fsx-ms How do you control conventional aircraft in FSX?

[odai 4]

Hello

 

I've been using flight sims for as long as I can remember, but since gaining my PPL a few years ago one thing I've stopped doing in FSX is using either the default or third party conventionally controlled aircraft (i.e, any aircraft other than the FBW Airbus). 

 

Manually controlling these aircraft is absolutely terrible - due to the lack of control loading it is extremely difficult to get a sense of the control inputs required. Trimming for example is usually just a case of releasing the controls then trimming until you have the attitude you want. For pitch, I often do end up just flying it with the trim wheel. Everything feels extremely unnatural. Instrument flying in the light aircraft is practically impossible - it's just too difficult to hold a stable attitude. 

 

In real life, even the big jets with hydraulically powered controls have at least some form of 'artificial feel'. 

 

One solution would obviously be to just use force feedback enabled joysticks - but for some reason there doesn't actually seem to be any in production at the moment? It would seem there isn't much demand for them, so how are people able coping without them? 

 

Odai.

[Orlaam 306]

So what are you flying if not default or third party?  Just the Airbus? (Aerosoft?)

 

One thing to keep in mind is that this is a game.  We can simulate many things, but at the end of the day it's a computer game.  Unless you want to buy a Level D sim for a few million   

 

They say X-Plane is much better at simulating flight dynamics but the visuals and other aspects aren't there for me.

 

But really, when was the last time you drove a car simulator that handled even remotely like a vehicle?  Even the expensive full-size arcade "sims" with steering wheels and pedals handle like crap. 

 

You just grow accustomed to MSFS or others and tweak the controls best you can.  Heck, even a shooting game is nothing like a real gun, lol

[Saucey12 38]

Yea you will never have the real "seat of the pants" feel, even in the million dollar sims that companies train pilots on. 

[gliderdriver 6]

A force-feedback stick is a good thing, and I use a MS FFB 2 stick which are quite expensive at around £50 but can be obtained on eBay and after  years of use still seem to function well.  Choose carefully from those available and be prepared to pay more for a better presented example.

 

I use the FSforce driver software which enables trim differently from the stock FSX trim.  It is as near to 'attitude-power-trim' or 'power-attitude-trim' routines that we use with 'trimming the forces' off the stick after a change of attitude, that we can get in simulation.  Not quite right, but at least we can simulate the correct process of changing attitude and power setting and then re-trimming with a degree of 'feel'.  Forces can be adjusted to the type of aircraft flown.

 

http://fs-force.com

 

This is quite an expensive solution but I find it very pleasant to use.  I hasten to say I have no connection to fsforce other than as a customer.

 

Phil

[vortex681 806]

Yea you will never have the real "seat of the pants" feel, even in the million dollar sims that companies train pilots on.

 

You clearly haven't been in a modern full motion simulator. Almost every sensation can be simulated (acceleration, deceleration, out-of-balance, turbulence etc). The only things they can't reproduce are sustained G forces (but you can get instantaneous G). If you're working hard it's easy to forget you're still in a simulator.

 

Back on topic, +1 for both the MS Force Feedback 2 and FS Force. The FF2 may have been out of production for quite a few years but they are one of the best-made joysticks around and, as Phil said, if you look on eBay you can find good examples for considerably less than the current high-end joysticks. Because the stick datum is held by motors rather than springs, you don't get the sloppy centre position you get from most joysticks as the springs age.

 

Whilst FS Force may seem like an expensive add-on, the improvements it gives over the default FSX forces is easily worth the money. Although there are a number of pre-defined profiles for different aircraft types, all of the forces are fully customisable. You can even feel the weight of the elevator pulling the stick forward until you start to build up airspeed during the takeoff run and you can have stick shaker effects as you approach the stall. The fact that you can use "real" trimming technique is an added bonus. Like Phil, I have nothing to do with FS Force other than being a very satisfied customer. Highly recommended!

[fs4fun 366]

Just want to mention an imperfect but free solution called RealTrimX: https://github.com/nmeier/fscode/wiki/Realtrim

Download link: https://github.com/nmeier/fscode/releases

 

I've only used it for a short time and just in small GA props but so far it's not bad. You might still want to have button assignments for fine-tuning trim but this gets pretty close. I also found it's helpful to reduce elevator sensitivity (I use FSUIPC calibration for that), so you have enough stick travel for RealTrim to do its job.

[cobalt 798]

 

 

One thing to keep in mind is that this is a game. We can simulate many things, but at the end of the day it's a computer game. Unless you want to buy a Level D sim for a few million

 

FSX is NOT a game, it is a simulation. Games feature points scored, winners and losers, and competition between individuals or teams. FSX has none of these. As with any other activity, you can always make it into a game,  -- even real flight (I wouldn't advise telling this to your flight instructor). But FSX is a product designed to simulate flight as closely as possible, and the fact that some users do not take this seriously does not make it a game. Period.

[Skysurfer7 34]

Hello

I've been using flight sims for as long as I can remember, but since gaining my PPL a few years ago one thing I've stopped doing in FSX is using either the default or third party conventionally controlled aircraft (i.e, any aircraft other than the FBW Airbus). 

 

 Instrument flying in the light aircraft is practically impossible - it's just too difficult to hold a stable attitude. 

Odai.

No, IFR flying is very possible :smile:

Infarct it's a grate & cheap tool, for learning & mantling RL IFR flying skills like procedures, manual raw-data flying, sing.eng emergency's etc. Basically a whole IFR check-ride.

 

You'd be surprised on how much people have saved money on their RL IFR flying lessons (even type-ratings) by peppering themselves in FSX beforehand.

 

If you have trouble holding heading & altitude in IMC in FSX, just practice on doing just that.

No matter what, nail that ADI on a stable attitude for heading & altitude.....that's what you'd be doing RL anyway....so even if you are un-trimed, it's you who are flying & no matter what position your joystick is at, again nail that attitude on that ADI.

Yes it's harder to do it in FSX, you have to scan more, find the trim, but when you master it flying RL IFR will be a breeze.

 

Many people can do it in heavy's & GA's, it's just a matter of practicing in FSX.

I use an x52 & trackIR, also use good addons like ie, RealAir, A2A, and calibrate your joystick trough fsuipc for better sensitivity.

Good luck :wink:

[Wobbie 938]

FSX is NOT a game, it is a simulation. Games feature points scored, winners and losers, and competition between individuals or teams. FSX has none of these. As with any other activity, you can always make it into a game,  -- even real flight (I wouldn't advise telling this to your flight instructor). But FSX is a product designed to simulate flight as closely as possible, and the fact that some users do not take this seriously does not make it a game. Period.

Erm.... It was developed by ACES Gaming Studios, sold in gaming stores, is played with gaming joysticks (mostly), is not approved as a licensed simulator, does not move like real simulators do, is now re-distributed by Dovetail Gaming, the list goes on..

It is actually a game that simulates a simulator. Realism - not really, (turning knobs with a mouse is not really simulating flight as closly as possible!) Immersion.. yes.

 

From Wikipedia,

Microsoft Flight Simulator X Developer(s) ACES Game Studio Publisher(s) Microsoft Game Studios Distributor(s) Microsoft Game Studios (Retail)

Steam (Online)          

   

Microsoft Flight Simulator X (abbreviated to FSX) is a 2006 flight simulation computer game originally developed for, and published by Microsoft Game Studios for Microsoft Windows.

 

Microsoft as well...

https://www.microsoft.com/Products/Games/FSInsider/downloads/Pages/

 

 

Now, P3D/Prepar3d IS licenced as a sim, sold not for entertainment..(see Red Bird sims)

 

I hope I have not thrown the cat amongst the pidgeons, but the above is only my personal view.

[Wobbie 938]

& yes, I do agree with Skysurfer7. A lot of real pilots use FSX to practice IFR,'s etc.

It can be a very valuable tool.

[tjrush 54]

I agree with ODAI.  I find it impossible to maintain altitude with any aircraft.

[cobalt 798]

 

 

Erm.... It was developed by ACES Gaming Studios, sold in gaming stores, is played with gaming joysticks (mostly), is not approved as a licensed simulator, does not move like real simulators do, is now re-distributed by Dovetail Gaming, the list goes on..

It is actually a game that simulates a simulator. Realism - not really, (turning knobs with a mouse is not really simulating flight as closly as possible!) Immersion.. yes.

 

OK -- Tell me: the next time you have a flight on FSX, who won and who lost?  If you can't name a winner and loser, it ain't no game. The reason FSX and its predecessors are sold as "games" is that gaming companies generally have no "simulator" category, no doubt because the "games" designation attract more buyers.

 

    Incidentally, FSX IS in fact used in real-world training: check out  Microsoft Flight Simulator X For Pilots Real World Training on Amazon.

[Kevin_28 164]

Just my opinion, so take it with a grain of salt. I guess it's how you want to see it. Certainly, crashing a plane can be considered losing if crashing is not your goal. Being able to complete mission challenges is also considered winning. On a smaller scale, being able to line up adequately to the center of the runway without making huge course corrections could be considered a win. That being said it is obviously a simulator, and as many people have said already, it is used to help real world pilots. I guess I just don't see the need to provide distinctions between the two genres for FSX.

[fs4fun 366]

A "game" can be any form of play. Winning or losing suggests competition, which can be part of a game but is not mandatory. 

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/game

 

A flight sim can be used as a game. At the core is a simulation, but it can be packaged and sold as an amusement.

 

FYI the earliest flight sim that I know of is the Link Trainer. It was built with the intent of training real pilots, but it took a long time to generate interest, so in the meantime it was sold as an amusement park ride.

 

http://www.canadianflight.org/content/link-trainer

[Raven9000 272]

OK -- Tell me: the next time you have a flight on FSX, who won and who lost?  If you can't name a winner and loser, it ain't no game. The reason FSX and its predecessors are sold as "games" is that gaming companies generally have no "simulator" category, no doubt because the "games" designation attract more buyers.

 

    Incidentally, FSX IS in fact used in real-world training: check out  Microsoft Flight Simulator X For Pilots Real World Training on Amazon.

 

What is solitaire?

 

You can try to justify it all you want, in the end it is, in fact, just a game...