Just flown her from Rome to Malta. I think it's the most under-rated aircraft in FSX. It's fantastic.

Sooo- I'm gonna go through all the planning, weather, preflight, etc for a flight from KORD to WSSS and sit in front of my computer for almost 20 hours? I thing not. This is not real flying, has anyone turned on failures?

That is why I used to fly the 767 as well on my long hauls as I could sleep trough the night and then wake up 1 or 2 hours before descent which is a very rewarding experience. I really miss those days on FS9 but unfortunately now on FSX there is no good 767 since Level D is outdated and Captain Sim would probably bug out during my sleep and then fall off the sky, not to mention it doesn't have fs2crew as I would consider buying that.  Those are for 10+ hour flights.

 

When I fly shorter than that I always fly something extremely complex like the Project Tupolev Tu-154 where you always have something to do, navigation, checking up on systems, other checks, making sure you stay on course, even updating your position... All of it very interesting as you do the job of a crew of 3-4 people. And as for the real world version if you got a complete engine failure, I would very much prefer to be on the rugged Tu-154 than the plastic dreamliner to actually have a change of survival : )

 

I'm surprised you have a Yak-52 as not many foreigners outside of the CIS use them not to mention owning them, but that plane sure is a beauty and as long as you mantain it properly (which fortunately for Soviet planes is very cheap and easy) it will always be strong as aircrafts were built to last. If the maintenance is excellent you could still push it to the limits but even the strongest of the strongest aircraft will last many more decades if not put into too extreme conditions.

We take very good care of her she's been hanger kept since she was imported in 90s and if anything is wrong with it we fix it

I think the best is to find a balance.  As a pilot and IT person, I understand that there will always be new technology.  I understand the importance of learning and making the most out of technology.  New technology should be welcomed, and compliment, not replace, the flying experience.  Central to the flying experience is having solid pilot 'instincts'.  Having a firm understanding of flying and navigation fundamentals is extremely important.  Strong understanding of the fundamentals help give a pilot good flying instincts.  

 

Balance is a good thing tho, if you fly your glass cockpit PMDG, spend some time in an old GA or warbird or something similar.  I feel for every hour one spends behind an FMS or G1000 following a magenta line, they should spend an equal hour flying some old vintage GA, Warbird, airliner....etc that requires the pilot to actually fly the airplane, use the brain and E6B for basic flying computations, and most of all, simply looking out the window.  You would be surprised how well you can navigate simply by looking at a sectional and comparing it to the world outside.  Give me a sectional and a pen, I can tell you current position, direction, distance, reasonable ETA to another point on the sectional.

 

With balance, you will keep your fundamental flying instincts strong and at the same time keep up with the new technology.  You will be able to get more out of the new technology anyway if you maintain strong fundamental skills too.

 

Will technology go overboard?  Perhaps, if we let it.  Airplanes in the future will just have a big button marked GO, everything else will be handled by computers, probably a lot of it remotely.  The person in the cockpit will be there just in case of an emergency...which will just involve him calling tech support LOL.  Will we still be called 'pilots' then?  I hope so, as long as I can hop in the old J-3 Cub and still experience the basics of flying I will be happy.

Sooo- I'm gonna go through all the planning, weather, preflight, etc for a flight from KORD to WSSS and sit in front of my computer for almost 20 hours? I thing not. This is not real flying, has anyone turned on failures?

 

+1

 

I've been turning random system failures on the 777 on my flights a lot lately. A good one I did recently was VHHH to RJTT and about 2 hrs into the flight the PFC's malfunctioned and the FBW went into 'secondary' mode which meant no AP for the remainder of the flight. The flight controls also felt a lot more sluggish in this mode, really had to put a lot of effort in to keep straight & level.

 

I highly recommend people try flying the 777 sometimes in modes other than just 'normal', makes you realise just how dependent you become on FBW.

 

Of course the problem I find with failures is that if you do decide to do a long-haul flight you'd probably have to sit in front of it the whole time in case you wake up in the morning with the plane floating in the ocean somewhere