Are home computer flight sims too real?
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are home computer flight sims too real?
Dear Pilots,
I'm doing research for an upcoming Salon.com article about the increasing level of realism in popular home computer games such as Microsoft Flight Simulator, Fly!, and several third-party add-on modules for these titles that simulate commercial jet aircraft. (To see one of the latest examples, go here: http://www.precisionmanuals.com/PROD...ners/737NG.htm.)
Given the events of September 11 and the ongoing terrorist obsession with using planes as weapons of destruction (as evidenced by the recent reports of a foiled hijacking plot in Saudi Arabia), are these games getting a little too accurate? I'm not suggesting for a moment that a person could learn to fly an airliner properly using their home computer. Yet could such detailed software be misappropriated by terrorists wishing to become familiar enough with the operations, procedures, V-speeds, and other characteristics of a particular model of aircraft to carry out their mission in the event of a successful hijacking?
The fair and balanced answer that I seek to this question requires input from airline pilots—hence the reason for this posting. If you have experience as a captain or first officer on Boeing or Airbus aircraft and are also acquainted with home computer flight simulators, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the subject. Please e-mail me at [email protected]. Thanks very much in advance for your input.
Sincerely,
Joshua Tompkins
I'm doing research for an upcoming Salon.com article about the increasing level of realism in popular home computer games such as Microsoft Flight Simulator, Fly!, and several third-party add-on modules for these titles that simulate commercial jet aircraft. (To see one of the latest examples, go here: http://www.precisionmanuals.com/PROD...ners/737NG.htm.)
Given the events of September 11 and the ongoing terrorist obsession with using planes as weapons of destruction (as evidenced by the recent reports of a foiled hijacking plot in Saudi Arabia), are these games getting a little too accurate? I'm not suggesting for a moment that a person could learn to fly an airliner properly using their home computer. Yet could such detailed software be misappropriated by terrorists wishing to become familiar enough with the operations, procedures, V-speeds, and other characteristics of a particular model of aircraft to carry out their mission in the event of a successful hijacking?
The fair and balanced answer that I seek to this question requires input from airline pilots—hence the reason for this posting. If you have experience as a captain or first officer on Boeing or Airbus aircraft and are also acquainted with home computer flight simulators, I'd like to hear your thoughts on the subject. Please e-mail me at [email protected]. Thanks very much in advance for your input.
Sincerely,
Joshua Tompkins
Guest
Posts: n/a
In a word - No.
Thanks to the advance of PC graphics cards, the realism of the latest PC flight sims is getting better, but flying a PC sim is no substitute for the real thing.
Light aircraft flying is more relevant than PC sim flying, and Full Flight Simulators (if you can access one) are better still.
Thanks to the advance of PC graphics cards, the realism of the latest PC flight sims is getting better, but flying a PC sim is no substitute for the real thing.
Light aircraft flying is more relevant than PC sim flying, and Full Flight Simulators (if you can access one) are better still.
With 80 types in my logbook, at-least half of which were P1, I still can't land a PC based flight sim.
So, no I don't think that they are all that realistic.
As to operating speeds for any common type, any qualified pilot is quite capable of finding enough information out from publically available sources far more accessible than a PC based flight simulator to fly and navigate most airliners. Apart from which speeds and procedures are kept on the flight deck anyway - it wouldn't be safe to rely upon memorised procedures.
It would be impossible to worldwide restrict access to flying training or aircraft information - the PC flight sim is an irrelevance in that respect. The only way, in my opinion, to stop terrorists doing undesirable things with aeroplanes is to stop them getting near the flight deck, or to solve the problems that make them terrorists. Given that in the past we've had terrorists trying to destroy free speech, freedom of religion - or trying to create free speech and freedom of religion, the latter probably ain't going to work.
G
So, no I don't think that they are all that realistic.
As to operating speeds for any common type, any qualified pilot is quite capable of finding enough information out from publically available sources far more accessible than a PC based flight simulator to fly and navigate most airliners. Apart from which speeds and procedures are kept on the flight deck anyway - it wouldn't be safe to rely upon memorised procedures.
It would be impossible to worldwide restrict access to flying training or aircraft information - the PC flight sim is an irrelevance in that respect. The only way, in my opinion, to stop terrorists doing undesirable things with aeroplanes is to stop them getting near the flight deck, or to solve the problems that make them terrorists. Given that in the past we've had terrorists trying to destroy free speech, freedom of religion - or trying to create free speech and freedom of religion, the latter probably ain't going to work.
G
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 235
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In a word...yes!
One doesn't need to know how to fly an airliner to carry out the atrocities of 9/11. All that is required is an appreciation of flying at private level, an appreciation of airliner performance and speeds, and a detailed knowledge of how to program the flight management computer controlling the aircrafts path.
Once this is programmed it will deliver you anywhere, anytime and at any height. Today's flight simulators more than adequately provide such information for someone with the motivation to learn.
Sadly whilst they are provided primarily as games, they now provide realism in the portrayal of airborne software and hardware that makes them an easy means of education for those with evil intent. However, in the same way that banning gun ownership in the UK has seen gun crime increase iexorably ever since, do we ban flight sim's and rob many thousands of genuine, harmless enthusiasts of their much loved hobby. I think not.
Banning flight deck sims is another knee jerk reaction that would provide the yanks with some good sound bites but do nothing to increase flight safety. All you would do is drive the industry underground and make it twice as dangerous.
One doesn't need to know how to fly an airliner to carry out the atrocities of 9/11. All that is required is an appreciation of flying at private level, an appreciation of airliner performance and speeds, and a detailed knowledge of how to program the flight management computer controlling the aircrafts path.
Once this is programmed it will deliver you anywhere, anytime and at any height. Today's flight simulators more than adequately provide such information for someone with the motivation to learn.
Sadly whilst they are provided primarily as games, they now provide realism in the portrayal of airborne software and hardware that makes them an easy means of education for those with evil intent. However, in the same way that banning gun ownership in the UK has seen gun crime increase iexorably ever since, do we ban flight sim's and rob many thousands of genuine, harmless enthusiasts of their much loved hobby. I think not.
Banning flight deck sims is another knee jerk reaction that would provide the yanks with some good sound bites but do nothing to increase flight safety. All you would do is drive the industry underground and make it twice as dangerous.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Posts: 292
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Once this is programmed it will deliver you anywhere, anytime and at any height. Today's flight simulators more than adequately provide such information for someone with the motivation to learn.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did a project on the accuracy of a PC flight sim for a project at university. I'm not yet a commercial pilot (still in training) but have worked for a full flight simulator manufacturer as a software engineer.
I think the answer to your question is yes and no. In terms of flying the aircraft no pc flight sim can really help you very much. However what they can do is model operation of all the systems such as Autoflight, FMS, EICAS/ECAM etc. Whilst these used to be fairly crude the level of accuracy on some of the more recent 'add-ons' is extremely impressive.
I think the answer to your question is yes and no. In terms of flying the aircraft no pc flight sim can really help you very much. However what they can do is model operation of all the systems such as Autoflight, FMS, EICAS/ECAM etc. Whilst these used to be fairly crude the level of accuracy on some of the more recent 'add-ons' is extremely impressive.
A few months ago I stepped straight out of a day in a PA-28 into a pilot's shop - and there was a full demonstrator PA-28 Flight Simulator setup all ready to go - yoke, pedal unit, hand throttle, the lot.
Just couldn't get to grips with it at all. The same as Genghis describes above. I think in particular the 2-D monitor display just doesn't give you the depth perception on flaring.
Just couldn't get to grips with it at all. The same as Genghis describes above. I think in particular the 2-D monitor display just doesn't give you the depth perception on flaring.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Age: 54
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you bought "Colin McCrae Rally" for the Playstation and practiced really hard do you think that you could teach yourself how to become a rally driver?
For september the 11th the terrorists used proper flight training and proper sims - I for one doubt if they'd have managed to do what they did using a PC sim for practice.
For september the 11th the terrorists used proper flight training and proper sims - I for one doubt if they'd have managed to do what they did using a PC sim for practice.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Around the World
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe it was no coincidence, that the bastards of 9-11 only hijacked Boeing 757/767 models. That time, there was on commericial add on for the Microsoft Flightsim available, which had a functioning layout (including FMS, Autopilot systems) of a Boeing 757/767. No other software at that time was so advanced than this particular program.
To do what the hijackers did, doesn't require a lot of flying skills. We are not talking about V1-Cuts, Decision making, Hydraulic failures, Landings... They only have to program the FMS and dial some switches on the Autopilot. With the 'training' on the 757/767 Software Add-on and a handheld GPS a piece of cake.
To do what the hijackers did, doesn't require a lot of flying skills. We are not talking about V1-Cuts, Decision making, Hydraulic failures, Landings... They only have to program the FMS and dial some switches on the Autopilot. With the 'training' on the 757/767 Software Add-on and a handheld GPS a piece of cake.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: ex EGNM, now NZRO
Posts: 551
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You don't have to buy add ons
In my earlier days I used FS2000, with an add on called Squawkbox (see here. It is a free download
This was basically an FMS that you could load a flight plan using waypoints and navaids (VOR's, NDB's, etc). There were a number of sites where you could 'plan a route. You could then go online and 'fly with others in controlled airspace - there was a controller add on called Procontroller (also free), which functioned like a radar, interpreting the whereabouts of the sim aircraft. In the later incarnations the 'ATC' was all done in voice using Roger Wilco. I have no evidence to suggest that any terrorists used this, but I do know that the guys who controlled various sectors used the lates SID and STARS and virtual pilots were expected to adhere to these (see here. The level of realism in that respect was amazing (even more so as they linked the weather on the flight sim to real time weather from airport ATIS servers).
However, I fully agree a PC sim is not like handling an aircraft in anyway, even with force feed controls. The difficulty lies in the limitations of a monitor[/URL]
This was basically an FMS that you could load a flight plan using waypoints and navaids (VOR's, NDB's, etc). There were a number of sites where you could 'plan a route. You could then go online and 'fly with others in controlled airspace - there was a controller add on called Procontroller (also free), which functioned like a radar, interpreting the whereabouts of the sim aircraft. In the later incarnations the 'ATC' was all done in voice using Roger Wilco. I have no evidence to suggest that any terrorists used this, but I do know that the guys who controlled various sectors used the lates SID and STARS and virtual pilots were expected to adhere to these (see here. The level of realism in that respect was amazing (even more so as they linked the weather on the flight sim to real time weather from airport ATIS servers).
However, I fully agree a PC sim is not like handling an aircraft in anyway, even with force feed controls. The difficulty lies in the limitations of a monitor[/URL]
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Scotland
Age: 45
Posts: 418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have bought some of the aircraft add-ons for Flight Sim (737-400/767PIC/A320), and must say, after being on many jumpseats of commercial aircraft and speaking to many pilots, I believe that anyone with a good knowledge of these packages, and some basic flying experience could get one of these aircraft off the ground. The packages simulate the systems onboard very accurately now, and, I'm not saying that someone could become a profficient pilot on one of these, but getting off the ground and being able to point the thing in a desired direction...
ref bucking broncos comments, I agree that you couldn't teach yourself to drive a rally car (maybe on a sega rally arcade machine
) but you can't programme a rally car (maybe one day) to do it's job, a modern day jet, well, follow the proceedures on one of the prementioned packages, and some previous flying experience, and this could be much more possible. Without depth perception and all round view, I actually find it a lot harder to fly the flightsim helicopters than I do the real ones, as is also the case with the cessna's! If anyone out there can get me in a real sim and test my theory, I'd be more than happy to have a go
(anyone from channel 4?????)
ref bucking broncos comments, I agree that you couldn't teach yourself to drive a rally car (maybe on a sega rally arcade machine ) but you can't programme a rally car (maybe one day) to do it's job, a modern day jet, well, follow the proceedures on one of the prementioned packages, and some previous flying experience, and this could be much more possible. Without depth perception and all round view, I actually find it a lot harder to fly the flightsim helicopters than I do the real ones, as is also the case with the cessna's! If anyone out there can get me in a real sim and test my theory, I'd be more than happy to have a go (anyone from channel 4?????)
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"To do what the hijackers did, doesn't require a lot of flying skills.
So your saying you would be able to fly a 767/757 precisely into the centre of building without having any previous flying experience with the type or with multi engined jet aircraft?
So your saying you would be able to fly a 767/757 precisely into the centre of building without having any previous flying experience with the type or with multi engined jet aircraft?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Scotland
Age: 45
Posts: 418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GrantT
They had previous flying experience, but basic, and from what I remember, had they not tried to get in simulators and asked to be tought how to basically keep the thing straight and level, and that they weren't bothered about taking off or landing, and no one questioned them!!! As someone mentioned before, strange how a very good 767 package was out at the time, coincidence? I started a subject about 2 years ago, before THE attrocious day, asking how real the 767 package was, and there was some very inteseting comments from pilots then, maybe worth looking at it.http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=46710
They had previous flying experience, but basic, and from what I remember, had they not tried to get in simulators and asked to be tought how to basically keep the thing straight and level, and that they weren't bothered about taking off or landing, and no one questioned them!!! As someone mentioned before, strange how a very good 767 package was out at the time, coincidence? I started a subject about 2 years ago, before THE attrocious day, asking how real the 767 package was, and there was some very inteseting comments from pilots then, maybe worth looking at it.http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...threadid=46710
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 143
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As someone who has occasionally been known to "fly" aircraft in FS2002 but has never flown in the cockpit of a real aircraft I felt tempted to put "finger to keyboard".
The first Flight Simulator I ever played was on the ZX81 - at that time it seemed incredibly realistic, but looking back now it wasn't!
Now, 20 years on we have something that is much more realistic but only really from a visual/ procedural point of view. Yes FS2002 will teach you the basics of flying an aircraft, you can learn how to fly instrument approaches, fly VFR even have your "first and second officers" call realistic checklists on pretty much any kind of aircraft you want. It is also a much cheaper option for those of us that cannot afford to fly for real.
However even though it is realistic and for me provides hours of enjoyment, does anyone here really think that someone could fly a full sized airliner based on knowledge gained from just flying FS2002?
Sure, it may have contributed to the "training" of the September 11th terrorists, but then I expect they read books and training manuals too and as was proved shortly afterwards had actual flight training in real aircraft and probably full sized simulators.
Getting back to the original question - Are home computer flight sims too real? No they are not. If anything, they are not realistic enough. You cannot ban everything, just because of what somebody fanatical might do.
The first Flight Simulator I ever played was on the ZX81 - at that time it seemed incredibly realistic, but looking back now it wasn't!
Now, 20 years on we have something that is much more realistic but only really from a visual/ procedural point of view. Yes FS2002 will teach you the basics of flying an aircraft, you can learn how to fly instrument approaches, fly VFR even have your "first and second officers" call realistic checklists on pretty much any kind of aircraft you want. It is also a much cheaper option for those of us that cannot afford to fly for real.
However even though it is realistic and for me provides hours of enjoyment, does anyone here really think that someone could fly a full sized airliner based on knowledge gained from just flying FS2002?
Sure, it may have contributed to the "training" of the September 11th terrorists, but then I expect they read books and training manuals too and as was proved shortly afterwards had actual flight training in real aircraft and probably full sized simulators.
Getting back to the original question - Are home computer flight sims too real? No they are not. If anything, they are not realistic enough. You cannot ban everything, just because of what somebody fanatical might do.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Just a couple of points from a PPL with 20hrs in a full motion sim.
Learning procedural stuff on MS FS may work very well, but the reality for me was that a 'real' sim was rather more challenging than flying a light aeroplane.
This was because one had to learn the layout of a complex flight deck, even to use the basic functions.
In fact, I found the autopilot quite complex, because of the need to think through the parameters in use and in particular what was controlling what
The sim was not a B757/767 nor an Airbus, so the more modern FMCs may be easier to use (or nor as the case may be), but I came away after 20 hours feeling that the sim was a demanding environment, whereas I can take off and land Concorde on my mates MS FS setup, whereas I have it on pretty good authority that this would noit be the case in the Concorcde sim!
Thus, if the terrorists had my level of skill or less, I don't think that MS FS is going help them too greatly. I respect the views of the pros, but what seems 'easy' to them is not necessarily the same for those of us with less training and experience on type.
Learning procedural stuff on MS FS may work very well, but the reality for me was that a 'real' sim was rather more challenging than flying a light aeroplane.
This was because one had to learn the layout of a complex flight deck, even to use the basic functions.
In fact, I found the autopilot quite complex, because of the need to think through the parameters in use and in particular what was controlling what
The sim was not a B757/767 nor an Airbus, so the more modern FMCs may be easier to use (or nor as the case may be), but I came away after 20 hours feeling that the sim was a demanding environment, whereas I can take off and land Concorde on my mates MS FS setup, whereas I have it on pretty good authority that this would noit be the case in the Concorcde sim!
Thus, if the terrorists had my level of skill or less, I don't think that MS FS is going help them too greatly. I respect the views of the pros, but what seems 'easy' to them is not necessarily the same for those of us with less training and experience on type.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Simfly-
"They had previous flying experience, but basic"
Exactly, that is why i said "without having any previous flying experience with the type or with multi engined jet aircraft."
"They had previous flying experience, but basic"
Exactly, that is why i said "without having any previous flying experience with the type or with multi engined jet aircraft."
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Scotland
Age: 45
Posts: 418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to add.. The aircraft that come with the FS package are rubbish, the default concorde, 73/4/7 etc don't really resemble the real things at all, but the point I was trying to make was if you had one of the additional, more realistic packages and got to know your way around, say, a 767 cockpit and got familiar with the systems, and had some flying experience, THEN it might be easier for someone to do something bad.
GrantT, the hijackers only had to get to the area they were headed, could easily have been done by programing a close waypoint/navaid in the FMC, and then when visual, disconnect the autopilot and point towards the buildings. They didn't have to take off. I admit, it may take a bit of skill to keep the thing straight at high speed, but where does the multi engine rating or much type experience come in? I don't think these guys were to worried about handling engine failures or sitting a type rating exam.
GrantT, the hijackers only had to get to the area they were headed, could easily have been done by programing a close waypoint/navaid in the FMC, and then when visual, disconnect the autopilot and point towards the buildings. They didn't have to take off. I admit, it may take a bit of skill to keep the thing straight at high speed, but where does the multi engine rating or much type experience come in? I don't think these guys were to worried about handling engine failures or sitting a type rating exam.
Last edited by simfly; 27th May 2003 at 14:56.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Yorkshire, UK
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll just add a bit more to this thread seeing as though were going a bit off-topic now, i know i would end up turning this into a conspiracy thread. 
Anyway, the main developer of 767 Pilot in Command is currently an American Airlines 757/767 pilot, the irony eh
Anyway, the main developer of 767 Pilot in Command is currently an American Airlines 757/767 pilot, the irony eh
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: somewhere
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, a certain online ATC agency has over 50,000 registered members (pilots & controllers) - pprune only has over 10,000 more - we still are a significant number !
Of these - there are ATCO's and real life pilots - but I think they use it more for fun than anything else.
ATC is a different ball game - seriously - if the new controller program wasn't run on a PC and you brought in a real world controller - they could be mistaken for reality - seriously. Most pilots use voice, and when there are special events there can be as much traffic as real life.
This is very real, I am also a member of what is called a Virtual Airline. Our scedules at BAVirtual are the same as real life BA - mix in some real weather with real STARs/SIDs then you have in theory an accurate representation of real life - although that is all.
I don't take it too seriously - although I wouldn't trust myself in a real aircraft, I do have a small advantage over your ordinary Joe in the street !
Ask a regular passenger some basic questions, eg: What is a VOR ?, or What SID did we just take there ? and you will get some very puzzled faces. Although most simmers can tell you that - surely that must be a slight advantage ?
RE: Air Traffic Controllers (Virtual ones)
Everything is based on real life procedures - but I still wouldn't take over EGPF tower and trust myself. Same thing as above though - if I were to go to NATS college of ATC and do the course, then I would be starting with quite a good advantage there.
But no-one should take a gung-ho attitude to real life flying if they have no experience. I found myself when in a light a/c (trial lesson) that I was always using the instruments, and the effects of aircraft movement was quite a suprise. Also, the fact that you feel every gust is, erm, different !
I would say that as a training tool - no way. As a tool to show enthusiasm towards flying, maybe. As a tool for fun - yes !
best regards,
Andrew M
Of these - there are ATCO's and real life pilots - but I think they use it more for fun than anything else.
ATC is a different ball game - seriously - if the new controller program wasn't run on a PC and you brought in a real world controller - they could be mistaken for reality - seriously. Most pilots use voice, and when there are special events there can be as much traffic as real life.
This is very real, I am also a member of what is called a Virtual Airline. Our scedules at BAVirtual are the same as real life BA - mix in some real weather with real STARs/SIDs then you have in theory an accurate representation of real life - although that is all.
I don't take it too seriously - although I wouldn't trust myself in a real aircraft, I do have a small advantage over your ordinary Joe in the street !
Ask a regular passenger some basic questions, eg: What is a VOR ?, or What SID did we just take there ? and you will get some very puzzled faces. Although most simmers can tell you that - surely that must be a slight advantage ?
RE: Air Traffic Controllers (Virtual ones)
Everything is based on real life procedures - but I still wouldn't take over EGPF tower and trust myself. Same thing as above though - if I were to go to NATS college of ATC and do the course, then I would be starting with quite a good advantage there.
But no-one should take a gung-ho attitude to real life flying if they have no experience. I found myself when in a light a/c (trial lesson) that I was always using the instruments, and the effects of aircraft movement was quite a suprise. Also, the fact that you feel every gust is, erm, different !
I would say that as a training tool - no way. As a tool to show enthusiasm towards flying, maybe. As a tool for fun - yes !
best regards,
Andrew M
Cool Mod
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: 18nm N of LGW
Posts: 6,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AndrewM
You might care to check your figures.
PPRuNe has rather more than your suggested 10,000 registered members. At least 4 times as many as that, perhaps 5 times, perhaps even.................................
I am sure you will understand the point.
You might care to check your figures.
Well, a certain online ATC agency has over 50,000 registered members (pilots & controllers) - pprune only has over 10,000 more - we still are a significant number !
I am sure you will understand the point.