Flight Simulators
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: london
Age: 37
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flight Simulators
Hi, I did search and look around and hopefully I haven't missed a thread that is there already and hopefully this is in the right place.
Was wondering what the best Flight Simulator is and how many of you guys actually use them? Wanted it to fill the gaps between flying as i've not really got the money to fly as much as i'd like to and thought it might speed up my progression to a PPL.
I have been looking at Flight Simulator X - Gold Edition (PC) 2008.
Any suggestions/advice would be great!
Thanks in advance!
Was wondering what the best Flight Simulator is and how many of you guys actually use them? Wanted it to fill the gaps between flying as i've not really got the money to fly as much as i'd like to and thought it might speed up my progression to a PPL.
I have been looking at Flight Simulator X - Gold Edition (PC) 2008.
Any suggestions/advice would be great!
Thanks in advance!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Kemble, Cotswolds, UK
Age: 40
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The use of Flight Sims for improving flying skills is an interesting question and I would also be interested in hearing from people from across the experience spectrum on what it is exactly that they use (or avoid) Sims for. I certainly think their usefulness can, and has, been both over and under stated.
I've used MS Flight Sim which appears to be great in terms of radio navigation features and general procedures but poor at simulating handling. I'm planning on using MSFS between flights for rehearsing joining/departure procedures, timings and general multi-tasking but little else as it tends to encourage an over-reliance on instruments and poor lookout if used unwisely.
I am also looking into getting IL-2 working which seems to provide more challenging handling characteristics due to the high performance aircraft (reasonably) faithfully simulated. But I anticipate its usefulness to be very limited in terms of my real flying.
Stating the blindingly obvious, there is certainly nothing better than time in the air and a home Sim should never be used in place of genuine training with a qualified instructor. But as an aid to the proverbial 'armchair flying' type of learning I find it useful to me.
Looking forward to others' opinions.
I've used MS Flight Sim which appears to be great in terms of radio navigation features and general procedures but poor at simulating handling. I'm planning on using MSFS between flights for rehearsing joining/departure procedures, timings and general multi-tasking but little else as it tends to encourage an over-reliance on instruments and poor lookout if used unwisely.
I am also looking into getting IL-2 working which seems to provide more challenging handling characteristics due to the high performance aircraft (reasonably) faithfully simulated. But I anticipate its usefulness to be very limited in terms of my real flying.
Stating the blindingly obvious, there is certainly nothing better than time in the air and a home Sim should never be used in place of genuine training with a qualified instructor. But as an aid to the proverbial 'armchair flying' type of learning I find it useful to me.
Looking forward to others' opinions.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Norfolk UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was very fortunate when I was student to have a pal who would take me flying whenever he went ,either in a Tiger Moth or Chipmunk ,and let me have the controls for the flight,apart from take off and landings.
I tried a basic sim after my first lesson but never liked it.
You recognise the limitations of sims,so good luck with the replies.
Lister
I tried a basic sim after my first lesson but never liked it.
You recognise the limitations of sims,so good luck with the replies.
Lister
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As an instructor I would advise you stay completely away from the things unless its part of a controlled lesson.
They create all sorts of issues and habits that are a bloody nightmare to sort out once you have got them into habit status.
They create all sorts of issues and habits that are a bloody nightmare to sort out once you have got them into habit status.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Brussels - Twin Comanche PA39 - KA C90B
Age: 51
Posts: 647
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I used the ASA ip trainer for my IR.
For VFR I would stay away from them, for the IFR part I would play on them as much as possible.
I have a few friends who uses On Top to keep them sharp.
For VFR I would stay away from them, for the IFR part I would play on them as much as possible.
I have a few friends who uses On Top to keep them sharp.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: EGBO
Age: 56
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a previously avid simmer, I would agree with madjock... If you are going to play with a sim, then only cover the areas of flight you have been exposed to in real life.
The big problem is that you start doing things in the sim that you haven't been trained for, and you WILL pick up bad habits. Like many simmers, I had flown countless event free hours in 737s around the world, following SIDS, airways, STARS, learning all about FMCs, and oher high level avionic systems... and then I actually sat in a 3 axis microlight, and realised I actually knew very little indeed about flying.
I'm still learning myself, and I still use X-Plane on the mac when I get a spare half hour. Despite having a microlight simulation loaded, the handling/feel bares little PRACTICAL relation to the real thing.
I use my sim purely to practice the procedural side of VFR flying - so I do my RT calls, checklists, emergency calls etc.
Home based sims, even with yoke, pedals, and throttle quadrants etc, ARE useful, but not anything like as useful as most students might like to think they are.
I think perhaps, from a procedural standpoint, they are more useful for learning instrument flying.
To answer your original question, I think X-Plane has a more realistic flight model - but it still ain't a patch on real life.
The big problem is that you start doing things in the sim that you haven't been trained for, and you WILL pick up bad habits. Like many simmers, I had flown countless event free hours in 737s around the world, following SIDS, airways, STARS, learning all about FMCs, and oher high level avionic systems... and then I actually sat in a 3 axis microlight, and realised I actually knew very little indeed about flying.
I'm still learning myself, and I still use X-Plane on the mac when I get a spare half hour. Despite having a microlight simulation loaded, the handling/feel bares little PRACTICAL relation to the real thing.
I use my sim purely to practice the procedural side of VFR flying - so I do my RT calls, checklists, emergency calls etc.
Home based sims, even with yoke, pedals, and throttle quadrants etc, ARE useful, but not anything like as useful as most students might like to think they are.
I think perhaps, from a procedural standpoint, they are more useful for learning instrument flying.
To answer your original question, I think X-Plane has a more realistic flight model - but it still ain't a patch on real life.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think a sim is useless for VFR aircraft handling.
But, for long flights, nowadays the scenery can be so good... Back in 2000 I bought some add-on scenery (which was crap compared to today's FSX stuff) and before doing a x/country flight, I would fly it on the sim, so I knew what to expect.
A sim is priceless for instrument flight. One should NEVER get airborne unless one has worked out, on the ground, fully what one should be doing. If something cannot be 100% understood on the ground, say in front of a sim, there is no point in paying ££££ to try to crack it in the air. Totally pointless. (Of course some instructors will disagree; most of mine just wanted me to fly, even when I didn't know what I was supposed to be doing). So, always use a sim for that stuff. Doesn't need to be fancy - a £10 joystick is perfect. I reckon I saved 20hrs on the IMC Rating alone. The first go at instrument flight is truly hard to pick up.
Later, for the IR, I didn't bother because by then I knew "how IFR worked" and it was just a case of learning "American English", learning how to fly an old PA28 wreck in Arizona turbulence, and generally coping with the silly workload of banging one approach after another.
But, for long flights, nowadays the scenery can be so good... Back in 2000 I bought some add-on scenery (which was crap compared to today's FSX stuff) and before doing a x/country flight, I would fly it on the sim, so I knew what to expect.
A sim is priceless for instrument flight. One should NEVER get airborne unless one has worked out, on the ground, fully what one should be doing. If something cannot be 100% understood on the ground, say in front of a sim, there is no point in paying ££££ to try to crack it in the air. Totally pointless. (Of course some instructors will disagree; most of mine just wanted me to fly, even when I didn't know what I was supposed to be doing). So, always use a sim for that stuff. Doesn't need to be fancy - a £10 joystick is perfect. I reckon I saved 20hrs on the IMC Rating alone. The first go at instrument flight is truly hard to pick up.
Later, for the IR, I didn't bother because by then I knew "how IFR worked" and it was just a case of learning "American English", learning how to fly an old PA28 wreck in Arizona turbulence, and generally coping with the silly workload of banging one approach after another.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 441
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As procedural trainers they are ideal as you get used to 'real time' situations.
As procedural instrument trainers they are good as you can analyse and interpret instruments to your heart's content at no cost - again in real time.
Great for flying routes - I'm lucky I have copies of the B737 FMS programme used by the airlines (and the one I used for my training) so 'professional' standard.
Not good for learning basic visual flying (in my experience). When MS Flight Sim first came out one of my (better) students practiced his 'flying' on this platform.
Trouble was he went from a good 'VFR' student to one whose head was in the cockpit 90% of the time trying to fly the aircraft as a 'flight sim'.
Once that issue was corrected and we went on to basic instrument flying he was very good and proved he had benefitted from that practice on the Sim - good scan etc.
I have practised many times for instrument rating renewals using quite basic Flight Sims over the years, but if you take cogniscience of their limitations and extract the benefits they can provide as procedural trainers they can have significant value.
KR
FOK
As procedural instrument trainers they are good as you can analyse and interpret instruments to your heart's content at no cost - again in real time.
Great for flying routes - I'm lucky I have copies of the B737 FMS programme used by the airlines (and the one I used for my training) so 'professional' standard.
Not good for learning basic visual flying (in my experience). When MS Flight Sim first came out one of my (better) students practiced his 'flying' on this platform.
Trouble was he went from a good 'VFR' student to one whose head was in the cockpit 90% of the time trying to fly the aircraft as a 'flight sim'.
Once that issue was corrected and we went on to basic instrument flying he was very good and proved he had benefitted from that practice on the Sim - good scan etc.
I have practised many times for instrument rating renewals using quite basic Flight Sims over the years, but if you take cogniscience of their limitations and extract the benefits they can provide as procedural trainers they can have significant value.
KR
FOK
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please this is a PPL student being taught to fly visually.
I agree for IFR work sims do have there uses even in a PPL. But it has to be in a controlled lesson not a DIY teach yourself instrument flying.
For example getting the scan sorted before going for the instrument lesson.
Before you can objectively use a sim it needs to be taught and defined goals set.
It its a completely different kettle of fish an IFR trained pilot practising the tools of the trade to a PPL student teaching themselves bad habits.
I agree for IFR work sims do have there uses even in a PPL. But it has to be in a controlled lesson not a DIY teach yourself instrument flying.
For example getting the scan sorted before going for the instrument lesson.
Before you can objectively use a sim it needs to be taught and defined goals set.
It its a completely different kettle of fish an IFR trained pilot practising the tools of the trade to a PPL student teaching themselves bad habits.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think a sim is useless for VFR aircraft handling.
When I would take them flying in my Beech, I found that they were very good at basic aircraft handling because of it; they knew what pulling, pushing and turning would do to the plane.
But they kept their heads glued to the instrument panel all the time.
Basic PPL instruction should teach students to maintain correct attitude by reference to the horizon, not to instruments. I know too many "head in the dash" VFR pilots; one in particular is VFR-only rated, but has a high-performance plane loaded with IFR kit including top-of-the-line in-dash GPS. I am petrified to be in the same part of the sky as him as he always has his head buried under the glareshield. In fact once he started his base-to-final turn just as I was starting mine (he was no. 2, uncontrolled field and his plane is about 20 knots faster on final than mine). He never saw me, but when I heard his call, I had to get on the radio and warn him to get the hell out of my chunk of sky. On another occasion I watched him almost land on top of a C150 that was on very short final.
That guy needs to be restricted to flying a basic trainer with only needle, ball, airspeed and altimeter and only a basic COM radio.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: U.K.
Posts: 805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the benefit of the latest of our membership who will not have read this before, I will repeat my experience of the use of flight simulator software. Such software had not been developed when I learned to fly, instructed or gained my CPL/IR and ATPL. In 1985 the flight simulator 2 program was all the rage on the Apple ][ after the wire graphics original and when the IBM P.C. arrived, Microsoft brought out a version for this. I was then working at a middle eastern flight training school lecturing in ground subjects and we were joined by an I.T. lecturer who had no aviation knowledge. "What's all this about aviation?" he asked me one day from behind his computer in the office we shared. I gaily tossed him a disc containing Microsoft flight simulator and invited him to have a go, using his keyboard as we had no joysticks or control columns.
I gave him some briefings and he studiously practiced, first basic visual handling skills and then some radio navigation. He had much fun saving his position on the ILS at a distance of about 15 NM and then trying to see how far he could go before he came off. It was just like a computer game and eventually he managed to stay on all the way to the runway.
After many lunchtimes of practice we went on leave and I invited him to visit my club back in the U.K. to try flying a real aeroplane. He enthusiastically agreed.
The first session was on a C152. I taxied him to the end of our runway and he imediately recognised the situation (only the Sears Tower was missing!) With a bit of encouragement, he managed a takeoff and within minutes he was flying visually as though he had received several hours of instruction. A second session of circuits and landings enabled him to actually land it successfully several times and we then went to lunch.
In the afternoon we attacked the club's full airways Archer which was the aircraft represented by the Flight simulator programme. This time, under IFR conditions he managed to track a VOR, achieved a procedure turn and then was able to accept radar vectors to the local "big" airfield's ILS. He followed this down to a decision height of 200' without difficulty and then accepted vectors back to the home airfield where another successful landing was achieved.
He had never flown an aircraft before.
In the years following this incident, I found that computer flight simulator software made a significant improvement in the standard of training achieved by candidates for the IMC rating applied stage.
P.P.
I gave him some briefings and he studiously practiced, first basic visual handling skills and then some radio navigation. He had much fun saving his position on the ILS at a distance of about 15 NM and then trying to see how far he could go before he came off. It was just like a computer game and eventually he managed to stay on all the way to the runway.
After many lunchtimes of practice we went on leave and I invited him to visit my club back in the U.K. to try flying a real aeroplane. He enthusiastically agreed.
The first session was on a C152. I taxied him to the end of our runway and he imediately recognised the situation (only the Sears Tower was missing!) With a bit of encouragement, he managed a takeoff and within minutes he was flying visually as though he had received several hours of instruction. A second session of circuits and landings enabled him to actually land it successfully several times and we then went to lunch.
In the afternoon we attacked the club's full airways Archer which was the aircraft represented by the Flight simulator programme. This time, under IFR conditions he managed to track a VOR, achieved a procedure turn and then was able to accept radar vectors to the local "big" airfield's ILS. He followed this down to a decision height of 200' without difficulty and then accepted vectors back to the home airfield where another successful landing was achieved.
He had never flown an aircraft before.
In the years following this incident, I found that computer flight simulator software made a significant improvement in the standard of training achieved by candidates for the IMC rating applied stage.
P.P.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Frinton-on-Sea
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Great to read all the responses but I would appreciate some advice too. I have about 20 hours in a Cessna 150 and due to a slight medical problem, I have been advised by my AME to put things on hold for 6 months.
I would like to retain some of what I have learnt and I fancy a play with a simulator. So, what do you suggest for a bit of fun and for learning?
As a non-techie person, is there a program you could recommend and are there any good control/joystick options I could consider?
All the best....
Greg
I would like to retain some of what I have learnt and I fancy a play with a simulator. So, what do you suggest for a bit of fun and for learning?
As a non-techie person, is there a program you could recommend and are there any good control/joystick options I could consider?
All the best....
Greg
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: U.K.
Posts: 805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With 20 hours under your belt, you may be either just about to go/have gone solo, or you may be starting to consider navigation. Plenty of ground studies to get your teeth into about now and as the latest simulation software is combined with excellent ground mapping, practicing a few cross country routes will do no harm. Be warned however that wheras after a bit of practice with your simulator these may prove easy, they WILL NOT be easy when you come to actually fly them as 75% of your brain activity will be involved with keeping the aircraft in the air and only 25% of it will be concerned with the navigation. With your computer of course, you won't be worried about keeping the aircraft in the air because, if you make a mistake, your computer screen will display some fancy graphics and lo, you will be back at the end of the runway from where you started! As you appreciate, it doesn't work like that in real life.
With regards to joysticks/control colums there are plenty of good ones out there, but I have yet to find one which simulates trimming properly. If you can find one of those, that will be a bonus.
P.P.
With regards to joysticks/control colums there are plenty of good ones out there, but I have yet to find one which simulates trimming properly. If you can find one of those, that will be a bonus.
P.P.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: UK.
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I started my PPL (when I was 17) every instructor I ever flew with always made the comment "You must be a flight sim pilot"... I wasn't a hardcore flight simmer at all, I would fly once every couple of weeks.
You end up staring at the panel far too much and the flying ends up lumpy rather than nice and smooth.
You end up staring at the panel far too much and the flying ends up lumpy rather than nice and smooth.
Last edited by Aerouk; 1st Nov 2009 at 16:00.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Over There
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to say flight sim has helped me a lot throughout the years. Now with most GA planes in Flight sim you have a condensed panel view which basically replicates what you see sitting in a 172 and its used for visual flying. I have to say it helped me a lot because as most flight sim pilots I had gotten into the habit of staring at the panel. This didnt take too long to get rid of after a couple of flights in the 172 and on Flight sim itself. I actually went solo after 8 hours of flight in a 172. i dont think I would have been able to progress so quickly without Flight sim. its an invaluable tool but beware or over-reliance. Its only an aid. its in no way capable of replacing real training and real flying. It is also more useful if you;re already a VFR pilot looking to get an IR. The instrument flying and heavy jet flying(with add-ons, the default planes are useless) are truly fantastic. Im currently flying Flight 1's ATR 72 and im loving it. I occasionally fly Level D's 767 and PMDG's 747. I mostly fly the ATR, without the FMC, using only VOR to VOR navigation and full visual approaches without the FD or the ILS(unless its IMC). I occasionally go back to the good ol 172 to practice a couple of circuits just to keep up-to-date with basics. As I said its an invaluable tool if you use it right and at the right dose. 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: U.K.
Posts: 805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately, I cannot advise as to a suitable simulator which accurately represents a C150. I learned to fly mainly on such an aircraft and I would say that the thing to watch out for is that it correctly simulates the application of full flap at 40 degrees. When such a huge amount of drag is applied, approaches can be extremely steep, but climbing away after a go-around should be interesting! - Climbing at all at any speed will be difficult until some of the flap is "milked" off.
I must also say how much I endorse the comments made by other posters about these flight sims encouraging a "head in the cockpit" attitude which, when flying visually should be guarded against.
P.P.
I must also say how much I endorse the comments made by other posters about these flight sims encouraging a "head in the cockpit" attitude which, when flying visually should be guarded against.
P.P.
