Actually, Let me pull some statistics here for your claims:"http://www.airdisaster.com/statistics/"So, The data is from 2004, They haven't cited their source, but this isn't a school paper - if you can find better.......great.British airways is clearly safer than.....a few airlines, but there's a few airlines which have better records than BA's. Many times US airlines are safer than european brotheren.. So I have to wonder what's in the interest of "Stringency?"

To say that flight simulator is "unrealistic" is very far from the truth. If FS is used properly, it is valuable training aid. Look up the book "Flight Simulator as a Training Aid" by Bruce Williams. It is basically training flights for an RW instrument rating. Or take something like VATSIM. Because of my flight time online, I knew exactly what ATC was telling me, and I was able to talk back to them with ease on my first flying lesson. While the sim won't give you the visual or tactile feedback that a real airplane will, it can be used as a procedural trainer, and you can learn what responses can be expected, you can learn navigation, how to fly instruments, etc. I find that Microsoft flight simulator is more realistic that some of the FAA approved simulators. The FAA sim my local flying club has is almost depressing. The Cessna it has rolls like an F-16. Have someone fly that, then put them in a real Cessna and they will be very surprised.

To say that flight simulator is "unrealistic" is very far from the truth. If FS is used properly, it is valuable training aid. Look up the book "Flight Simulator as a Training Aid" by Bruce Williams. It is basically training flights for an RW instrument rating. Or take something like VATSIM. Because of my flight time online, I knew exactly what ATC was telling me, and I was able to talk back to them with ease on my first flying lesson. While the sim won't give you the visual or tactile feedback that a real airplane will, it can be used as a procedural trainer, and you can learn what responses can be expected, you can learn navigation, how to fly instruments, etc. I find that Microsoft flight simulator is more realistic that some of the FAA approved simulators. The FAA sim my local flying club has is almost depressing. The Cessna it has rolls like an F-16. Have someone fly that, then put them in a real Cessna and they will be very surprised.

Once again you have highlighted the differences between the US and the rest of the world with regard to training practices. In the UK FS9/FSX is a GAME period. It/they are not remotely close to REAL FLYING period. No amount of time "playing" with FS9 etc can prepare you for flying a real aircraft. Everything about real flying is different. In a real aircraft a pilot has to be super prepared for any and every eventuality the aircraft throws at him. And going back to the start of this topic only a fully trained pilot would have the chance of coming into an unfamiliar cockpit and successfully bringing the a/c into land.vololiberista

A)No he would not, Your average A320 pilot would have difficulty in a boeing, your average boeing pilot would have difficulty in a an airbus.This also goes to say someone with a PPL or CPL and 2000 hours who is a check examiner but has no type ratings in transport aircraft would be absolutely clueless on the operation and characteristics of a Boeing or Airbus.B.)You're absolutely wrong:FS9 and FSX are simulators, they are not FAA approved and can not be used to log time............There's no difference between the US and UK in this regard (Or the rest of the world). This also brings to light that even though it can not be used to log currency, both FS9 and FSX are commonly used by Pilots around the world in keeping proficiency so that they breeze through their Real exams with little difficulty (You get good procedurally in FS, you get good in real life too, it's not a coincidence).those Sims which seem less realistic he mentioned? the ATD/FTD's.........It's typical to see them approved for use in other countries around the world, including Europe and Australia/New Zealand.

Once again you have highlighted the differences between the US and the rest of the world with regard to training practices. In the UK FS9/FSX is a GAME period. It/they are not remotely close to REAL FLYING period. No amount of time "playing" with FS9 etc can prepare you for flying a real aircraft. Everything about real flying is different. In a real aircraft a pilot has to be super prepared for any and every eventuality the aircraft throws at him. And going back to the start of this topic only a fully trained pilot would have the chance of coming into an unfamiliar cockpit and successfully bringing the a/c into land.vololiberista

Once again you have highlighted the differences between the US and the rest of the world with regard to training practices. In the UK FS9/FSX is a GAME period.

Where did I say that FS9/X was an approved trainer in the US? I said it was more realistic than some of the FTDs, which it is. Look up the Epic FTDs. You can log IFR time on them, and as Ryan stated, I'm fairly certain they are approved for use in other countries as well. Also, look up RedBird Flight simulators. They are FAA approved training devices. They run MS ESP, which is FSX, albeit with more expensive hardware.

It/they are not remotely close to REAL FLYING period. No amount of time "playing" with FS9 etc can prepare you for flying a real aircraft. Everything about real flying is different.

I'm sorry, but have you ever flown a real aircraft? Very much is common. It is amazingly helpful to already know what to expect when you get into a real airplane. On lesson 3 I was doing steep turns and crosswind landings. I have done all radio work since lesson one.

In a real aircraft a pilot has to be super prepared for any and every eventuality the aircraft throws at him.

The simulator, when used as a simulator can train you for those kinds of decision making processes. Real Pilots train for those same eventualities in simulators.

And going back to the start of this topic only a fully trained pilot would have the chance of coming into an unfamiliar cockpit and successfully bringing the a/c into land.

I think any amount of experience is helpful and will give the "pilot" a fighting chance. While the Airbus pilot will be a bit confused in the Boeing cockpit, he will know at the very minimum the basics of how to operate a transport category aircraft. Anyone who has a fluent understanding of those basics would have a chance. I think there are many simmers that understand those basics. However, those who are generally the most loudmouthed are the ones who don't understand them.

QUOTEIt/they are not remotely close to REAL FLYING period. No amount of time "playing" with FS9 etc can prepare you for flying a real aircraft. Everything about real flying is different.I'm sorry, but have you ever flown a real aircraft? Very much is common. It is amazingly helpful to already know what to expect when you get into a real airplane. On lesson 3 I was doing steep turns and crosswind landings. I have done all radio work since lesson one.

i'm very sorry to inform you that I received my ATPL in 1978 and have many thousands of hours in the air in numerous aircraft of all sizes. Also havng the privilege of flying that fastest subsonic passenger jet (which still flies!!!).I strongly suggest that before you make wild broad sweeping comments you check your facts. It is because I am a REAL pilot that I have stated my opinion bases on many years of experience. When you have had the equivalent experience then you may also talk in the way you do. Until then check your facts before making untrue comments.vololiberista

"When you have had the equivalent experience then you may also talk in the way you do."Grabbing my popcorn and soda.This is going to be interesting.

Sort of a silly proclomation for an internet board where nobody can prove anything, isn't it?Is that kettlecorn?!?

"When you have had the equivalent experience then you may also talk in the way you do."Grabbing my popcorn and soda.This is going to be interesting.

Yes, it happens to be kettlecorn. Did I leave my webcam on again??Plenty for all, drag up a seat.

i'm very sorry to inform you that I received my ATPL in 1978 and have many thousands of hours in the air in numerous aircraft of all sizes. Also havng the privilege of flying that fastest subsonic passenger jet (which still flies!!!).

Don't be sorry at all. Flying is wonderful, and if anything I'm happy that someone else can enjoy it as well. However, my point still holds. If you received your ATPL in 1978, then I am going to assume you learned to fly in the late 60's to early 70's, when desktop simulators were non-existent. If I had been flying for 15 years before simulators really came into their own, I might be not see them as realistic either. I can see where you are coming from. In no way am I saying that flying in MSFS is equivalent to real flight time (the FAA might think so, but I don't). My sole objection to your comments was that you said it was "not remotely close to REAL FLYING period" and "There is no realism". Based on my experiences in real flying, they are extremely useful in teaching the basics. As someone earlier in the thread said "The truth is in the middle".

I strongly suggest that before you make wild broad sweeping comments you check your facts. It is because I am a REAL pilot that I have stated my opinion bases on many years of experience. … Until then check your facts before making untrue comments.

Nowhere have I stated any facts that are not true. Everything that you have objected to has been my opinion.

When you have had the equivalent experience then you may also talk in the way you do.

I am talking the way I am based on my experience, and you are speaking based on yours. While you may have more experience, that does not make mine inferior. We both have valid opinions.

So where I think most simmers would fall down, is the pressure combined with if they had to try a manual landing with no radio assistance, locating the airport visually, lining up and descending all on their own whilst putting the right amount of throttle on.

Speaking as a long time simmer who eventually got his break and is now a 737 f/o I think I can provide a bit of perspective. I think as a simmer, one could look at each individual flying activity and say "I know that", "I can do that". But the problem comes in stitching all together in a safe manner. A professional pilot has to demonstrate superior skill and judgement all the time. Professional pilots make mistakes, they also recognise those mistakes very quickly and act on that recognition quickly and efficiently. Professional pilots obviously know a lot about a vast range of subjects that are all directly related to the planning, operating and communicating. This knowledge enables pilots to retain a highly developed sense of situational awareness about the state of the aircraft, crew, the environment they are operating in. This situation awareness enhances a pilots ability to predict how the situation will unfold ahead of time. During all this, the pilot will assess and mitigate risks as well as prioritise tasks. All within a multi-crew paradigm.What we are talking about here, is just getting an airplane on the ground, just in one piece is all that matters. The reality is that ATC would have cleared the way and would be providing plenty of timely and essential guidance and essential information. Nobody would care about how rough the ride was, how inefficient the descent, what regulations were being busted or if he touches down within the first 2,000' of the runway. There isn't a whole lot to consider other than keeping the ship in one piece.If this were a reality, I could absolutely guarantee that the simmer would be behind the aircraft and the situation for most of the scenario. He would never get ahead of the aircraft and he would be reacting to events throughout the scenario.If the simmer was truely left to his own devices, i.e. assume the task of a regular pilot, totally on his own, he would have a number of challenges to overcome which are never apparent in a PC flight simulator. The simmer's lack of situational awareness would be manifest right from the start of the scenario. The simmer would probably make mistakes without knowing. Descent planning would be a significant issue alone. Never mind A/T and A/P usage. Flight control manipulation to touchdown would all be strange and new experiences with the simmer trying to figure it out as it happens. MS Flight Sim is able to convey the concepts, but in reality it will be different, many small differences that could quickly overwhelm our simmer.A big risk would also be loss of control, either through the A/P or if it is disconnected. It isn't that an airliner is difficult to fly, they aren't especially. But they have certain characteristics that are not represented in any PC simulation. When things start to go wrong with the flight path things tend to unravel very very quickly. Recovering from an unusual attitude would be unlikely.Obviously the simmer would know about how the primary and secondary controls work. How to operate radios. How to interpret navigation equipment. Also the major buttons and levers on the flight deck would all be familiar.It might be theoretically possibly, but somebody with absolutely no formal training, only their FS flight sim experience to lean on. The odds are really not in their favour.

In no way am I saying that flying in MSFS is equivalent to real flight time (the FAA might think so, but I don't)

You could use a PC flight simulator as procedures trainer (PCATD). A PCATD is to train in operating and interpreting equipment and the flight model is of no consequence at all. PCATDs are typically used to practice IFR techniques and develop operational knowledge and congnative skills. In fact, the software is just one component that makes up a certified PCATD, it is the whole device that is certified, not the software per se. Also, it isn't the time on the device that you are logging, it is the time with the instructor whilst using the device - that is a crucial difference to MSFS being recognised by the FAA, it isn't.

My sole objection to your comments was that you said it was "not remotely close to REAL FLYING period" and "There is no realism". Based on my experiences in real flying, they are extremely useful in teaching the basics. As someone earlier in the thread said "The truth is in the middle".

Well quite. But with the specific scenario we have here it isn't about basics it is about making decisions at 7nm per minute.