Sign in to follow this  
Guest

Any current IFR, or students, using FS2002 for practice

Recommended Posts

I'm doing my IR currently, and am wondering if anyone here used FS for practice. I realize that FS is not loggable by the FAA, but I figure it can't be bad for just practice.I'd be interested in any hints or experiences in using FS for this.Thanks,Bruce.KBJC, Jeffco, CO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

I practice approaches with fs2002 and fs98 along with the free demo of asa's on top ifr sim, it is just like the full version except you are limited to flying within a 75 mile radius of helena montana, you can shoot all the approaches within that area though. here's the link.http://asa2fly.com/demo_ot.htmcombined with http://edj.net/cgi-bin/echoplate.pl? free approach charts sets you up for some good procecures training.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't say enough for IFR practice in FS. As a student at Embry-Riddle, we use Jeppesen's PCATD software with some crappy old control yokes and some rudder pedals that served absolutley no purpose other than being there. I'd do an hour of that with my instructor, log it as simulator, but still get nothing out of it because i had to constantly hold full left aileron to fly the dang thing in a straight line. Going visual? HAHA, if you call seeing 3 dots representing a runway "visual". I'd come home and practice it on FS2K2, and not be able to log it, but I'd get a heck of alot more out of it. Before my checkride, I practiced and practiced a common procedure that they throw at us on the inhouse rides. Its an NDB approach to runway 29 at New Smyrna, followed by immediately joining a DME arc to the ILS 7L back at Daytona. I aced it on the ride.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FS 2002 is an invaluable tool for your initial rating as well as to stay proficient, once you have the instument ticket. You will save alot of money too! For training purposes, you can improve your scanning techniques, practice holdings, and learn ILS, LOC, VOR, and NDB approaches. As a matter of fact you can practice all the approaches and become proficient before getting in the airplane. When you do, it will be alot easier to perform the scanning, holdings, and approaches. That's how you'll save alot of money. You'll be better prepared and safer too. YES, you may not log the time, but the time you spend with FS 2002 will make you a more prepared instrument pilot, because you can practice any approach before you go out there and perform the approach in instrument meterological conditions.Best of luck, JoseCFI, CFII

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, with the recent announcement by the FAA that they are 'reviewing all the rules' to bring them 'up to date' why don't people make some noise. Technology has brought this stuff to the point that it COULD easily be logable. Why not push for it. Lobby your representatives, contact the FAA - DO something about it! I can only hope that if America actually made a sane regulatory decision, then Canada/ICAO might follow it.The main problem that I see the regulators having is that of oversight. It would be too easy to fudge. But it would also be too easy to actually DO IT, so that might compensate somewhat.Naa - I'm dreamin. There is a rule that beauracracy can only increase, that costs and availability must be maintained at an extreemely high level, or otherwise it is just not 'real'!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, as almost everyone has stated so far in this thread, FS2002 rocks for gaining and maintaining IFR proficiency. At the very beginning of my instrument training I was having some problems multi-tasking in the aircraft during an approach, so I came home and flew approaches for days on end. It didnt take long before some things became second nature and my instructor was really impressed with my progress. Which leads me to something really important which I think I stressed before in another thread. Even though you cant log the time, it will without a doubt save you money if you use the time wisely and learn while simming. By the time I was ready for my instrument checkride, I was looking for places to get my 40 hours in to get over legally to the examiner.Craig

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was training for my IR, I used both MSFS and X-plane a lot. I liked MSFS for the accuracy of the navigational database. At the time, X-plane had a rather sketchy database. It has since been improved. The benefit of X-plane is in the incredible smoothness of the gauges. They react like the real thing. However, don't look to do backcourse approaches in X-plane. They aren't supported for some inexplicable reason that Austin has yet to answer.I saved a considerable amount of money using flight simulators. My thousands of hours in FS before I even started IR training meant that I already knew how to track VORs, fly NDB bearings, and could capture and maintain an ILS (in principle). It was still FAR more difficult to do it in the plane.One thing I'd like to see is more variability and realism in the winds. Nothing like tracking a good ILS in a real plane only to hit that swirling, turbulent wind as you approach DH/A and have to adjust quickly to avoid a full deflection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I almost use FS2002 exclusively...Back when I was working on my Instrument ticket I preferred FLY!, X-plane, or even Pro-Pilot over FS2002. The reason ? Smooth instruments !Walt,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"While I almost use FS2002 exclusively...Back when I was working on my Instrument ticket I preferred FLY!, X-plane, or even Pro-Pilot over FS2002. The reason ? Smooth instruments"On my system I found the opposite. I could not stand the panel and instruments used in FLY and I really did not like X-Plane at all. I used FS2002 everyday during my instrument training and still use it weekly to stay tuned in when Im not getting any actual IFR. With MSFS2002's panel settings maxed out the panel looks and works fantastic. Its especially great when you use an add on GA aircraft like FSD-International's Seneca V. Though I agree if FS2002's settings are set to high for a given system then the panel and the rest of the program are not so fluid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting ready for interviews with the regionals so I have been using MSFS 2002 with an ELITE yoke set up. Most interviews use a PCATD to see if the applicants can:a) track a vor radial inbound/outbound:( shoot an approach down to minimums then go missedc) handle a single engine approachetc etcSpeaking of which....Any regional airline pilots out there? Care to walk a poor flight instructors' resume in to hr?!?!?! :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats cool..To each their own I guess. But from what I remember trying to do a ADF Approach in MSFS2002 was a major pain in the rear.I don't remember exactly what it was..Perhaps the Tick-tock needles or the Panels but I know I didn't use FS2002 fer sure.Walt,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Might be the aircraft or some other settings. The NDB stuff on MS2002 is one of my favorite things to practice. I just did two RW NDB approaches a few days ago including two different NDB holds. Then next day I did the same approaches and holds with MSFS2002 aside from not bouncing around in the aircraft it was identical.I have my aircraft and panel settings maxed out, but the general settings pushed back to about 60%. Frame rate is locked and holds a solid 20FPS. I have noticed that with lower frame rates the instruments do get jumpy and its even worse if the frame rate is changing frequently. When all is running smoothly I find the instrument display to be fantastic.PIII 800 512mbGeForce 4 128mb 4400Sony Multiscan G410 19"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is correct, but mostly it is used for new private pilot students to teach basics and procedures. It is used a little during instrument training, but mostly we used Frasca's for training outside of the aircraft. They need to upgrade the whole lab! Most of the machines are FS98 with a few that are 2000. Its a great lab it just needs to be brought up to date. (Maybe it has by now... I finished up there last summer)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this