Heck no!!!!!!!!!!!!! You're crazy if you think a third-rate computer game can teach you to fly an airplane with any semblance to reality. FSX has flaw after flaw in terms of aerodynamics modeling, and quite franky the PMDG NGX is over-hyped crap in this department as well; all this in spite of what the pretend pilots and Fan-boys claim here.

 

In terms of properly modeling drag and ground effect, the NGX is a complete joke on landing approach and flare compared to the real aircraft. It's a crappy computer game made to entertain people what don't know any better or care.

 

If you were to try to land a real 737 based solely on your experience with PMDG products, you would die.

 

So you're a real "non-pretend" 737 NG pilot then? Which airline?

pilot the NGX 737 cold and dark to cold and dark perfectly ?

 

if no tell me why

 

Perfectly? I don't think so.

You'd know more than the average Joe or even the average private pilot, but you'll lack airline SOPs knowledge and overall routine/proficiency with the 737NG, especially when it comes to hand flying.

Tactile stuff can also be tricky. Operating flaps, reversers, gear-lever, nose-wheel steering, TOGA buttons, A/T disconnect buttons, etc is not just moving a joystick or pressing some key on the computer keyboard like in FSX. Few of us have hardware setups that closely resemble the real 737NG, and believe me, that can really make you feel uncomfortable in the beginning.

 

I myself hold a PPL and I had the pleasure to enjoy a couple of hours in a real-world 737-800 level d simulator. It takes a few attempts to get the manual landings right and to develop a general feeling for the aircraft.

 

After those sim sessions I dare to say that I could now probably handle a standard manual approach and landing in the 737-800 should it be required in an emergency situation, although I'd probably be busy trying to not sh*t my pants. It would be far from pretty or even perfect, but survivable.

 

However, without these sessions in the real-world level d sim I'd say chances are quite slim that one manages to nail a manual approach/landing on the first try without bending some metal, especially in an emergency situation.

 

So, no - "flying" the PMDG NGX will unfortunately not enable us to just take the controls in real life and perform as a type-rated 737NG airline pilot would do.

I think we are all missing the point about flying in RL or on a Sim, how many of us simmers know - follow - use the principles of flight , WCA / CAS / IAS / TAS / GS / Emergency procedures / Deviation angle / glide slope / forward cg / backward cg / LIFT on an AOB etc .... , of course I do use these things sometimes but I have forgotten a lot. Yeah we can say that the 737 can autoland and can do a lot of other things due to some computer (i am GA flyer) but what happens if the systems fail, do we know what is the AOB by looking at the windshields , Hey guys I don't mean to say that I know everything of course there are experienced simmers and RLP who could and can prove my points wrong and no offense is intended to anyone , but I am saying this because for me siming is going according to RL thingy else it all becomes a game, I talk about principles of flight and other flying stuff is because I have had some ground training but never flew in RL.

 

But again flying the real 737 after training extensively on a sim remains to be proven.

 

Hope no one feels offended by my post.

I think the question might be better asked as, "If I've never piloted a real aircraft of any kind, does the PMDG 737 NGX teach me enough to enable me to fly a real one, from starting the engines to flying the route to shutting down at the destination? If not, what percentage of what I need to know does it teach me?"

 

Hook

To those of you around the DC area who have not flown a real plane before, if you'd like to test your theories about sim versus reality, I'm opening an invitation:

 

Fly the crap out of the default Cessna 172 this month and next month.

In February, I will make myself available on the weekends so that I can meet you in Leesburg and we can go bomb Winchester for a while to see how you do.

 

I'll record the flights, as I do all of my flights now, and I'll post them here for the detractors to see. I honestly believe that anyone who has flown the sim long enough to pick up the basics will be able to land the plane safely - perhaps roughly, but safely. From there, yes, there are differences in thinking ahead of the plane, but flying is flying.

 

If you look back on page one of my logbook, you'll find the first entry has a landing recorded with it. No touch and gos. Prior to that flight, I had flown a plane once with my neighbor. On my first flight as a student pilot, I landed the plane. I believe that my experience with flight simulators made that happen.

 

As I said earlier: stop kidding yourselves. It's not as hard to fly any aircraft as you're making it.

 

Flying safely, flying well, and being able to handle emergencies is the tough part, and that's where experience and knowledge counts.

 

Admitting flying isn't too hard isn't going to affect the size of certain parts. I promise.

I think the question might be better asked as, "If I've never piloted a real aircraft of any kind, does the PMDG 737 NGX teach me enough to enable me to fly a real one, from starting the engines to flying the route to shutting down at the destination? If not, what percentage of what I need to know does it teach me?"

 

Hook

 

I don't think a game will ever replace real world training, Hook.

 

To those of you around the DC area who have not flown a real plane before, if you'd like to test your theories about sim versus reality, I'm opening an invitation:

 

Fly the crap out of the default Cessna 172 this month and next month.

In February, I will make myself available on the weekends so that I can meet you in Leesburg and we can go bomb Winchester for a while to see how you do.

 

I'll record the flights, as I do all of my flights now, and I'll post them here for the detractors to see. I honestly believe that anyone who has flown the sim long enough to pick up the basics will be able to land the plane safely - perhaps roughly, but safely. From there, yes, there are differences in thinking ahead of the plane, but flying is flying.

 

If you look back on page one of my logbook, you'll find the first entry has a landing recorded with it. No touch and gos. Prior to that flight, I had flown a plane once with my neighbor. On my first flight as a student pilot, I landed the plane. I believe that my experience with flight simulators made that happen.

 

As I said earlier: stop kidding yourselves. It's not as hard to fly any aircraft as you're making it.

 

Flying safely, flying well, and being able to handle emergencies is the tough part, and that's where experience and knowledge counts.

 

Admitting flying isn't too hard isn't going to affect the size of certain parts. I promise.

 

Kyle, one thing is to fly a Cessna 172 and another is to hand fly a B737-800. Stop kidding yourself.

Look. I've watched Star Trek for years. I've played every single Call of Duty. Put me on the Space Shuttle, slap on a few guns and Ill travel back in time and dog fight The Red Baron in space. Don't tell me you can't learn from TV and games.

Well if I could fly one 737 perfectly and maintain all the principles of flight by training on a sim than why would CP's did not or don't do that ? why would someone spend thousands of dollars on an Academy where they would learn MCM / Multi engine aircraft's and about flying. Heck no one can experiences the forces affecting or acting on the aircraft in a sim. If this is a possibility than I am not going to my training academy , rather use FSX or XPX or even FG and then just appear for my PPL license , a situation awareness during a sim is just nothing like in RL. F1 drivers users sims to train on a track but even they make mistakes during the real race.

 

Whatever you do flying that big girl would require proper RL training. Who knows for aircrafts like the 152 or the grob or any small it could be a possibility.

Kyle, one thing is to fly a Cessna 172 and another is to hand fly a B737-800. Stop kidding yourself.

 

Last I checked it was still:

Align aircraft with runway

Control descent rate towards runway

Closer to runway, flare to arrest descent rate

Upon contact with runway, apply even braking to slow aircraft

 

Of the different aircraft I've flown, none of them have had some sort of special procedure otherwise.

 

The empty weight of the Piper Malibu I flew a friend in down to CHO a while back is just about the max gross weight of the 172 I normally run around in, but I don't recall doing anything special to put it on the ground when compared to the 172, other than putting the gear down.

 

Granted, a Piper Malibu is no 737, but it's still a plane, and a landing is a landing.

 

If it were really vastly different, how is it that you can get a 737 type rating in less than two weeks? I can guarantee you that the syllabus of that course doesn't really cover normal landings as a primary topic, either. Why? A landing is a landing. They're more interested in how you perform when they start failing things.

 

...and that's the difference.

 

Anyone can fly and land a plane. Only the people who truly understand the intricacies of the plane can bring it down safely when things go wrong. That's why pilots are pilots and not just airborne bus drivers.

 

Look. I've watched Star Trek for years. I've played every single Call of Duty. Put me on the Space Shuttle, slap on a few guns and Ill travel back in time and dog fight The Red Baron in space. Don't tell me you can't learn from TV and games.

 

Last I checked, you can kill someone in Call of Duty with a knife stab to the leg. On the other hand, I can hit someone with a .50 caliber rifle in their midsection, and they can still run off. Simulation isn't exactly a word I'd slap on the product...

Anyone can fly and land a plane. Only the people who truly understand the intricacies of the plane can bring it down safely when things go wrong. That's why pilots are pilots and not just airborne bus drivers.

 

And you just confirmed what we all have been saying all along. Only people trained to understand the intricacies of the plane can bring it down safely when things go wrong. So yes, in the unfortunate event of a pilot and co-pilot getting food poisoning on their fish dinner and passing out, unless there is another well trained pilot on board, the odds of that airplane making safely back on the ground is almost none.

Kyle, a more interesting test would be to hand them the keys and let them solo. That would be closer to the original question.

 

The first time I ever had this discussion was with the moderator of the Aviation echo of FidoNET. Yeah, that was a long time ago, in the era of BBSs and 2400 baud modems. I got to talk to him in person, face to face. When I suggested that someone with lots of flight simulator experience could take fewer hours to get their PPL, you'd think I'd called his child ugly and criticized his parenting skills. Eventually I told him that while the simulator couldn't train the muscles, it could train the mind, in areas like VOR navigation. He didn't disagree.

 

Soloing a 737 NG would be quite a different situation.

 

Hook

Let's put it that way - if one pilot was not able to fly, you'd still be the one on the plane who is fimilliar with the aircraft systems and could do simple things like lowering the gear, turning off the PACKS or starting the APU etc. to help the pilot flying - except there's someone with a pilots licence or type rating on board in this situation...

 

Another example: In FSX you can fly perfectly staight with +/- 0 ft. on the VSI - in real life there is no such thing like level flight, you will find yourself trimming the aircraft and making small adjustments so you can hold the altitude with + or - 50 feet of space.

In FSX, you got your eyes all the time on the instruments and are basically flying IFR - in RL you have to look out, you have to use landmarks for visual refference if you want to do a good coordinated turn or a chandelle.

 

And once again, NO, you can't fly, land or pilot a real Boeing 737 just because you're so good with the NGX at home at your PC...

If this was the case then airlines would spare a lot of money and let their pilots do their type rating in FSX LOL...

 

The NGX is theory, excelent theory - one could even say "visualized theory". But it takes a loooooooot³ more to pilot a real aircraft, which was allready mentioned above...

Let's put it that way - if one pilot was not able to fly, you'd still be the one on the plane who is fimilliar with the aircraft systems and could do simple things like lowering the gear, turning off the PACKS or starting the APU etc. to help the pilot flying - except there's someone with a pilots licence or type rating on board in this situation...

 

Another example: In FSX you can fly perfectly staight with +/- 0 ft. on the VSI - in real life there is no such thing like level flight, you will find yourself trimming the aircraft and making small adjustments so you can hold the altitude with + or - 50 feet of space.

In FSX, you got your eyes all the time on the instruments and are basically flying IFR - in RL you have to look out, you have to use landmarks for visual refference if you want to do a good coordinated turn or a chandelle.

 

And once again, NO, you can't fly, land or pilot a real Boeing 737 just because you're so good with the NGX at home at your PC...

If this was the case then airlines would spare a lot of money and let their pilots do their type rating in FSX LOL...

 

The NGX is theory, excelent theory - one could even say "visualized theory". But it takes a loooooooot³ more to pilot a real aircraft, which was allready mentioned above...

 

+1 Very good post.

Performing preflight procedures correctly (i.e., setting up the aircraft correctly) is just as important as flying it correctly

 

+++1

And you just confirmed what we all have been saying all along. Only people trained to understand the intricacies of the plane can bring it down safely when things go wrong. So yes, in the unfortunate event of a pilot and co-pilot getting food poisoning on their fish dinner and passing out, unless there is another well trained pilot on board, the odds of that airplane making safely back on the ground is almost none.

'

 

No, I really didn't. I said pilots are trained to know what to do when things go wrong. What I meant by that is when an engine fails, your HYD stops working, or you have to land in the soupiest of the soup and the plane isn't CAT-III cap, you have to rely on your training and experience.

 

I wasn't referring to the crew being incapacitated. While something there went wrong, pilot training really doesn't address that.

 

You're welcome to continue to live in your ignorant bliss, but it's been done before:

More recently, here, a low time pilot with no experience on a twin, or a turboprop, landed the plane safely after the pilot died.

Here's an article outlining a few others. While some of them point to prior experience, there's at least one where the passenger had no experience at all.

 

Again, landing a plane is landing a plane. Normal procedures are normal procedures. They're mostly rote. Learning them in FSX is just like sitting in a D sim. The only difference is the tactile feeling.

 

There are certainly people out there who have no feel for flying at all, just like some of my friends who can't hold a beat or sing at all. Those people likely stop flying the sim because they simply can't grasp the concept. From there, it really isn't a giant leap to do the same thing in the real aircraft.

 

I am 100% serious about my offer above - and now I'm almost ready to start recruiting instead of making it a passive offer.

Simmer, no pilot time, I'll pay for the flight. Heck, I'll even throw in some AOPA stuff, and I might even get you a pilot bag like mine if you land the plane without my assistance by the end of it.

 

Kyle, a more interesting test would be to hand them the keys and let them solo. That would be closer to the original question.

 

This is true. I think they could pull it off, but would get stumped when it came to the pushback - haha. When I worked ramp at IAD, even real pilots had issues with that because a lot of the rampies had difficulty with english. When ramp tower gave specific instructions every now and then ("tail east/west"), the rampie mind would shut down.

 

When I suggested that someone with lots of flight simulator experience could take fewer hours to get their PPL, you'd think I'd called his child ugly and criticized his parenting skills.

 

I get the same, and then I pull out my logbook and show them the page with my checkride on it.

It took me 4 years to get my pilot's license because I started in high school and paid for it myself. Because of that, I had huge gaps in flying because I needed to save up for the next flight. In between those flights, I'd hit the flight sim to keep my mind sharp. Got my PPL at just over 40 hours. What's the national average again? Ah, right...

 

Had I not hit the sim, I would have had to relearn elements on each actual flight, which would've added to my total time.