Love it! Keep freakin' 'em out, says I!

 

+1  I have noticed  you are a  (relative) newbie to the forums, but your posts are nothing compared to the long winded inanities most of us have suffered through that are in pursuit of nothing.

One of the great things about FSX or other flight sims is that we can create an unrealistic flight environment, and "fly" a B744 today and an A320 tomorrow..... but the OP may be more realistic than many of us realize....

 

:rolleyes: Well where do I fit in here. Im not a real pilot just a simmer so I don't have a "home base" anywhere so it doesnt matter where I start in the sim, It would not make it more realistic or unrealistic for me  So I have the freedom to go anywhere in the world and still "keeping it real".

A good-hearted, friendly, open discussion, with all sides of the fence being respected and listened to .... excellent.  What AVSIM is all about! :smile:

 

The saying "It's all good" comes to mind where our hobby is concerned. :cool:

 

Sometimes aiming for realistic operation is good... sometimes crazy fantasty is fun too.

 

 

 

One of the great things about FSX or other flight sims is that we can create an unrealistic flight environment, and "fly" a B744 today and an A320 tomorrow..... but the OP may be more realistic than many of us realize....

:rolleyes: Well where do I fit in here. Im not a real pilot just a simmer so I don't have a "home base" anywhere so it doesnt matter where I start in the sim, It would not make it more realistic or unrealistic for me So I have the freedom to go anywhere in the world and still "keeping it real".

So honestly, this is where my decision to focus like this came from.

 

I'm a newb here but have been around flight simulation for some time. I got to the stage at one point with FSX9, years ago, where I'd hop in any plane, pick any destination, and it all just started to feel the same to me. I was paying only superficial attention, and neither had nor wanted to spend the time going deeper. Plus, my wife had the inordinate instinct of ALWAYS bursting in to insist I come to dinner when I was on final approach, in a crosswind. FS Enthusiasm Killer right there.

 

I also could not afford latest PC, spending on payware, etc. etc.

 

Am lucky at the moment after having wasted time and money in the interim to have rediscovered FSX upon death of my Core2Duo system, right at the point where I could afford to replace it, and check out some payware.

 

I have to say, and no infomercial here, it was discovering A2A's P-47 that really revved my "OMG!" enthusiasm this time. Thanks, guys! That level of focus in the design showed me what the moments in FSX might really be like. I _had_ to obsess over one route (KJFK to KLGA) so I could just concentrate on flying and landing the plane! Plus it was a good way to focus on a a "peak PC performance challenge" scenario, initially, so I could set perf levels and tweaks to levels that would be satisfactory, over all, for the rest of the FSX world (after getting ORBX PNW, that switched my FOB to KSEA for similar reasons; if you can fly into runway 16L in a storm after passing downtown Seattle, at night.... well, all the FPS gets better from there!).

 

I got so much pleasure out of that focus, and getting to the point of knowing where I was between KLGA and KJFK, and why IFR ATC was routing me the way it was, that I've simply extended that experience elsewhere.

 

And then the FSX weather server died for awhile, and so I discovered REX.

 

Doesn't mean I won't fly a Fairchild 24 out of NZME one day and an F/A-18 out of EGFF or KSFF the next, of course. But it does mean I've discovered ferries in FSX have schedules, ATC for all its wonkiness is amazingly interesting, and all the other sorts of details people with more time and money in FSX and in RL aviation probably take for granted. To me, it's all fresh discovery, and it's that sense of discovery I don't want to have to just rely on my wallet for! Or, more importantly, to lose.....

 

At the rate great stuff is being developed now, it's simply tough to "keep up" - I just have to remind myself to slow down and smell the Avgas along the way. And keep discovering new things in what's already there, in the process.

 

Plus it's relaxing, to me at least, to not be pushing the edge on everything all the time (that way lies heartburn! ), and to have the time to just admire the wood textures, shiny chrome, rivets and ORBX trees while in flight.

 

Things get boring to me if I am always on the way somewhere else, instead of savoring the moment and place I'm in right now; I think Thoreau said something about that. That's all, really.

 

Finally, there are a lot of great, interesting people from all around the globe here, with all sorts of perspectives. I have to say I'm really enjoying that, too.

 

May your CTDs be few and your FSUIPC remain unhacked..... I really should get FSUIPC, but that recent hack scare kinda freaked me out.

I think bottom line in this thread is we all have our own ways too enjoy the sim, everyone is different. What bores me may excite another etc etc. :rolleyes:

Very good thread here and I'll add my own two cents...

 

When I was doing RW training, VFR flying necessitated that you get aware of all the landmarks in your local area. It was 1 airport where you took off and landed at, but during the time you could land at others. When we did go to other airports, it was always an adventure to me. You'd see flying clubs that had been around for years, sometimes the old vet in the lawn chair planespotting, parachuters getting ready, hot air balloners and blimps around Somerset (NJ), etc.. One thing remained constant, you were coming back to your "home" airport. (For me CDW then MMU and later back to CDW). So coming "home" it was a thrill to me that I knew many of the landmarks. Boonton reservoir, the "apartments", Lake Hapatcong, etc...  Eventually I began to anticipate the approach and it became one less thing distracting me from flying the plane. With one airport you got a real feel for that area and to me reading this post reminded me of those days.

 

I see a lot of people advise folks to fly a 172 first. Well why? In this sim world, fly what you WANT to fly and learn it. My first serious civil sim flying was Flight Assignment: ATP. I wanted to fly complex airliners so I read the manual often. Fast forward a bit to PS1. It was a system trainer for the 747-400. I had no FMC, EFIS, or any other type of 747 knowledge. I read, re-read and then read again. I wouldn't say I was even close to a commercial pilot's knowledge of the aircraft, but I was plenty comfortable flying and programming it. In the real world, making an error of any type on a multi million dollar plane can be catastrophic. That's why RW ops start with flight trainers. However in FSX, there are no consequences. Fly what you like and have the patience to learn about it.

 

Finally, there is one underlying theme that comes across in all the responses to this thread. We talk about flying F18s, An2s, 747s... We talk about EGFF, NZSI, KSEA... IMO, it goes to show what a remarkable program FSX truly is. Yes it has warts and is woefully dated, but it's enabling us to fly in planes and places we probably would have never done in our lives.

 

Fly the way you want to and let's all enjoy the diversity that flight sims grant us.

I really should get FSUIPC, but that recent hack scare kinda freaked me out.

 

It really shouldn't.  Note that FSUIPC itself was not hacked.  It was the certificate used to sign the code that was compromised (I don't know if it was ever determined exactly how the cert became compromised), and when Mr. Dowson discovered this, he took appropriate steps to see that the certificate authority revoked the cert so that a hacker couldn't misrepresent malware as trusted, signed software. 

 

What was probably most unusual was that FSUIPC was signed in the first place to provide an extra level of trust.  I can't think of too many FSX add-ons that are.

 

Scott

Interesting topic! I am a bit like the OP, at least in certain regards.

 

I am for certain a ONE PLANE MAN! I hardly buy addon planes anymore unless I know for certain it's the best there is and if offers what I want (and what I don't have yet). A year ago I bought the RealAir Lancair Legacy and I flew that plane and ONLY that plane until the end of 2012. Before that one I flew the Katana 4x from the day it was released until I got the Legacy. (Let's forget about the months I waisted on Flight, please... ). I usually don't even have more planes installed than the one I am flying in!

 

However, with a GA I like to fly from unknown airports to unknown airports (which is why I stopped buying addon airports), but I do so in a nice environment which usually is ONE addon. I have flown for years (so it feels) in FTX PNW alone! And for a short while I moved my Legacy to FTX England.

 

But then I rediscovered the PMDG 737NGX: I think it had to do with reading about (and buying) FS2Crew and also with getting ProATC/X, but ever since december 2012 I have been flying the 737NGX only! And it still is the only plane I fly right now. I may have taken the Legacy for a spin every now and then, but not more then a few times.

 

However (once more) when it comes to airports I have a different approach with the 737NGX than I have with GA: with the 737NGX I mainly fly between 3 to 4 airports. When I bought the 737 (the day it was released: seems long ago already) I mainly flew between EHAM, LFPG, EGLL and EDDF for a long time. But since I rediscovered the 737 I have been flying in Norway between EGNM, EBNR and ENVA (yes, very short flights). I think this also has to do with the 737 procedures being more complicated or extensive. With the Legacy I can fly in and out of any airport with ease but with the 737 I want to follow procedures etc. (also due to FS2Crew and ProATC/X) and so I like getting to know the ins and outs of those three airports more. I like knowing what's coming and I like to learn all about it. You don't really need all that with a GA (although it can be fun too, of course). So in that regard I am almost like the OP altough I need more then one airport!

 

 

I really should get FSUIPC, but that recent hack scare kinda freaked me out.

It really shouldn't. Note that FSUIPC itself was not hacked. It was the certificate used to sign the code that was compromised (I don't know if it was ever determined exactly how the cert became compromised), and when Mr. Dowson discovered this, he took appropriate steps to see that the certificate authority revoked the cert so that a hacker couldn't misrepresent malware as trusted, signed software.

 

What was probably most unusual was that FSUIPC was signed in the first place to provide an extra level of trust. I can't think of too many FSX add-ons that are.

 

Scott

Thanks for the reminder, right, it was the cert thing. I will have to get FSUIPC at some point.

Interesting topic! I am a bit like the OP, at least in certain regards.

 

I am for certain a ONE PLANE MAN! I hardly buy addon planes anymore unless I know for certain it's the best there is and if offers what I want (and what I don't have yet). A year ago I bought the RealAir Lancair Legacy and I flew that plane and ONLY that plane until the end of 2012. Before that one I flew the Katana 4x from the day it was released until I got the Legacy. (Let's forget about the months I waisted on Flight, please... ). I usually don't even have more planes installed than the one I am flying in!

 

However, with a GA I like to fly from unknown airports to unknown airports (which is why I stopped buying addon airports), but I do so in a nice environment which usually is ONE addon. I have flown for years (so it feels) in FTX PNW alone! And for a short while I moved my Legacy to FTX England.

 

But then I rediscovered the PMDG 737NGX: I think it had to do with reading about (and buying) FS2Crew and also with getting ProATC/X, but ever since december 2012 I have been flying the 737NGX only! And it still is the only plane I fly right now. I may have taken the Legacy for a spin every now and then, but not more then a few times.

 

However (once more) when it comes to airports I have a different approach with the 737NGX than I have with GA: with the 737NGX I mainly fly between 3 to 4 airports. When I bought the 737 (the day it was released: seems long ago already) I mainly flew between EHAM, LFPG, EGLL and EDDF for a long time. But since I rediscovered the 737 I have been flying in Norway between EGNM, EBNR and ENVA (yes, very short flights). I think this also has to do with the 737 procedures being more complicated or extensive. With the Legacy I can fly in and out of any airport with ease but with the 737 I want to follow procedures etc. (also due to FS2Crew and ProATC/X) and so I like getting to know the ins and outs of those three airports more. I like knowing what's coming and I like to learn all about it. You don't really need all that with a GA (although it can be fun too, of course). So in that regard I am almost like the OP altough I need more then one airport!

 

Perhaps it's embarrassing to admit, but after all these years I've only _just_ started to play with the Garmin Procedures button, present in FSX from the get-go. It's probably my gateway drug into finally being excited about programming those darn FMCs. Maybe. I've glanced at FSCommander a few times, but skyvector.com and simroutes.com are sufficient for now.

 

As Kaboki says, it's really not much: we all enjoy different things. For instance, I had a bout of concentration on the [electrical] section of aircraft.cfg recently, as a result of a few anomalies on my system. I could have just gotten frustrated but instead I got interested in how FSX handles circuit modeling, for which there seems to be very little layman info. And I am not a member of IEEE.

Here is what I have been doing, mostly one airplane but definitely different airports and ALWAYS real world weather (day and night). Some mix between VFR and IFR.

 

Statistics:
Flights=2080
Planes used=7
Airports used=638
Hours=2037.9
Night=764.4
IFR=291.8
 

Planes:
BEECH B350 (primary)
BEECH BE58
BOEING F18
Cessna C172
Grumman G21
Hercules C130
RAYTHEON T6

 

Each to their own and what THEY enjoy the most...........Happy Simming..................

It really shouldn't.  Note that FSUIPC itself was not hacked.  It was the certificate used to sign the code that was compromised

 

Even that isn't a fully accurate impression of the situation. As I understand it the master certificate which was used to sign Mr Dowson's certificate (which was used to sign fsuipc) was hacked, which had the effect of rendering all certificates signed with it un-trustable too.

 

It was a hack that affected far more than fsuipc (but probably only fsuipc inside the FS community), and wasn't targeted at the FS community at all, we were just collateral damage.

 

For a (probably bad, they always are) car analogy:

 

It's like ford's key making machine being stolen, and your Dodge dealership calling you to tell you that they NEED to change your car's brakes, because the dodge parts are delivered in a ford truck, and they just can't trust that guy in the F650 to be an actual delivery guy anymore.

I totally know what the OP means. When I first got DCS A-10 I flew that thing non stop for about 2 months. After about a week I found a nice airfield in the default scenery and made it into my homeplate and just flew all my practice maneuvers out of it. Practiced ILS, practiced visual everything, I dug into the manual, deciphered everything I could. Ran into every hard limitation of the module design, learned all the neat tricks of the old school CDU, I became as close to a pro as you can get in a month or two.

 

The friend who'd been playing a while before me, who got me into it, found himself behind the curve with me, because I was so into it. Of course I burned out on it, but I blame DCS for that, not the plane itself.

 

FSX I do the same thing, with the NGX of course. Not original, but certainly fun. Its such a complicated plane that there's so much to learn. I have also recently come to pick a nice homeplate to practice circuits out of. Its small, its not complicated, its easy to focus on the details of the approach, and it has little AI traffic so I can leave all the settings nice and normal, then when I feel like it do a short 10 minute hop over to a major airport for a typical procedural landing.

 

It all depends on your priorities, but in general its accepted that in order to excel at anything you need solid correct repetition. Ive in the past played complex things, a little here and there, left it alone, and when I came back found myself just not as good as I wanted to be. Its really weird, but OP is right. The more you do something familiar, for me at least, the more interesting it becomes.

 

I think the key is that its not boring because you're starting to master things and do them without stress. Its one thing to autoland a plane and say "well done", its another to approach it and understand 100% what you did, why you did it, and how things happened. Its a powerful feeling. First time I switched the autoland off to touch down manually, exactly like the videos you see of real pilots, it went perfectly, was thrilling. The more confident in your understanding of whats happening, the more you can manipulate and control it with confidence, and that starts to feel like real control. 

 

I used to drop bombs and mavericks on targets in DCS with authority because of the practice I put into it, and with the NGX understanding the feel of the plane as you flip the A/T off and knowing you're gonna put it on the pavement just right is lots of fun. Its also nice to be able to know which turn off you want without even looking at a diagram.

 

Interesting you should bring this up. I have been planning to try a specific scheduled route three days a week for a month with the only change being each day's real world weather. It would consist of an early morning flight from A to B and an evening flight from B to A, and I have pretty much settled on using the Carenado Cargomaster.

 

Thought it might be a fun experience.

 

That sounds like a great idea. I might look up some real world flights like that and try to emulate them by checking which STARs and/or SIDs they're filed as using, using real weather, and fly into those airports. 

And it's true, you reach a point where you've wrung everything out of a particular situation or aircraft that you can, and then you know it's time to move on, start fresh..... but with the feel now for what it's like to be completely engaged. And that makes the new thing more interesting from the start, too.

 

.........

That sounds like a great idea. I might look up some real world flights like that and try to emulate them by checking which STARs and/or SIDs they're filed as using, using real weather, and fly into those airports. 

 

 

What I often do with the NGX, because of the simulations ability to faithfully save a flight with full panel/instrumentation status and reproduce it perfectly on future occasions, is save a flight prior to TOD into an airport (usually something with some excellent visuals from FSDT, etc.). I then retrieve the flight and change around the STAR and/or landing runway according to prevailing weather (through OPUS), and always hand fly the aircraft under 10,000’ unless there is a Cat III landing involved. It’s amazing how different each flight becomes, even the same arrival and runway procedures as before but just different weather.

 

My hometown Class B airport is KDEN Denver. If anyone has access to charts, you will note that there is a proliferation of RNAV procedures and approaches that actually join together (the end of the STAR mates with the IAF / IF of the approach), and there are different arrival procedures from the same direction that mate up with different approaches catering for prevailing winds. So, without much, if any at all, “vectoring”, I can fly the entire arrival and approach in IMC.

 

Another twist is to plan to fly on a certain day, then less than 18 hours prior check that TAF weather for the forecast, figure out an approach and arrival that would work with that weather, then use real weather METARs and see how well the planned arrival and weather works out. Yep, I’ve got to be a nerd, I must admit…..

Thanks, Bruce.

Very good thread here and I'll add my own two cents...

 

When I was doing RW training, VFR flying necessitated that you get aware of all the landmarks in your local area. It was 1 airport where you took off and landed at, but during the time you could land at others. When we did go to other airports, it was always an adventure to me. You'd see flying clubs that had been around for years, sometimes the old vet in the lawn chair planespotting, parachuters getting ready, hot air balloners and blimps around Somerset (NJ), etc.. One thing remained constant, you were coming back to your "home" airport. (For me CDW then MMU and later back to CDW). So coming "home" it was a thrill to me that I knew many of the landmarks. Boonton reservoir, the "apartments", Lake Hapatcong, etc...  Eventually I began to anticipate the approach and it became one less thing distracting me from flying the plane. With one airport you got a real feel for that area and to me reading this post reminded me of those days.

There's a reservoir in Boonton? Huh....didn't know that....