AOPA's Flight Review - "Negative transfer of learning"

[g_precentralis 191]

Nice review, and thats is one of thing Im trying to explain, flight have potential to be an training aid tool, but for now, its miles away from that goal.I use FSX as training aid, but there are "Negative transfer of learning" in FSX too, so new pilots should be extremely careful (same stands for MS flight! users). I pick up some bad habits from FSX and its pain in the &@($* to correct that. But, if you know what are you doing, it can be helpful, we just need more features.

[RamonB 449]

Now, that is one good, fair and balanced review. No more no less.Punch Line for me: “Microsoft Flight is a totally different experience”Not for training. Yet.Good for fun and feel the joy of flight. NowBTW: OP I think the thread title might be misleading.

[air-ick 79]

You know, I'd also agree that it is a fair review of Flight even though it sounds to me that he has already dismissed it as a tool for any kind a basic flight training. In its present state I would wholeheartedly agree that Flight has a long way to go before it replaces FSX as a serious tool for training. But I think that it has the potential to turn into a very useful tool in any young pilot's arsenal of training aids, assuming that MS has the desire to make it so.I have no way of knowing whether this reviewer spent any time in the RV-6, but if he didn't I think he missed out on where the real potential for Flight exists. Unfortunately, I think that some people who subscribe to Flight Training magazine or are looking for information about learning to fly may come across this video and not even bother trying out Flight.I agree with the general consensus that much more is needed to make Flight a viable flight training product. The ball's in Microsoft's court. I would love to see some sort of "IFR" DLC whereby those who want to use Flight in such a way could, while others can just go and weave around balloons if that's all they want to do. I really think Flight can be both products at the same time.

[Oracle427 45]

So a functional 6 pack, dual VOR receivers, standard radio stack, a switch panel, lighting controls, elevator trim, complex controls and all the usual engine, vacuum gauges, etc. is not up to snuff?What do you fly normally?! :)the flight model is the one improvement to write home about. :)Also, why would you use a mouse when you should be using the controls you use with FSX. I'm using my rudder pedals, stick and throttle quadrant without issue.What does the throttle doesn't feel real mean? If I push it in, I climb, if I pull it out, I descend. If I set for cruise and trim I fly level.Sorry but i feel compelled to keep asking this out of curiosity because I do not understand the basis for these statements.

[air-ick 79]

BTW: OP I think the thread title might be misleading.

Well, without giving it much thought, I just picked out what I thought was one of the more significant quotes from the review since I had not heard anyone else mention this yet. But I can see how my title could imply that that was the only point of this review and that wasn't my intention. If there's a way to change the title I would drop the quote.

[RamonB 449]

You know, I'd also agree that it is a fair review of Flight even though it sounds to me that he has already dismissed it as a tool for any kind a basic flight training.

I think we have not heard the last from Mr. Twombly.AOPA is a serious organization, Flight will evolve and DLC will come out, so I’m almost certain AOPA will give Flight time to mature and future reviews.-----------------------------

If there's a way to change the title I would drop the quote.

If you want to change it, your best bet is to contact an admin.

[g_precentralis 191]

So a functional 6 pack, dual VOR receivers, standard radio stack, a switch panel, lighting controls, elevator trim, complex controls and all the usual engine, vacuum gauges, etc. is not up to snuff?What do you fly normally?! :)the flight model is the one improvement to write home about. :)Also, why would you use a mouse when you should be using the controls you use with FSX. I'm using my rudder pedals, stick and throttle quadrant without issue.What does the throttle doesn't feel real mean? If I push it in, I climb, if I pull it out, I descend. If I set for cruise and trim I fly level.?Sorry but i feel compelled to keep asking this out of curiosity because I do not understand the basis for these statements.

Did you see some FNPT ever at least, or some big level D one? Not cockpit, graphic, or size, but control room for instructor? There are about million adjustable parameters. Some home "simulators" have dozen adjustable parameters. flight has maybe 2. thats the difference.

[fastcarfastplane 0]

Well I have been reading a lot about this new game Flight, the hardcore games (one myself, and real pilot) are complaining about it's lack of realism and simulation. In the other others are really happy about it's simplicity and pc friendly, and some more i candy features. In the end both may be right. IMHO we are just losing the basics here. Flight at this time, at this stage (let's be clear, because it has the potential to become a more solid and more likely a simulator) it's just a game, just like a Play Station game, it's the same as flying a P51 or a Japanese Zero in for instance Battlefield 1943, or Top Gun in PS, it's the same, just a basic game. I can already see al the comments comming from dissapointed Flight fans, but please don't feel insulted, that was what MS intended, and there's nothing wrong with it, Hardcore simmer can still stick to FSX or FS9 and keeping making it as real as it gets, improving their skills and enjoying a more real simulation wtih all the add ons available. This Flight forum could be perfeclty placed in the PS action games forums as well, no offense please, it is not my intention. Finally, i like both styles, when it comes to simulation, I for sure pcik up FS, and when I just want to have an I candy flight with no flight worries or duties, I pick up Flight.just my two cents

well, i'm a hardcore gamer, and a real pilot...and if anyone thinks this game OR FSX, (or xplane) for that matter are good flight 'simulators' then you are sorely mistaken.is it as good as you can get without having a moving theater and chair? yeah but..there is no feeling of "oh hell" when i go into a spin in this game, there is no feeling of..."what am i gonna do if this xwind hits a 20kt gust"...etc... both games are VIDEO GAMES...and should be treated as such. It's no different from driving a lamborghini in FORZA and thinking you're a race car driver, that said, it doesn't mean you can't take lessons from them, and incorporate them into the real world...and for some get a sense of accomplishment out of it. scanning the guages, leaning some basic plane tendancies, following checklists (no mention of GUMPS in the game though?) are all stuff that are about as real as it can possibly get, short of getting in an airplane.we, at some point, should be able to have simulated instrument, and mech. failures...randomly.i think they could greatly increase the benefit of this game if there were actual punishments for not following procedures...as in...if you crash a plane, and its pilot error, maybe that airport won't let you use one of their planes anymore. maybe you should have to do jobs to earn money and 'buy' the planes to put in your own hanger...hell, they should let you put speed mods on the planes...and when you decide to fly your beautiful skyhawk in a thunderstorm, or somewhere else you shouldn't be, you're going to regret it when you crash, and lose the plane...and have to buy another one with money you don't have ;p

[Oracle427 45]

Okay, now we're talking. So it's about the amount of parametrization and the very specific scenarios that can be set up. On that point I'm with you 110% sadly, Flight doesn't even make an attempt at this.I have logged close to 15 hours in a Redbird AATD. Never sat in any of the larger ones though I have seen the Dassault Falcon unit at Teterboro.

[sibtiger 0]

And the instrumentation is very basic,

Well, you only have GA planes now, so yes they are less complex than twin engine or jets.

so it can be flown by anyone without any trouble.

Can a person w/o any experience be able to nail those crosswind and ILS landing challenges?

do you really need the instruments to fly in flight?

oh yeah, in dense fog for sure.

[chdriver 0]

I'm loving Flight. Definitely a different experience for me. Last night i did some navigating via VORs, an ILS landing and some general free flight in the RV. Radios are a bit of a pain to set with the mouse. But I love the feel of this game/sim. Everything works so smoothly for me. No setup/tweaking just get in and go. My CH Products yoke and pedals have never worked this well in FSX or FS9. I've been spending way more time in Flight than I should but it is such a blast including the multiplayer function. BTW I have it running on two machines. One is my home/business computer which is low end with Athlon II X2 350 CPU. I use a Wingman cordless controller on that machine. The other machine is my flight sim computer (i5 750, OC to 3.8 Ghz, ATI 5770 video, CH Products yoke-pedals-throttle, Saitek switch panel, multipanel and raido, FSUIPC, 24" monitor for outside view and and 22" for gauges, etc., etc.). I see great potential for Flight as I move into retirement next month. There is room for FS9, FSX and Flight in my world.

[Air1 136]

As with most reviewers he did not go into the game nearly far enough to really learn what it is capable off. Seems he did not get beyond the beginning demo! What kind of a review id that?

[ronzo155 0]

The one thing(Word) that is bothering me in some the responses to opinions of Flight vs everything else is the word "Serious".c'mon people; it's a hobby.I enjoy Flight sims...I enjoy playing my 5 string banjo...I enjoy playing my 12 string guitarI enjoy singing.When I describe my hobbies to people, I never preface it by saying;("I'm serious about.....") I don't have a "serious" guitar, or a "serious" banjo, or a "serious" flight sim.I DO ENJOY playing them all.Y'all need to lighten upRB

[FrankFasi 0]

Radios are a bit of a pain to set with the mouse

The mousewheel method has made this piece of cake. I stuggled, too, until I read about using the mousewheel.

[Chock 17,769]

As the reviewer says, that video is more of a quick overview of Flight in relation to his specific need from a PC sim, than an actual review, and as such it's a pretty fair assessment.Of course what is not mentioned, is that Flight is almost certain to have all the stuff he actually needs added to in order to use it as a basic intro training tool at some point. But even at this point, there are some things it has which other flight sims do not, for example, it's one of few where you can do a psuedo walkaround and demo where to stand when around aircraft so you don't get a face full of propeller, which is an important safety point. Further, it is entirely possible to demonstrate control surface movements to a novice pilot with MS Flight, so it's not completely bereft of the ability to be used as an educational tool, particularly since Flight seems to do a better job of simulating crosswinds than FSX does.Al