The case for FSX...

[Indy511 686]

7 hours ago, birdguy said:

An analog man trapped in a digital world.

Love that song by Joe Walsh. Says it all

Spoiler

Analog Man

Joe Walsh

Welcome to cyberspace, I'm lost in the fog
Everything's digital I'm still analog
When something goes wrong
I don't have a clue
Some ten year old smart a** has to show me what to do
Sign on with high speed you don't have to wait
Sit there for days and vegetate
I access my email, read all my spam, I'm an analog man.

The whole world's living in a digital dream
It's not really there
It's all on the screen
Makes me forget who I am
I'm an analog man

Yeah I'm an analog man in a digital world
I'm gonna get me an analog girl
Who loves me for what I am
I'm an analog man

What's wrong with vinyl, I think it sounds great
L-Ps, forty-fives, seventy-eights but that's just the way I am
I'm an analog man

Turn on the tube, watch until dawn
One hundred channels, nothing is on
Endless commercials, endless commercials, endless commercials

The whole world's glued to the cable TV
It looks so real on the big L-C-D
Murder and violence are rated P-G, too bad for the children
They are what they see

The whole world's living in a digital dream
It's not really there
It's all on the screen
Makes me forget who I am
I'm an analog man

Yeah I'm an analog man in a digital world
I'm gonna get me an analog girl
Who loves me for what I am
I'm an analog man

Yeah I'm an analog man in a digital world

 

[Matthew Kane 1,343]

I still use FSX as well. I did buy P3D but never really made the transition, what I have works great for me.

I also have a 1989 Honda Civic which puts a huge smile on my face every time I drive it. My other car is a 2012 Honda and no where near as fun. So whatever puts a smile on your face is the one that works best for you 

[Luke 782]

One of my earliest memories of my parents as a young child was how uninterested they seemed in learning something new. They had me somewhat later in life (for the early 1970s) and I just assumed that's what happened when you got into your late 40s. It wasn't until later that I started to notice that older folks who retained a young child's determination to constant learn and experience something new seemed younger than their peers. I'm now reaching my mid to late 40s and having watched my children growing up I refuse to be like my parents.

I can't think of anything from 40 years ago I would want back.

Cheers!

Luke

[Patco Lch 1,459]

I only started simming ten years ago and FSX Is the only Sim I have used. It was frustrating buggy then but over the years I have seen developers turn it into a fine sim. HiFi for weather FUSIPC solved several anomalies such as ground friction and study sim developers such as PMDG,A2A,TFDI and Leonardo provide great planes to fly and learn. Not to mention a plethora of scenery. If I don't spend another dollar I have enough to keep me busy for life. I haven't scratched the surface on some of the aircraft I own. With Steve's DX10 fixer and my new rig I can achieve great visuals with fine performance. I will continue to grow my FSX world as long as developers keep providing. If they move on I stay busy with what I have and my credit card will rest.

[ZKOKQ 984]

8 hours ago, Chock said:

As someone driving round in a 20 year old MX5 through choice,

Good choice. I am the same with cars. There is plenty of cars I have owned, and it is always the old school motoring that I enjoy. Car with Bluetooth does nothing for me.

One of my favorite old cars, I owned for many years was an Morris Isis series 1. Also owned a Morris 6. Wished I kept them.

[John_Cillis 2,406]

10 hours ago, birdguy said:

I know this is the P3D Forum but I am dumping my P3Dv4 installation and going back to FSX.

I can't seem to connect with P3D.  Lots of little things like some Orbx airports that don't work in FAT areas while all the others do; CTDs that seem to happen for no reason; and just the general level of comfort I felt with FSX that I don't withP3D.

I'm an airplane collector.  I collect them even if I am only going to fly them once.  And I have to start that all over again in P3Dbecause so few FSX aircraft work in P3Dv4.  I miss the military ai traffic I had with FSX.  But mainly I was comfortable and satisfied with FSX.  But, like  most simmers, I felt I had to push the envelope when new stuff came along.

I don't know if I can adequately explain this. 

Last summer I won a brand new 2018 Toyota Camry in a drawing.  The  first significant thing I had ever won.  I was delirious with my new car.  I gave my 4 year old Toyota Prius to my wife and proudly drove my new Camry...for about two weeks.  Then I gave the new Camry to my wife and took my old Prius back.  It fit me like a well worn pair of slippers while the Camry felt like a new pair of shoes I had to break in.

I supposed flight simming is a personal thing.  Like the brand of toothpaste or deodorant you use.  You try the newest thing in a commercial you see but revert back to the old standbys.

There's noting wrong with P3D.  I just prefer the familiarity and comfort lever of FSX.  Having been a pilot in past I know no simulator will ever be capable of replicating the feeling of sitting alone at the controls of a Cherokee five thousand feet above the ground with your destiny in your own hands so I'm not going to try and chase it.  I just want to play the game.

Ya know, I don't own a smart phone.  At this stage of my life (a few weeks short of my 84th birthday) I just want to avoid learning curves.  I don't carry my old flip phone around with me either.  I have not been assimilated into the continuum.  The same with flight simming. 

Noel

An analog man trapped in a digital world.

I was able to overcome any issues I had with P3D.  It is simply FSX evolved.  I bought it knowing what I was getting into.  I don't have to have every system in the universe.  I just fly what I fly, light jets, the B200, props, and ultralights.  I was never meant to be a commercial pilot and never had an interest in going that far.  It is a grueling program, you are constantly browbeaten, the pilot/copilot relationship, and check rides.  Every pilot just wants to be the greatest pilot who ever lived.  I am a sloppy pilot.  I do not like use of the rudder one bit, except for very slight corrections on final.  I was outraged when that jet crashed during wake turbulence.  Pilots were taught to stomp on that rudder, it puts incredible stresses on the airframe.  The wings turn the plane, I learned from a glider pilot that had only ailerons on his RC aircraft.  He could keep that glider up in ridge lift until we got bored of the whole thing.  Then he could take it right down to his hand and grab it from the sky.  He was the best pilot I ever knew.  Thank goodness Light Sport came into being for that reason.  Older pilots tend to be very safe, they know their limits.  As they say, there are old pilots and there are bold pilots......

[birdguy 3,943]

On smartphones...

A couple years ago two of my daughters came to town for Mother's Day.  One from Denver the other from South Carolina.

We went out to dinner at a nice restaurant to celebrate Mother's Day and they completely ignored Mom and were engrossed in showing each other pictures on their smart phones.  "Here's on of my neighbor's best friend's dog."

They are both over 50 years old and it's been over 30 years since I had scolded any of them.  But that day I did.  I reminded in fairly strong language they were supposed to be there to celebrate Mother's Day with their mom and they were completely ignoring her  with their smartphone word not allowed.  They were contrite and put the phones away and started talking to my wife.

I have  noticed so many people are joined at the with their smartphones.

We have four cats and I have a tagline on my e-mail signature saying "I would rather be owned by a cat than a smartphone."

Noel

[birdguy 3,943]

Luke,

I have taken about 30 of The Great Courses since I retired.  Mostly about ancient history, the dawn of civilization from  Sarkan to Alexander the Great.  I'm fascinated by the Persian Empire. 

But other subjects too like economics and currently I am taking two of them, Zoology and The Science of Flight.

So getting old doesn't mean you stop learning.  You just focus on your interests without it getting too complicated.

It's the technology learning curve I have problems with.  I already know how to read listen, watch, and remember.

Noel

[HighBypass 2,339]

John, a counterpoint to that part about wings turning the aeroplane if I may - sometimes a bit of rudder is required to counteract the adverse yaw encountered due to aileron drag, but it depends upon the plane's design I suppose. I never think about using the rudder in flight with the freeware Saab Viggen fighter in my hangar! LOL.

I've flown aileron-elevator RC gliders and like you say got bored of staying up there. I've also flown rudder-elevator RC gliders and done the same :)

 

Noel - yep sometimes the smartphones are a curse! I like technology, I love science fiction stories and movies. However, I'd think nothing over buying an old car over a brand new one. Heck, I'd get two - one practical, economical shopping trolley, and one with a simple 8-in-a-vee configured engine with a bucket or two for carburation, coupled to a beefy manual transmission driving the rear wheels!... and then probably end up running over a jaywalking pedestrian who couldn't even hear the Chevy or MOPAR due to listening to their bloody phone! 

 

As for flightsims that's a little different - I'm all for getting more immersion, but I would hope that it isn't too steep a learning curve - P3D is FSX evolved, but FSX is the comfy pair of shoes 

[Luke 782]

30 minutes ago, birdguy said:

It's the technology learning curve I have problems with.  I already know how to read listen, watch, and remember.

That's good - I find those are the skills I need with technology as well. :)

Cheers!

[John_Cillis 2,406]

1 hour ago, HighBypass said:

John, a counterpoint to that part about wings turning the aeroplane if I may - sometimes a bit of rudder is required to counteract the adverse yaw encountered due to aileron drag, but it depends upon the plane's design I suppose. I never think about using the rudder in flight with the freeware Saab Viggen fighter in my hangar! LOL.

I've flown aileron-elevator RC gliders and like you say got bored of staying up there. I've also flown rudder-elevator RC gliders and done the same :)

 

Noel - yep sometimes the smartphones are a curse! I like technology, I love science fiction stories and movies. However, I'd think nothing over buying an old car over a brand new one. Heck, I'd get two - one practical, economical shopping trolley, and one with a simple 8-in-a-vee configured engine with a bucket or two for carburation, coupled to a beefy manual transmission driving the rear wheels!... and then probably end up running over a jaywalking pedestrian who couldn't even hear the Chevy or MOPAR due to listening to their bloody phone! 

 

As for flightsims that's a little different - I'm all for getting more immersion, but I would hope that it isn't too steep a learning curve - P3D is FSX evolved, but FSX is the comfy pair of shoes 

The only glider I ever flew was the original Radian, it used rudder and a very pronounced dihedral to turn the aircraft. I became so proficient I could do barrel rolls with it, flew it for about thirty flights then the battery went out after it reached cruising altitude and it nosedived into the asphalt pavement.  I decided that it was way too dangerous to fly what was advertised as a park flyer in a residential area, and even though they gave me a replacement glider, I never flew it.  It was interesting though, when I would thermal the hawks would circle in tandem with the glider, as if it were their God, LOL. 

I used the hawks to spot where the thermals were and could extend my flights up to thirty minutes.  But it gets tiring to stare at the sky for that long, I would start seeing spots before my eyes, simming I can do all day long, sometimes for 1214 hours or more.  I know the use of rudder, it has to be there.  I flew an Ercoupe and did not like the autocoordination, crosswind landings were a challenge, you had to come in crabbed rather than slipped.  I feel the slip is much more effective at handling crosswinds, so I would slip ever so slightly on approach during my light sport lessons.  Trike flying is even better because you can control the aircraft on all three axis if needed.  I can fly trikes in a 20 knot crosswind and do turns around a spot and S turns very easily with them.  My last trike flight was some years ago in NM, I was with the owner and we got caught in a gust front.  It took both of us taking turns to bring that beast back to earth.  Meanwhile someone we were supposed to join up with had to wait it out in his single place trike.  If I fly again, it will be a single place trike away from populated areas, we have lots of open space in AZ, especially along I-10 west of Palo Verde Nuclear Power plant.

Finally a funny story, I had a kite with a thousand feet of line.  One day I had it all the way out, then was reeling it back in when a tiny bird landed and perched on the line.  I was fit to be tied, I had to wait until the cute little guy took off.  Funniest moment of my life.

John

[Boomer 1,619]

On Monday, November 06, 2017 at 3:04 PM, tjstreak said:

FSX enjoys a number of advantages over P3d.  First is price.  A non academic version of P3d costs hundreds of dollars.  A copy of FSX, Steam Edition, can often be had for under $20.  This leads to the second advantage:  a large use base.  If you compare the number of people still using FSX, they greatly outnumber those using P3d and X-Plane.  This means developers should want to develop for this userbase, just because there is more money out there.  The third major advantage is because FSX has been around so long, there is a huge backcatalog of both freeware and payware.

The third advantage is what keeps me coming back to FSX.  (I have both FSX and P3d installed.)  I have found that P3d can misbehave just as much as FSX.  It always takes time to install and setup a new  program.

Of course, the best answer may be:  if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Your last line is curious given the FSX was never completed, abandoned by MicroSux while still fundamentally broken.

[birdguy 3,943]

Mark,

When I was going for my glider rating in a Schweizer 2-32 I was taught to lead my turns with rudder because the long wing has so much drag.

My instructor said fighter pilots were the  most difficult to teach because they thought the rudder pedals were foot rests.

Noel

[Chock 17,769]

18 hours ago, Cactus521 said:

I do not like use of the rudder one bit, except for very slight corrections on final.  I was outraged when that jet crashed during wake turbulence.  Pilots were taught to stomp on that rudder, it puts incredible stresses on the airframe.  The wings turn the plane, I learned from a glider pilot that had only ailerons on his RC aircraft.  He could keep that glider up in ridge lift until we got bored of the whole thing.  Then he could take it right down to his hand and grab it from the sky.  He was the best pilot I ever knew.  Thank goodness Light Sport came into being for that reason.  Older pilots tend to be very safe, they know their limits.  As they say, there are old pilots and there are bold pilots......

No passenger on an airliner is going to like you pulling the kind of bank angles you do regularly in a glider, i.e. in a glider when thermalling, as you know, it's nothing to be over at sixty degrees of bank, where the elevators are acting as the rudder more than the rudder actually is once it gets over past 45 degrees of bank. That's what is part of why flying gliders is so much fun, you turn them more like you would a Spitfire in a dogfight than you would a GA single or an airliner. Providing you are aware of the angle of attack and the stall speed, one might even say it is a bit safer to be doing a steep turn, since there is less differential in airspeed between the two wings when steeply banked, and it is helped a lot by feeling for when the stick starts transmitting the buffeting of the elevators to you, which allows you to take the thing right up to the limits, also helped by the fact that most gliders have a G-Meter too of course and most of them can take +4G no problem.

So yeah, a lot of the time in a glider, there's not so much need for a lot of rudder to hold it in a well-banked turn and that's why such turns are called aileron turns, and so beloved of WW1 and WW2 fighter pilots since they get the thing around as tight as it can go. But despite them being called aileron turns, where there is a need to use that rudder, especially on a glider, is to get it into that turn, since there is tons of adverse yaw to overcome with a big wingspan and no propwash on that tail to help kick it into the turn either. At that point, you really do need to give it plenty of rudder to get it into the turn without risking a spin.

Full rudder deflection is fine at low speeds, especially at the typical speeds a glider would be turning at; i.e. in a thermal where you actually want to be going as slow as you can get away with in order to stay in the thermal, it's at high speed where you can overstress the tailplane with large deflections. And in the case of the Airbus over New York, it wasn't only the full deflection at V_A which broke the tailfin off, it was the pilot continuously pumping it back and forth to full deflections either way in rapid succession, which effectively levered the thing off in the same way that if you were trying to snap off a tree branch, you'd lever it back and forth rapidly to get it to break.

But make no mistake, when hammering it between one area of lift and another in a glider, where you can easily be going much faster than most GA singles could ever go, kicking large deflections on the rudder at those speeds could potentially overstress the tailfin, and most likely would do, just like they did with that Airbus, although if I recall correctly, I think there are six massive lugs holding the tail onto an Airbus of that type, so the pilot must have really been giving it some to break those things.

[HighBypass 2,339]

LOL Noel - I hear you.  I have done a few hours in gliders, K13 and K21, not gone solo. As you and Alan say, you do indeed need rudder, leading with it into turns.

John - here's hoping you get to fly for real again. Clear Skies!

Speaking of rudder, I've been reading some anecdotes about the Curtiss C46 Commando's rudder... and how ineffective it can be when on the ground . The plane knows when you think you've used enough rudder to correct a deviation... and then she makes you realise.. NOPE! 

I think I'll leave my FSX C46 configured with a steerable tailwheel rather than castoring..