bstolle:--- super(above) critical (refering to critical AOA)..... terminology first introduced to me by a Russian DOSAAF instructor working in the UK (an excellent aerobatic pilot and true gentleman.)" Neither 'advanced aerobatics' (Szurovy/Goulian) nor 'aerobatics' (Williams) etc.. mention this term"---good books but now superceded. If your interested would highly recommend.the ones I refered to.

“Fight Unlimited” ? R U serious? That one's almost 30 years old. How can it be superseded by 'advanced aerobatics' etc..? The aerobatic planes at that time weren't even remotely comparable to planes like the Extra or Edge. The are a few really good Russian instructors like Sergei Boriak and the Russians love to use different terms but 'super(above) critical (refering to critical AOA)' = stalled.Point is that there are planes in FSX that can even enter an unintentional spin/flatspin, something I consider important for a simulation and/or pilot training.IFR training can be even done an old ATC-610 trainer.

(I'm not going to sit and read through these books for aerobatic "basics".)Your choice,............... for the rest definitely definitely read these books especially the sections on “basics”. Then for example you’ll understand why the manufacture’s spin recovery instructions for the Pitts S2 are less than brilliant and why you might even use power! They too will reinforce the importance of type specific instruction with a competent current instructor.(“Fight Unlimited” ? R U serious? That one's almost 30 years old)Absolutely.......The books you quote(which I’ve read) are good...the books I’ve quoted are in my opinion better. When / if you read them then you’ll be in a position to have a valid opinion...but not until then. Date of publishing isn’t necessarily an indication of quality. Mr. Langewiesche published his book in 1944 I personally still view it as one of the best books on piloting ever written. If it helps Cassidy’s book was published in 2000(The are a few really good Russian instructors like Sergei Boriak and the Russians love to use different terms but 'super(above) critical (refering to critical AOA)' = stalled. )Now you’re just being silly. Include in the people who “love to use different terms” aerodynamicists , the authors of Vol. 1 RAF pilot’s manual, author’s of Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators (USA).I suspect there are more than a “few really good Russian Instructors”. The Russian men and women have won the World Aerobatics Championships more times than I would care to count. Hint....they didn’t go to Austria, USA or UK for their instruction. TIM

When / if you read them then you’ll be in a position to have a valid opinion...but not until then. (The are a few really good Russian instructors like Sergei Boriak and the Russians love to use different terms but 'super(above) critical (refering to critical AOA)' = stalled. )Now you’re just being silly.....Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators USA).

Doesn't make sense to continue this discussion if you think that a few thousand RW hrs and in depth aerodynamic knowledge are not valid except if you read the 'holy' stone age books you mentioned.BTW, haven't found your 'supercritial maneuvering' in Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators either.

(Doesn't make sense to continue this discussion)Don’t be like that. It’s good to have polite respectful conversations: broadens your perspective, exposes you to new ideas, and helps challenge previous beliefs.(if you think that a few thousand RW hrs and in depth aerodynamic knowledge are not valid) I don’t think I did say that. As far as 1,000’s of hrs are concerned it rather depends on what was being done. Sitting 30,000ft straight and level with the autopilot on doesn’t count for much. Commercial airline pilots may accumulate huge numbers of hours. Many of the top aerobatic instructors only a tiny fraction of these hours. But I know who I’ll turn to for advice on the areas we are discussing.(This is not to say there aren’t some fine aerobatic pilots who are also Commercial Airline pilots; just that this had very little to do with the hours they sat in the cruise.)(except if you read the 'holy' stone age books you mentioned)As for ‘holy’ stone age books. My apology.. I obviously wasn’t specific enough. Cassidy’s book was first published in 2000 AD not BC. If it helps of the two books you referred to both good books.. that have been surpassed....Guilan / Szurovy 1996 latest so that would be 4 years out of date using your approach.......Williams reprinted 1975...are let you do the maths. By the way this book was based on instruction in the Stampe (lovely plane but probably more closely fitting your “stone age” definition). TIM

(I'm not going to sit and read through these books for aerobatic "basics".)Your choice,............... for the rest definitely definitely read these books especially the sections on “basics”. Then for example you’ll understand why the manufacture’s spin recovery instructions for the Pitts S2 are less than brilliant and why you might even use power! They too will reinforce the importance of type specific instruction with a competent current instructor.

Why would I limit myself to manufacturers spin recovery instructions? As I previously said, there are loads of additional information freely available on the interent.

@bstolleLet me put it this way. You build cars for GM, and you expect us to believe your opinion on the handling characteristics of Toyotas?

I fly Bonanza/Barons-but I still know how a Piper/Cessna fly. Not sure I understand this argument.

I fly Bonanza/Barons-but I still know how a Piper/Cessna fly. Not sure I understand this argument.

Me neither....

@GeofaEasy, he's a flight dynamics designer for FSX aircraft.

(Doesn't make sense to continue this discussion)Don’t be like that. It’s good to have polite respectful conversations: broadens your perspective, exposes you to new ideas, and helps challenge previous beliefs.

Strange..........I feel like I'm listening to an attorney, who does well with double talk. But personally, I'm not buying it. The term "smug" comes to mind. This isn't a polite respectful conversation, if you know what I mean...I agree with BStolle..............that it doesn't make sense to continue this conversation

@GeofaEasy, he's a flight dynamics designer for FSX aircraft.

Yes, but he previously worked with X-Plane models for a long time. Back then, I told him I did'nt believe that X-Plane was that good.

@GeofaEasy, he's a flight dynamics designer for FSX aircraft.

And I am hoping he may be interested/enticed to become a flight dynamics designer for Xplane-because in my experience expertise such as he has is sorely needed in the Xplane world.

And I am hoping he may be interested/enticed to become a flight dynamics designer for Xplane-because in my experience expertise such as he has is sorely needed in the Xplane world.

He would have already shown interest. Reading his comments would lead me to believe the contrary.

Yes, many of the comments he has gotten would put me off too.

(Why would I limit myself to manufacturers spin recovery instructions?)I don’t know, but then why would you limit your book reading ?----- (I'm not going to sit and read through these books for aerobatic "basics".)(As I previously said, there are loads of additional information freely available on the internet.)Already covered. Again punters be careful out there.(I feel like I'm listening to an attorney, who does well with double talk. But personally, I'm not buying it)Wrong again. And it was never for sale,(The term "smug" comes to mind. This isn't a polite respectful conversation, if you know what I mean...)I am sorry you feel this way. Perhaps challenging discussions aren’t your thing. (I agree with BStolle..............that it doesn't make sense to continue this conversation)Strange because you seem to keep coming back for more. Personally I ‘m loving it. TIM PS---Bstolle your correct I’ve looked again and can’t see the term in the Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators....my mistake.

Hi,a very Happy, full of Health and if possible Love too 2012 for you all!After a long while away from this forums and flightsimming, I couldn't resist reading this interesting thread to the end and posting here a little tail ....As a glider pilot, I know how easy, but also how difficult/sometimes almost impossible it is to enter spin in some gliders as compared to others. Spinning and Astir Club is easy, spinning an as k-21 is a nightmare (even if you do strange and highly unrecommended changes to your CoG...).I believe I am one of those still dreaming of a spinning sim :-) Actually I believe it wouldn't be that difficult to model the effects of "out-of-the-envelope" flight characteristics of airplanes. Most surely it has been done on some MSFS add-ons (thinking of the only I used to spin for fun - RealIair's SF260) and also in x-plane. I believe MSFS has definitely not been designed for such purposes, just as ELITE (try a spin on ELITE - use the demo ...) This is really not the point on such a sim....What is a MUST and what is not really depends on the use you're going to put on your sim. Strangely there are many other aspects that I find very hard to explain why they're so poorly/not even modeled on GA simulators. Weather for a instance! Things that we all learn as being basic when getting a PPL. Also what our experience when flying real aircraft teaches us. Before going deeper into the meteo side of this post, I would bring a phenomena that really upsets me in x-plane: slipstream effects on prop aircraft and the overwhelmed torque effects!Those of you who fly prop airplanes for real, say simple ones such as a C150, a Robin, Piper... can easily explain that pushing your throttle lever will have (sometime quite) an effect on ground but also in the air, but that effect is mainly on YAW, NOT ON BANK! It simply irritates me to feel that over valued torque effect on x-planes. They bank at the slightest throttle changes, but most do not even so an hint of yaw, as completely opposed to your RL experience, unless your flying a Pitts or an Extra (and some of you do in RL... Whow!, me, just as a passenger...) I've mentioned it to Austin for quite a while. I hope it gets fixed one day, and, after all, x-plane is getting more and more into a standard that MSFS once was, and Austin is a really active developer (and I do respect is work and dedication!!!).Back to the initial meteo hint.... From your PPL aviation meteorology syllabus, do you recall the famous: "FORM HIGH TO LOW, WATCH OUT BELLOW"Now, we all know most sims do model this from the Pressure side of the sentence, but point a single one modeling the temperaturepart? Maybe FlightGear with the latest weather model due for the next February release (not sure), but, appart from thatnone!Most simulator assume an ISA variation of temperature and pressure with altitude. We, RL pilots know it is not the casewhen we're flying, and the FROM HIGH to LOW on the temperature side of the sentence has quite an effect (L. Adamson, as faras I recall as a mountain pilot will easily remember that - Mountains look higher/bigger in Winter :-) )X-Plane, ELITE, Flight Unlimited, Fly!, ... never minded about the fact that pressure levels are not plain. Theycompletely forgot about the well known geopotential in the real atmosphere.Strangely (well, probably not that strange...) MSFS together with FlightGear are the ONLY simulator I know that canmake temperature editing at various altitude levels possible. MSFS even includes a setting for Td (dew-point!!!)So, the ingredients are there (well, pressure levels editing is not, the one that would make it possible to simulatethe temperature side of the above sentence work in the simulation world...) but in the end MSFS never makes real useof those parameters, and regretably the Weather Engine injectors I ever experienced don't either :-(So, I really can't complain about spins when not even the most basic effects such as slipstream (where there is place for such an effect -certainly not on every aircraft...) and a sound/useful model of the atmosphere (even without exquisite feature, theycan keep downloading/parsing METAR and TAF data, together with Weather themes/user modifiable weather) are modeled!I take my hat off for Flight Unlimited 3 with it's weather setting menu, based on frontal areas and their effects - therewas once some hope for realism in this area... :-)