I hand fly a lot of IFR to keep my skills up, but I turn off crash detection because it is unrealistic combined with the unrealistic AI movements.  If you don't go below minimum altitudes, and fly the published course lines, you won't hit anything anyway.  IFR flying is stabilized precision flying, not extreme aerobatic maneuvering.  Fly by the published numbers and you will be fine.   

 

NDB approaches aren't too hard, especially with an RMI setup.  Fixed card ADFs are a little harder but not too bad.  Just remember the old saying 'tails rise, heads fall'

 

I mainly have crash detect turned off for bush flying, landing at these little FTX sloped dirt fields and such that would be considered 'off airport' by FSX.   With damageable aircraft from Realair, A2A, Aerosoft...etc, I don't need crash detection to tell me that I have landed too hard.  A bent prop on my P-40 lets me know I hit the brakes too hard.  B)

 

Cheers

TJ

Crash Detection....Schmash Schmetection.

 

It has no place in a flight simulator IMHO.     If you have encountered a situation that would have led to a crash, I'm sure you'd always know about it.

 

 

I don't get that Gregg.. If a glory mapel tree is represented as twice the size in the sim, just think its a red oak. so the idea that a tree is larger or a building is larger is moot.

 

It's entirely your call.  If there were a tree twice as big in the real world, they'd have to evaluate the approach to see if the tree violated the protected zone.  If it did they'd either modify the approach (raise the glide slope and/or minimums) or 'top' the tree to bring it down to size.  In most cases they'd do the latter.  Real world crashes can and do, sometimes, occur when they don't. 

NDB approaches aren't too hard, especially with an RMI setup. 

 

flying an airplane is not hard if you know how,, you don;t need a sim!  :lol:

 

Sorry I couldn't help it..whats that got do with anything we are talking about?

 

 

If you have encountered a situation that would have led to a crash, I'm sure you'd always know about it.

 

 

Not really...not in IMC (in FSX) If you clip trees or buidlings or tower  . thats why crash detection is important in IMC in FSX

If you're touching trees you're not abiding by the approach plate. And if you're abiding by a RW plate, you have to pretend the final approach course would be cleared of all obstacles.

 

This isn't the case in FSX sometimes. If there's a published obstacle on the approach plate and not in FSX, fine, but if it's the other way around I just disregard the obstacle.

 

If you fall behind on a busy instrument approach, and pop out of the clouds on the grass - YOU KNOW you screwed up.

 

If anything I want to view my flight and see where I effed up - I can't do that if it resets.

 

I turn crash detection off and it has been basically since day 1.

Flying above the circle to land minimums is not hard either, and you won't run into any buildings that way B)

 

 

Manny, on 08 Oct 2013 - 1:29 PM, said:

flying an airplane is not hard if you know how,, you don;t need a sim!  :lol:

 

Sorry I couldn't help it..whats that got do with anything we are talking about?

 

Crash detection in FSX is a joke.  And not just because the hit boxes are often larger than the visual objects or because AI is so erratic.  It's a joke because many things in real life that would cause damage simply does not in FSX.  I fly MP a lot, and many of the landings I observe would leave pieces of airplane all over the airfield in real life and with crash detection on in FSX, they are fine.  If you are using crash detection to add realism to the sim, then you are deluding yourself.  

I had purchased the SF from Realair way back with a previous version ... at the time I didn't fly it much and failed to appreciate the special nature of the aircraft. I have not purchased any Realair aircraft since then... until the discount offer on the Legacy. ...

 

I was blown away....

 

Even though this is not sticking to my budget I then purchased and downloaded the Duke V2  - all based on the performance of the legacy. I have to say what many others have already stated.... Awesome!

 

ROB and SEAN thanks to your 50 percent discount on the legacy I decided to buy the full price Duke and while I really should stick to my monthly budget - can't say I am going to regret the purchase

 

Brilliant work guys and thank you.

If RealAir ever designs a glider for FSX... then they'll have to design it so that tail-first landings are accepted - actually this is the most correct way to land most modern gliders ( what we usually call the "plastic" gliders, as opposed to those great machines I learned to fly in ...)

 

BTW: RealAir.... Why not a great glider in your fleet?  One with a good flight computer, probably with SSG and SLG versions... Think about it!!!  Or, it could be a Stemme!!!

I had purchased the SF from Realair way back with a previous version ... at the time I didn't fly it much and failed to appreciate the special nature of the aircraft. I have not purchased any Realair aircraft since then... until the discount offer on the Legacy. ...

 

I was blown away....

 

Even though this is not sticking to my budget I then purchased and downloaded the Duke V2  - all based on the performance of the legacy. I have to say what many others have already stated.... Awesome!

 

ROB and SEAN thanks to your 50 percent discount on the legacy I decided to buy the full price Duke and while I really should stick to my monthly budget - can't say I am going to regret the purchase

 

Brilliant work guys and thank you.

 

Similar story here.

 

Like Napoleon calling up the conscripts a year early, I brought forward next month's budget to secure the Duke upgrade and the half-price Lancair. After some introductory messing about in the sky with both and a few trial landings, I'm very happy with my purchases, the Lancair in particular - there I've said it. The ghost of the Orbx Lancair has been exorcised. :smile:

 

 

 

Not really...not in IMC (in FSX) If you clip trees or buidlings or tower . thats why crash detection is important in IMC in FSX

 

It not  the  trees  or  objects  that you cant  see  its also the fuel trucks  that  seem to be  attracted   to you when your taxing,  they seem to make  a bee line  for you,  and  than its the a1 planes which is  another  story,  Anyway if you like having  it  on that's fine  most of  us don't as the previous poster  have  suggested

It not  the  trees  or  objects  that you cant  see  its also the fuel trucks  that  seem to be  attracted   to you when your taxing,  they seem to make  a bee line  for you,  and  than its the a1 planes which is  another  story,  Anyway if you like having  it  on that's fine  most of  us don't as the previous poster  have  suggested

 

I don't have it on either for the same reason you mention and for the reason FSX kicks you out so unceremoniously. But I like the concept. I want that for IFR but not for taxing with unruly AI aircrafts and trucks and stuff crashing into us.

With it on my landing gear always fails & it drops the wing onto the deck, I thought & I may be wrong that it has to be on for the vrs superbug to work properly, I generally fly vfr as a rule & if I fowl up an approach and stuff the landing I like the fact my aircraft breaks, but to be honest I havent trashed a plane for a few years now in normal flights, carrier landings I still find tricky but I have only done around 15, & if I hit the deck hard I would expect to die.

 

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 4

 

 

With it on my landing gear always fails & it drops the wing onto the deck, I thought & I may be wrong that it has to be on for the vrs superbug to work properly, I generally fly vfr as a rule & if I fowl up an approach and stuff the landing I like the fact my aircraft breaks, but to be honest I havent trashed a plane for a few years now in normal flights, carrier landings I still find tricky but I have only done around 15, & if I hit the deck hard I would expect to die.

 

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 4

 

I was hoping you might have better results, sleightflight, but if those are the results of your experiments, then it looks like you're one of the people that definitely need to run with Crash OFF.  Interesting that me and at least one other person have reported no ill effects from Crash detection ON, despite Rob's admonitions, and I'm curious why we seem to be immuned to this requirement.  I guess I'll just consider myself lucky that I can still use the new Duke without having to change the way I've been doing things with the previous versions for years now.  I like having crash on too, and don't consider it even close to as problematic as some others are saying, but I think that discussion has pretty much run it's course.

It could be that the grass suspension option doesn't require crash detect to be off, because it is much softer suspension and therefore doesn't fool FSX into thinking there is something "wrong". I'm testing this currently.