I have a stupid question about FS2004 and the 2D instrument panels. I'm a licensed private pilot flying C172's (R & SP models), and have decided that I am going to start working on an instrument rating in a couple of weeks. I'm planning on making uses of flight sims at home as much as possible so I can practice while I'm not having lessons. Anyway, I know the animation of the 2D panel instruments in FS2004 for the C172 is not very fluid... Kind of jerky, if you know what I mean. For that reason I'm planning on using X-Plane a lot because of the smooth instrument animation. But, I was just wondering if there was, by any chance, a way to improve the instruments in FS2004, either through a configuration change or through 3rd party stuff. I've thought about possibly using Project Magenta's GA IFR panel on a second computer with FSUIPC, but not sure if that would be worth it. Any thoughts?

At this point, it's the smoother animation of X-Planes instruments versus the more trustable navigation data-base of FS2004.I go with FS2004 myself......L.Adamson

A number of add on aircraft have much better panels for instrument practice, but Im not sure if you can get a great version of a 172. The only issue with Xplane that I have had is that the nav database is not nearly as complete or accurate as FS9 (at least in the US).

Reality-XP FS-addon instruments will give you the smoothest possible instruments. But they are not analog - they are the new PFD/EHSI type. Look at Flight1's Piper Meridian as the ultimate application of this display technology. As smooth as Project Magenta.Michael J.http://www.reality-xp.com/community/nr/rsc/rxp-higher.jpg

I'd agree with the others. FS should be more than adequate for instrument work.

Hi,I fly the same a/c, and am about 2/3 through my IR (although it fells like only 1/8 through at times :) ).While I am and remain an outspoken critic of FS9 regarding learning VFR flight (unless one can seperate the virtual from the real in one's mind, which does come easier once you have experience, so experienced pilots may not see this issue); FS9 is excellent for instrument practice. I have used it to often "refly" my "botched" lesson and have gained a lot from it. I'm just finishing up approaches, then the revisiting of all the prior work to get check-ride ready will commence. My worst issue in real flight is talking dribble to TRACON controllers, botching that up and making comms way too wordy, and knowing that every United pilot in the Denver TRACON sector that I'm in must be having a laugh! I'm sure it comes with experience :) We should stay in touch in the IR training, we might get a few pointers from each other. Be prepared for some very bad landings until your eyes and brain learn to switch from a focal point only a foot in front of you to a 1/2 mile on landing when you go "heads up". I thought I would never land again properly until I flew some VFR flying in between lessons and figured out what the problem was :)[email protected]

I am interested in this topic too...Project Magenta has an IFR panel. http://www.peoplesforum.com/cgi-bin/[email protected]/50The Demo is awesome..but the demo was not talking to my FSsim.. cause I didn't have the other two pieces of s/w.BTW..if you want to learn IFR.. you need to look at ASA's IPTrainer. I don't mean ON Top or anything.. I mean IPTrainer.. this one teaches you all the procredures etc and the performance figures.. RPMs Pitch attitude and fpm etc are dead on.. These are the things that you need to remember....and its very difficult to pass its internal "test" cause its very demanding.. but I love it. Its the best $200 I have spent for real world IFR Learning.But I still use the MS Flight Sim for unrestricted flying in fsim and am looking for a high performance instrument stack that would run on a laptop thats on the home wireless network with a desktop running Flight sim.

Hi Manny,Yes, IPTrainer is good. I find that my limitation with it is the yoke (CH Products) mechanics, at least that's what I believe is causing "jerky" control and throttle inputs that constantly end up sending me back to the start of the lesson :). I got frustrated with it and let it gather dust on my HD. However, that's before I commenced actual flight training, so I should try even just some free-flight examples of what I'm flying in lessons maybe. My CFII uses the KLN94 and MFD in our C-172SP's very constantly, which actually become a part of the procedure- even for ILS and other approaches for which the GPS is not able to be as the primary navigation source. And. of course, I find the differences in tach between the -N and the -SP models a little different too.Maybe I should try it again and give it the benefit of the training experience that I've now had. I actually bought it to pre-empt my flight training, but soon found out that this is not a good idea. :)Talking of GPS's: Wasn't it you that I sent a KLN89B manual to some time ago? Thanks, Bruce.

Hi Bruce...Now I remember.... :)You know.. If you mailed it.. I never got it.. but thats OK.. Thanks anyway..if you mailed it.But I have a downloadable version for the KLN94 and a simulator for the KLN89B.About the CH Yoke and the IPTrainer... I have been doing reasonably good.. but then.. I have not gone far within the training... I am around the third section. Approach speed descend etc.... But I have been doing them fairly OK.. without too much trouble.. From what you said... I am assuming thats not good enough for flying the IP Trainer Approaces with the CH yoke. Is that so?Manny

>While I am and remain an outspoken critic of FS9 regarding>learning VFR flight (unless one can seperate the virtual from>the real in one's mind, which does come easier once you have>experience, so experienced pilots may not see this issue); Okay......................... I don't see it! :)But I still see a number of benefits. An example is using add-on mesh scenery to re-create the topography around airports you havn't flown to before; as in cross-country's while working towards the PPL.At least you'll get a good idea of the runway layout in relation to terrain, as well as taxiway's, ect. Just check with a "Flight Guide" or other method to make sure everythings up to date.And not to mention memory items such as fuel pump/ tank switching, etc, in which a sim such as this is beneficial.L.Adamson

Ditto-Lots of benefits-vfr/ifr/multi all my training since 1989 done with different versions of ms-lots of saved money-lots of safety practice-lot of emergency practice which has helped with the real ones-I have used it in every aspect of my training vfr/ifr/multi/comm and for keeping up the proficiency. (Waiting for the #$^#%$ CH multi engine joystick now so I can practice multi drills for cheap vs. a lot of $$$$ and engine wear! ). Nothing like flying on the sim to an unfamiliar airport before doing it for real life,or shooting a few practice approaches to minimums before doing the real thing.The smooth instruments we had briefly in fs2000 but due to complaints of stuttering in the 3d view was removed (and the patch for fs2000 which made the 3d view smoother at the expense of the instruments being jerky was considered good ! :-))I also wait for smoother instruments and my pet peave-more realistic ones!http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

I'm sooo tempted by the Project Magenta GA IFR panel. But, it'd be a messy setup and somewhat expensive. There's no room for my laptop on my computer desk (I've got a 21" monitor on it already), so I'd probably end up have to put an extension cable on my USB hub, move my laptop to my kitchen table (not too far from my computer), and move my GoFlight equipment, yoke, and pedals to the kitchen table as well. So the sim would be running on my desktop machine at my computer desk, but I'd actually be flying at my kitchen table. Uhhh... That's kind of weird. Then there's the $99 cost of the GA IFR panel. Oh, and you need a registered version of WideFS, which I already bought last night along with FSUIPC (for 30.00EUR) in preparation to buying the GA IFR panel from Project Magenta. I didn't realize until after I had bought registered versions that I could have gotten them for only $20.00 from Project Magenta if I bought the GA IFR panel first.Anyway, I'm holding off on the GA IFR panel for the following reasons:1. Not sure I want to keep moving my equipment back and forth between my kitchen table and my computer desk.2. Cost. $99 + $20-$30 for WideFS/FSUIPC (not positive you have to register FSUIPC though)3. I might end up programming my own IFR panel to use with FSUIPC. I actually have a little experience doing this already, as I did a glass cockpit several years ago (although it was never finished nor released). The downside to this, is of course, time. I've already got a full plate and am going to be starting the real IFR lessons in less than 2 weeks.4. I was flying with MSFS2004 some more last night, and I guess it's probably doable as-is. My current plan is try to use BOTH X-Plane and FS2004. Sometimes I'll fly with one, sometimes I fly with the other. My X-Plane 7 CD finally arrives today, by the way. I've been using 6.40 up until now.

Hi Geof and Larry,I did say "outspoken" :)Yes, I actually agree with you guys, particularly on determining a new airport environment which I still do when flying somewhere new. My comments were more concerned with the visual depth perception issues which all 2D PC screens will have. This really screwed me up in my pilot training (my CFI threatened to coem to my place and throw away the computer if I didn't stop using it for FS, as I recall :) ). But once you can seperate the virtual from the real visual perception in one's mind, it all works out. (Mind you, I most likely would have had bad landings anyway, FS or no FS :) ).As far as an instrument trainer, it's excellent. That's where these PC sims really shine.Our club has a new Frasca Truflite(sp?), which I'm about to try this Thursday evening on my IR training. L

You are right, it is a messy setup, unless you go all the way and get an overhead projector for the scenery, and a flat screen for the cockpit.I did exactly what you are thinking of doing, and as a test, put a second monitor in front of, and below my main monitor (almost in my lap)and used a second computer to drive Magenta's GAIFR cockpit.It is a really different feeling, much like the real thing where not only do the instruments update fluidly, but also, you have to refocus when you move your eyes from the outside world to the cockpit instruments. An added bonus is that you reclaim about half your outside view that is otherwise covered up by the cockpit panel, great for judging the runway when landing.After flying with this setup over several days, I've come to the conclusion that unless you truly go the "home cockpit" route, you may as well use a good FS airplane like the Flight1 Archer or Cardinal and use the "W" key to reduce the cockpit to the mini-panel when landing.It gives you similar situational awareness with a lot less hassle. I still do look at projectors though, and may yet go all the way...

>My comments were more concerned with the visual depth>perception issues which all 2D PC screens will have. I do use different combinations & zoom rates of the virtual panels for landings, but then I know what I'm looking for.........I suppose!:)And since there is some X-Plane in this topic, the transparent panel option in X-Plane just before landing, works well too. L.Adamson