Anyone using MS Flightsim to aid PPL training

[EGLD]

Just bought this product, and some may find it useful for VFR training?

www.visualflight.co.uk

In its quest to bring news levels of realism to Microsoft Flight Simulator, Visual Flight have developed an exciting new photographic scenery for Microsoft Flight Simulator 2002 - VFR Photographic Scenery for England and Wales.

Visual Flight have developed this exciting new scenery in association with Getmapping plc, whose Millennium Map™ is the first ever complete, seamless aerial photographic image of the UK.

VFR Photographic Scenery is made by draping the high quality photographic image of the Millennium Map over a 3D model of the terrain so that it can be used by Microsoft Flight Simulator to show the landscape as it would be typically be seen in real life.

VFR Photographic Scenery is great for recreating Visual Flight Rules (VFR) flying in which navigation is by visual features such as motorways, railways, lakes and other prominent features in the landscape.

VFR Photographic Scenery will allow you to make sightseeing trips for the sheer enjoyment and beauty of the countryside, and for the first time ever you can explore areas you are familiar with in real life - your home, the place you were born, where you work, your favourite holiday spot.

Reaction from real pilots who've tried the photographic scenery has been very positive

[Wee Weasley Welshman]

Waste of time and money in my book.

There is only one way to learn VFR navigation techniques and that is in the air with a flying instructor.

Spend the money on a set of 1.50000 CAA maps and learn how to read them quickly and accurately. Would be my advice.

WWW

[kabz]

There's another way to learn, ... and that's getting lost on a cross country ...

Don't worry, you won't get lost on the next one, because you'll have good landmarks, know how to read the maps, and not be a muppet like on the first one.

:D

[EGLD]

oh for gods sake, well of course its nothing in comparison and no substitute for the real thing, but could it really be such a waste of 29.99 english pounds???

i think it would be cool to fly a VFR route you know you'll be flying the next day in what is essentially a pretty good GA sim for the money, over an actual scale map of the east of england??

i'll keep me mouth shut next time ! ;)

[Kefuddle_UK]

I think FS is a great tool for the PPL but only for practicing procedures and memory checks until you can do them without thinking. If you get some of the artificial inteligent flight plan add-ons (free at www.avsim.com) for GA aircraft or buy the midlands scenery from www.uk2000scenery.com then you will also have good reason to keep a sharp eye out on overhead joins! Lots of traffic.

VFR in a sim is not a realistic proposition.

[faacfi]

sound an ad to send his product!nothing else!

[Kefuddle_UK]

OK, I'll re-word to any sim not just FS!

:rolleyes:

Oh yes, I forgot to mention that the physics is accurate enough for it to be possible to get some practice in using your whizz-wheel (CRP-1 or whatever), the facilities are accurate enough to get some kind of flight plan together for your cross-country :)

[Tinstaafl]

I disagree, WWW.

Properly used visual sims such as the M$ type with appropriate graphics make a very useful adjunct in the early part of nav training, in the same way a synthetic flight trainer is useful in the early parts of instrument training.

Appropriately structured & with a supervising instructor supplying background ATC, traffic etc they can shorten the time required in the a/c to develop a range of skills.

I'm not supporting using them to 'pre-fly' each training nav. route since I believe a trainee navigator also has to be exposed during training to flying tasks and demands that haven't been rehearsed.

As navigators we often have to go places that we've never seen before. Our competence level is supposed be such that we can cope with navigating through unfamiliar regions. Bit rough it that happens for the first time after qualifying...

[Craggenmore]

Despite the plug, this is one of the all time debating topics.

I used sims for years before my first real lesson and there is absolutely no doubt in my mind that it helped me in every area (apart from stacks :D)

Aside from VFR, during my first IFR stint, I was executing 180's +/- 20ft, within balance. As I always used to set the sim conditions to minimums (a base of usually 500 ft did the trick), there is no way that I could have accomplished this without the hours and hours of prior instrument monitoring sim experience. (BTW, this was achieved in lesson two).

Yes, I do agree that nothing beats the real thing but you just have to look at the amount of FTO's that now use FRASCA sims to train IFR students. IFR renewals are also now accepted via these sims, and as for line training...................

Cheers,

Craggenmore

[POL.777]

I wouldn't recommend any aspiring pilot to use MS FS as an aid to the PPL. Simply because you will get this nasty habit of looking at your instruments rather than on the visual horizon. - That's what VFR is all about. A FS like ELITE is a good aid for an instrument rating, but until then - don't bother! (I know, cause I've been there. Costed me at least 3 or 5 hours of ekstra flight during my PPL training).

Best regards

POL

[Kefuddle_UK]

I wouldn't recommend any aspiring pilot to use MS FS as an aid to the PPL. Simply because you will get this nasty habit of looking at your instruments rather than on the visual horizon. - That's what VFR is all about. A FS like ELITE is a good aid for an instrument rating, but until then - don't bother! (I know, cause I've been there. Costed me at least 3 or 5 hours of ekstra flight during my PPL training).

That is very true. Unless you actually incorporate not looking at the instruments into your procedures. That means trimming. This is a good point because that is the one area where sims very nearly make themselves useless for PPL. Trimming in FS is a tricky excersise and can mastered but is obviously nothing like trimming a real P28/C152, which can be accomplished extremely quickly without looking at the instruments.

[Freak On A Leash]

IMO using the flightsims for VFR is very close to worthless since you don`t get the feel of the aircraft, nor can you get the proper visuals (including depth perception), even though the sims recreate the instrument panels well.

However, the sims` value increases once you begin using them as an IFR procedure trainer (FTD) to fly approaches during low weather conditions sicne you`ll basically be looking inside the aircraft at all times (IMC) rather than outside.

But no matter what, the sim is just that - a sim. It`s a representation (mock-up) of the real thing and can therefore never truly be the real thing (allthough some sims are very very close). My advice would be to get in the aircraft with an instructor and put in some hard work - it will pay off!

[bluskis]

Is it just me? When I have tried the kid's or friends computer flite suites I found the aileron control in particular not to reflect actual airplane control.

That is bank continues while the stick is held over to the side, but centering the stick returns the airplane to straight and level.

[Bagelman]

I wouldn't use a sim for VFR mainly becouse whatever you do you will find yourself looking at the instruments. Which when you get in the a/c is a difficult habit to break. I found a sim very useful during my IR. Anyway best of luck with your navs and the rest of PPL.

[drauk]

"whatever you do you will find yourself looking at the instruments":

You can (a) switch them all off and just look at out of the window (b) fail some/all of them (c) stick post-its over them (d) use the professional edition where you can modify the nav fit in the plane.

I think PC flight simulators are useful for some parts of pilot learning, but not all: it is as simple as that. Holding a heading for X minutes with a wind of Y at Z and seeing if you arrive where your plan said you would. Yes. Triangulating a position from two nav aids? Yes. Experiencing the physical sensations involved in steep turns, landings or stalls? No. Dealing with ATC, general airmanship, coping with stressful situations (e.g. being lost)? No.

And if you do want to get as much out of a PC flight simulator as possible (in particular for instrument appreciation, which is part of a PPL) I suggest you at least try X-Plane as personally I think it has a more realistic feel to it.

[Keef]

I'd be extremely chary of using them for VFR flying training (unless you're very young and want to get in some practice before you're allowed up in an aircraft).

But for IFR - it's a different story. I did a lot of hours of IFR, no outside vis, using MSFS and I think that stood me in extremely good stead, both for IMC rating renewals and more recently for the FAA IR. For that, I can't recommend it highly enough. Use the real IFR charts and it's amazing how you can actually fly the procedures (in California and Florida, anyway, which is where I tried MSFS).

[propjockey]

In a word... DON'T DO IT!

that was 3 words oops!


I flew loads of time on FSims before hand and it took me a long time to get out of the habit of havin my head in the panel instead of out of the window!

It breeds some nasty habits that are hard to break out of!

My instructor would say that I still have some of them I'd bet!

fly for real and leave the Fsim's to the computer based flyers!

regards

Simon

[englishal]

I agree with Keef....It can be a useful tool for practicing instrument procedures, tracking airways, VORs etc, even possibly "flying" approaches. However, flying FS2002 is nothing like flying a real light aircraft.

Cheers
EA:)

[Tinstaafl]

Englishal,

I don't think anyone is suggesting that M$ FS flies like a real a/c. Rather, that it can provide the opportunity to learn & develop some of the skills that make up the sum of the pilot's repertoire.

For this to be beneficial then I believe it must be part of a course, not just J.Bloggs installs it, uses it a lot & then believes he/she should expect some reduction in a/c training time. If anything, this would lead to an increase in the minimum training necessary to qualify.

As with most things aviation: He who teaches himself has a fool for an instructor.

M$ FSim just increase opportunity to be a fool.

[MLS-12D]

I agree with most of the above posts. PC flight simulators are good for practicing some IFR procedures, but for VFR they are a waste of time and money; also counterproductive, in that they teach you to keep your eyes in the cockpit, rather than outside where they belong. :(

EGLD - try not to be so defensive. No doubt it is a fun toy, but that's not what your post asked. :rolleyes:

[drauk]

I wonder how many of the people advising against using MSFS have actually tried the add-on VFR scenery that EGLD is talking about? Or stopped to think that you don't actually have to look at the instruments all the time if you decide not to? If the CAA are publishing pictures of VRP's (e.g. for the Stanstead/Luton transit zone) what's so bad about looking at them in a flight simulator? I guess for some people it's just a case of LEARNING TO FLY = FLIGHT SIMULATOR IS BAD. Oh well, their loss in my opinion.

[jonathang]

Only thing flight sim helped me with is.

Practice NDB and VOR tracking.

Flying wise , just isnt the same..

[Tinstaafl]

There are lots of things that could be beneficially 'pre-taught' using M$ FS or similiar software:

Track corrections
Departure procedures & techniques
Arrival procedures & techniques
Diversion procedures
Uncertain of Position & Lost procedures
Navigation/workload cycle
Radio procedures (who to call, when, where, what to say)

etc etc etc

The intent isn't to teach to fly & navigate in an a/c. The intent is to provide the opportunity to learn these skills in a less demanding environment and practice them to achieve some higher level of proficiency PRIOR to a/c exposure.

Again, I emphasise that these are skills that need to be taught THEN practiced, NOT 'J.Bloggs: Have M$ FS, no need for an instructor...'.