSFS.. He enjoyed it a great deal.

Well IFR on a desktop sim, which many of them are far far better than many of
the older analog sims which are used for ifr training, is not something that is
going to build proficiency or comfort when going down to mins...

But it can be great for honing procedures and practicing approaches, which can
make you a better IFR pilot.

Re-read what you just wrote, Ron. If desktop sims are good for
practicing approaches which can make you a "better" IFR pilot,
then it simply follows that to a limited degree desktop sims can
also help make you feel more "comfortable" when going down
to mins.

For example, when dispatched to a strange airport (esp. at night
in bad WX) from time to time me and my fellow charter jockeys
would fire up MS FlightSim 98 on our desktops, drag out the
applicable approach plates and practice a few approaches at
that strange airport before leaving for work.

But don't expect someone as insanely irrational and illogical as
Kramer to admit that he's more full of **** than a sperm whale with
NO ass! Remember that Kramer is not even a PILOT (much less
instrument rated) therefore he has no clue what it's like to routinely
shoot precision or non-precision approaches in Can't-See-****
conditions down to minimums as *PIC* (just for Kramer....PIC means
Pilot In Command).

The fact of the matter is that Kramer couldn't even successfully pass
a BASIC private pilot IFR written and/or oral exam, not to mention a
checkride in actual IMC conditions!

-Mike Marron
CFI-Instrument & former Commercial single-pilot IFR
(single & multi engine) pilot.

Glenfiddich wrote:

Part of the value of sims is to safely train experienced pilots for
those rare dire events that would risk the aircraft if tried in
flight.


IMO this is one (as you say) of the most valuable points of
simulators. Another, of course is basic switchology.

I don't mean that only literally but include all the basic
'moves' inherent in commercial piloting so as to make them
habitual and a natural part of the job rather than something that
takes conscious thought and therefore 'mental processing time'.

This leaves more capacity for 'getting ahead of the aircraft',
which is usually a good place to be...
--

-Gord.

"James Hart" wrote:


I don't know what sim it is but this setup looks impressive.
http://jameshart.mine.nu/ngs/flysim.jpg

I'd sure as hell hate to prang *that* one!...it'd probably kill
you!
--

-Gord.

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:51:44 GMT, Gord wrote:

You should be ashamed of yourself...

As should you. You've taken your dislike of Art to such a level that
you're showing your own ass. Do yourself a favor and stop looking to flame
his every post.

-Jeff B.
yeff at erols dot com

"Gord Beaman" ) wrote:
(ArtKramr) wrote:

I don;t know much. Just a few lessons learned over the Rhine Valley in 1944 and
1945. BTW, I didn't see you there so maybe you are the one who doesn't know
much about the reality of flying for sure. That is why you are confused about
MSFS and real flying.

You should be ashamed of yourself...

After he was caught responding to his own posts from his anonymous
"Autocollimator" account and "agreeing" with himself, he should also
be absolutely MORTIFIED beyond words. Hard to believe that he even
has the balls to show his chicken****, lying face on this NG after
that outrageous stunt!

Subject: PC flight simulators
From: Yeff
Date: 11/19/03 9:16 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:51:44 GMT, Gord wrote:

You should be ashamed of yourself...

As should you. You've taken your dislike of Art to such a level that
you're showing your own ass. Do yourself a favor and stop looking to flame
his every post.

-Jeff B.
yeff at erols dot com


Doesn't matter Jeff.I plonked him a long while ago so I never see anything he
posts except when others quote it. But since he rarely has ever said much of
interest anyway, why waste the time?


Arthur Kramer
344th BG 494th BS
England, France, Belgium, Holland, Germany
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

Yeff wrote:

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:51:44 GMT, Gord wrote:

You should be ashamed of yourself...

As should you. You've taken your dislike of Art to such a level that
you're showing your own ass. Do yourself a favor and stop looking to flame
his every post.

-Jeff B.
yeff at erols dot com

Ok Jeff, thanks, I'll certainly give it consideration...
--

-Gord.

In message ,
writes
Whilst on the subject, I am having a debate on the subject of whether planes
like the BF109 and FW190 were really as unstable and prone to stalls and
spins at the drop of a hat as modelled in the PC sim IL2 Sturmovik,
Forgotten Battles. I am taking a Kramer view (but more politely because
they're my friends) and saying that the air war would never have been won if
planes of that era could barely fly.

A humble Cessna can be a spinning, stalling brute in MS Flight Sim (in
my distant experience of trying to fling one around). Flying a similar
light, novice-friendly aircraft, it was extraordinarily forgiving...
provided you felt it through your seat and hands and middle ear, and
were much more gentle with the controls in reality than you were in the
game.

I'd hazard that the aircraft in Il-2 were a lot easier to fly when the
feedback of "get the stick out of that corner, you idiot" came from the
effort of hauling it there and holding it, and your _feeling_ the
airspeed bleed off... but that trying to model them in a computer game
played through a monitor and joystick means a lot of the crucial cues
are lost, and so the nasty characteristics are much easier to experience
because the warnings are missing.


--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

wrote:

Yeff wrote:


On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:51:44 GMT, Gord wrote:


You should be ashamed of yourself...

As should you. You've taken your dislike of Art to such a level that
you're showing your own ass. Do yourself a favor and stop looking to flame
his every post.

-Jeff B.
yeff at erols dot com


Ok Jeff, thanks, I'll certainly give it consideration...
--

-Gord.

Yeah Gord, do what I did, I killfiled him a year ago along with several
other PITB's. Now if everyone would quit replying to those folks I would
never even hear of them. VBG

George

On Sun, 16 Nov 2003 18:03:34 -0600, "Gene Storey" wrote:

http://www.x-plane.com/

There's some simulator companies that use this for FAA certification.
It's pretty complex, as you can have 10 computers running and all
networked together for the different views and gauges, etc.

I believe Scaled Composites uses/has used X-Plane for some simulation work.
But of course, what would they know? They're only building sub-orbital
vehicles, thats all. :-)


This made me laugh:

In 1943 I flew a simulator that was the cockpit and nose of a
B-26 complete with full reality sounds and feeling to the controls plus rough
air effects..My pilot was in the cockpit and we flew the simulator as a crew. I
did bombruns over Berlin that unrolled under us with accurate engine sounds and
flak impacts. It was as close as you could get to actual flying in combat
bombing and navigating. In fact we often got lost in the trainer procedure and
actually felt we were in the air on bomb runs,

Welcome to 2003! Home-built motion cockpits + PC based flight sims have been
achieving far more than this for years!

Comparing that to a PC is just total a stretch beyond all reason.

Indeed. A PC sim would blow it out the water!

1943!! ROFLMAO!!

And yes, I have flown real aircraft. Seems a lot of you guys have only
experienced sims from way back. More modern ones aren't that bad. In fact PC
sims are often more difficult because of the lack of SA and 'feel' of the
aircraft. But they still simulate flight to a degree. Just because you don't
have to be some super-hero, God-like, all knowing fighter pilot, to use them
doesn't mean they're crap.

:-)

--
Steve.