>The very best we can do is design a>simulation to "fly" by the numbers. Well, this is exactly what probably Microsoft thinks - at least when I attended the Avsim conference in Tahoe last year, hitting the published POH's "numbers" was the only thing they bragged about.But I don't think it is enough. To get the "feel" you have to simulate right behavior when aircraft is displaced from its equilibrium, dumping extra pitch, roll, yaw, etc - if this is not done right it may feel like flying on 'rails'.I would accept it for a fact that simulation can't go beyond getting the "numbers" right and any dream of a right feel - is just a distant dream - if not for many dedicated enthusiasts who proved to us many times that - yes, you can get both the performance numbers and the right "feel" if enough time is invested in the effort. Definitely a lot more time than Microsoft FM experts allocate to their task.It is not that I have time or expertise to take every flight model under the microscope whether it 'feels' right - if within the first couple of minutes of flight I don't notice anything dreadful - it probably 'feels' right. Michael J.http://www.reality-xp.com/community/nr/rsc/rxp-higher.jpg

No doubt I agree that we are all treated to some excellent designs into which a great deal of work was put. Please don't misunderstand, I very much appreciate their efforts. :)Never-the-less, the simulator will never be more than a compilation of numbers. Even with the much touted 'blade element analysis' we are still only experiencing mathematics, not fluid dynamics, or atmospheric conditions. The "feel" is based on sensory input. Beyond that, flying and simulation have fundamental differences. The goal in simulation has always been to create the illusion of flying. This can be done without specific flight models. For some, however, the fun comes in the form of a good flight model. I guess the point I'm trying to make is this: Would you prefer a full-motion, visually encompassing, surround sound simulation with a slightly sub-standard flight model? Or would the vast majority be more drawn to our 2-D representation with a perfect flight model? If the goal is to give the impression of flight for the purposes of entertainment, then FS does a fantastic job. If you want to be more specific, then a tighter flight model would be in order. I guess it squarely depends on what makes you smile. Either way, I think MS was aiming to entertain the vast majority that falls into the first category.

>Aside from the occasional instrument practice, FS works well>for just having fun. And if that's what you want it to do, it>works GREAT! :)I'm no real pilot and when I use FS2004 I would also like to learnsomething about real flying in addition to having fun.

>>Aside from the occasional instrument practice, FS works>well>>for just having fun. And if that's what you want it to do,>it>>works GREAT! :)>>I'm no real pilot and when I use FS2004 I would also like to>learn>something about real flying in addition to having fun.You are.....The basics are there.....L.Adamson

Adding to what Larry just said, FS gave me enough basic training to be able to jump into a Cessna 172 for the very first time in my life and fly it by myself with little help from my instructor sitting next to me... I

Adding to what Larry just said, FS gave me enough basic training to be able to jump into a Cessna 172 for the very first time in my life and fly it by myself with little help from my instructor sitting next to me... I

Adding to what Larry just said, FS gave me enough basic training to be able to jump into a Cessna 172 for the very first time in my life and fly it by myself with little help from my instructor sitting next to me... I

Adding to what Larry just said, FS gave me enough basic training to be able to jump into a Cessna 172 for the very first time in my life and fly it by myself with little help from my instructor sitting next to me... I

Sorry about the multiple post guys, the forums are really slow today. I thought my post didn't take, maybe Avsim will delete the multiple posts...

And to add to the multiple postings.....:)MSFS, as well as other sims can be very realistic throughout the "landing phase" with single engine GA aircraft. And that includes bleeding off airspeed, keeping the nose up in the flare, and slight corrections with rudder pedals to get & stay lined up with the center line. The sim even works for some cross-control in cross wind situations.But in real life, practicing landings during student piloting is one thing you do over & over, even to the point of perhaps hundreds of times. The look & feel needs to be somewhat memorized. While the simulation does a credible job of imitating what I wrote above, I know my "mind" is filling in the gaps of "feel" based on what I visually see in the sim.Therefore, I believe that if a non-pilot thinks they're somewhat comfortable landing in the simulation, they most likely won't be near as comfortable or proficient with their first landings in real life.L.Adamson

Do you mean the aircraft.cfg file provided by Trev Morson? I downloaded it when it was available, but have not yet tried it.Regards,

L.Adamson Wrote:"Therefore, I believe that if a non-pilot thinks they're somewhat comfortable landing in the simulation, they most likely won't be near as comfortable or proficient with their first landings in real life."Agreed! It is far more effective to bring real life experience to the sim, and practice flying stabilized approaches. This can help procedurally where "dry flying" the real thing might not. Bringing FS experience to flying has its draw backs in that bad habits can quickly develop. FS is, without a doubt, a wonderful tool for learning about the fundamentals of flying (Again, a perfect flight model is not really required for this) but it's main focus is fun. I fly for a living, and still have lots of fun with FS! :) As it happens, it is also great for IFR practice, and broad geography lessons!

">FS is, without a doubt, a wonderful tool for learning about>the fundamentals of flying (Again, a perfect flight model is>not really required for this) .... As it>happens, it is also great for IFR practice, and broad>geography lessons!"Exactly so! Could not agree more!As to the "feel" issue, I think people are confusing feel with expectation. When I say an aircraft "feels" right or wrong I catually mean that it flys (or does not) according to what I would expect. I don't neceserily refer to the emulation of the sensory inputs I get when flying the real thing.In this respect, just to add my 2c, MS did a fair job with GA aircraft. The bigger commercial jets though, leave a lot to be desired.

>As to the "feel" issue, I think people are confusing feel with>expectation. When I say "feel" as I described in an earlier reply, it's actually what I mean. It's not really feeling flight surface forces, but what my mind interprets from the visual reaction from joystick inputs. A good flight dynamic file will artificially provide "feel" for trim, a sense of ballooning with flap deployment, prop braking action, yaw (using the VC's)as well as other senses.In the past, I've described "poor" flight models as nothing more than a representation of an aircraft tied by strings to a stick. Pull up & plane goes up; push down & plane goes down........... but no "feel" of flight. Many of today's flight dynamics have gone well beyond that stage.When I'm thinking I'm actually pushing the joystick against against a lifting force when I applied a stage of flaps to lower the nose, then the dynamics are pretty good IMO. My mind can even be faked into feeling a loss of lift, if I retract flaps to quick in a go-around. Now if anyone could simulate the force you have to apply to a yoke or stick while remaining in ground effect during a short/soft field takeoff while building speed........... I'd be happy, 'cause I've never felt it! :) L.Adamson

I still say FS helped me a great deal on my first flight... I landed the plane with no problems. I will say this, landings still take lot's and lot's of practice because I must admit that first day the winds were in my favor. In real life there are many things that you'll have to become accustomed to. Don't misunderstand my statement above to say that FS is the end all and a substitute for actual flight experience. You'll be sadly mistaken if you do. It pays to be safe and know what you