Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Bigbluss

Not sure why people say that this is just a VFR sim

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

I've been using MSFS extensively for the past few months and I have to say, I'm confused about why people say this is a sightseeing sim only.

Using the JustFlight Arrow 3 and Aerosoft CRJ addons, alongside the GNS530 mod, I've been able to complete the PilotEdge Cat-ratings, I-ratings and SkyHigh Charters. For those unacquainted, these are detailed and challenging tests that require internalising a huge amount of information pertaining to instrument (and VFR) flight, and putting it to use on their environment.

 

These courses have required me to fly all sorts of situations, including but not limited to:

Class D,C and B departures, arrivals and transitions

VFR routes through busy/complex airspace (take a look at the VFR coastal routes around KLAX for an example. Impossible to fly without a capable suite of instruments)

VOR/DME navigation.

Visual navigation.

ODP procedures out of non towered airports.

ODP procedures out of towered airports.

IFR without sids and stars, with radar vectors to the route.

IFR on sids and stars, including ATC required leg activations and direct to routing.

Vectored ILS approaches with or without HILT or PTs, RNAV approaches, localiser approaches, VOR B circling approaches, missed approaches with holds.

Non vectored full approaches from a feeder point through the IAF IF and FAF, all of which you can discern via DME, radials, GPS or a timer.

DME arc approaches using the GPS or radials and DME.

Contacting ATIS for the weather and I've found it extremely accurate where I've been flying.

As far as I can tell from people more knowledgeable, the Arrow and CRJ have realistic flight dynamics and systems.

The point here isn't to list off as many acronyms as possible, but rather to show that there really isn't much in the way of instrument work that you can't achieve to a very high level in this sim.

I know people enjoy the super high fidelity jets like PMDG (I'm one of them), but there's far more to instrument flying than turning on the autopilot in a 320 and watching it follow the magenta line down to minimums. There is an absolute wealth of learning and enjoyment to be had from flying the needles or GPS systems. I've found the beautifully dynamic and visceral environment, coupled with flying in poor weather whilst trying to perform an instrument scan and communicate with ATC, to be an immensely rewarding experience.

Perhaps if one has mastered instrument flying and refuses to use anything but the most complex add-on airliners, there's an argument that this sim doesn't meet their IFR needs. That said, I feel like there's a contingent who believe that IFR == vnav and autopilot holds. This viewpoint is flawed imo. I bet they could benefit a bit from trying instrument flying by hand in this sim.

 

Edited by Bigbluss
  • Like 26
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

While I’m sure there’s varying opinions on why some call it a VFR only sim, I think a large part of it is the very poor implementation of a proper flight management system.  They took older FSX code and thought that it would be acceptable today.  Or, and this is my guess, they didn’t have the background or expertise to tell good from bad.  At least it’s fixable, and that’s why I believe they brought the WT team onboard.

Edited by Gilandred
  • Like 4
  • Upvote 2

Gary

 

Ryzen 5800X, EVGA FTW3 RTX 3080, Asrock Steel Legend X570, 32 GB Trident RGB 3200, Seasonic Prime 850W

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bigbluss said:

Perhaps if one has mastered instrument flying and refuses to use anything but the most complex add-on airliners, there's an argument that this sim doesn't meet their IFR needs. That said, I feel like there's a contingent who believe that IFR == vnav and autopilot holds. This viewpoint is flawed imo. I bet they could benefit a bit from trying instrument flying by hand in this sim.

Well put.  I find it ironic often the same people who see MSFS as a scenery only game cut P3D all kinds of slack for 'flying on rails' with completely phony or absent turbulence effects, as if that is a better simulation of realistic flight.  I have found myself instrument flying by hand vastly more than I ever did in P3D and also use autopilot holds when I get tired of hand flying, and that lately has been in the Citation L.  And lots of ILS/VNAV approaches all of which work every bit as good as ancient FSX/P3D is. My biggest priority is for ATC to be improved and to be synced w/ weather conditions as the two appear often to be disconnected completely, which really seems like a minor issue that simply has been left on a back burner to deal with after other priorities.  

  • Like 6
  • Upvote 2

Noel

System:  9900K@5.0Ghz@1.21v all cores, MSI MPG Z390M GAMING EDGE AC, Noctua NH-D15S, Corsair Vengeance 32Gb LPX 3200mHz DDR4, Sabrent NVme 2Tb x 2, RTX 3080 Ti FE, Corsair RM 850W PSU, Win10 Pro, Dell curved 3440x1440, Saitek Yoke, TQ & Cessna Trim Wheel, UNLIMITED frames vSync to 30Hz in P3D 4.5 & MSFS.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very easy to be critical of the base MSFS when people are running 3rd Party - Aircraft, AI Traffic, Scenery, ATC, Weather, Flight Planning & Navigation.

I occasionally pop back into p3d to fly my favourite aircraft, but then realise how much I've spent over the years getting it into the position it's in, compared to FS - where the only thing I use 3rd party is the ATC (which I also use on P3D) yet prefer FS - even though 90% of my time is at 40,000ft+ .... 

No small thanks to Working Title though..... do we class their stuff as an "Addon" now, or a beta (?), either way my spend on FS is a fraction of what it was in P3D and I already have a far better looking and performing sim in which I rarely fly VFR. If detractors want to write it off as a scenery viewer more fool them....

 

G

 

 

  • Like 4
  • Upvote 1

Gary Davies aka "Gazzareth"

Simming since 747 on the Acorn Electron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Bigbluss said:

Perhaps if one has mastered instrument flying and refuses to use anything but the most complex add-on airliners, there's an argument that this sim doesn't meet their IFR needs

As a GA simpilot, I definitely do not fall into this category, but there are such obvious flaws in the flightplanning implementation that I really cannot say that it meets my IFR needs.

As an example, if I am flying a flightplan in a Garmin GPS and wish to skip to a waypoint in the plan, I should be able to highlight the waypoint I want to fly to, and push Direct-to, Enter, Enter.

If were to do that in MSFS, my entire flightplan would be gone, and if it works at all, I would be flying from "USER" to the selected waypoint, end of story.

You might say... OK that is a bug.. but there are a number of these shortcomings, and at some point, I have to say:  This does not meet my IFR needs.. :cool:

I do have faith in WT though.. and am patiently waiting for SU4 / 5 / 6..

..and like you, I am carefully using the IFR capabilities that MSFS does offer..

Edited by Bert Pieke
  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Bert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, Bert Pieke said:

As a GA "pilot", I definitely do not fall into this category, but there are such obvious flaws in the flightplanning implementation that I really cannot say that it meets my IFR needs.

As an example, if I am flying a flightplan in a Garmin GPS and wish to skip to a waypoint, I should be able to highlight the waypoint I want to fly to, and push Direct-to, Enter, Enter.

If were to do that in MSFS, my entire flightplan would be gone, and if it works at all, I would be flying from "USER" to the selected waypoint, end of story.

You might say... OK that is a bug.. but there are a number of these shortcomings, and at some point, I have to say:  This does not meet my IFR needs.. :cool:

I do have faith in WT though.. and am patiently waiting for SU4 / 5 / 6..

The gtn750 mod is worth  a look.  Saves flight plans, and the premium version ( that loads METAR and Navigraph data) is currently free while it is in beta.

Be aware they are struggling with tracking down a MSFS memory related CTD error that effects some users though.

Edited by Glenn Fitzpatrick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Glenn Fitzpatrick said:

The gtn750 mod is worth  a look.

Agreed, it is really good, but does not fix any of the underlying flightplan issues.

  • Like 1

Bert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

Agreed, it is really good, but does not fix any of the underlying flightplan issues.

Hopefully Asobo do that with SU4 May 20th.

  • Like 2

Ron Hamilton

 

"95% is half the truth, but most of it is lies, but if you read half of what is written, you'll be okay." __ Honey Boo Boo's Mom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gilandred said:

While I’m sure there’s varying opinions on why some call it a VFR only sim, I think a large part of it is the very poor implementation of a proper flight management system.  They took older FSX code and thought that it would be acceptable today.  Or, and this is my guess, they didn’t have the background or expertise to tell good from bad.  At least it’s fixable, and that’s why I believe they brought the WT team onboard.

Like is said here "this is my guess"................. Take old code from FSX to make it work in a modern environment with a whole new approach to the infrastructure would have been extremely difficult and impractical.

 


AHS712D Alvaro Escorcia KSGR/OMAA
AirHispania Virtual Airline
MSFS / ASUS TUF Gaming F15-Refresh-144Hz / 11GenIntel (R)Core (TM) i7-11800H
NVIDIA-GeForce-RTX3060GPU / 1TB-Samsung SSD / 32GB-RAM
SAMSUNG-SmartMonitor-M7-32"4K

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Bert Pieke said:

As an example, if I am flying a flightplan in a Garmin GPS and wish to skip to a waypoint in the plan, I should be able to highlight the waypoint I want to fly to, and push Direct-to, Enter, Enter.

+1ⁿ
MSFS Navdata is lacking significant quantities of published instrument approach procedures (IAP) for the USA.  

MSFS avionics lack significant features of real world equivilents that have been closely modeled in previous sims for more than 10 years.  Embarassing! 

Similar to Bert, when I fly in IMC I am flying strictly ILS approaches in MSFS and flying most of those by hand. That has often required flying approaches to runways that would not be the active runway today for the same conditions for aircraft comparably equipped.  It also requires flying holds and procedure turns by hand, with perhaps AP altitude control.  Those are not limitations in FS9, FSX, P3D, or XP.  So while instruments approaches can be flown by hand, not all of them are available in the sim, and again, most lacking capabilities have long since been available in sims.


 

  • Like 4

Frank Patton
MSFS MS Store version (for now!); MSI Z490 WiFi MOB;  i7 10700k Comet Lake 3.8 Ghz CPU; Ripjaws 32GB DDR4 3600; Gigabyte RTX 3070 TI 8GB OC Gaming; cool MasterCase Pro H500M; Corsair H100i Pro; Corsair Gold RMX850X PSU; ASUS VG289 4K 27"; Honeycomb Alpha & Bravo, Crosswind 3's w/dampener.  AOPA Member #07379126. 
Former USAF meteorologist & ground weather school instructor
                       
"I will never put my name on a product that does not have in it the best that is in me." - John Deere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, wlix261 said:

Like is said here "this is my guess"................. Take old code from FSX to make it work in a modern environment with a whole new approach to the infrastructure would have been extremely difficult and impractical.

 

I am not convinced that is the case.  There seems to be an understanding of current aviation in previous sims that does not seem to be in MSFS.  It just seems to me that those doing the coding are watching videos of actual aviation and flight operations and then attempting to code that which they understood, or felt they understood.

  • Like 5

Frank Patton
MSFS MS Store version (for now!); MSI Z490 WiFi MOB;  i7 10700k Comet Lake 3.8 Ghz CPU; Ripjaws 32GB DDR4 3600; Gigabyte RTX 3070 TI 8GB OC Gaming; cool MasterCase Pro H500M; Corsair H100i Pro; Corsair Gold RMX850X PSU; ASUS VG289 4K 27"; Honeycomb Alpha & Bravo, Crosswind 3's w/dampener.  AOPA Member #07379126. 
Former USAF meteorologist & ground weather school instructor
                       
"I will never put my name on a product that does not have in it the best that is in me." - John Deere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, fppilot said:


Similar to Bert, when I fly in IMC I am flying strictly ILS approaches in MSFS and flying most of those by hand. That has often required flying approaches to runways that would not be the active runway today for the same conditions for aircraft comparably equipped.  It also requires flying holds and procedure turns by hand, with perhaps AP altitude control.  Those are not limitations in FS9, FSX, P3D, or XP.  So while instruments approaches can be flown by hand, not all of them are available in the sim, and again, most lacking capabilities have long since been available in sims.


 

 

I don't recall the default NavData in FSX or p3d being amazingly good - or ever updated. That was Navigraph's whole business model.......

 

32 minutes ago, fakeflyer737 said:

Hopefully Asobo do that with SU4 May 20th.

Unfortunately WT have already said to "temper your expectations" for SU4 as they are really only just getting going on that side of things, so doubt that there will be any massive improvement unless Asobo improved it before they started work....

 

G

  • Like 2

Gary Davies aka "Gazzareth"

Simming since 747 on the Acorn Electron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, Gazzareth said:

I don't recall the default NavData in FSX or p3d being amazingly good - or ever updated. That was Navigraph's whole business model.......

I did not speak to FSX or P3D default data.  What I said was that GPS technology and nearly current Navdata have been infused into sims for over 10 years.  So what was the problem with MSFS.  It is there to reach out and touch, and has been for years.  Garmin Trainers, Navagraph.  They did not embody either, or an equivilent in the initial release or do-date.

Edited by fppilot
  • Like 1

Frank Patton
MSFS MS Store version (for now!); MSI Z490 WiFi MOB;  i7 10700k Comet Lake 3.8 Ghz CPU; Ripjaws 32GB DDR4 3600; Gigabyte RTX 3070 TI 8GB OC Gaming; cool MasterCase Pro H500M; Corsair H100i Pro; Corsair Gold RMX850X PSU; ASUS VG289 4K 27"; Honeycomb Alpha & Bravo, Crosswind 3's w/dampener.  AOPA Member #07379126. 
Former USAF meteorologist & ground weather school instructor
                       
"I will never put my name on a product that does not have in it the best that is in me." - John Deere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bert Pieke said:

As an example, if I am flying a flightplan in a Garmin GPS and wish to skip to a waypoint in the plan, I should be able to highlight the waypoint I want to fly to, and push Direct-to, Enter, Enter.

When I'm going to choose an arrival procedure I go to LittleNM, look at which procedure works best, then next select the destination airport in the flight plan, chose Direct-To, then select and activate the approach procedure.  Always works fine.  I haven't tried to select an enroute waypoint for Direct-To, so will try that next time up and see what goes wrong.


Noel

System:  9900K@5.0Ghz@1.21v all cores, MSI MPG Z390M GAMING EDGE AC, Noctua NH-D15S, Corsair Vengeance 32Gb LPX 3200mHz DDR4, Sabrent NVme 2Tb x 2, RTX 3080 Ti FE, Corsair RM 850W PSU, Win10 Pro, Dell curved 3440x1440, Saitek Yoke, TQ & Cessna Trim Wheel, UNLIMITED frames vSync to 30Hz in P3D 4.5 & MSFS.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This just in:  Asobo is building a platform to attract a new cadre of potential enthusiasts via console as their initial exposure, some of which will go on to join the others in the asylum.  It's no wonder they haven't yet arrived to the same level of systems sophistication, and even some basic flight planning refinements the previously initiated yearn for.  So no, this is not just in--this was obvious from the start.  


Noel

System:  9900K@5.0Ghz@1.21v all cores, MSI MPG Z390M GAMING EDGE AC, Noctua NH-D15S, Corsair Vengeance 32Gb LPX 3200mHz DDR4, Sabrent NVme 2Tb x 2, RTX 3080 Ti FE, Corsair RM 850W PSU, Win10 Pro, Dell curved 3440x1440, Saitek Yoke, TQ & Cessna Trim Wheel, UNLIMITED frames vSync to 30Hz in P3D 4.5 & MSFS.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Tom Allensworth,
    Founder of AVSIM Online


  • Flight Simulation's Premier Resource!

    AVSIM is a free service to the flight simulation community. AVSIM is staffed completely by volunteers and all funds donated to AVSIM go directly back to supporting the community. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. Thank you for your support!

    Click here for more information and to see all donations year to date.
  • Donation Goals

    AVSIM's 2020 Fundraising Goal

    Donate to our annual general fundraising goal. This donation keeps our doors open and providing you service 24 x 7 x 365. Your donation here helps to pay our bandwidth costs, emergency funding, and other general costs that crop up from time to time. We reset this goal every new year for the following year's goal.


    53%
    $13,405.00 of $25,000.00 Donate Now
×
×
  • Create New...