A few years ago I placed 2 18000 hr pilots on MSFS and was really stunned that they could hardly fly the aircraft with violent pitch movements in roll and pitch.They complained that there was little sensation or feel and that the aircraft felt like puppets on a string.A couple of nights back I did the same with an MD83 pilot on an aircraft that I respect and although better than the initial pilots a couple of years back the comments were pretty much the same.I am flying a Citation Bravo which takes a hefty muscle pulling effort to pitch to 10 degrees on take off at VR real world yet none of the biz jets I have flown in MSFS can represent that.There is still not enough speed differential in pitch and roll forces, still not enough reluctance for the sim aircraft to depart their trimmed state.Ok this isnt just flight modelling hardware comes into the equation but we are a long way from where a novice could learn to fly a sim model and then do a passable flight in the real deal.My son is into race car sims and can qualify and beat Michael Schumacher but how would he fare if placed in a real snarling F1 car?Point taken?This brings me onto another point and that is to do with review marking.The Aeroworx B200 is one of the most realistic "feel" aircraft available yet it scored poorly.I wonder whether more emphasis should nt be placed on "realsitic feel" and useability in the reviews.An aircraft is of little use if you need to call up a screen full of multiple windows to access the sub panels and systems.We are stuck with a lack of Peripheral views making flying sim models like flying a real aircraft looking through a square cardboard box.I hope MS address this by some ingenious method :-) in the next version.This isnt supposed to be antagonistic but I must admit I was dissapointed that the old saying that MSFS models are most realistic on autopilot hasnt changed much since FS95.Peter

the articles from folks getting rides in the full motion sims at the conference seem to indicate that they actually did pretty well and learned a great deal from MSFS. Nobody should be under any illusions about how "realistic" a PC flightsim can be. There are limitations to what you're going to get from a $50 piece of software and a $100 joystick or yoke or what ever. Theres a reason the real training simulators cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. I think FS does a reasonable job of simulating flight. Am I a real pilot? Nope, but I'd imagine 95% or more of the people flying the sim aren't either and I'm not so sure MS is even aiming at the real pilots. All I know is that the flight modelling (of the better add-on planes that is) in MSFS is as convincing and believable to me as any other flightsim I've owned and thats good enough for me. I also see quite a few real pilots on the forums here who enjoy FS and who do feel the flight modelling is reasonable. I don't think plunking a real pilot with no FS experience down in front of the PC for five minutes and letting him tool around in your favorite heavy is very useful really (any more than plunking a person with zero flightsim experience down in a full motion sim and letting them try to get off the ground would be useful). The person doing the testing needs to be aware of the inherent limitations of the PC platform to make any sort of meaningful judgment really. Its the same with racing simulations. You take a real driver who's never really tried the sims much and let him have a go at say NR2003 (a pretty "realistic" sim by most standards) and invariably the driver comes away unimpressed - doesn't feel anything like what he's used to. Otoh, Dale Jr. is a devoted sim fan and according to him NR2003 is top drawer. Why? Becuase he's been playing PC sims for years and knows how to "read" them given the fundamental differences between a PC sim and reality.

Peter,check out Project Tupolevs Tu-154 (http://tu154.avsim.ru/files.html and http://tu154.avsim.ru/docs.html). They have developed custom input routines (bypassing FS Stick routines) mostly for the purpose to recreate handling and feel. A well experienced Reviewer (who had also the chance to fly the real Tu-154) at a German Flightsim magazine mentioned it's the first time an aircraft in FS feels like in a Full Flight sim.You're right, it's not only the flight controls. I have a PFC Jetliner Yoke and still a lot of flight models feel much too sensitive and unbalanced.Also the trim sensitivity is an issue. But since the MS Autopilot works with trim (or the way MS has implemented the trim), could be this is to blame. In some planes, if I reduce elevator_trim_effectiveness to a value more to my taste, then e.g. Altitude Hold modes can't hold the altitude during turns anymore.Michael

My feeling is it isn't so much the flight models-but the flight controls.A computer can simulate "numbers"-and the ms flight models do a pretty credible job here. 3rd parties have taken flight models to an art.However,the "feel" is in the controls (notice that is what the pilots complain about-I do too)-and basically there hasn't been much progress if any here in 20 years.The force fed joysticks don't simiulate the real forces, and imho do things that are very unrealistic.The pilots I know who have no sim experience always over control-as the joystick gives no feedback as to control forces. Those like me and probably you that have simmed forever learn how to adjust-but the feel is not right.IMHO this is a huge area that needs to be addressed. This is the problem; this is why you may have one person stating a fm is great and another saying it is terrible-the controls are 80% of that feel.We of course for 100% also need full motion-but one step at a time!After all-we percieve our airplane in the "feel" of the controls-if that feel is not right, a perfect flight model would never be recongnized.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

MS FS is quite handicapped by it

I second Geoff's comments. If one was to add a calibrated control loader to the flight simulator, it would make a world of difference. The control loader would have to replicate the forces and moments of the aircraft used. The flight controls would have replicate the actual aircraft used, i.e., yoke/pedals or stick/pedals.The other issue is visual cues, which are strictly limited in the flight simulator. You can simply turn your head when flying a real aircraft. The flight simulator requires pressing keys or joystick top hat button to see in different directions.The problem with correcting the above issues is money. A fairly representative flight simulator could be build on the MSFS Software base but it will cost more than the general public is willing to pay.W. Sieffert

"An aircraft is of little use if you need to call up a screen full of multiple windows to access the sub panels and systems."I couldnt agree more with this, and in fact ive stopped flying alot of popular payware planes that i own due to some cumbersome panels like you mention. Even the b200, which by the way will also fly like a puppet on a string when not trimmed perfectly (and its not an easy plane to trim either) needs the opening of several windows while in vc mode if youre going to use the a/p...while its vc a/p might be clickable its not of much use without a zoomed window due to its size/location/readability, so i find myself having to open both the a/p and hsi gauge windows. There are worse examples than this, however, this isnt intended to be a bashing thread so ill stop here with point being taken.I also agree that hardware can make a big difference in the overall effect/feel of flying in this sim, although ive never actually used any high end yokes/pedals (i have CH) i would imagine that something with a heavier feel requiring alot more input pressure would make it more realistic as far as physically controlling the aircraft is concerned.You're comparison between F1 racing and MSFS is a little "off" but not by much im sure...while they are both GAMES and not true simulators, either one of these titles WILL teach you alot about its respective genre...no, youll never be able to compare the physical "feel" or emotional experience of racing or flying the real thing with these games we tend to love so much, but i think its the more technical aspects such as understanding how to use flight instruments and procedures, how to navigate, basic aerodynamic principles as well as how changing certain mechanical elements on a race car will affect its response on the track is more of what we are really getting good at. We may be missing out on the physical and emotional experience which is needed to safely fly the real thing, but the other half of the equation is there at least, and we need to be greatful for that at least as its just as important as the half we are missing out on.Have the flight dynamics changed much in recent years?, nope not much at all...but lets be honest, no matter how great the dynamics might get, a $50 piece of software with a couple hundred bucks worth of flight hardware will NEVER preapre us for the real thing, for this youd want a full motion multi-million dollar simulator which emulates exactly and in every way the particular aircraft you are training in...and evenif you had one of those in your home the pucker factor of real life events would still be missing from the equation.But to be honest, i dont think thats so bad, especially considering the fact that we gain all this knowledge for as little as $50 plus equipment...AND we get to do it on our own time at home in our underwear (figureatively speaking LOL) for an unlimited amount of time...oh and the most important part...we all ENJOY it!...all techincal aspects and arguments aside, how many other ways can we spend $25-$39 (typical price for add-on plane) and get MONTHS of entertainment value out of it?...for some its the cheap thrills/entertainment and for others its instrument training/practice...but whichever you fall under we still are getting more out of it with each new version and closer to reality, and i am very greatful for this and would miss it all very much should it ever go away.Dave

Well my experience with my grade/high school friend who went off to drive F4s was completely oposite. After near 40 plus years he moved back in town, we got together again and after a "few" glasses of conversation lubricant, I had him try my T37 that I had purchased for the night. Now keep in mind he also had spent 3 years in Texas teaching the "world" how to fly the Tweet by the numbers. A few years in the Pentagon with "simulator" reviews didn't hurt either. But that was in the early 80s before he went back driving F4s. NO MS FS experience!With both of us now in our early 60s, he sat down with my FS9 Tweet, x45 HOTAS, and ... took off, went to a local VOR turned it around and landed. All by the numbers on the numbers. He worked with pitch-power settings that he will never forget. (Yes, the trim buttons were constantly in motion with small power adjustments.) All of the Tweet instruments were where he expected and they worked like he expected for pithc/power settings. Fantastic show! I guess "Feel" is not used in the AF teaching method. Know your numbers and BOLD FACES and everything will work out okay!Now I know why he became the F4 driver I dreamed of, and I stayed on the ground. He went out the next day and bought the neeeded equipment for his computer and his new Tweet. And I still can't fly the Tweet like he did a year ago.Regards,BobShttp://s95171098.onlinehome.us/junk/aopa.jpgSeems the rage to talk about the "size and speed" of each others computer. Beat this if you can for solving novel/unique problem anywhere in the cosmos. ..Have K&E and know how to use it!

You got some good staments there and I can agree on most of them. One thing that is missing in your cost calculations is the computer hardware which can be pretty expensive if you want to experience the sim at its full glory.I'm a R/W G/A pilot, I can't comment on airlines and biz jets, but I've been flightsimming since FS was b&w and running on a Macintosh Plus. With the age of 16 I joined a pilot training program sponsered by the goverment with the military pilot as goal. The first R/W flying experience I got in a ASK-21 glider in a 2 weeks pilot training camp.My flight instructor was impressed and couldn't believe I haven't flown a R/W aircraft before (except of R/C planes). Bottom line is flying wasn't new to me at that point. In fact I was already feeling like an"experienced" pilot, because of many years simming and flying different R/C aircraft, although never flown for real before.So yes flight simulator can teach many, many things. And it's even possible to get flight simulator performing and feeling quite realistic. Just build your own cockpit with real world parts project the image with a projector with a spherical lense on a 180 degrees screen. Use project magenta to bring the whole thing to life. And ad a hydraulic plattform for g-force simulation.}(Check out Jonathan Richardson' video on http://www.projectmagenta.com/video.html and you'll get an idea how real it can get.cheers,Claudio

Perhaps this is where the automated, autoland, airbus-type simulations come into their own? A real crew might spend 45mins or so pre-flighting the aircraft and setting up the FMC, take off using a stick with no control forces and press AP1 at 400'. At the other end they might take the AP off with the aircraft rolling down the runway. FS lets you simulate something like that quite well, especially with some detailed payware offerings, which give unlimited button pushing opportunities. True, you haven't experienced the motion or sensations of flight, but you've 'managed' the flight in more or less the same way that the real crew have, and you haven't been exposed to FS's fundamental lack of realism. No, it's not my idea of fun either!Ian

I agree with the controllers being a very large part of the problem. For the most part, we are using rather inexpensive plastic controllers to simulate what would be done in the real world by a heavy metal yoke (in many cases). I've always been a little disappointed at the lack of variety of controllers available for flightsim. It seems that you either have to go with the CH products and/or Saitek gear in the relatively lower price range, or you have to go for the big price $500+ items. While the Saitek and/or CH gear give you good bang for the buck (that is what I use), you are still using relatively flimsy plastic controllers. It just seems like we are missing a "mid-range" quality yoke or stick.

Really what you talk about the limited views and everything it

"Add stereo3d glasses and you have a very believable working space."No you don't. Steroe3d still doesn't offer the all important peripheral vision. The BugEye system is going in the right direction, but at it's curent cost and complexity there simply aren't enough of them in the mainstream simmer's hands to bring much impact to the hobby. Hopefully time and technology will bring us more of the all important peripheral vision.The things we I'd like to see to make "desktop" simming more realistic:Better flight dynamics modelling... not so much from the aircraft but from the atmosphere and aircraft combination. No desktop sim available today models this dynamic combination well at all.Enhanced peripheral vision and motion sensation. Seems to me that if we want these in our home sims we'll have to move away from our desks and into dedicated "cockpits" that model motion and offer something more than just a flat screen.Better fight controls. FF is more a toy at this point in time. Also, the precision of a $50.00 joystick is light years away from what we need to fly a simulated airplane realistically. This lack of precision often puts the desktop pilot behind the curve with regard managing attitude changes (especially in the pitch axis). In essence, many folks spend more time "catching up" to the simulated airplane because they are chasing changes in flight attitude. This will get folks dead in a hurry in real life, where the key to survival is staying ahead of the airplane.Greg

>Better flight dynamics modelling... not so much from the aircraft but from the atmosphere and aircraft combination. No desktop sim available today models this dynamic combination well at all.

I would pick my 80$ glasses over the bugeye anyday. And believe me the speed sensation when seeing everything in 3D is immense. Flying low over forest with choppers almost makes me wanna vomit. Landings is happening so much faster now it