Flight sim ideas
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flight sim ideas
Guys and gals, I require some feedback and perhaps assistance regarding flight sims.
I have never used these before and feel it would be a great tool to utilise to practice instrument flying and play with automated equipment.
Can you guys advise me on what flight sims are best and what controls (in addition to home computer) you used and where do you get all these?
I would love to hear what you guys think of flight sims on home computers and if or how they provide value to your flying/SA.
Thanks
I have never used these before and feel it would be a great tool to utilise to practice instrument flying and play with automated equipment.
Can you guys advise me on what flight sims are best and what controls (in addition to home computer) you used and where do you get all these?
I would love to hear what you guys think of flight sims on home computers and if or how they provide value to your flying/SA.
Thanks
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NZ
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PS1 is the industry standard for simulation, but is also mighty expensive. FS2K is a game (not looked at FS2002 or the nes 2004 version), Fly! has good reality in as much as setting instrumentation, etc but is clumsy in terms of having to use the mouse all the time. Perhaps do a search on the net re. sims in Aussie - there are about half a dozen folk who have built full motion sims like here or here
Guest
Posts: n/a
Try Airline Simulator 2. It's not a game, but a structured activity (line from the box). The B747-400 and MD83 aircraft are the best (also has 737, 747-300 , A 320 and Shorts.) The simulation grades your performance and gives a 'career path' with check flights for promotion. Outside graphics arn't as good as MS FS 2002, but the flight dynamics are MUCH better. Also has a great performance booklet and FMC. Cold WX ops make the rRWY slippery. You can program WX and winds to a greater degree than MS FS as well. Has ATC and ATIS. I use flight sims before sim checks to polish up on reading the QRH checklists in real time.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I disagree in calling FS2k 'just a game'. I think that it is a sound platform for practicing instrument flying, namely orientation. The instruments look and behave in an authentic (but perfect!) manner. Fly the aircraft on the autopilot, (use the mouse to change heading, altitude etc) put the cloud down to the ground, add some wind and practice intercepts, approaches, holding patterns and orientation exercises. Your track can then be displayed to see how it all went afterwards.
Trying to get realistic handling on a home PC I think would be difficult and expensive, but certainly sims like FS2k and I am sure others are fine and useful in getting an idea on what needs to point where, when and what you need to interpret from that to place you in the big picture!
Trying to get realistic handling on a home PC I think would be difficult and expensive, but certainly sims like FS2k and I am sure others are fine and useful in getting an idea on what needs to point where, when and what you need to interpret from that to place you in the big picture!
I've got a Simulator check coming up next week. In the next few days I'll be practising heaps of the approaches and manoeuvring on my FS2002.
I give PC Flight Simulators a big thumbs up
, very good for keeping your scan rate up.
Safe flying, hoss
I give PC Flight Simulators a big thumbs up
, very good for keeping your scan rate up.Safe flying, hoss
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks guys for your advice, it sounds like FS2002 is the go in terms of the majority.
Where do I get a copy of this and is it best to get any control column or is the keyboard/mouse enough?
Where do I get a copy of this and is it best to get any control column or is the keyboard/mouse enough?
I just use a Microsoft joystick, I thiunk it is the 'sidewinder'. Now you can get the 'forcefeedback' which seems even better if you were to run it with an Airbus add-on.
Any one know if the 'forcefeedback' has a stick pusher or does it just vibrate at the stall?
Safe flying, hoss
Any one know if the 'forcefeedback' has a stick pusher or does it just vibrate at the stall?
Safe flying, hoss
Guest
Posts: n/a
Yeah, but when ya wanna blow something up, try A 10 Cuba. Man when those tanks get F@#$% up by that 30mm gun.. way cool. Hoo-ah!!!
The only problem that I have with MS FS is that the flight dynamics for the heavy aircraft are all wrong. For example. I have FS 98 with a B767 cockpit add-on (classic wings) and the Alt/speed/ TAT/ N1/ Fuel flow/ TAS Mach realationships are just ALL WRONG. Airline Simulator 2 doesnt have this problem. AS2 has figures that are right out of the perfomance book and thus is more realistic. Also, stuff like pitch/power/thrust/configuration is mush more authentic. As I said previously, the external graphics are a little simplistic, but the MD 83 and B744 cockpit graphics are superb. Also the FMS is sort of close to the real thing and the whole package is probaly more 'educational' than MS. Not knocking FltSim which is a good product and useful, but if you want to play Airline Pilot, get AS 2 as well. Call up Computer Pilot in Cheltanham (Melbourne) and ask for info on both products. Just dont forget to talk to the wife occasionally...
The only problem that I have with MS FS is that the flight dynamics for the heavy aircraft are all wrong. For example. I have FS 98 with a B767 cockpit add-on (classic wings) and the Alt/speed/ TAT/ N1/ Fuel flow/ TAS Mach realationships are just ALL WRONG. Airline Simulator 2 doesnt have this problem. AS2 has figures that are right out of the perfomance book and thus is more realistic. Also, stuff like pitch/power/thrust/configuration is mush more authentic. As I said previously, the external graphics are a little simplistic, but the MD 83 and B744 cockpit graphics are superb. Also the FMS is sort of close to the real thing and the whole package is probaly more 'educational' than MS. Not knocking FltSim which is a good product and useful, but if you want to play Airline Pilot, get AS 2 as well. Call up Computer Pilot in Cheltanham (Melbourne) and ask for info on both products. Just dont forget to talk to the wife occasionally...
Last edited by Ralph the Bong; 9th Aug 2003 at 18:42.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: cairns
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
X-plane
If you want to try something a little different, and much more interesting if you are an aviaition enthusiast as well as a professional pilot (there is a difference ) have a look at www.X-plane.com and its associated site www.X-plane.org
Its also the only decent sim that runs on both Windows and Mac OS (including OS X).
You have all the regular C172 through to B747, but it goes a step beyond that. Most of the sims you buy have aircraft behaviour programmed into them as a computer model. In X-plane you describe the aircraft as an aerodynamic model. You can build your own plane, by basically drawing it, telling it where the engines are, what type and what power output. The program then calculates the vectors (lift, drag, blah blah). and then it flies just like a real aircraft -- in reaction to aerodynamic forces.
Example...
After a not so exciting day on the job, I come home and fit my computer 146 with four x 777 engines and try the Cairns 3 departure again. Fun. Then I go back and add AMRAAMS slung between engines 1&2 and 3&4 and position myself on a 10 mile ILS final at Darwin. Kick in some right rudder and loose off the AMRAAMS at the tower controller that wanted me to read back "visual approach"
Then re-set environment to Mars. Yep. Gravity and atmosphere model for mars. Low IAS, high TAS, etc etc.
As former FS98, IFT pro, and B747 precision sim user, I reckon X-plane is just as good for the proficiency stuff, with the benefit of running on both Mac and Win, and with more opportunities for fun!
To give you an idea of its true-to-life value, it is the only computer based sim under $1500 that the FAA has approved for credit towards ATPL quals (not sure how it works, but FS2002pro dont cut it there)
Visuals not quite as detailed as FS, but much smoother transitions and framerates/equal scenery scrolling and performance to FS with cheaper graphics cards.
(trinalw, you should really learn how to clear your cookies off the crew room computer!!- love ITCZ)
If you want to try something a little different, and much more interesting if you are an aviaition enthusiast as well as a professional pilot (there is a difference
) have a look at www.X-plane.com and its associated site www.X-plane.orgIts also the only decent sim that runs on both Windows and Mac OS (including OS X).
You have all the regular C172 through to B747, but it goes a step beyond that. Most of the sims you buy have aircraft behaviour programmed into them as a computer model. In X-plane you describe the aircraft as an aerodynamic model. You can build your own plane, by basically drawing it, telling it where the engines are, what type and what power output. The program then calculates the vectors (lift, drag, blah blah). and then it flies just like a real aircraft -- in reaction to aerodynamic forces.
Example...
After a not so exciting day on the job, I come home and fit my computer 146 with four x 777 engines and try the Cairns 3 departure again. Fun. Then I go back and add AMRAAMS slung between engines 1&2 and 3&4 and position myself on a 10 mile ILS final at Darwin. Kick in some right rudder and loose off the AMRAAMS at the tower controller that wanted me to read back "visual approach"
Then re-set environment to Mars. Yep. Gravity and atmosphere model for mars. Low IAS, high TAS, etc etc.
As former FS98, IFT pro, and B747 precision sim user, I reckon X-plane is just as good for the proficiency stuff, with the benefit of running on both Mac and Win, and with more opportunities for fun!
To give you an idea of its true-to-life value, it is the only computer based sim under $1500 that the FAA has approved for credit towards ATPL quals (not sure how it works, but FS2002pro dont cut it there)
Visuals not quite as detailed as FS, but much smoother transitions and framerates/equal scenery scrolling and performance to FS with cheaper graphics cards.
(trinalw, you should really learn how to clear your cookies off the crew room computer!!- love ITCZ)
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: ex EGNM, now NZRO
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Forcefeed
Does vibrate as a stick shaker, and can give thuds and bumps (e.g on touchdown). There is appropriate back pressure/ counter forces on control inputs, including appropriate attitude changes when you stall (e.g. the controls do go sloppy). Fly is more accurate with Forcefeed and also also in terms of QRH. The other problem is the MS forcefeed (Mark 1 & 2, not sure about later models) is ergonomically designed to fly right handed, which is no good if you are simulating P1, it is NOT comfprtable.
FS2K is OK, but IMHO manually flying a VOR sucks and is 'Not as real as it gets' - it is much harder to maintain track, and pitch changes with minimal control inputs are very unrealistic. Likewise have you ever seen a B734 or 772 that you can get off the ground in 900 metres?
Perpetual hold - I presume you do press Z at some point, otherwise what's the point?
FS2K is OK, but IMHO manually flying a VOR sucks and is 'Not as real as it gets' - it is much harder to maintain track, and pitch changes with minimal control inputs are very unrealistic. Likewise have you ever seen a B734 or 772 that you can get off the ground in 900 metres?
Perpetual hold - I presume you do press Z at some point, otherwise what's the point?
