Flight Simulator Software - Any Help or Just a Game?

"Dave" wrote in message news:aNq%c.1509$sS4.87@trndny03...

Although your motorcycle skills and experience would most certainly have
had a positive effect on accelerating the learning process in the
airplane, the actual effect of flying a desktop simulator would have
limited effect. It's true that the simulator would have taught you the
basic DIRECTION of movement for each control, and that would be a
positive, but for the actual purpose of flying an airplane, it's
PRESSURES and RATES that are the pertinent factors, NOT direction!



This has made me rethink a little. My time windsurfing surely helped in
this regard.

I agree. I liken flying more to sailing than anything else. The
basic concepts of passing air over a movable surface to give lift (in
the air planes case) or thrust (in the sailing sense) are almost
identical. The other thing that struck me as being almost identical
was that if you make a change in trim in either case the craft takes a
moment to 'settle' into its new configuration. I spent a bit of time
chasing dials when I first flew until I made this connection to
sailing. Also the notion of 'staying ahead' of what the craft is
doing is identical (although its far easier to do in a
yacht/windsurfer than it is in a plane IMO, but thats debateable).

Dudley Henriques wrote:
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
Another point of view:

I learned to fly ten years ago in 1994. I started "flying" sims in the
mid-80s, when they were little more than wire-frame depictions of
flight. (Anyone remember Atari STs?) By the time I could afford real
flight lessons, I had a zillion hours of sim time.

At least partially as a result, I took to flying immediately, and
soloed with just 6.4 hours in my logbook.

Same here. I soloed after 4.5 hours, but in 1984 during
the wire-frame depiction age, and my sim time was all on
one of those thingies (a Sinclair in my case). Didn´t have
zillions of hours on those either, but probably several
dozen.

I definitely had the impression that the sim time helped
a lot right from the beginning, not only with the direction
the controls worked, but things like minding the speed,
keeping the glidepath towards the threshold and other
details. Even managed a landing on my first lesson without
intervention (except verbal) from the instructor.
(Though I am not sure how remarkable or unusual a feat
that is, on a reasonably calm day).

As for other background there was no motorcycling experience
in my case. But I was extremely motivated. And I had been up
in a glider maybe three or four times as a kid and been
allowed to briefly try the controls (some 15 years earlier,
and total time for that cannot have amounted to more than
about half an hour).

This would actually be an interesting subject to see
investigated scientifically. It is so easy to have opinions.
Not that some of the opinions aren't valid and helpful
sometimes, but somehow they can never be totally convincing.

Cheers CV

I agree. Flight sims did not teach me how to fly. But they DID teach me
about maintaining a sensitive touch and how powerful small adjustments can
be. The first time I got behind the wheel of a car with an instructor, he
was amazed at how smooth my control inputs were. I didn't swerve while
alternately jamming on the gas and brakes. He asked "are you SURE you've
never driven a car before?" While I certainly wasn't perfect, I credit
flight sims with giving me that smooth touch.

In addition, flying different aircraft in MS Flight Simulator had me
constantly trying different sensitivities so that I didn't get locked into
believing that "when I push the joystick this much, I will bank this much."
Instead, I would learn to adapt to each aircraft and see that there was no
single way of flying the sim. When I first took the controls of a real 152
in February, it was the same basic idea. This was a new set of controls, and
I'd have to explore them.

Now, I'm not sure if I can give the following credit to FS or not, but I
seem to have a good sense of direction these days. I always seem to know
which way I'm heading and where things are in relation to me. My instructor
has asked where we are at random points on x-c's, and I tell him. Maybe
that's just something built into my mind, or maybe it's the result of 6
years of flying above a virtual Los Angeles. Maybe it's a bit of both.

In summary: Flight sims taught me that before I could learn a vehicle's
controls, I would first have to explore them with a careful hand. A good
sense of direction may have been at least partly the result of the sims.


-Tony
Student Pilot
31.3 Hours




"Jay Honeck" wrote
Another point of view:

I learned to fly ten years ago in 1994. I started "flying" sims in the
mid-80s, when they were little more than wire-frame depictions of flight.
(Anyone remember Atari STs?) By the time I could afford real flight
lessons,
I had a zillion hours of sim time.

At least partially as a result, I took to flying immediately, and soloed
with just 6.4 hours in my logbook.

Quite frankly, I'd be willing to bet that my time riding motorcycles was
just as helpful in learning to fly (the physics of riding and flying are
nearly identical) -- but my instructor (who, by the way, was an older
gentleman and quite the technophobe. He believed that computers were evil
devices from Day One.) figured that all my sim time really helped --
especially in the early stages of flight instruction.

Your mileage may vary, of course.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 21:56:09 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

So damaging can the use of the simulator be during this stage, that it's
use can actually retard the progress of a new student.

Another point of view:

I learned to fly ten years ago in 1994. I started "flying" sims in the
mid-80s, when they were little more than wire-frame depictions of flight.
(Anyone remember Atari STs?) By the time I could afford real flight lessons,
I had a zillion hours of sim time.

At least partially as a result, I took to flying immediately, and soloed
with just 6.4 hours in my logbook.

Quite frankly, I'd be willing to bet that my time riding motorcycles was
just as helpful in learning to fly (the physics of riding and flying are
nearly identical) -- but my instructor (who, by the way, was an older
gentleman and quite the technophobe. He believed that computers were evil
devices from Day One.) figured that all my sim time really helped --
especially in the early stages of flight instruction.

Your mileage may vary, of course.

Atari ST? I would have killed for one of those. I was stuck with an
Atari 800 that I had about $1,000 invested in, if you can believe
that. I started flying Bruce Artwick's flight simulator before it was
SubLogic. I also believe that my 30 years of motorcycle riding helped
with my flying. Everything from the similarity of motion to the
attentiveness to weather helped.

That being said, I do think that the simulator can be harmful to a new
student primarily because of the well documented "head in the cockpit"
syndrome. Those that have flown simulators for many years may be over
that problem. At any rate, there is much to be gained from Flight
Simulator, even if not at the beginning of your training. In response
to the OP, it is not a substitute for a real plane or a CFI but it is
clearly more than just a game.

Rich Russell

On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 21:56:09 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

I learned to fly ten years ago in 1994. I started "flying" sims in the
mid-80s, when they were little more than wire-frame depictions of flight.
(Anyone remember Atari STs?) By the time I could afford real flight lessons,
I had a zillion hours of sim time.

At least partially as a result, I took to flying immediately, and soloed
with just 6.4 hours in my logbook.

Perhaps. On the other hand, during the war years it was routine to
solo students in as few as 8 to 12 hours of stick time. This is with
no previous experience and in some cases no previous experience even
driving a car. In addition, the trainer was inevitably a taildragger.

This pre-dates electronic flight simulators by over 40 years so the
ability to solo early had nothing to do with any kind of pre flying
training.

Most of the people who become pilots have ALWAYS wanted to learn to
fly and this tends to create a very receptive attitude for learning
when that time comes.

Corky Scott

Corky Scott wrote
Perhaps. On the other hand, during the war years it was routine to
solo students in as few as 8 to 12 hours of stick time. This is with
no previous experience and in some cases no previous experience even
driving a car. In addition, the trainer was inevitably a taildragger.

True. The standard military trainer of the time was a Stearman.
These days, it's considered a tricky, high performance (sic!) biplane.
There were some important things you're leaving out, though.

Training to solo took place on open grass fields. Cross wind landing
were not taught - or done. The students were all young and eager.
There was no radio work and no instrument work - just airwork and
landings.

Every field had a truck standing by. Each truck had a repair crew -
and a bed full of ailerons. The crews could replace an aileron on a
groundlooped airplane and have it ready for service in SEVEN MINUTES.
Imagine how much practice they got. A groundloop was no big deal.

Most older taildraggers are pussycats on wide open grass fields
landing into the wind - it's landing on paved narrow crosswind runways
with obstructions that makes them exciting. If all I had to do was
teach the average teenager to land, only on grass and into the wind,
and only well enough that I could be certain he would not hurt himself
- the occasional groundloop not being a big deal - I could solo them
in 6 hours all day long and twice on Sunday.

Realistically, I can't solo a brand new student in 6 hours these days.
My home field only has one narrow paved runway, aligned cross to the
prevailing winds and with structures and trees that make any crosswind
gusty. The pattern is busy, and radio use is expected. The FAA gives
me a laundry list of things I have to do with them before I solo them.
These days, if someone soloes in under 10 hours, that's pretty good,
and generally indicates better than average preparation.

Michael

I have the full yoke/rudder setup and found the simulator to be of
minimal use for initial training. Where it came in useful was in
habitualizing the procedures. (e.g. carb heat at midfield, RPM to 1500
at landing line, etc.). I am also finding it very useful for learning
IFR approaches and improving my instrument scan. I notice that the CH
Yoke sticks very slightly in the pitch access which makes it difficult
for precise glide slopes. Overall, I find the real airplane much easier
to handle.

Eric

Jay Honeck wrote:
So damaging can the use of the simulator be during this stage, that it's
use can actually retard the progress of a new student.


Another point of view:

I learned to fly ten years ago in 1994. I started "flying" sims in the
mid-80s, when they were little more than wire-frame depictions of flight.
(Anyone remember Atari STs?) By the time I could afford real flight lessons,
I had a zillion hours of sim time.

At least partially as a result, I took to flying immediately, and soloed
with just 6.4 hours in my logbook.

Quite frankly, I'd be willing to bet that my time riding motorcycles was
just as helpful in learning to fly (the physics of riding and flying are
nearly identical) -- but my instructor (who, by the way, was an older
gentleman and quite the technophobe. He believed that computers were evil
devices from Day One.) figured that all my sim time really helped --
especially in the early stages of flight instruction.

Your mileage may vary, of course.

In article . net,
Dudley Henriques wrote:
So damaging can the use of the simulator be during this stage, that it's
use can actually retard the progress of a new student.

My experience is completely the opposite. I was having trouble with
crosswind landings (I had to think about what I had to do to stop the
drift, and it was of course too late by the time I'd come up with the
answer - this is something you have to do automatically). With a flight
sim with a yoke and pedals, I could practise doing crosswind landings
with extreme crosswinds over and over and over again until I'd
automatically put the control inputs in the correct way. This was with
FS95.

The next crosswind landing lesson may not have resulted in perfect
landings, but they resulted in no overshooting of the centreline when
turning base to final, and automatically using the correct inputs to
stop the drift, and no sideways movement on touchdown. Worked great for
me.

Of course, for instrument training there is no question it's valuable
(the best ones are the 'PCATDs' with the right physical controls
including knobs you can twist on the radios, but a normal FS 'game' will
do the trick - and of course you can simulate conditions you'd never do
in real life training because they are too dangerous, such as engine
failure on takeoff in a light twin in low IFR, gyro failures - with the
slow failure of the gyro that might go un-noticed. We had great fun with
the PCATD with the separate instructor console as the poor pleb who we
are torturing has no idea what will happen next.)

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

Like Dudley, I think that using a flight simulator actually retards progress
for student pilots. I think they can be somewhat useful for instrument
students, but even there I would rather see a student using something like a
real flight simulator.

"pjbphd" wrote

I'm a student pilot and have heard mixed reviews of Flight Sim
software. Some say it's great for a little on the ground practice.
Others say it's really a waste of time.

When I encounter a new student who has "learned to fly" using
a Flight Sim program, I usually find it necessary to cover the
instrument panel for the first 2-3 flights in order to teach
him to fly a real airplane. The US Navy (where I learned to fly)
by far preferred future Naval Aviators who had never set foot in
an airplane before.....no bad habits to deal with.

Bob Moore
ATP CFI
PanAm (retired)