Any current IFR, or students, using FS2002 for practice

[Guest lawyerpilot]

flight model....like RealAir simulations freeware addition to the 182 flight model or Steve Small's files for various aircraft, especially the Caravan. PLUS, you have to use the 2-d panel most of the time so that you can see the gauges clearly and react to the trends of the needles....Good Luck!Christopher ASEL, Instrument 210 HoursCommercial in 3-4 weeks

[brucek 38]

Very interesting and useful. It's a shame that it's unloggable, but I can see too where that could be "fudged". I'm about to start work with my CFII, so your answers are all very interesting. It's good to hear from those who have actually taken "the ride" and benefited from FS.Bruce.PS. I assume that the IR ride is not as daunting as the PP one is. At least we know that the DE is a human being and not some sort of monster :). BK.

[Guest]

Hi,I use FS2002 for practice quite regularly to stay tuned up for IFR flight. I will have to agree with others who have previously commented about the gauges not being smooth like they should be. One thing I have found is that the gauges that are used in the "W" panel view gauges view are far smoother than the ones that come installed on the default panels. I have used FS Panel Studio (payware panel editor) to use every "Mini Panel" gauge that is available in my IFR cockpits of light airplanes. I have also gathered cockpit bitmaps of planes that I now fly (Cessnas and Pipers) and enlarged them to give an available window that only shows the "six pack" of the basic flying gauges along with the two VORs and an ADF as applicable. That enlarges the gauges to almost realife size on my 21" monitor. This gives me a good realistic panel for instrument work with the General Aviation low and slow types.The reason for doing the enlarging of the panel and gauges was that I noticed that it was too "easy" for me to view practically all the instruments at once and thereby not exercise a "scan" which is so vital for instrument flying. It was kind of funny, because I could fly some great instruments in flight simulators on the PC and then not be worth a hoot in the real cockpit. This was especially true when flying ILS approaches because the planes I rent all have separate VOR/ILS instruments from the ADI/HSI group and you have to really look back and forth over a fair distance. It finally dawned on me what I was doing and after enlarging the panels and the gauges to as big as I could get them I got far more real eye scan practice than what I previously had. IMHO I think this is one of the biggest limitations of PC instrument flying with most available panels. We just need monitors as big as the real panels in the real planes. Enlarging the "six pack" to fill the whole screen of a 21" monitor gets you in the ballpark. I also get a bang out of flying the FS2002 planes with all the add on planes with the tiny gauges for the fun of it. I try not to get too serious about "doing it for real" with these panels and reserve that for my own panel creations. Getting a reasonable air file to go along with your plane helps a lot also. It takes some amount of self discipline to force yourself to not use the autopilot because you know that the real planes you are flying don't have anything but you for an autopilot. I think FS2002 is far superior than previous versions of Microsoft flight simulators for IFR training because you are able to trim the planes far more precisely than you could before. The gauges/instruments might have been smoother but flying the planes was for me almost comical. I thought about reloading FS98 and FS2000 just to take a look at the gauges after reading this thread to see how much smoother they were than FS2002 but I remembered about the jerky trim and the zoo I felt I was in when trying to fly them. The place I rent/fly from has a Frasca type simulator worth something like $90,000 when it was orginally purchased about 5 years ago. There are several CFIIs there that along with me feel that FS2002 is superior in flying instruments to that expensive simulator. It's also a lot more fun as well. You have to spend some super major bucks to get real servoed instruments working out of rather sophisticated computers to fly like the real thing. I have also used "IP Trainer" by ASA for initial training procedures and I have to say that it had it's place. Not at all glorious to look at but it does help hammer some procedures in place. ASA's "ON TOP" program has some pluses as well but then again, nothing glorious to look at. I also own and have used Jeppesen's Flight Simulator program whatever it's called and taken a look at the Elite simulation program demo. They all have their points, but, for me, I prefer FS2002 with my personalized cockpits over all of them. It's a bit far cheaper than those others as well. The very best training is with a CFII in real clouds. The best proficiency training is by yourself in real clouds. FS2002 has provided a great "cobweb cleaner" tool for me prior to getting in those clouds since I don't get to fly all that much because of a lack of "missions" and more fundamentally, a lack of bucks.Just some thoughts, hope it helps,Bob, Rogers, Arkansas

[brucek 38]

Hi Bob,Thanks, some good insight.The problem out here, in the rainshadows of the Rockies, is that we never get any IMC- and if we rarely do, it's full of ice or a thunderstorm- most pilots have reservations about flying in either :).Thanks,Bruce.KBJC, Jeffco, CO.

[Guest]

FWIW, when going for the instrument ticket I had the same question, and was very frustrated with MSFS's smallish instruments on the screen and jerky instrument-needle updates (not as bad as Fly, though). I ended up buying Elite (a, gulp, relative bargain compared to the cost of one good days' worth of dual instrument instruction), and was delighted. Elite has large gauges, fluid instrument updates, and a simple yet extremely powerful interface. Using Elite really helped with my instrument training and probably saved me money in the end, because of the speed at which I improved.One neat trick to enhance your simulator instrument training experience (by putting more pressure on your brain) is to do the following. Get a bunch of 3 x 5 cards and on each card write the name of an instrument approach at one of your local airports. Fire up the sim and set yourself up in cruise in the general vicinity of the airports you picked, then pull out a card and fly the approach you picked without pushing "pause" or using the autopilot. You'll be pretty busy figuring out how to get to the IAP and fly the approach while at the same time flying the plane. Good luck.Paul

[Guest]

I think the FAA does allow instrument logging for MSFS2002. A flight school near me has a simulator setup using MSFS2002 and you are able to log time with it.Check it out.I wouldn't know where to start :(

[Guest]

I think the FAA does allow instrument logging for MSFS2002. A flight school near me has a simulator setup using MSFS2002 and you are able to log time with it.Check it out.I wouldn't know where to start :(

[Guest]

Bruce,Totally agree about the ice and thunderstorms. Followed a leader into a boomer once and made it but the plane was really banged up pretty bad. Worst case of turbulence I ever encountered by far and never want to do it again. Also had the horrible experience of arranging funeral services for a buddy of mine, his wife and baby daughter killed in an aircraft accident from flying in bad weather. He was a heck of a fine young man and superb aviator. Too much self confident transference from flying heavy metal to a Cessna 172 over the mountains in thunderstorms I think. His wife was seen running around the airport prior to takeoff frantically asking any pilot she could find if they would go up in weather like what was in front of them. Really tragic. Every year around here it seems that someone super qualified with great equipment augers in flying in miserable icing conditions. Even with planes with deicing equipment. My motto is I don't do Ice and I don't do Thunderstorms. Flying to minimums I'll do but with a pretty fair amount of preplanning and a tad bit of good old FS2002 in the goo. Take care out there in the mountains,Bob, Rogers, Arkansas

[brucek 38]

Hi Bob,Yes, we do give the big mountains here plenty of respect! They rule everything we do here (flying or otherwise), and have a micro-climate of their own. On another aviation forum, myself and one other from CO spent a half dozen messages persuading a guy that he did not want to fly his Cherokee from FL to CA via the mountains around here (multiple legs of course :) ). This was in winter too, when the winds are at their worst, and those huge rotors get set up on the lee side (east, Denver side). I've heard PIREPs around here from the big guys reporting 3,000 fpm downdrafts, a guy in a 172 or Cherokee doesn't stand a chance in that! And every year the coffins come out of the mountains, controlled flight into terrain in VMC mainly- either caught in a downdraft or the density altitude is just too high. Most passes here are in the order of 11-12,000 ', with peaks at 13 and 14. With a service ceiling of 14, on a good day, there's not much margin there.Thanks for all the tips.Bruce.

[brucek 38]

Hi Paul,I like the trick you use with the cards, I must give that one a try. Do you just go through the listing on the Jepp plates and use each one as a possible approach?I would love to see FS be able to slowly fail the AI and HI, slow enough that you don't realize an early failure and therefore don;t take these out of the scan. That's got to be the ultimate challenge in partial panel :)Thanks,Bruce.KBJC, Jeffco, CO.

[Guest]

No they don't...Call the FSDO!!! :-)If they do, I'm suddenly up there with a Captain at the majors.For it to be "loggable" it must run a self diagnostic and check all the controls as per AC 61 something or another. Our ELITE at my school runs this every time we fire it up.Bruce,Good luck on the II. Couple pieces of advice.1) Look outside the airplane a lot.2) See #1.My DE told me the MOST important thing a CFII does is act as a safety pilot. One other piece of advice...If the ADF works, placard it as inop before the ride. I HATE partial panel NDB approaches. A nice VOR or LOC partial panel will do just fine! :-)Good luck and remember to yell TORA! TOR! TORA! as you dive for MDA on a non-precision approach.

[brucek 38]

Thanks (I think!) :)Bruce.

[Guest cimgrp]

Any recommendations re the best tutorials to use with fs2k2 on flying vor/ndb instrument approaches. Haven't checked out the fs tutorials yet. Thx for any ideas.

[Guest]

The best way I've seen is to pick one VOR and NDB approach and do it over and over and over again. Change the winds aloft etc to see the effects of wind.I think MSFS2k2 makes tracking VOR's and NDB's much easier than it is in real life. They should make a crappy, trainer version of a 172 with VOR's and NDB's that dance around. Now thats real life!

[Guest byoung]

What about the feel of the Sim vs Real aircraft? I think of it as playing tennis and racketball, one messes your timing & mechanics of performing the other? Shorter racket.As far as instrument panel training, it is awesome.Now the question is, how much faster can you get signed off to take your IFR check ride? And ESPECIALLY how much less expensive?Would like to hear comments on this..Barry