My question would rather be can someone who fly PMDG 737ngx be better prepared for flight school than someone who is fresh new to aviation ? For example if you were to join a flight school program would you comprehend basic procedures for 737 better than someone who is completely new to aviation? I mean no flight sim  experience whatsoever. 

 

 

Will you have a better chance to understand all the studies that flight school instructor gives you to study?

Definitely.

Given you really studied PMDG 737NGX, you would be already prepared for many subjects:

 

Part of aircraft performance subj, part of air law subj, part of aircraft systems subj, part of instruments subj.... If you fly on vatsim, VFR/IFR communication subjects will be ridiculously easy...

 

Instruments and systems for ATPL is basically 737 classic explained. Not to the level of type rate, but enough for general ATPL knowledge.

 

 

I would love to see student pilot doing VFR navigation, steep turns, spirals, stalls and spin recovery in B737.

 

All doable in a simulator. I don't see how spiral / stall / spin practice with a C172 would help you when flying a 737 anyway.

Definitely.

Given you really studied PMDG 737NGX, you would be already prepared for many subjects:

 

Part of aircraft performance subj, part of air law subj, part of aircraft systems subj, part of instruments subj.... If you fly on vatsim, VFR/IFR communication subjects will be ridiculously easy...

 

Instruments and systems for ATPL is basically 737 classic explained. Not to the level of type rate, but enough for general ATPL knowledge.

 

Thank you for that information it would really help one who is trying to get into a flight school program. At lease we know that what we learn here can help us better understand the work we would be receiving in a flight school program. 

Thank you all for your answers. 

 

So now that I've read many different opinions on whether a simmer could actually fly a real 737 or not. Some of you said I could under very specific circumstances and/or with a real pilot next to me, and others said I couldn't, because the feeling would be very different and much more would be to take into consideration during a flight. Before I tell you in what I am believing now, I want to get something off me: I read some posts here of people saying something like: "Oh god, not again a noobie-flight-simmer who thinks he could fly a real airliner...". It's true, I am really just a beginner in flight simulation compared to other people and yes, that is the reason why I am asking this question. I mean, I was so incredibly stunned of how complex it is to fly a plane and how good and detailed the simulation was. Then, suddenly I had my first simulated landing on a 737 and it was amazing considering the highly complex procedures I had to go through. Now I'm wondering of how could anyone, who had his first landing, didn't want to know if he could do that in real life too. Anyone who says he wasn't curious, is a liar, in my opinion ;D

 

Now, thanks to your posts, I think that I could do a startup, taxi to the runway on a big and empty airport and maybe, under very good conditions, depart from that airport, all with a bit of instruction of a real pilot next to me. Handling the autopilot during the flight wouldn't be any problem, I think. But, I would leave the landing for the real pilot. I think that I could do all that, if nothing special would happen. To know what to do in special situations depends all on experience. 

 

Thank you all again for your answers. 

Ah, this topic never get old.

 

If you study documentation comes with PMDG 737NGX, and practice a lot in PMDG NGX, and weather is nice, and aircraft is completely serviceable, and you are extremely lucky, you can actually fly it via autopilot.

 

Manual flight? Forget it, not even taxi. You couldn't taxi or take off or land even Cessna 172 with simulator practice only.

I don't agree...on my very first checkride I was able to taxi and take off in a 172 with only minimal help from my instructor on taxiing. All the "help" came after we had already begun taxiing as well. 

I don't agree...on my very first checkride I was able to taxi and take off in a 172 with only minimal help from my instructor on taxiing. All the "help" came after we had already begun taxiing as well.

On your very first checkride you are supposed to fly aircraft without any help.

On your very first checkride you are supposed to fly aircraft without any help.

 

LOL, im sorry but that was SHARP...In every aspect

On your very first checkride you are supposed to fly aircraft without any help.

Sorry...I meant my introductory flight. The flight before the first lesson

Personally I think I could fly anything. I am a pilot and that is a lot to be said for the TLAR method of flying which covers just about any aircraft if you know how to fly to begin with.

 

There are plenty of stories about passenger landing aircraft after the pilot was taken ill. From experienced pilots to passengers being talked down by instructors on the ground.

 

Here is just one example:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-humber-24450534

I guess it depends on what some individuals idea of "fly" is

On your very first checkride you are supposed to fly aircraft without any help.

 

Probably not, but I when I was in the USA on training in 1997 with my work, took a started flight for 40 dollars, said I had a few hours from a while ago and he let me do the whole flight, I chickened out using the radio, as FS 98 radio did not make me brave enough to try it,  the flight was great, a bit off centre on takeoff, wasn't expecting so much pull to the side, had the brakes on at touchdown as I wasn't used to the pedals really, I also wasn't used to scanning the sky so much, basically all the things that are not well simulated in FS98 I was a bit weak at, but the actual flying part I found straight forward and easy, climbs, turns, steep turns through 360 deg, lots of fun and I nailed the vsi and the ball the whole turn, he was impressed (I had never heard of a steep turn before) once you relaxed and got used to the fact the the wee plane bounced around a lot in the turbulence.  All in all my instructor was really pleased and wanted to put me through my PPL with minimum hours.  Some people need a lot of teaching, some are more natural, there is no right answer to the question as everyone is different. 

I was cut loose once on Bell 412. A Friend of mine flew one for a living at that time. We flew out into open land and he said "you got controls" and I almost soiled my self. I grabbed the cyclic and collective, put feet on the Anti-Torque pedals and off we went (mind you we were already airborne). Trying to remember what I could from the sim and apply it it went fairly well flying forward at 70 kph. Then came the good part, he pointed out a clearing in front of a dam and said "slow to a hover over there". I managed to get the ship down into a hover and kept it at 100 feet for a while and then things got difficult. The heli wanted to go everywhere I didn't and when I corrected it went the other way, where I didn't want to go. He told me "small inputs require small corrections" so I got better (not much). When he asked "you doing ok?" I said "I think so"...then he took it off "Auto Hover". What an eye opener. I have a lot of respect for pilots, it's not easy.

This topic is always interesting and it brings a wealth of opinions. I myself was a avid flight simmer before I started flying any heavy metal. I must say that the flight sim gave me a lot of perspective. From the sim, I was well prepared for flight training. A lot of my instructors were impressed with my ability without having prior flight training. As I said before, the flying part is relatively easy. It's the jet management that does and will get you into trouble. I had been flying jets for a while before I had a go in piper arrows. Smaller planes seemed easy compared to the procedure heavy jets I was flying. The original poster questioned heavy metal, which I think is very possible but comes with some pitfalls. So I will point out some pitfalls that would get you into trouble quickly if you were unaware.

 

Preflight: I mentioned this in a earlier post. Some checks are simple, but there are some that require multiple steps and system knowledge. Lets take IRS/INS alignment for example. On my jet the step is FMS/IRS-set/align. Now in most aircraft, the expanded section of the flight manual may give full details for the checklist step. But in my case, they both state set/align. The way it's done is 1. turn IRSs to NAV. 2. While the IRSs enter test mode, check the basic operating weight on the PERF page 3. ensure the FMSs are sync'd 4. Verify date and time on the ident page against the GPS status page. 5. check software version 6. verify GPS position against parking coordinates and load position on the POS INIT page. 7. request flight plan, winds and digital ATIS on the data link page. 8. Load and perf flight plan/winds, departure/arrival and verify the flight plan against paper copy. That's a great example of how one step is made of many steps. Here's some system knowledge for ya. When the IRS are first turned on, majority the INS/IRS system will enter a test mode before starting the alignment count down. If you try to load position during the self test, it will not accept it. You won't know until the end of the alignment process when the align lights start flashing. On most systems, this require a shut down and re-alignment. These are just some pitfalls in the preflight. I mentioned the walk around earlier. Gear pins, covers and other items can ruin your day if not removed. If missed, there are no lights to warn you. Some operators leave their aircraft configured in certain conditions to save on wear and tear. Would you be able to catch them all?

 

Weight and balance: This is a big pitfall. In my operation we have a computerized weight and balance program. I have a form that gives zero fuel weight and CG position based on passenger loading. I select the number of pax and that's the cg i use with my fuel load to calculate a trim setting. For aircraft with a varying cg range, weight and balance is important. Two examples. 1. A buddy of mine was flying a C-141B for some local radar and VFR pattern work. The jet was empty with only a comfort pallet that consisted of a portable kitchen with water and lavatory. During takeoff, at rotate the nose did not rise with normal input. Though he was above V1, he immediately aborted. The C-141 is rotated to 6 degrees and the plane will leap from the runway because of its positive incidence. After investigation, it was found that the potable water in the comfort pallet had leaked overnight, seeped into the belly and flowed towards the nose and froze. That change in CG position had actually put the aircraft out of CG range for flight. Had they continued, it was unlikely they would have made a safe landing. 2. I had a guy that was having a problem transmitting on the radio right prior to takeoff. I made the call myself and started the roll. At rotate, I pulled and she wouldn't budge. That's when I noticed that he had been pushing the nose trim down instead of the radio transmit button. I pulled hard as I was running the trim and we got airborne with in the next 1000ft. Again, a mis trimmed/out of cg jet can be a handful. In flightsim, no matter the CG or trim, you can get an aircraft to fly.

 

Takeoff: Takeoff is the most dangerous part of flight. It's easy to keep the jet pointed down the runway. Do you know how much runway is required? We brief this before takeoff during the takeoff briefing. The pitfall here is the rotation. As I stated before, the trim is set for a nominal rotation rate engine out at V2. First thing to notice is that the nose will forcefully continue to rise. You will find that you will be rotating and trimming nose down at the same time to catch V2+10. Once you experience this a few times, it becomes second nature. You won't find this effect in flight sim. The problem with this pitfall is that if you are not expecting it, it has the potential to get away from you. The lighter the aircraft, the quicker it accelerates acerbating this effect. It only takes a few moments of having the nose too high to get into a powered on stall.

 

Limitations: This pitfall catches even the most experienced pilots. Every hanging device has a speed limit. Flaps are most likely over sped after takeoff. Not only do you want to clean up in a timely manner, you have to clean up on proper speed. In the heavies I flew, you were limited to 15 degrees bank when below minimum maneuver for configuration. When ever cleaning up after takeoff, you are periodically below min man. Clean up too fast or exceed that 15 degree limit and you get into trouble. I once had someone retract the slats too early on me after takeoff. We were about 580,000 pounds in a DC10 in hot weather. Since it was hot and heavy, i elected to clean up at 800ft agl. We were departing over flat desert so 800 was standard. At 800ft, i called "climb power-N1 hold-vert speed 500" and lowered the nose and accelerated to flap retract speed. At FR, I called "flaps up, bug me up". At this point the CO repeated flaps up, retracted the flaps and dialed my speed bug up to clean min maneuver. Shortly after, i got the shaker and the plane started descending at 500ft per minute. The flashing slat reset light cued me in that the CO inadvertently sucked up the slats. As the auto slats extended, I called for slats extend and we were climbing again. Flaps are the most over sped item on an aircraft. You have to know speed limits cold even though they are placarded. In jets, you call the speed limit and the configuration as you configure. For example, "below 250, flaps 10". This is repeated by the other pilot as he confirms the speed before selecting the setting. "below 225, gear down". This goes to show that over speeding is easy. In the Gulfstream, as soon as the gear is up after takeoff, we pull the power during pattern work to keep a healthy margin for the flaps.

 

Feel of the aircraft: This pitfall deals with aircraft control. Jets respond slowly to light to medium throttle inputs. This makes it very easy to get fast and slow. When maintaining speeds, i adjust the throttles a nudge at a time. For configuration changes, I have pre determined fuel flows and throttle travel for each configuration to get me close. I set the fuel flow and then call for the configuration. Also with a stable power setting, i know about how much throttle movement is required for each configuration change. Flight controls can be way different from your sim set up. The yokes in the jets are rigid. There are feel springs and artificial feel systems to prevent over controlling the aircraft. Though the yokes are rigid, you can still over control the aircraft. Inputs are made purposely but smoothly. It's hard to replicate this in the sim. It's easy to G up an aircraft so inputs must me smooth. Too much pitch input can ripple the wings and elevator. Too abrupt pitch inputs during maneuvers leads to accelerated stalls, hence the reasons approach to stalls are mainly done in the level d sim.

 

Descent and landing: A guy told me early in my career that if you find your self sitting doing nothing, you're wrong. Jets require lots of management and your scans should be constant. Automation can be quirky also. It will sometimes do things or not do things without any warning. Flight level change is a great example. After mach change over, it can get pitchy and oscillate. I've seen the nose raise and the jet gets slow and suddenly it will lower the nose to speed up. Doesn't take long before you over speed or stall. This happens because of temperature inversions and wind changes. It's difficult for the jet in mach vs ias. There's more variance between mach numbers than there is between kts. On descent, lets talk about the famous VNAV. Here is the pitfall in VNAV. VNAV cares about altitude and speed. Given a choice, VNAV gives altitude priority. If the path gets steep or if the jet gets behind, you would see the speed increase. As VNAV tries to make the altitude, the speed will creep up. You have to be on top of the aircraft and fully know its limitation. This is the perfect opportunity to over speed the flaps. The only warning you may get is that the FMS may say check speed/altitude constraints or vertical path unachievable. For this reason, I prefer flight level change below 10,000ft. I'm always speed protected in FLCH. The pitfall with flight sim is that automation works perfect. In the real aircraft, automation is quirky.

 

Approach and landing isn't that difficult. Do you know how much landing distance is required? Again, this is briefed on descent. The pitfall in landing is landing too firm or floating. Flight sim aircraft have a habbit of being too floaty. They will actually flare on their own. When heavy metal is sinking at 700 to 800ft per minute, it takes ground effect and flare to change the momentum. Text book landings are firm. Over time, you get a feel of the flare technique to land smoothly. Some carry a little power, some a little smash while others yoke pump giving little jabs of pitch while judging the rate of altimeter call outs. I myself feel the PMDG 737 is floaty. I feel that most flight sim guys would be in more danger of hard landing than floating. Most real world airline guys that end up floating are your greasers. They have pressure for smooth landings for obvious reasons. While in the Air Force, I've jump seated the C-40 a few times during pattern work. The only plane that i know that's subject to floating is the G-5, G550 and the KC-135R. The G-5 has a huge wing for its size and big motors. You have to be at idle at 50ft and start the flare no earlier than 20ft with no more than a 2 degree pitch change. With the 550, the trailing edge wing mod and winglet vortex generators require you to be in idle at 100ft. The 5/550 has a flat approach with a pitch of -1 to 0 degrees on speed/glide path. The KC-135R has the big CFM motors giving it extra idle thrust compared to the earlier models.

 

These were Just some example pitfalls I wanted to share. As long as a simmer has these in mind, the chances of success increases.           

Personally I think I could fly anything. I am a pilot and that is a lot to be said for the TLAR method of flying which covers just about any aircraft if you know how to fly to begin with.

 

There are plenty of stories about passenger landing aircraft after the pilot was taken ill. From experienced pilots to passengers being talked down by instructors on the ground.

 

Here is just one example:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-humber-24450534

(I'm assuming that you are serious with this comment):Get into the cockpit of a Concorde and show me how well TLAR works for you. And a passenger landing a Cessna with guidance is in no way similar to landing a 737. 

 

This is the way I see this whole 'argument': A hardcore NGX pilot might be able to get a real 737 up and running, and might even be able to take off. However, the landing is what will get them. You simply cannot get the feel for an aircraft that you need to land it safely from a sim. In that situation, something on the aircraft would bend at the very least.

 

You said that you're a pilot. What aircraft do you fly? 

People damage planes all the time during taxi. I've had a couple of friends who have put the main wheels of DC10s in the dirt and smashed taxiway lights.

 

Woohoo! I'm not the only one! lol