Flying HAS to be more difficult than this!!!!!!!

[Guest PaulL01]

>Two hat switches!! I use one as an eight position switch for >2D views and for panning in the virtual. I use the other one >for elec. trim. There are also many other switches/knobs for >possible trimming. Cool!Thanks Larry.Paul

[michal 44]

>to this: they all agreed that real-life flying (as far as >controlling the aircraft and making it do everything you >want) was a piece of cake compared to flying the PIC 767. Now obviously there is something wrong with this statement. Am I some kind of super pilot since I can fly 767PIC very well including full manual approaches and landings ? Of course not. I agree with what has been said - these guys are not proficient in the way joystick controllers work. You need some time o get the "feel" of the controls otherwise your first flying attempt - specially when you are used to big control columns in a real aircraft - will be disastrous. On the other hand those real 767 pilots who managed to transition to PC simulators testify that something like 767PIC is remarkable close to the real thing.Michael J.

[Guest]

If you want to see some true realism. Look at my B757 CATIIIc approach post in the PMDG forum.Your's Truly,CB :-walksmile

[LAdamson 240]

Went & checked it out. Excellent taxiway approach..... just as you said! At least during the yearly EAA "Air Adventure" flyins at Oshkosh, Wisconsin, they designate the taxiway as an active runway, so maybe that was the case here!! :)L.Adamson

[MartijnPleines 0]

>When a 10,000 hr. real pilot can't fly MSFS with any profiency, it's usually more a matter of not being use to a simulated computer inviroment and it's obvious restrictions, than the program itselfYes, that's exactly what I meant.

[Guest]

Hi, guys.If you want to real excitant experience with FS2k2, check this web.http://www.iespana.es/RutasPeligrosasFS2002Is in spanihs, but you have flightPlans for really difficult approaches, with possibility of download FMC programming for the best commercial airplanes.Try it!!Sergio

[Guest]

It seems to me that there is a big difference between lighting the fires and kicking the tires and off you go, and flying these planes by the numbers. I think that flying in the MS environment is as difficult as you want to make it. For instance, can you routinely and easilly configure your airplane for desired climb/descent/cruise at a given speed, manually, without the AP, at different weights? Do you plan your fuel so you arrive at your final approach point with the same amount of fue (and thus weight) every time? I certainly can't, and have been flying this sim for many an hour. This is my biggest complaint about many of the addons, both commercial and free. Commercial jet pilots work hard to master climb and descent profiles (targets speeds, throttle settings etc.) for different weights and weather conditions. Rob Young provided a good one for his Hawker V88 for Fly - based on the actual ones flown by Hawker pilots. Master that and the plane was relatively easy to get to the landing area consistenty (that is, if you could line it up, which I still have trouble with). What I would really like to have to make this more realistic would be some of those profiles to work with for the PIC 767 and the Dreamfleet 737.

[Guest GabrielR]

Coudnt agree more, maybe Im dumb, but making an IFR approach, crosswind, low visibility and trying not to land bouncing in the grass is still dificult for me, planning a fuel load and pax: even worse. After 4 years of flight simmimg Im still having trouble landing on the center line of the runway!!!

[Azapata87 173]

ive been flightsiming since fs98 I can land it on the centerline but without bouncing and on or near the runway numbers...only when I get lucky.:-)Andrew

[Guest]

I would prefer QuickTime or Windows Media!!The RealPlayer was all black!

[Guest]

Is simply comes down to this this (philosophically speaking): We all chose SIMMING for our own reasons and pleasure... We enjoy the challenge of 'tweaking', we enjoy the 'eye-candy' the '1000's of aircraft', the tremendous pleasure it brings to us in our moments of seclusion from life's normal trials and tribulations... We enjoy the forum discussions, the arguments, the comradery of 'simply simming' SOMETIMES ALONE, SOMETIMES WITH FRIENDS...We are an unusual bunch (ever tried explaining this hobby of ours to others?):-lolAny one of us has a 'story' and if ever we all got together in a big-room - WOW! what stories we could tell!! :)Barry, if you are still following this thread - 'WELCOME', 'ENJOY''PARTICIPATE'Lastly... we are a group of 'International Friends' let us never forget that! :)

[Azapata87 173]

lol everytime someone comes over they see me looking at some map(fsnav) and then switching to spot view then the cockpit then the map again lol :-) Everyone and i mean everyone asks me "whats the fun in that" "do you do missions" "Can you shoot down stuff". Andrew :-)

[brucek 38]

When I get the feeling the the ground is really coming up to meet me on touch-down, I'll believe that sims are real. We portray (for today's technology) a 3D world on a flat 2D panel, and it has limitations.I'd love to be able to simulate side load on the mains when a cross-wind landing isn't perfect. These sims just instantly "switch" to normal ground mode on landing. As all pilots know, you're still flying the lane while the wing is developing lift, although your 3 wheels are firmly on the ground.However, instrument flight is another thing, this does really well in the sim. All that lacks is the vertigo.Bruce.

[Guest]

>I have been using FS2002 for about 6 months now -- I can >download a new unfamiliar type aircraft , start it up , fly >and land it easily within minutes. Now, I am pretty sure >that, as a non-reallife flyer, I would find it impossible to >get into some advanced aircraft cockpit and just simply take >of and land in it. Probably couldn't even find where to put >the key in the ignition!!!!! >>So , is this really just a game? Is there some >aircraft/panel out there that really does simulate a >complete aircraft and the experience of flying? >First of all, in a anyone can fly a plane in a simulated environment.(excluding those 70 million dollar sims of course)Initially, MS intended this as an introductory learning tool. Introduce you to flight and the knowledge required to do it properly. But as time has passed, more and more people want non learning related eye-candy. So, while its not an FAA certified flight simulator(there is one that costs $795), It is very much more a learning tool than a game. I feel quite confident, that if I am ever flying as a passenger with a pilot friend and the need arises, I have a good understanding of what all the displays mean. I masy not handle a real world plane as well as the one in the sim but I'll still have a better chance at landing safely, than without the knowledge learned.Other evidence of this sims priority being a learning tool is all of the flight courses you must take. If this were just a game, those lessons would be 10 fold more vaigue.Pete

[Guest]

>Larry >>I placed two 18000 hr corporate pilots on MSFS and they >found the aircraft to be twitchy, far to sensitive and >lacking in feel. >>They were all over the place like newbies yet these guys fly >commercial simulators which themselves are different. Perhaps if they were using the FAA certified Yoke and rudder pedals($700 each) they would say it "felt better". Its a $70 dollar sim for jeesh sake. >>Maybe by FS2004 a number of weak areas in the sim will be >looked at including panel presentation, stopping the >ridiculous 2D/3D marriage,Don't know whay you would consider this ridiculous. This being an uncertified teaching tool, its smart to have the 2D panel with only the primary displays. That VC thing. While neat. Is just eyecandy. Even if it was functional. >Far better flight modelling capability especially in the >slow flight area. Go buy the $700 dollar FAA certified sim from Jeppsen.>Far Far better weather and Sky depictionDon't need the skies to look pretty to learn. >>Pete J.