Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Donations

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About auburntsts

  • Birthday 07/13/1966

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Dumfries, VA

Flight Sim Profile

  • Commercial Member
  • Online Flight Organization Membership
  • Virtual Airlines

About Me

  • About Me
    Builder/owner of RV-10 N728TT, PP ASEL-IA

Recent Profile Visitors

1,105 profile views
  1. As others have said, it is possible, at least in the US, but best to get professional medial advice and not rely on forum advice unless the poster is a respected AME. I suggest checking out Aircraft owners and Pilots Organization (AOPA), http://www.aopa.org/. They have a wealth of info on becoming a pilot. AOPA also allows you to post to their forums in the medical section anonymously and without having to be a AOPA member. Pilots of America, https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/, is also a good site to check out for all things aviation related. Good luck!
  2. I get what you are saying, but I'm not concerned as most of what you bring up simply is not anything I care about with one exception: Airport accuracy. And even then it is only an issue as far as the runway environment (specially runway and approach lighting) as being able to visually acquire it is the key as to whether a given approach can be continued all the way to a landing or having to go missed. This is why I want a 2-screen system: one for the panel and one for a forward out the window view. Anything beyond the runway environment (buildings, ramps, trees, grass, houses, etc) is of absolutely no interest. Also I've already got some dedicated IFR software, the problem is none of it can emulate my avionics. Plus the Nav databases are waaayy out of date and aren't updatable. I should note I've played around with different versions of MS Flight Sim over the decades (yes decades) and never found Flight Sims specifically, or computer gaming in general, very enjoyable (my 17 yr old son on the other hand...). To me a flight sim is a simply a tool and not an entertainment medium.
  3. Nope -- VR would be way over kill for what I'm trying to accomplish. Although I'm still learning, it would seem I can setup what I want for closer to $1500--new i5 7600K based PC, a 16"-24" inch touch screen monitor, and F1 G500/600 with GTN add-ons. I care nothing for scenery, traffic, pretty clouds, or entire simulated enroute IFR flights from airport to airport (I get enough of that flying my real world airplane). My intent is purely to set the ceilings and visibilities at or near minimums and practice approaches, system failures, and system integration. I guess I don't understand why I need a $3K investment to do that.
  4. I get using test prep packages, but I think too many folks use them as a crutch. By that I mean they help you pass the test but they typically don't really help you understand the material. If you understand the material the tests are easy. So my advice, focus on getting the most out of ground school whatever instructional format you choose.
  5. Yeah, I have the G1000 trainer too, but haven't used it since I got my ticket 4 years ago. Although the G1000 system logic is very similar to my current EFIS and radio setup (It's all Garmin after all), the buttonology is different enough that I'm willing to invest in a new PC, hardware, and software to get better emulation.
  6. No need. The weather in the sim can be set to whatever minimums I want. It doesn't have to look pretty with raindrops on the windshield and stuff like that. When you are in solid IMC in the real world it's like you are flying inside a ping pong ball. It's just solid off white unless you passing in and out of layers/individual clouds or flying through precip. None of that is necessary to accomplish what I want which typically is to break out at minimums (at or near DA on a precision approach, and at the MDA prior to the MAP on a non-precision approach), see the runway environment, transition to visual, and land OR go missed if no runway environment is in sight at the DA or the MAP. Now what I would like is dynamic weather in the form of changing ceilings, wind, and vis just like the real world as these can be very different on the approach than what ATIS or AWOS is reporting on the field.
  7. Thanks guys! All good info giving me lots to ponder.
  8. Concur on Flight1, but why P3D over FSX (which I already have) considering my relatively modest performance requirements? Great looking raindrops on the windscreen, terrain, other visuals have little appeal to me, at least at the moment.
  9. Here's an example of the setup I'm taking about, except I'd like to use a touch monitor and of course replace the G1000 with the G500/600-GTN 650 combo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwRiYI4L5FE What I don't know is which sim would implement this best as there's apparently multiple ways to the skin the cat.
  10. I think based upon what I want to do with the sim, I'll stick to either one of the sim's built-in aircraft (I got a boxed version of FSX) or perhaps one from one of the usual suspect 3rd party developers. The airframe really doesn't matter (although fixed gear is preferable) as it's all about the avionics. Speaking of which, the Flight1 G500/600 and GTN addons look like they fit the bill nicely. So any piston-single that is capable of stable 120kts approaches and is compatible with the Fight1 addons will work.
  11. I have ASA IP Trainer and On Top software and both are descent IFR sims, they just don't offer an option to switch between aircraft, much less anything akin to modern avionics (plus they aren't updateable or supported anymore). At the time they were probably the best "affordable" options. Packages like Elite were combined hardware and software packages back in the day and were prohibitively expensive. In the end, any aircraft package that doesn't emulate close to what I have, (full-up EFIS and IFR WAAS GPS) simply won't cut it. Otherwise I'm really no better off than using my old outdated programs.
  12. So is there a way to determine which 3rd party aircraft have 2D panels? I took a quick look at random aircraft from Carenado and Alabeo and there's nothing in the descriptions as to whether they support 2D panels or not, as far as I could tell.
  13. The problem with Elite is I can't customize it to match my avionics. I already have a steam gauge IFR trainer, but there's significant imitations with it in that I can't update the nav database (it's over 10 years old now) and there's no auto pilot. While it's still usable, as I have a completely glass panel in my own plane, I'll get more training bang for my buck by having the same panel as close as possible to what I fly with in the real world. Practicing things like buttonololgy, operational modes, and failure modes are just as important to operating a TAA as attitude flying is to basic IFR operations. .
  14. Alan, Thanks for that awesome post! I have a way ahead now. I own an RV-10 -- here's me and the plane in Homebuilt Camping at Oshkosh during AirVenture 2017. Although the plane will fly approaches at 90 KTS just fine, I typically shoot my approaches at 120 KTS as I find this speed a bit more stable, particularly when coupled. ATC likes that better too. In fact over Thanksgiving, ATC asked me to maintain best forward speed on the ILS 07 into KORL to sequence me in between jet traffic so I kept it at 150 KTS until I was on short final (it's nice to know you can if you have to). Anyway, so any low wing model (fixed gear preferably 2500- 3000GW category, but not a showstopper) that is stable at on approach at 120 KTS should work.
  15. Thanks Scott. Right now all I have is a an iPad mini (and I use GarminPilot as my EFB) and an old laptop that can't really run any of the platforms. Building my own PC has always been the plan as I did it for my son a few years ago. I already have a CH yoke and one monitor (albeit it could replacing), so beyond the touch screen monitor I don't want any additional controllers or hardware (beyond the PC itself). Do I need something else? And for those wondering why I'm hung up on the touch screen, I want to emulate my real plane's cockpit as much as I can so the procedures and flows are as similar as possible. I can live without it, but it would make for a more realistic environment. Si here's the big question. Assuming FSX, FSW, P3D, and X-plane can all do a 2-screen setup like I want what's the advantage of P3D since it's the most expensive software package? Also looking at X-Plane 11, can someone confirm that to do the 2-screen implementation that I want, that I'd need go the 2 copies of x-plane running on 2 networked computers route?
  • Create New...