I'd just as soon have somebody know what the proper control movements are suppose to do, rather than no idea for lesson number one.

 

This one sentence is a perfect example of why I don't recommend the use of a desktop simulator between the first hour of dual and solo.

From the moment a new student begins dual, any GOOD instructor begins the necessary indoctrination of the student to control PRESSURES as OPPOSED to control MOVEMENT.

Movement is naturally part of the lesson plan but it's incumbent on the instructor to wean the student totally away from thinking of the controls as movement. The first time a student requires any cross control for ANY reason the necessity to understand why pressure and not movement will become instantly apparent. The desktop simulator unfortunately doesn't deal with control pressure correctly. It's for this exact reason students should stand down from the sim during the pre-solo dual period as using the sim directs attention to control movement; the exact anthisis of pressure.

Every pilot must seek their own level of understanding on what I have mentioned here.

 

I would emphasize in closing that control movement is defined by a direction. The direction of that movement means little in defining the aircraft's RESPONSE to that movement. It's the applied PRESSURE that accompanies the movement that will determine not only how the aircraft responds but the RATE at which the aircraft responds. The rate in turn will vary with the dynamic pressure on the control surfaces involved.

Until the student totally understands this relationship between control pressure required vs aircraft response, the student's pre-solo learning curve will be retarded.

I respect your opinion to disagree.

Dudley Henriques

The reality of the sim is that it is just that. A simulation. It can never replace real experience in the aircraft. If you are going to learn how to fly an airplane....fly an airplane, not a sim.

 

That said...

 

What the sim CAN do is help you with a- procedures and b- skill building in systems (aka cockpit) management. If you were exceptionally proficient in flying the PMDG sim on a very high end platform, you could hop into a Boeing Level D simulator and not embarass yourself. As you get more proficient on the big sim and begin to understand how the aircraft feels it will help you transition when you get in the real airplane. It can, however, never be a substitute for hands on - in the airplane flying experience.

 

What real world flying does for your sim experience is quite similar. The techniques you use in the real world airplane are quite effective in the sim, so long as you have the right software driving your weather and the flight dynamics are PMDG quality. You'll certainly fly the sim better and as we advance, I think we are going to ultimately bridge the gap between gaming and training, since when we look at PMDG quality programs and similar quality hardware, it builds a platform for inexpensive fixed based training which, in my opinion, over time will only get better and will become a viable training tool.

 

For now, it's just for fun.

 

Cheers,

Dave Lamb

I found RW flying has made my flight simming more disciplined. Oddly, I tend to avoid restricted airspace in the sim...

 

I had a lengthy break from flying at one stage after getting my PPL, and the only thing I was flying was the FS9 172 and Baron, with a force feedback twisty stick. Then I went on a scenic flight with an instructor and a friend. I was in the LHS. I botched the landing a bit - flared a bit high, misjudged my height from the hump in the runway (which FS generally doesn't have). I grumbled a bit. Mr Instructor said he wished some of his students could keep their hand in that well from a two week break, let alone two years. I didn't mention the sim time.

 

I would agree that the steady improvement in the VCs and scenery makes 'head up' flying in the sim easier than it was ten years ago. Flight is really good in this respect.

This one sentence is a perfect example of why I don't recommend the use of a desktop simulator between the first hour of dual and solo.

From the moment a new student begins dual, any GOOD instructor begins the necessary indoctrination of the student to control PRESSURES as OPPOSED to control MOVEMENT.

Movement is naturally part of the lesson plan but it's incumbent on the instructor to wean the student totally away from thinking of the controls as movement. The first time a student requires any cross control for ANY reason the necessity to understand why pressure and not movement will become instantly apparent. The desktop simulator unfortunately doesn't deal with control pressure correctly. It's for this exact reason students should stand down from the sim during the pre-solo dual period as using the sim directs attention to control movement; the exact anthisis of pressure.

Every pilot must seek their own level of understanding on what I have mentioned here.

 

I would emphasize in closing that control movement is defined by a direction. The direction of that movement means little in defining the aircraft's RESPONSE to that movement. It's the applied PRESSURE that accompanies the movement that will determine not only how the aircraft responds but the RATE at which the aircraft responds. The rate in turn will vary with the dynamic pressure on the control surfaces involved.

Until the student totally understands this relationship between control pressure required vs aircraft response, the student's pre-solo learning curve will be retarded.

Our discussion is I believe getting off topic from the OP. I suggest we disengage and allow the main topic to continue.

I respect your opinion to disagree.

Dudley Henriques

This one sentence is a perfect example of why I don't recommend the use of a desktop simulator between the first hour of dual and solo.

From the moment a new student begins dual, any GOOD instructor begins the necessary indoctrination of the student to control PRESSURES as OPPOSED to control MOVEMENT.

 

There are so..............many different opinions on this subject. Never hurts to Google the subject and spend a few days reading. One instructor who can always be seen on various flight forums, feels that NO ONE, should ever use desk top flight sims to practice "landings".............EVER! He feels that it can only hurt. Of course many others feel exactly the opposite.

 

L.Adamson

This one sentence is a perfect example of why I don't recommend the use of a desktop simulator between the first hour of dual and solo.

From the moment a new student begins dual, any GOOD instructor begins the necessary indoctrination of the student to control PRESSURES as OPPOSED to control MOVEMENT.

Movement is naturally part of the lesson plan but it's incumbent on the instructor to wean the student totally away from thinking of the controls as movement. The first time a student requires any cross control for ANY reason the necessity to understand why pressure and not movement will become instantly apparent. The desktop simulator unfortunately doesn't deal with control pressure correctly. It's for this exact reason students should stand down from the sim during the pre-solo dual period as using the sim directs attention to control movement; the exact anthisis of pressure.

 

I could be wrong, but I thought I've saw your name connected with various beta test's for third party products over the years, or at least comments on these flight models. As we know, some of the better perfections of simulated aircraft go quite a ways in simulating the pressure against a control device versus the effect that the flying surfaces deliver. It's certainly not a case of a linear response to joystick/yoke movement. When it's linear, there is no sense of "feel". And I'm certainly aware of the fact, that the sense of feel is much better, when it's a "pilots" brain that's filling in the gaps................versus someone who hasn't flown, or very little.

Never the less, I'm going along with others, who feel that desktop simulation has the benefit of allowing non-pilots the chance to figure out how airplane controls work..................versus knowing NOTHING, the day they show up for their first flight lesson.

 

L.Adamson

Once upon a time it was the norm for real world aviation people to totally despise desktop flight simulators, and declare them absolutely worthless for anything having to do with real world aviation. It took a long time but we finally got some grudging admittance that they could be used for procedure training. But you can still see vestiges of this attitude when an older flight instructor, for example, brushes off the usefulness of flight simulators and focuses on the shortcomings.

 

Flying is 90% mental and 10% physical. Even if it can't be used to train the muscles, it can be used to train the mind. Procedure training is one possibility here, but not the only one, or necessarily the most important one. You can learn procedures by reading a book, but there are other things that you actually have to practice.

 

One thing I don't see mentioned is situational awareness. For example, "Ok, student, where is the airport?" This also covers things like noticing subtle changes in the horizon, how to fly a pattern and lining up with the runway in a crosswind... or even when you're first learning lining up with no wind at all; I think people forget that this wasn't necessarily something they did perfectly the first few times.

 

After you've flown a variety of GA aircraft in a variety of simulations with a variety of controllers, the real airplane just becomes another aircraft in another sim with another set of controls. Every time you get in a new sim you have to adjust, so eventually you become used to doing it. This aircraft is docile and forgiving, this one is twitchy, this one has considerable adverse yaw, this one requires opposite aileron after you're banked for a turn, and so on. It doesn't even matter if all the simulated aircraft are wrong, as long as they're sufficiently different to force you to adjust to each one.

 

Now, if the only thing I ever flew before getting in a real Cessna 150 was Falcon AT with a Kraft joystick, then probably everything I learned was wrong and will either be inapplicable or outright dangerous negative training. So to that extent, the older CFIs are right. It would be best, if you're going to use your desktop flight sim to supplement real world training, to have a session or two on the sim with your flight instructor at your elbow so he can correct any obvious problems before they become too ingrained.

 

Now to the original post, since I'll never solo a real world aircraft, but enjoy getting at the controls once in a while, all my real world flying is basically a supplement to my simming. An hour in a real aircraft, even in the right seat but with some stick time, is probably the best addon you can buy for FSX.

 

Hook

I could be wrong, but I thought I've saw your name connected with various beta test's for third party products over the years, or at least comments on these flight models. As we know, some of the better perfections of simulated aircraft go quite a ways in simulating the pressure against a control device versus the effect that the flying surfaces deliver. It's certainly not a case of a linear response to joystick/yoke movement. When it's linear, there is no sense of "feel". And I'm certainly aware of the fact, that the sense of feel is much better, when it's a "pilots" brain that's filling in the gaps................versus someone who hasn't flown, or very little.

Never the less, I'm going along with others, who feel that desktop simulation has the benefit of allowing non-pilots the chance to figure out how airplane controls work..................versus knowing NOTHING, the day they show up for their first flight lesson.

 

L.Adamson

 

Reading over our discussion I believe we might not be communicating for some reason. Might be me, might be you, might be both of us.

Let me be perfectly clear and possibly get us together here.

First of all, I have absolutely no problem at all with new students coming into the training program using a desktop simulator for aircraft familiarization (including controls) BEFORE they show up for their first hour of dual. In fact, I have for years now emphasized the practical use of FSX specifically for just this purpose.

My concern and indeed ALL my comment on this is directed SPECIFICALLY to the period between the first hour of dual and solo. It is during THIS period and this period alone where I strongly recommend student pilots stand down from the simulator for the exact reasons I have given.

Programs like FSX have certain use if used correctly and during certain periods of a pilots training.

The period BEFORE actual training begins and after solo are where the simulator is most useful.

Dudley Henriques

Question for the pilots who also fly on sims here, from someone who likes flying high end aircraft in FSX i.e RealAir, A2A, Eaglesoft, PMDG etc and learning to fly in VATSIM using VOXATC, Aivla soft EFB etc

 

For learning Aviation, Navigation, Communication, where do you see the strengths of desktop simulation and weaknesses?

Question for the pilots who also fly on sims here, from someone who likes flying high end aircraft in FSX i.e RealAir, A2A, Eaglesoft, PMDG etc and learning to fly in VATSIM using VOXATC, Aivla soft EFB etc

 

For learning Aviation, Navigation, Communication, where do you see the strengths of desktop simulation and weaknesses?

 

I can speak only for FSX as I was advising Microsoft as far back as the features stage of development and you might throw into the equation that I've been active in real world aviation as an instructor and safety adviser for over 50 years.

 

What you usually will run into with your question as asked is a lot of extremes with one side offering little but negatives and the other a lot of positives.

The actual answer lies in the middle. For a beginning student pilot and even after the obtaining of a certificate, the sim has a lot of positives in the exact areas you have mentioned. There is a caveat however. For the sim to be useful in actual training, I ALWAYS suggest that when it's used that it be used in conduction with input from an appropriate source of expertise on the subject involved. This is necessary if the benefit obtained from using the sim is to be maximized. For training purposes it is imperative that any and all differences between how a specific system or sim function is represented in the simulator and how that system or function works in the actual aircraft be openly discussed between a qualified source and the pilot using the sim.

In other words, and putting it in my world as a flight instructor, FSX has use as a training tool but should be used properly and at the right time for the right reasons.

Dudley Henriques

Thanks Dudley, much as a I thought and your flight guides for the P51 really helped me with the A2A and DCS Mustangs.

Thanks Dudley, much as a I thought and your flight guides for the P51 really helped me with the A2A and DCS Mustangs.

 

Glad to be of help, anytime.

DH

I highly recommend that the sim NOT be used during the dual phase before solo. It is during this period the student is introduced to control PRESSURE vs control RESPONSE for the SPECIFIC aircraft used in training. Dynamic pressures on the control surfaces used on most training aircraft increase with airspeed. It is IMPERATIVE that the student be completely familiar with this all important relationship between dynamic pressure and response before solo can be safely accomplished.

 

This one sentence is a perfect example of why I don't recommend the use of a desktop simulator between the first hour of dual and solo.

From the moment a new student begins dual, any GOOD instructor begins the necessary indoctrination of the student to control PRESSURES as OPPOSED to control MOVEMENT.

 

Nice post. One thing that could possibly overcome (at least in part) this problem, is the new Saitek X65F joystick ( http://www.saitek.co.../prod/x65f.html ). It is a force sensing device, meaning it does not move at all, but only senses pressures exerted by the user, just like the F-16 sidestick. The max force that can be sensed in the roll and pitch axis is 10 Kgs, i.e. 22 lbs. That is less than the aerodynamic forces exerted at cruise speed even on a light plane, but 22 lbs is quite a significant force after all. Coupled with a good flight model that simulates the reduced control deflection with increasing airspeed (for the same exerted control pressure), this new joystick could be a big step forward maybe?

 

Marco

In all the GA aircraft I have flown, the stick forces vary as a function of indicated airspeed and angle of attack. unless you have a setup with force feedback that properly simulates this, you won't develop a feel for the control forces during landing/takeoff and several other maneuvers outside of cruise.

 

The changes in stick forces are also not the same on every axis. I have found the roll axis to become very light, almost feel disconnected at the edge of a stall or in a spin. The elevator on the other hand may become very heavy and move all the way to its stop without any input.

 

Then there are the sounds, the forces and the visual cues that no sim replicates. All of these are very important, and while there have been a lot of improvements in the visuals, i think that training with the exact same view out the window during early phases of training is very important.

 

Not to say that a sim isn't useful as a training tool, because I believe it is very useful for procedures, navigation, etc.

Nice post. One thing that could possibly overcome (at least in part) this problem, is the new Saitek X65F joystick ( http://www.saitek.co.../prod/x65f.html ). It is a force sensing device, meaning it does not move at all, but only senses pressures exerted by the user, just like the F-16 sidestick. The max force that can be sensed in the roll and pitch axis is 10 Kgs, i.e. 22 lbs. That is less than the aerodynamic forces exerted at cruise speed even on a light plane, but 22 lbs is quite a significant force after all. Coupled with a good flight model that simulates the reduced control deflection with increasing airspeed (for the same exerted control pressure), this new joystick could be a big step forward maybe?

 

Marco

 

Hi Marco;

 

During the period I was advising Microsoft as a Microsoft MVP associated with their FSX program I did considerable research dealing with the question of just what value MSFS had if utilized along with a real world flight training program in real world aviation. During this period we carefully examined many controllers along with their associated drivers and software. I viewed this research from a background of a half century directly involved with flight safety and flight instruction.

I concluded, along with other professional pilots, that FSX if used properly did indeed have some positive value.

Rather than waste a lot of Avsim's bandwidth explaining all that was involved with this, allow me to supply a link for my findings on the excellent book written for ASA by Bruce Williams on this exact subject. I believe my comment there explains a great deal about the inter-relationship between FSX and real world aviation.

That link as follows;

http://www.bruceair....trainingaid.htm

To find the report, simply scan down the right side of the site margin to about halfway.

 

The Saitek stick is very good hardware and replicates to some extent the behavior of the Viper's control system. I like Saitek products and use the combat pedals myself along with a Thrustmaster Warthog Hotas setup.

 

But it's important to note that as of this writing, the problems I have noted in available technology as it exists today for replication of dynamic pressure in flight for a specific airplane with reversible controls (the type we use for training student pilots today) are issue involved enough that I make the caveat concerning FSX as a flight training tool that it NOT be used during the period between first dual and solo. This of course addresses the movement vs pressure issues I have already noted in prior posts in this thread.

I say this not to imply that using FSX during the pre-solo period is necessarily dangerous. I say it because in my experience as an instructor,using ANY desktop simulator during an initial training period where control PRESSURES are being taught as CRITICAL to flight safety, any use of a simulation that doesn't replicate the same pressures experienced by the student in flight can be counter productive.

Other than this short pre-solo dual period, as I have said many times before, the sim has wide ranging positive use as a training tool if used properly and with proper instructive interface.

 

I am in SERIOUS disagreement with anyone who offers argument that states a parity between control movement and control pressure when it comes to giving flight instruction.

From the INSTANT a new student takes flight it is extremely destructive for an instructor to allow a student to continue a belief based upon prior exposure to a desktop simulator that control of an airplane should be thought of as "movement of the controls".

Naturally we see as pilots that if we "move the controls" a certain way, they will "move" a certain way. That is NOT what a pilot needs to understand about aircraft controls. Movement is basic and can be explained in seconds. What the STUDENT has to understand is that PRESSURE on the controls and the RESULT of that PRESSURE will vary for the SAME AMOUNT OF MOVEMENT of that control as a function of AIRSPEED or more correctly of the dynamic pressure on the control surface!

THIS is good flight instruction. Concentration on control movement is BAD flight instruction and generally bad advice to ANY pilot!

It's for these reasons I ask students to stand down from FSX while they are learning about control pressure and its effect on the airplane.

 

Hope all this makes some sense. :-))

 

Dudley Henriques