A few questions about flying with the 152

[xender 459]

Hi guys!

I plan to fly around the world with this but after finishing my first flight in it i have a few questions:

1) Since this doesnt have autopilot i have to constantly make aileron and rudder trim adjustments. I have to be on top of the airplane every second to avoid losing control of the airplane. Do you have any tips about this? How can i archive leveled flight without doing constant corrections?

2) How can i get the distance to the vor station? I can tune it but i cant see the distance anywhere 0.o

thanks!

[Pegaso 53]

A huge project, Juan. Well, the C152 and C172 are the only somewhat flyable aircraft in MSFS, all other are -carefully spoken- absolute garbage. 

Ad 1) This means FLYING an aircraft. At least a virtual and a real Cessna achieve a pretty constant level only by her throttle setting - dependant on winds of course). The 152 has no elevator or rudder trim, so nothing can relieve you from permanent interaction.

Ad 2) There is no DME, so have a Tablet and GPS with you for that. 

And always have a tanker aircraft at your side, esp. across the oceans ;-)

Blue skies and happy landings

Fritz

[Nyxx 6,993]

The 172 G1000 makes far more since than the 152.

[xender 459]

13 minutes ago, Nyxx said:

The 172 G1000 makes far more since than the 152.

Yeah but there's so much missing from that G1000 that i cant stand it. I eve know a few flight plans that can crash the unit (Already reported on zendesk)

35 minutes ago, Pegaso said:

Ad 2) There is no DME, so have a Tablet and GPS with you for that.

You mean like flying with the "VFR Map" window open?

[Chock 17,769]

The default 152 only has basic avionics, since it is a training aeroplane, although it is also suitable for some short trips, but preferably not in IMC weather. This means that as great as the 152 is, it's not a great choice for a very long trip unless (in a real one) you have a GPS, which you kind of do in the sim because of the basic in flight map which is available to you, although it's not going to give you as much info as genuine GPS avionics would, so the map in the sim is kind of like using your mobile phone as a GPS when flying a real plane; okay at a push, but not ideal and certainly not what I'd want to rely on when flying around the world!

Another reason a 152 is not the best choice for a round the world trip, is its ability to clear terrain. It has a service ceiling of less than fifteen thousand feet, but even then since most of them don't have an oxygen system, going anywhere over about eight thousand feet for a prolonged period would not be a great idea unless you like ending up with a headache or blacking out from hypoxia is your idea of fun. That limited ability to go up high means it's not going to be able to clear terrain in many places around the world, for example, the runway at Mexico city is well over seven thousand feet above sea level and some peaks in the Sierra Nevada mountains in southern Spain reach up to over eleven thousand feet. This might limit the choice of places you can fly into and out of, and on a round the world trip, that's kind of the point, since it is a sightseeing venture amongst other things.

Since it is mostly intended to be a training aeroplane, the fact that you have to fly the 152 and correct its tendency to roll without an autopilot to assist you, is a plus point for its intended use as a trainer, but less endearing a feature if you are flying a long way. Keep in mind however, that at cruising altitude with the throttle back a bit, it won't roll quite so much, but you will still have to 'fly it'. Nevertheless, if you want to try to fly it around the world, this is not impossible and good luck, but I suspect the fact that you will have to route your trip carefully to avoid high terrain and have to manually fly it will mean as an experience, it'll get old real quick.

But, if you insist, here's how you get your distance to a nav aid with only basic avionics...

With the VORs not having DME capability, it is still possible to find your distance to a beacon, but you'll have to do it the old fashioned way: How you do that, is tune into two beacons. From this you can determine (approximately) which direction these beacons are from your aeroplane. When you know that, you can look at a map and draw a couple of bearing lines from your aeroplane to the beacons; where the lines intersect is your position; when you know that, you know (roughly) how far you are from them. This is what you had to learn how to do when doing the real PPL for cross country navigation exercises (years ago), although these days the PPL navigation stuff also includes using GPS so it's a bit easier and that's definitely a good thing. It's still useful to know how to do it the old way just in case your GPS breaks, but in all honesty, if that happens, the best thing to do is land at the nearest airport and get it fixed instead of making life hard for yourself.

If you really want to circumnavigate in a GA single, the 172 would be a better choice than the 152 with its GPS and its ability to fly hands off for long distances with the autopilot. It's still got a pretty low service ceiling, so you'll still have to steer around some terrain, but at least you can stick it on autopilot and enjoy the views.

Personally, if I was gonna try it, I'd pick one of the GA twins with modern avionics. Flying low over mountains at or near your service ceiling whilst loaded with fuel for a long leg in a single engined aeroplane (especially if you have failures selected in the sim) is not my idea of a relaxing trip. 🤣

[xender 459]

Thanks a lot guys for all the insight. Seems like i will be switching to the 172.

The reason i chose the 152 was because it felt like one of the most realistic/less buggy planes in the sim (Even more if you add the amazing mod). But, i will be switching to the 172 with gauges.

Thanks!

[badderjet 181]

1 hour ago, xender said:

2) How can i get the distance to the vor station? I can tune it but i cant see the distance anywhere 0.o

DME is missing, so file a ticket on Zendesk. IFR equipment unusable the way it is.

[gnirtS 2]

1 hour ago, badderjet said:

DME is missing, so file a ticket on Zendesk. IFR equipment unusable the way it is.

Yep, the DME, a basic, essential instrument missing is a bug.
VOR without a DME makes no sense at all.

It's kind of hard to fly a VOR-DME approach without a DME.  Relying on a GPS or VFR map isnt realistic or desired.  Its a basic fallback navigation instrument.  Even just a simple sanity check on a bog standard ILS approach needs a DME.

Its not only missing off there either - it doesnt seem to exist on the 172 either.  OBS works etc but no distance.

Edited September 6, 2020 by gnirtS

[snglecoil 1,828]

26 minutes ago, gnirtS said:

Yep, the DME, a basic, essential instrument missing is a bug.

DME (or equivalent GPS distance data) certainly makes instrument flying easier and opens up several additional approaches that require DME. It’s not mandatory, however. A single nav/com with CDI can get it done legally. I don’t think I’d want to try it outside of the sim. 2 navs would be very doable. You just have to pick a suitable approach.

[gnirtS 2]

Generally if any form of VOR nav is fitted it comes with DME (its a bug because there are fields for DME on some aircraft but never actually get digits in them).  TO me it looks more like they forgot to put it in and nobody noticed.

Although not huge GPS v slant distance means the two aren't exactly the same thing.

[sd_flyer 6,040]

3 hours ago, Pegaso said:

The 152 has no elevator or rudder trim, so nothing can relieve you from permanent interaction.

 

Yes it does

rudder trim

 Elevator trim

[Chock 17,769]

Ground adjustable tabs on most aeroplanes are not normally intended to be adjusted by pilots; it's more of an engineer task, since you actually have to bend the metal.

[snglecoil 1,828]

27 minutes ago, gnirtS said:

Generally if any form of VOR nav is fitted it comes with DME

That is just not true anymore 

[gnirtS 2]

2 minutes ago, snglecoil said:

That is just not true anymore 

Ive yet to come across one that hasnt (and i see a few...).

Amongst other things a backup method of navigation is pretty essential (and relying on a GPS alone is foolhardy for various reasons).

 

[snglecoil 1,828]

@gnirtS, Speaking from my own experience I’ve flown 10 different Cessna 172s in the past year. Only 2 of them where equipped with DME and that was only because they were G1000s. All others where dual Nav with GPS in lieu of DME. None of the 152s in my club nor the flight school where I have done some training are equipped with DME. But it looks like your experience is different.