re real v sim...FSX is a great product BUT, I am an experienced VFR PPL of 7 years 400+hours around the London TMA which is restrictive/saturated airspace, flying for real is much harder than FSx believe me, wind, thermals, turbulence count for nothing in FSX, when your on approach at 300ft and the aircraft is weathervaning in a gusty xwind I can tell you now its not pleasant especially when the runway is 650m surrounded by trees, on touchdown your fighting the wind to keep the centreline.....Fsx gives none of these sensations. Its just pitch up and fly, all the aircraft fly like there on rails and there is no sense of fear, you just manhandleThen there's aerodynamics, real world its easy to drop a wing during the landing phase turning base to final, get to slow and use the ailerons too aggressively you will quite possibly spin into cumulus granitus, FSX the plane just wobbles even at 45 degrees ! Add in airspace/traffic control FSx we generally go where we want when we want, no NOTAMs or TRAs to bust and even if we do it doesn't matter. FWIW I have also been very fortunate to fly the 744 and the 772 simulators at BA training Cranebank, Fsim allowed me to step into these flightdecks understanding the systems and perform take offs and landings no sweat. Throw in the wx related issues into the mix and things get interesting!Some landings in the 744 at JFK with an 18kt xwind were not very straight or pretty! There is no doubt that most experienced simmers could step into any aircraft and fly it but in real life when your on your own, the reality bites Fsx is a great entertainment product with amazing potential for systems training, thats as far as it goes IMHO

Must say that real flight controls vs FSX flight controls are definately different. With the joysticks there are almost no feedback (even if you have force feedback it is nothing like the real deal). Just sitting on the deck with rotors turning you can feel the vibrations and such pulsing through the sticks, and just sitting there being in a real aircraft just feels completely different from sitting in front of my PC.. Was actually quite afraid the first time. Especially when you have other people around, and you are trying to keep your awareness up of whats around the bird and what is going on within. FSX is the closest I will get though to being able to fly any aircraft I want when/how I want though. At least until I win the lotto. :(

... I am an experienced VFR PPL of 7 years 400+hours around the London TMA which is restrictive/saturated airspace, flying for real is much harder than FSx believe me.....Fsx gives none of these sensations.

I disagree. I dont have as many hours as you, in fact not even one hundred hours yet, but for me flying a real Cessna 172 is much easier in real life than it is in the sim because of the sensations and situational awareness that you have. I've done the majority of my flying in the high desert of California (KAPV area), which is a notorious for being a very windy area. Having flow in those type of conditions a lot, while it might be scarier in real life, for me its easier to fly than trying the same thing in the sim because I cant feel anything.Although some will agree or disagree, my experience has always been than the sim is harder to control a/c in than real life.Sean Campbell

Hi,What it comes down to is the flight sim user and his dedication to realism and system knowledge while using a particular aircraft. I personally know of two individuals (Friends) that have spent "hundreds" of dollars on Boeing manuals and studied them "religiously". If they had problems understanding any info provided in the manuals they searched for answers on the internet or called me and broke my chops :( . They both have at least 1000+ hours with FS9/FSX and only fly the Boeing aircraft that correlates with the manuals they purchased. They both have full column yokes, rudder pedals and Boeing throttle quads. They are true/hardcore flightsim fanatics.Both men paid for two hours in a level-D sim and had no problems handling and/or landing the Boeing aircraft, one of my friends made two impressive landings at KJFK's (Parkway Visual) 13L. My other friend spent his time at KFLL. At the end of the day, both men performed six landings and did "NOT" crash the aircraft.Both of my friends felt that the Level-D sim aircraft was "MUCH EASIER" to control than FS9/FSX. The only negative thing they had to say about the experience was that they were not able to film their sim time.All-In-All, I believe its doable, but it depends on the simmers knowledge in regards to the aircraft in question. If this were a real situation, the ability to control one's emotions would play a critical roll in a successful landing. In the real world I'm sure they would be talked through the autoland procedure and would be assisted (via radio) in configuring the aircraft.

Have you tried the Captain Sim 767, its the best 767 on the market.

Are you serious? That aircraft is a port over from the 757, it has horrible FPS. Yes the Level-D 767 visuals are outdated, but it is IMHO it is one the most realistic simulations to date. Captain Sims 767 does deliever decent graphics (nothing id die for though), but the switches don't do anything as they should - the Level D 767 does. Honestly, the CLS 767 has the best graphics, Level D the best system modeling - those two mereged would be a dream.I welcome your response.

Hi,I have to agree, the Level-D 767 is the "BEST" (system/sub system) 767 airliner on the market. If the flight deck was brought up to today's visual standards combined with McPhat's HD textures, I'd buy the aircraft again!.

Are you serious? That aircraft is a port over from the 757, it has horrible FPS. Yes the Level-D 767 visuals are outdated, but it is IMHO it is one the most realistic simulations to date. Captain Sims 767 does deliever decent graphics (nothing id die for though), but the switches don't do anything as they should - the Level D 767 does. Honestly, the CLS 767 has the best graphics, Level D the best system modeling - those two mereged would be a dream.I welcome your response.

I agree Colin. I have never flown a real airliner sim, but I have flown an F-4 sim years ago as well as light a/c in the real world, and would have to agree that flying a/c are much easier in real life than in the sim as far as manually flying them goes.Manually flying an a/c itself is not the hard part, its learing all the sytems, what they do, and how to operate them correctly that is the hard part. I'm sure most people who have spent some time in FSX/FS9 could go take a lesson in a Cessna or fly a real 737 sim and be able to control it and fly it reasonably well.Sean Campbell

Sean, One of my responsibilities in my job is to brake ride aircraft that are being towed from remote parking to our gates, so I am qualified to start the APU's on the 737 and Airbus aircraft. I always kid my coworkers that I can start the airplane, and I can probably get it off the ground, but I can't make any guarantees about the landing. :(

Sean, One of my responsibilities in my job is to brake ride aircraft that are being towed from remote parking to our gates, so I am qualified to start the APU's on the 737 and Airbus aircraft. I always kid my coworkers that I can start the airplane, and I can probably get it off the ground, but I can't make any guarantees about the landing. :(

That's interesting, I had no idea your job duties included that. Let's take one for a joy ride late one night while everyone is sleeping and see how we fare :( Sean Campbell

Sure, Would you like a 737-300 or maybe a 400? Or, how about an A319 or A320? I'm sure the jail time will be the same!

Have you tried the Captain Sim 767, its the best 767 on the market.

The LVD is much easier on the system - and I'm not a huge fan of the Captain Sim flight models. They wayyyy over model intertia. Planes don't usually go where you point them. Colin Ware

I dont have as many hours as you, in fact not even one hundred hours yet, but for me flying a real Cessna 172 is much easier in real life than it is in the sim because of the sensations and situational awareness that you have.

Agreed. I've only flown in windy conditions (being from Oklahoma)... In fact when we get a calm day... everyone at my base lands long and fast. We had 45knot gusts today 35 degrees off the runway which is not uncommon... but typically we'll have 20-25 gust 30-35... RW flying is easier for me because of the SA as well...Cheers!

Me and a couple of buddy's regularly go in a 737-800 sim, maybe once every two-three weeks. And yeah, it's incredible, nothing like FS9 or FSX. In the sim you can feel what the aircraft is doing, what it wants to do, what it doesn't want to do and the list goes on and on. None of this stuff can be simulated in FS9 or FSX. In the sim you can actually see how small that little runway is in comparison to everything else you can actually see. How small that centre line is compared to the 150 miles left of you and another 150 miles right of you and the 150 miles ahead of you. Another thing is you can actually see when you close to the ground on landing, not having to look at the radio altimeter in FS9/X!!!Nothing will compare to the sim. Nothing will compare to the real thing.

Consider someone with many hours on a Tiger Moth and being let loose in a 1500hp Spitfire....alone with only 5 mins going over the controls, tap on the shoulder for good luck and hood slammed shut.....hundreds did it and became ace fighter pilots.....not a computer in sight. Some people could do it, some could not.I had 20 years experience with sims (up to FS98) and told my first flight instructor that I had a few "real hours" so he let me do the full flight. The 152 was easier in real life than the sim, he sat but and done the radio while I flew around southern CA. Takeoff was easier because the rudder is not so laggy, the aircraft floats of the ground instead of jumping off the ground, landing was great too. Doing it in a 747 or similar is a different story indeed but 1000's of hours of simming would be a huge advantage.

Sean, One of my responsibilities in my job is to brake ride aircraft that are being towed from remote parking to our gates...

Sean,I'm curious to know, what specifically does the term "brake ride" mean?

We have four gates at DFW but we have 8 RONs (Remain Overnight), so as one flight leaves, another is towed to the gate. FAR's require that there is someone on the flight deck who could stop the aircraft should it become disconnected from the push tug or if the push tug were to have a brake failure. This requires that the APU is running for brake pressure and beacon and nav lights. I am trained to brakeride the 737/ Airbus and the Embraer 170/175, but they're so touchy only the mechanics are allowed to brakeride them. I hope this answers your question.