PS: One of my favourite addons is the now ancient JustFlight FlyingClub X Piper Warrior. It has a very rough looking 2D and VC but it flies (IMHO) like the real thing. That to me is more important than it looking pretty.

The JF warrior IS really good... Rob from RA did the FDE!

I used to fly light aircraft out of RAF Topcliffe. Honestly it was less exciting than FSX to me. You're so bound by rules and realities when flying an actual aircraft that it was less fun and more procedural. That's not to say it wasn't fun, but once you've adjusted to the hand flying feeling it's no better than hand flying in a simulator, just different and more realistic.

 

That's part of flying in Europe. In the US, we can pretty much do whatever we want outside of Class B and squawking VFR. The best part of real flying is actually going somewhere.

That's part of flying in Europe. In the US, we can pretty much do whatever we want outside of Class B. 

 

True, you guys are really lucky in that respect.

Nothing feels like the real thing. The forces you feel flying a real plane can't be simulated and it's one of the biggest parts of flying that you simply don't understand if you only fly simulators. The feeling of landing, of a crosswind, turbulence, a plane out of trim, etc. Nothing really comes close. 

 

Now, can it respond like the real thing? Yeah, somewhat. Climb rates, turn rates, etc. 

Most real pilots use home based simulators for IFR training vs. anything to do with the flight dynamics for a reason. 

True, you guys are really lucky in that respect.

 

Plus it's way cheaper to fly here. 

 

I think I paid $5.03 USD for 100LL last weekend. My uncle's airport is $4.63 right now. We certainly are very lucky to have the opportunity. 

Well, air is not technically a liquid (since it is a gas), but it is fluid, and behaves like liquid as atmosphere.  Haven't you ever heard the expression "sea of air"?  When flying, you realize that the air through which you fly is moving as a mass, has eddies and currents (that's what turbulence is) and is not much different in terms of its effects on the craft moving through it than the effects of the ocean on a submarine.  

 

That's perhaps one of the most difficult things to simulate on a PC.  FSX can't do it well by itself, although some addon aircraft do a better job of modeling the feel of a wing in such a medium than others.  ASN has raised the bar here again.  I fly gliders again now after many, many years hiatus in FSX because the best models, in conjunction with ASN, actually feel somewhat like gliders finally.

 

That feeling of moving through a body of gas is what draws me to the Milviz T-38a. The T-38a has tiny wings that are designed for going supersonic. During landing, when the plane is flying close to vref you can really feel those tiny wings struggling with trying to keep the plane in the air. You can almost feel the air "roll" off the wingtips, kind of like the wake of ship going through a body of water. A tiny mistake could easily ruin the approach. You can really feel the wing slice itself through the air. It's such a great feeling, very few planes gives me this kind of immersion.

That feeling of moving through a body of gas is what draws me to the Milviz T-38a. The T-38a has tiny wings that are designed for going supersonic. During landing, when the plane is flying close to vref you can really feel those tiny wings struggling with trying to keep the plane in the air. You can almost feel the air "roll" off the wingtips, kind of like the wake of ship going through a body of water. A tiny mistake could easily ruin the approach. You can really feel the wing slice itself through the air. It's such a great feeling, very few planes gives me this kind of immersion.

 

My experience with that airplane was a little different, but I'm open to re-examining it, maybe.

 

I had a heck of a lot of trouble with elevator authority on that aircraft when doing approaches and landings despite careful attention to flying it at the prescribed speeds.  I almost never crash, but on this one, I was crashing almost all the time.  I felt something was fishy with it, and took to the internet to find out about it.  I did see one or two people who claimed to be real T-38 pilots mention something about the elevator authority, but never heard much more about it.  Back then, I didn't have a joystick, only a yoke, so I wasn't getting the right feel anyway.  It's uninstalled now, but maybe I'll take a look at it again, because I really wanted to like it, it just ironic that you mention it, because it was one of those planes that didn't convince me that it had an accurate flight model.  My thoughts were if this is a training plane....

 

Isn't one of the moderators here on Avsim, like a Colonel Scott (Tinmouse 737???), or somebody, that knows about T-38's?  I thought I remembered that name from one of the discussions about the Milviz T-38 flight model, and maybe he could tell us if the flight model is accurate.

Hi bonchie,

 

 

 

Nothing feels like the real thing. The forces you feel flying a real plane can't be simulated and it's one of the biggest parts of flying that you simply don't understand if you only fly simulators. The feeling of landing, of a crosswind, turbulence, a plane out of trim, etc. Nothing really comes close.

 

That may be true, but the question was

 

"How do you conclude that a FDE of an airplane is good or bad?"

 

Plus, let's not discount the imaginations of the people who love the "feeling" of flight (or other activities) through simming.

 

Knowing what the real thing feels like is great, but I wouldn't suggest that all the simmers saying that this or that aircraft (or tractor, or city bus) "feels great" aren't fairly interpreting what's being presented to them.

 

For example - if you read a review of a Piper Warrior II and it contains a lot of info about how great it "feels" - beyond just "behaving" when it comes to the numbers - and it's reviewed by someone who flies one in real life, does it mean that a simmer who flies the same simulation, yet has no real-world experience, can't supply informed commentary of the feel of that simulated Warrior II?

 

(Or, for that matter, that they'd enjoy it just as much as a real-world pilot?)

 

Understanding these sensations and suggesting that someone would actually feel them are two different things, and I think many simmers do have a good understanding of what would be felt as they interpret the cues from a sim.

 

cheers

Andrew

It's an advanced supersonic trainer, it's definitely not for novice pilots. It's for pilots that already have extensive knowledge flying basic trainers. Many students crashed their plane during the approach, exactly because of the unforgivable nature of the tiny wings.

It's an advanced supersonic trainer, it's definitely not for novice pilots. It's for pilots that already have extensive knowledge flying basic trainers. Many students died crashing their plane during the approach, exactly because of the tiny wings and the limited elevator authority

 

Are you calling me a novice who just doesn't have what it takes? ]

 

Not out of the realm of possiblity by any means!  Still, I know the issue was brought up by a real T-38 pilot who took issue with not the fact of limited elevator stabilator, but too little.  I'll have to go back and find the discussion somewhere, but it's years ago.  Like I said, maybe I'll take a look at it again, this time using a Thrustmaster Warthog and Throttle, which I've acquired since, instead of using my standard Airliner yoke/throttle setup.  

I'm guessing you're thinking about this thread -> http://forum.avsim.net/topic/339005-attn-col-bob-scott-re-the-milviz-t-38/

I'll use this topic to ask a question , but first I have to clarify something :
My experience in aviation comes almost 20 years , with a maximum of 20 hours in real aviation, the 20 hours of actual aircraft are ultralight 18 hours , two hours a Cessna Cardinal .
Well, in this forum there are many people who have great experience in real aviation, then spinning easily assess the reactions , the behavior of the aircraft that are made for simulators based on that I learned , and even feel a 737NGX has personality .
Here come my questions :
For those who know the real 737 , which is the percentage of realism , especially with regard to reactions in maneuvers .
The other question is about the Aerosoft Airbus Xtended , it has a similar behavior to the real airplane ?
I have trouble piloting it ( Airbus ) out of the AP , but I think good, after winning challenges is good .
One last clarification, I love airplanes , like the noise of their engines and have four simulators installed , FS9 , FSX ,P3D 1.4 and P3DV2
Thank you.

 

João Alfredo

 

"translated by Google Translator"

I'm guessing you're thinking about this thread -> http://forum.avsim.net/topic/339005-attn-col-bob-scott-re-the-milviz-t-38/

 

Yes, thank you very much Wim, that was the one.  I'm positive now that it was his line "I've found myself reaching the mechanical limits of stick travel at times, for example during landing flares" that put the nail in the coffin for me, because that perfectly described my own experience.  Certainly made it easier to blame the humiliating crashes on Milviz, rather than my own skills, or lack thereof!    So as not to derail this thread, I might consider raising that old thread from the dead, and see what w6kd thinks about the T-38, years later, and presumably, several updates.  Thanks!