The title really says it all. We hear that people want to fly what they see at their airports. That may be true. But I'm curious to know what other reasons there might be. Some I can think of are:

Used to fly this in the real world.

Because it has all the toys that let it fly itself (so I don't have to)

Because it has no toys so I have to fly it myself

It's what flies over my favorite scenery package

Because the cockpit looks cool

Because the outside looks cool

Because it sounds cool

It flies sector lengths that fit my available time

Because it's a classic (by whatever definition)

Because it's the only one in my sim of choice

No point making this a poll - there will be as many answers as responses...

 

I fly things that have enough buttons to push to feel like I'm doing something while still hand flying, that flies up to around two hours and fits in with my scenery.

 

Cheers

 

Mike

Interesting question. Myself, I start with what kind of flight I want to make, and then pick an appropriate aircraft. I flip back and forth between airliners and general aviation, so I tend to go for variety. Lately, I've been flying around mountainous areas, so I've picked the 172 for it's ease of flying and high wing/visibility for checking out the scenery. If there's water involved, I use the Goose, in case I want to make a random water landing somewhere. For short hauls, I'll use the x737 and will take the 787 or 777 on long, "set it and forget it" type routes. I own copies of the popular CRJ-200 and Challenger 300 for X-Plane, but haven't done much flying with them. I may pick a free day and fly a Cessna from a remote strip to a regional airport, take either the CRJ or Challenger from there to a large hub, and then set off to somewhere exotic in a long range airliner.

 

In FSX, it was pretty similar with my aircraft choices in that where I flew determined what I flew. I mainly flew default aircraft or really well done freeware. Project Opensky / Freeware for airliners and the default 172 or Baron for GA.

Well for myself these days I fly mostly the Lancair Legacy, Vans RV-7, and long EZ. Main reason is the superb unobstructed views out the bubble canopies. Use to be into the heavies from PMDG and Captain Sim, but finally got über bored, so these days it's flying in and out of little airfields using Orbx and Mega Sceneries, and enjoying the sights.

 

Chris

ever since i purchased one ORBX scenery, it quickly turned into buying ALL of their sceneries and wishing the rest of the world was ORBX covered. As for plane types, ive always since FS 5.1 been low and slow and i love The Real Air Bellanca Scout and Aerosofts DHC2 Beaver, and Carenados Cessna 182T G1000 is an awesome plane also

Hi, Mike!

 

A very good question but I think you have pretty much answered it yourself. I believe for many of us, all or most of the factors you listed do contribute.

 

In my case I could think why I simfly an airbus A320 most of the time and why having a huge number of quality addon airports I usually find myself using just a small part of them.

 

As for the 320, real life is not the reason, as I have flown an airbus in RW only 6 times and most of my flights were actually on 737's. I think the main reason is I have adored Airbuses ever since I saw them for the first time. I love their concept, their look, their cockpits (their night lighting is one of the most beautiful things I've ever seen in my life), I love the sidestick idea, the managed/selected mode of the FCU knobs, the FBW, etc. Additionally I fly 90% of my time in Europe (with some exceptions for Asia, when I feel like doing a long-haul) and most European airlines use airbuses. And since I like recreating real world routes (not necessarily the ones I've been on), it fits my needs. Also watching the awesome Pilot's Eye videos (best on the market for me) is worth mentioning.

 

Why these and not those airports? Well, I see most people (most, not all) tend to fly where they live. Why? I don't know, since it should be the other way - the sim lets you jump out to any places you want, so why stay at home? I do fly in Poland sometimes, thanks to the awesome sceneries by Drzewiecki Design, but I find myself based mostly in Frankfurt, and also Munich, Berlin and Zurich. Maybe because I just love the Frankfurt Main Airport. I love its look, timetable, airlines and importance for this part of the world. I also spot a lot of planes flying between Germany and Asia every day. I also admire German commercial aviation, especially Lufthansa - its aircraft, pilots, routing and business model. Another important reason is there are great addon sceneries for these places, thanks to German Airports Team and FSDT. Additionally, I love flying to Scandinavia (mainly Helsinki) and Russia (e.g. Moscow, Yekaterinburg and Novosibirsk) as these are very interesting locations from the geographical point of view. Same for doing some charter flights to the Mediterranean (Spain and Greece) and Egypt (usually with Air Berlin) - nothing like having a short holiday for the price of electricity...

Mike

 

I don't like GA aircraft very much in the sim because I've flown them for real and it all just seems very flat by comparison.

 

I much prefer airliners, and the more automation the better. Why? Because to me it seems that reality and simulation come that little bit closer. Of course, you've just as much of a gulf between hand flying a real airliner and a sim one, but the fact that in many cases the real things are flown fully automatic from climbout to landing by basically pressing a variety of buttons in the right order means that you can at least simulate that particular aspect with some degree of realism.

 

I don't sim that much these days anyway, but I do still like the fact that I can load a well designed and very accurate simulated aircraft (lately the NGX) and take a plane load of virtual passengers to a foreign destination using more or less the same procedures that a real flight crew would use. I usually fly from the UK to European destinations. My favourite bases are London City, Heathrow, Stansted, Southampton and Edinburgh. Destinations might be Lisbon, Frankfurt, Berlin, Rome, Oslo amongst others - places where I've got some decent scenery as default airports are a definite no-no!

 

Like Rafal though, I much prefer the Airbus and I'm hoping to use either the Aerosoft or FSL product pretty much exclusively once they arrive.

 

Naturally, that doesn't appeal to everyone, but that's where I find myself right now!

 

All the best

 

Ian

For me, simulation is an opportunity to "fly" machines that I'll never get a chance to fly in real life (I fly ultralights - and sometimes GA aircraft - in real life).

 

Ten years ago, my answer would have been : 95% military (Falcon 3, Hornet etc.) and 5 % civilian in FS

 

Then I gradually switched to FS only and it was mostly business jets (Eaglesoft CJ1...)

 

Then, like many, I discovered PMDG's 737 for FS9 and switched to airliners only (737, 767, ATR, A320, 747, MD11).

 

But I don't "fly" sims as much as I used to a few years ago...

 

Bruno

Fly because I can viturally, and good way to unwind to fly low and slow. Never get bored with flying there is always somewhere to fly too, and been flying around Mexico in Carendo Cessna or Default one and V35 Bonzana with new UTX goods with 3d monitor. Loved flying in Arizona and Utah loved the canyons and Midwest with the forests and lakes. VFR around to small airstrips is fun feel like you are away from civilization. FSX been flying just about everyday for the last two years like half hour here or 2 hours there. Short flights around. Carendo got a lot them as GA is my thing like small airstrips and VFR flying learned how useful radio towers and powerlines are.

is an opportunity to "fly" machines that I'll never get a chance to fly in real life

 

Yup--because at least on my machine I can FLY the 777 from Dubai to Atlanta instead of sitting in the back. Sort of. I do prefer the real thing (little Cessna's) but 100LL is 5.75 a gallon at my local FBO these days.

Yup--because at least on my machine I can FLY the 777 from Dubai to Atlanta instead of sitting in the back. Sort of. I do prefer the real thing (little Cessna's) but 100LL is 5.75 a gallon at my local FBO these days.

Hi Jim,

Don't know if that'll make you feel better but in France, at the current $ to € parity, 100LL is above 6.5 US $ a gallon .

Fortunately, ultralights use unleaded (car) gas, which is "only" 4.5 $ a gallon !!! (granted, the euro is high again these days, but still, it makes you really enjoy each and every minute in the sky).

Bruno

 

PS : (edit) corrected mistake in conversion (used to be an engineer, but apparently this was a while ago :sorry: )

Fortunately, ultralights use unleaded (car) gas, which is "only" 4.5 $ a gallon !!! (granted, the euro is high again these days, but still, it makes you really enjoy each and every minute in the sky).

 

I hear you--it's sad because when I learned to fly it was around a buck US a gallon. :(

Hey, Mike, that's actually an interesting question, and you have already mentioned most of the reasons, why I fly what I fly in the sim:

 

Because the cockpit looks cool

Definitely, because that's where I spend most of the time of my virtual flight (except if there's the chance of capturing nice screenshots)

 

Because the outside looks cool

Most of the time, that's important to me, too, because I always try to make good screenshots, so the exterior should have enough details to keep them interesting.

 

It flies sector lengths that fit my available time

That's also important to me. I don't want to fly short hauls in an A380, though flying it might be fun, and I'm limited to short hauls. This is also why I prefer aircraft that allow me to start them with CTRL+E rahter than sticking to checklists.

 

Another reason to fly what I fly (mainly either some GA props or 737's, A32x's, recently the Avro RJs) is that they are apt to land where I fly (e.g. LOWI: I wouldn't like to land there in a T7 or a 747, though that would be an interesting challenge), and they visit the airport I fly to regularly.

 

Simulation is an opportunity to "fly" machines that I'll never get a chance to fly in real life

That's also a good reason. While actually considering to make a PPL after finishing university (given I can afford it), I surely won't be able to make an ATPL anymore, so I surely won't be able to fly the heavies in reality, but still I can in the sim.

 

Regards,

Flo

For me/us it's the Learjet 45. I have interest (lots of interest) in other aircraft but because I've got a full scale LJ45 simulator that is fully interfaced for 2-crew operation, then it's a no-brainer. We fly mostly 1-2 hour trips into and out of all sorts of airports, not just pay-ware enabled locations. One reason we can do this and it not be so bad is that when you're flying as a crew (literally, 2 of us using the full checklists, calculations, handbooks etc.) then you're so focused on managing the airplane and flight like a real crew would, that you really don't even realize that you're using FS9 (albeit, a very dressed up FS9 with all the bells and whistles). Being a panel maker, some folks would assume it'd be super easy to build whatever cockpit I wanted, but space and time is a huge factor. Not to mention, you can only afford to build a complete flight deck usually once :-) But, it does beg the question: When will I finally start flying something else? Dont know. I have lots of interest in other aircraft but it's hard to go back to desktop simming. However, the huge advantage to that is you can have an incredibly large variety of wonderful payware to fly.

Because I like the view, I take the Orbx invitation to fly low and slow seriously, and I am much more attracted to GA planes than any other type. I also like gliders, including the occasional hang-glider.

 

Slower planes that let you enjoy that view are a preference, but a jet that gives you the power to race through high mountain passes is also fun. I enjoy being in the air, and the realism of the world outside as I dip and soar is usually much more interesting to me than instruments & systems.

I favor multi-engine planes rather than singles generally. It really is the accuracy of the plane that counts not so much the type of plane. I really like it when I get hold of a real manual with tables and find that the plane flies by the book. The NGX fulfills this of course, but I also spend time with planes like the A2A props. They never dissapoint or force me to imagine I'm doing things that aren't modelled correctly, they simply deliver and actually make me do things as they are done in real life.

 

Sound and visuals are not separate from the accuracy to me, I consider them a big part of it. A big warning flag goes up for me when I load a plane up for the first time and it sounds bad because I think if they didn't care about the sound, what else didn't they care about? External visuals are not quite as important to me as VC, but it all counts. Every intstrument in the orchestra must do its part.

 

My collection of planes is on the small side, and it hurts to say, but a fairly large amount of my purchases don't make the cut. Frequently I'll read reviews or comments that confidently declare some plane to be the coolest thing since sliced bread, and I'll be dissapointed. So overly effusive praise often results in wasted money for me time and time again.