Why am I not surprised? The signals from the folks in Redmond are mixed, but the news seems to be grim for Microsoft Flight Simulator, the popular flying game that predated by a good stretch the advent of the Windows operating system. (Many of our readers, it should be noted, can not say the same.)
Employees at the program's developer, ACES, were laid off as part of Microsoft's 5,000 employee downsizing last week, and the company won't say if it's going to shelve Flight Sim altogether, take it internal or what. All you get out of them is, that the company is committed to gaming and to flying games. Whatever that means.
I, for the record, am not a Microsoft Flight Sim fanatic. Don't get me wrong, I admire the game, and am appreciative of what Microsoft has done with it. I can trace my Flight Sim experiences back to the early 80's when my dad installed a copy of the software and on the family TRS80 computer. It was horrible. The trick to not crashing every time out was to anticipate the lag time in the system and feed in just the right number of key strokes at just the right time to keep disaster at bay. It was nothing like flying.
The game has improved tremendously over the years, and it's a lot more like flying now. On a good computer, the graphics are beautiful, the action is smooth and the details are rich and realistic. You can get a good semblance of the experience of an actual flight, with all the airport lights, gear horn sounds and even avionics functionality. And the best part is the terrain, which is better than ever. There are online communities of people who share the experience, too, flying virtual airlines, creating upgrades and customizations and scenery. It's great fun for a lot of folks.
But just who those folks are and what they do with their experience is something that's not entirely clear. Do kids who get into Flight Sim wind up learning to fly? Sure. But are they kids who wouldn't have learned to fly anyway? In most cases, probably not. And are there grownups who take their love of Flight Sim and translate that into a love of actual airplanes? There are probably a few.
Several years back Microsoft worked on making that link between flying and sim'ing stronger. They teamed with King Schools to get instruction into the program and with Patty Wagstaff to show the users how it's done. And they discovered in the process what most everybody had suspected all along. People who play flight sim games are gamers and people who fly airplanes are pilots. Is there an overlap? Sure, just as there is between people who play fly fishing games on their Nintendo Wii and those who hit the streams for real. But is that link significant. I don't know anyone in either industry who thinks it is.
This is not to say that there's no benefit in flight simulation games. There clearly is some knowledge and familiarity to be gained by playing them. But the dream that some folks held 20 years ago that Flight Sim would bring scores of new pilots into the ranks is now known to be fantasy.
And I wouldn't worry too much about the game itself. History has shown us that if there's money to be squeezed out of any product, someone will be there to do the squeezing.
And Flight Simulator is a well honed, fun and interesting game that gives a flying-like experience to those who play it. There's certainly some value in that. But my advice would be to go to the airport instead, where the experience you can get is exactly like flying.
All Comments
I can certianly understand a pilot looking down on those who only "play" at being pilots, but there are a number of us who use flight sim that are every bit as into flying as many of you pilots. There are many reasons we don't actually run out to the airport and take flying lessons. The cost and the time necessary to devote to it are two that figure in my own circumstances. I did take lessons way back in the 70's, but then work took me in a different direction. I still had the urge to learn more about it though and Flight Sim has provided that vehicle. I also subscribe to and read every issue of Flying Magazine cover to cover every month. I promote general aviation every chance I get and enjoy learning as much about it as I can. Flight Sim has tought me more about flying than those lessons years ago did, and while it may not inspire everyone who uses it to fly, I'll bet it encourages some, and that is a good thing.
Ditto to what Bill said. When my four kids get older, I will have the time an money to get my PPL. Until then, reading Flying Magazine, belonging to AOPA, and flying in an FSX community will have to suffice. When I am ready, I will be able to buy into the airplane two of my law partners own. Are there kids who play FSX and then play 'World of Warcraft' or 'Call of Duty'? Sure. Do pilots and people who hope to be pilots fly MSFS? Yes. Just check out the AOPA forums.
I'm with Bill. I used to fly years ago and realized that it's not something I could financially support. Now a days I get my "flying" kicks in by parking at the local airport with a scanner and occasionally "flying" MS Flightsim. I never saw Flightsim as an entry step to real flight. It's for us dreamers and others who can't afford the entry fee.
I have to disagree with the author on many points as I use FSX as a procedure trainer almost daily. Sure it will do very little in the way of teaching one how to "land" a small aircraft, but it does wonders in showing that person how to set up an approach, how to fly a pattern accurately. Allows you to practice slips and severe x-wind approaches. Teaches you the mysteries of the VOR and how to hand fly ILS approaches. All of this for free and in the comfort of your own home?! I think it's a fabulous tool for all of these things. Considering it costs less than 1/2 hour dual I don't care that I cannot log the hours spent flying the program. Where it matters will be the next time I want to practice something that might be too expensive or too dangerous in real life.
This program running on the right hardware and treated with the proper respect proves immediately is far from a "game". Perhaps the author should not have tried to "play" it and instead looked at it for what it is. A fancy link trainer for the 2000's.
Bill is flat wrong. I use MS Flight Simulator to brush up on my skills before I fly. It is an amazingly sophisticated piece of software. Many of my pilot friends use flight simulator for practice too. Even Richard Collins wrote that he was using Xplane to keep his head in the game while he was not able to fly his airplane. It is far more cost efficent than burning time in a plane, learning how an instrument works. We would love articles that gave more information on the flights, approaches you write about, so we could fly them with Flight simulator as we may not get to that part of the country. Flying magazine could expand its readership base by not sticking their nose up at the little guy, which is what this article did.
I too have to disagree with the slightly negative comments made by the original author. While 'flying' MSFS will never teach you all you need to know about real world flying in an actual moving aircraft, it will get you really close to many of the fundamentals just as others have stated in response to the original article.
Each and Every time I have went up in a real aircraft, I have impressed beyond belief my pilot friends with my abilities to fly the real deal, all from 'flying' my desktop sim and now, my Full Size LJ45 sim. I dont say this to brag, but to stress to those in the flying community that although MSFS may be marketed as a 'game', it can be a great tool for learning many important aspects of real world aviation, and at a price that cannot be beat.
A very good example to take it farther is the fact that once I was given the chance to sit up front on a C40 (Navy 737NG). I was able to show the entire start up sequence to the crew that was showing the plane. They asked, "How did you know all of that?" I was able to respond, "I have a very realistic 3rd party add-on to Microsoft FS".
I say all this to point out that I think it's safe to say there's more folks that have been drawn to real world aviation, even if they are not pilots, because of this long standing *game* title from Microsoft. I know it did for me- I changed my major in college to Aviation Operations & Administration because of my love of flight simulation and fly each time I get the chance. Hopefully MS will bring the title back, as everyone was greatly looking forward to FS11.
We need to stop thinking of Flight Simulator as a "game". Unless, that is, you want to think of the big Level D sims we use at the airlines as "games"! (Actually, some of us do think of them that way, or perhaps as something closer to an amusement park ride - at least I always looked forward to getting to have a go at them, and still would today, after having retired!)
Microsoft Flight Simulator, as well as several other products that have achieved similar levels of maturity and realism, is a real "simulator" in just about every sense of the word. It differs from the most advanced airline versions only in degree of realism, and most of that difference lies in the area of hardware. If you look at the effects that some people have achieved by using real airline nose sections as hardware (check out Project 727 as an excellent example) you will see how realistic Flight Simulator can be with some top notch hardware!
Most of those who enjoy using Flight Simulator are, or more likely have become, real aviation enthusiasts in their own right. This is of tremendous importance, because the world of aviation is a small one, at least in terms of those who actually do it, as opposed to those who merely use it as transportation. We need many more people who "enjoy" flying, in either of its forms (real and virtual), to form a support base for those of us who are privileged to actually be doing some real flying. Especially in a political sense. We need all the support we can get to have the political clout to continue to enjoy the privileges we have in this country. Every flight simmer is not only a potential pilot, but a real aviation enthusiast as well, and that can only be good for us!
In addition, we have yet to even scratch the surface of the benefits, in terms of money and time, that can be had by using Flight Simulator as a training aid, FAA approved or not. The US Navy did the pioneering work here, and the results are in -- much lower student attrition in pilot training when FS is available as a study and practice aid. Instrument training costs could be cut significantly by using FS as part of an integrated training program, for review and introduction of concepts and procedures. Again, this does not depend upon FAA approval! (MSFS is superior to all of the lower end "approved" software in certain important aspects, including visual imagery.)
American Airlines, my own alma mater, no doubt saved a buck or two as a result of my flying the LDS 767 (a very realistic 767 add-on for MSFS) before training sessions! And I'm sure that I was not the only airline pilot to have done so; although to be sure, the ranks of airline pilots who go to such lengths are no doubt thin. But the truth is that the ranks of airline pilots who actually enjoy flying (as evidenced by flying light airplanes, gliders, or the like on their days off) is equally thin!
But for the cost of flying today, Flight Sim would have already been the entry nudge into real flying for thousands of people. For most, Flight Sim is a necessary sublimation of the urge to fly; an urge that, for most, must needs remain over the horizon of experience because, sadly, personal flying in the real world has become a sport of the well-to-do. Even the Light Sport program in the USA will not change that.
So, for now at least, we need to embrace both the product and the community it has created. They are kindred spirits, and will be quite valuable allies in our quest to keep the love of flying and all things aeronautical alive.
I disagree with the main point of the article as to whether or not the value in SIMs lead to truly becomming a pilot. (not only MS). I am an instrument pilot with my own aircraft. I appreciate the support that the outside community is giving to SIMs which has allowed me to obtain a craft like mine,photograph my own panel, configure it with my gauges, GPS and then practice approaches. I have found it to dramatically increase competence throught total familiarization with the added pressure of multi-tasking during an approach.
I don't necessarily blame MS either for their business decision as the current core product is about as good as it needs to be but I am confident the third parties will continue to develop its enhancements.
Boy did Bill miss the mark on this one IMHO. I was a FS flyer and it was that which drew me into real flying. Like a lot of folks, my income didn't let me take up flying while I was younger and Flight Sim filled that yearning nicely. It made my transition to flying real airplanes easier. I use it to practice in-cockpit procedures/emergencies when the real weather prevents real flying, and has been even more helpful as I climb the pilot training ladder to multi-engine instrument flying. It's not a replacement for the real thing, but it has its place and is a useful adjunct. I also get to fly airplanes in Flight Sim that I will never get to fly in real life. As a rule, flying in Flight Sim is in many ways tougher than the real thing but as aircraft models have improved, they are getting closer. I live on the west coast and mountain flying can be tricky. I use FS to recce my routes which provides a mental imprint of what the journey will look like. Flying, real or simulated is like anything else, you get out of it what you put in to it.
Microsoft is making a mistake by ending one of the most popular programs they put out. I have been a pilot for over 30 years and have flown all kinds of aircraft for thousands of hours. I still fly both privately and professionally. Yet, I never miss a day without some time spent with FS2004. I use it to stay current in procedures and enjoy flying aircraft I don't or will never fly in real life. Sometimes I can get just as much satisfaction from the flight sim.
Microsoft is not just hurting the many happy users. There are hundreds of small companies that provide add-on software in the form of aircraft, scenery and utilities for flight sim versions. I'm positive this will put an end to those businesses. Not something we need to be doing at this time.
MSFS is not a "game". It is a simulator that can be used as a game and, as stated by most of the respondents, used to enhance skills of pilots and non pilots alike.
Richard Collins comments support this reality.
Beyond offering pilots and non pilots the opportunity to operate in a virtual environment which ranges from imaginary and playful to nearly virtual of actual conditions, it also can provide a relatively cheap introduction to many who would not be able to get to an airport.
I say that the loss of MSFS is significant, and a vacuum that I can only hope X Plane can fill
I too have used the MSFS to brush up on approaches that I will be flying on my yearly check ride. I can run through all the approaches I will likely be asked to demo in very little time. Also, I am not tying up the airspace system while doing so. And, in these tough economic times, it is a reasonable thing to do.
I would also like to point out the fact that although not making me current on approaches, it does make me more efficient. I notice no surprises and only need to follow what I had practiced on MSFS. Again, not a fun as the real thing.
I too have used the MSFS to brush up on approaches that I will be flying on my yearly check ride. I can run through all the approaches I will likely be asked to demo in very little time. Also, I am not tying up the airspace system while doing so. And, in these tough economic times, it is a reasonable thing to do.
I would also like to point out the fact that although not making me current on approaches, it does make me more efficient. I notice no surprises and only need to follow what I had practiced on MSFS. Again, not a fun as the real thing.
I am a licensed private pilot, who via freeby software included with the purchase of my computer in the late '80's, had an old version of FS. I played with it some, getting enamored with flying out of Meigs Field in FS. After I learned to fly, and got my private pilot license, I moved to Naperville, IL, and flew out of Bolingbrook's Clow International Airport, which is only about 40 miles from Meigs. I planned to actually fly there for fun, but the combination of congested airspace, and a $39.00 landing fee at Meigs gave me pause. So, I decided to load up FS and try it on that. To my surprise, even though it was an early version, it had VOR's. However, it did not provide any flight planning software, or sectional maps, so it was difficult to plan a trip. Then, I thought that maybe I could use my 'actual' sectional maps to see if they worked with FS. I planned the trip just as I would plan a real flight, then flew it in FS. It was like an instrument flight with no visuals outside until I got to the airport, and the program operated in 'real' time. Amazingly, I arrived at Meigs right on time exactly where I was plotted to arrive using my real sectional maps!! I was very impressed, not only that it was realistic timewise and mapwise, and that the navigational instruments really worked just like the real ones, but that it actually had the very small, one short runway, Clow "International" Airport in Bolingbrook in the database! (I have no idea how Clow got the word "International" in its name.....must have been a joke or something). I have since moved from the area, and had often thought of planning a trip to Meigs, as I would love to have actually landed there. Now, unfortunately, due to the unfortunate 'backstabbing, bully' tactics of the disgusting Mayor Daily of Chicago, Meigs is no more. Now, I refuse, for any reason, business or otherwise, to ever return to Chicago until Daily is gone, but I do have a renewed interest in this FSX version of flight simulator. Perhaps I will go buy a copy and try it out. Hopefully, Meigs Field is still in FSX.
I tend to disagree with the author that there is not a significant link between those that use FS and those that fly. Personally when I was doing my flight training, I used FS extensively to practise approaches, flying in the pattern and simulating take offs and landings. It was invaluable in helping develop the sight picture of the landing enviroment. I continue to use it today, especially since up here in the north east the flying weather has been horrible and my opportunities to fly limited.
It also serves to continue a life long hobby of scale modeling, only now, done on the computer developing add-ons for FS, bringing back to life aircraft from the golden age allowing enthusiasts, providing the opportunity to experience flying in a whole new way.
I personally thought that FS2004 was the best version released and FSX although very "pretty" was, and remians, diffuclt to get the most out of its capabilities with anything other than a high end gaming computer. I do hope that this is not the end of Flight Simulator, but if it is, with the continued third party support of both FS9 and FSX, it will still have a very long life in "retirement"
There are thousands of us pilot wanna be's out there who for various reasons cannot make that leap into the real left seat.
For me, MSFS keeps the dream alive and keeps me engaged in the aviation world, along with Flying Magazine, AOPA, and Plane and Pilot magazines. So, you get the picture?
Occasionally I get to fly with someone, and they are always impressed with how much I know about procedures and instruments. They tell me their flying experience that day was better because it was like having a co-pilot, instead of a nervous passenger. So even the guy who is a real pilot, just got an indirect benefit from a flight simulator.
When the time comes that I am able to devote the time and money to real flying, it will be because my time using flight simulators, both X-Plane, and FSX kept me going and interested in piloting.
Without those tools, flying might be enigmatic and intimidating to me and others. Flight simulators are a much safer and economical way to determine if you have the passion, the aptitude and love of aviation to be a pilot.
Do you pilots really want a unsure, insecure student pilot trying to see if aviation is for them at the controls of a plane in your airspace?
Or would you rather have a grinning, adept wanna be sharing the sky with his fellow aviation fanatics?
So let’s get real. Whether its planes at an airport, or planes on a desktop, both feed the general aviation world with potential pilots.
I have used some of the old flight sims in the past but today most of my computers are for business applications. I also have not built a gaming machine for MSFS and other games but I would like to one day. I just recently achieved my Private Pilot Certificate in October 2008 fulfulling a life long dream and I will go for my IFR rating sometime within the next 2 years. I will also work on building an experimental aircraft as that will be the only way I could aford to own and operate my own aircraft. I would like to have a home flight sim to practice IFR approaches and looking at the terrain for a XC flight. Microsoft or others should step up to the table and get their program certified to be used as an official training device to log IFR training time and be done with it. How many people would use it for that purpose? How many people IFR trained would keep profficient if they had this tool readily at hand for practice? Can one use it as a fun game? Yes. Can one use it as a practice training aid? Yes. I for one will continue to budget some money to continue to fly and if I can practice with a sim even if it is to calm down the flying bug it would be worth it to buy a sim. Microsoft isn't going to do away with a money maker. The layoff is one way to save cost but also shake up the paradyme. This could be a good thing for Microsoft to reinvest at the right time to take the sim to the next level... One could only hope...
I was ECSTATIC that Micro$oft is in TROUBLE! That MONOPOLISTIC, PREDATORY, producer of OVER PRICED, UNDER SECURE O/S crap got a HUGE BREAK from the DAMN BUSH JUSTICE DEPT.!
I hated it when they bought the maker of FSim. May Bill Gates ROAST in HELL for ETERNITY!!!
I think doing away with the msfs platform and developers is a big mistake.
As a private pilot in training I look at at flight sim "games" more as training devices that help with procedure and situational awareness. I come back from actual flight lessons and find myself a more compotent virtual pilot and vice-a-versa. Addtionally, look at how many flight schools and aviation programs use msfs as altraining aids? I have personally never viewed msfs as a game and this goes way back to grade school when I first saw it in the late 80's. As soon as I started "playing" I realized this was not a "game". I think the term "game" implies a non-reality aspect to it which msfs is anything but. It is a simulator and to pilots working on instrument ratings or above there is no argument with the benefits of working in a simulator environment.
Maybe if we're lucky they finished the next version of msfs before they laid everyone off. Or maybe they'll move it in house or sell the technology to another developer. I haven't tried x-plane yet as I am waiting to get a computer with some more hp first.
To summarize tho, hopefully the usefulness and benefit of the product will continue to be realized as an excellent training means as well as something they helps foster and breed interest in new pilots to be. With FAA minimums for soloing and licensure at 16 years of age I would say it would be dangerous to assume those under that age aren't getting their first flights and desire to fly from the realistic msfs software.
Something this good should never go away and enough of us voice our support for it, it will return with future versions in tow. At least that's what we would like to think.
I am a fan of MSFS, a pilot and CFII. I probably would have learned to fly anyway but MSFS was key in helping me develop my passion further. Although I have real-world flying experience, I can "fly" airplanes on MSFS that I cannot touch in real life. Through the many add-ons to the programs by third party vendors, I have a fleet of sophisticated, transport catergory aircraft, as close to the real thing as you can get for a $50.00 program (actually, quite a few $50.00 programs!) The Dash 8 software available from a vendor was so well done that it helped me prepare for my job at a regional airline operating the Dash 8.
It's a tool I use now to keep my proficiency in the big stuff while I instruct in the small stuff (thanks to the economy). It's a tool I recommend to my instrument students to practice with. It's a hobby for many and a possible disappearance of MSFS would leave a large void in the world.
My commercial cross-country consisted of flying from Pittsburgh, PA to Meigs Field in Chicago. I had flown from that iconic field for years on MSFS and I was lucky to do it, for real, a few months before it was destroyed.
Woah, feel the love.
I once put in more time one year on flightsim than driving (and I have 4 kids too). Same reason as above: the 4 kids will have to move out before I have enough resources to go up for real. I read Flying cover to cover, and someday I WILL fly real world, although (sticking to the article) I think that it would be tough to top FSX anyway. Perhaps this economic donwturn will just be a creative pause. Now, if the recession chops the price of a Censsna 350 in half ... now THAT'S an economic stimulus package I can put my flight bag in.
I am an active licensed private pilot, and have been for many years. I have used practically all the versions of MSFS and am currently using FSX. I have never viewed FS as a "game". For me this has been an invaluable tool for practicing procedures, and familiarization flights to various areas of the USA and Canada. Although MSFS could never really simulate the real thing it certainly has helped me to be more confident and comfortable in the cockpit. Many times I would come home after a session with a flight instructor and re-fly the maneuvers and procedures on my computer. Last evening I attended an AOPA safety seminar, where many of the attendees indicated they are using PC flight simulators as an inexpensive ground based aid to learn operation of GPS equipment. I don't think home flight simulators will go away, because there is a huge base of users out there. If MSFS does cease to exist I am confident some entrepeneural entity will fill the void quickly.
Sheesh, folks... come on! Are there people in the "flight sim community" who are way over the top and get carried away with trying to replicate every detail of the experience of flight? Sure there are. Is it a very inexpensive and fairly accurate simulation of many aspects of flight? Yep! It is fairly demanding on a computer system to run MSFS well and additional money needs to be spent on hardware; yoke, rudder pedals, throttle quadrant, and other things the user might deem important. No, flying a herky-jerky flight game on a computer that isn't optimized for it and using a keyboard instead of appropriate devices to control inputs isn't "fun" by any definition and, I'm afraid, what most folks do when "trying it out" on their computer. Many of them just walk away unhappy with having spent the money.
After I retired from my real job I worked for Microsoft on the Flight Sim Team and, among other things, ran some online forums and was part of the team that brought MSFS to the web over 10 years ago. I had lost my medical certificate in March of 1987 and was "grounded" for 17+ years. When I was able to get a special issuance it took me 7.6 hours to complete both the Flight Review and Instrument Proficiency Check; this after over 17 years of not flying. I attribute the few hours it took to MSFS "keeping my head in the game" even when I was completely sidelined by the aviation version of injured reserve. Another few hours of prep and I was ready to take my CFI reinstatement ride and passed it without scaring the designee too badly. Today I use MSFS with my instrument students and firmly believe it adds a great deal to the learning process.
Many folks who are dedicated to the FS hobby are folks who can't actually fly for one reason or another. Unfortunately many of us here in the U.S. are facing that possibility; if the federal government keeps "helping out" it's almost a certainty. As an example, flying for a virtual airline isn't something I would enjoy doing but many people get a great deal of pleasure out of operating simulated heavy iron on a schedule. Some in a virtual world created online with live, very professional, "air traffic control" provided via a web site that is extremely well built and operated. Some simply complete trips and report the results to an "official" with the virtual airline. Some FS fans build elaborate home flight decks that are works of art as well as being functional. One of the folks I knew personally who built an extremely accurate cockpit was an active 747-400 captain for a major airline. His home cockpit was powered by 12 computers driving about 16 displays all tied together and into MSFS by a software program written by a gentleman who was simply an enthusiast.
IOW just because you don't understand it or enjoy it there's no reason to disparage those who do. It can provide a great deal of value for real (and virtual) pilots for the money spent. I, for one, hope Microsoft doesn't abandon the franchise, it's always been very profitable for them and has a huge fan base world-wide.
I have to agree that Flight Simulator has been a big part of my Life. I started years ago and learned the basics, started lessons, got my Private. I currently have my hours for my Instrument Rating. Just need my oral and check ride which are scheduled for next week. I think FSX is a wonderful learning experience for both my children and they fly it on a regular basis. They will also be pilots someday, I gaurantee it !
I also have to agree with many here- the author of this article is flat wrong. I have always been into aviation and MSFS was my "fix" along with Flying Magazine until I could afford to start taking lessons. It didn't start the fire of desire that I have for aviation- but it kept it going until I could pursue my dream of being a "real pilot".
I also have a friend who has owned over 10 aircraft and did a lot of real flying. Because of various reasons he is now unable to pursue his passion for flight in the real world. What are his choices? Give aviation up or maybe go virtual with Flight Sim? He is choosing to do the latter and is currently building his own sim setup.
Flight Sim is not a substitute for the real thing but it keeps many people interested and in the game and that is EXACTLY what this industry needs during this tough time.
I have to say I'm very disappointed in the tone of this article. I had thought the attitude of real pilots looking down their noses at computer flight simulators had died out years ago. What a shame to see Flying magazine promote this opinion still.
The author does not seem to believe that flight simulation brings people into aviation. Well, I can state without a doubt that the reason I am a currently licensed pilot and aircraft owner is because I was exposed to aviation through Microsoft Flight Simulator.
How blessed and lucky so very many pilots are! Learning to fly and getting a pilots license is something most people only dream of. Spending years building time and experiences in as many aircraft and places, are things many lives are built around. Old or young when unfortunate circumstances render a pilot "grounded" too many soaring, lofty plans die. When fliying simulators came around I jumped at the chance to enjoy a little of what a stroke took away. So have hundreds more. It isn't my fault I can't hear the engines as I push the throttle forward and watch the ground get farther below me. Just as other reasons a person can't get into a "real" airplane, money, location, availability, work all give way to so much fun. My fllight simulator time gives me just as much enjoyment as the guy that tskes aoo for real and takes it for granted. Heaven help me (or us) if more opportunities to find the peace and feedom the skies provide are lost. Then only the rich and powerful will know the feelings I miss.
While I'm with the crowd on this one, that there are benefits to pilots from Microsoft Flight Simulator, I must also agree on two points that are gravely overlooked by the above negative comments:
1) First and foremost, MSFS is indeed a "game." Granted, it doesn't have bouncing cartoon characters, and although there are "missions" pre-programmed into the software, the majority of MSFS pilots use the GAME to "just go flying." In fact, that's what non-professional pilots do in our aircraft...we fly for the sole purpose of "just flying."
And although FSX is an incredible quantum leap in graphics technology...it is still only a "game," and all pilots should recognize that. Although we pilots can approximate instrument approaches and fly a reasonable facsimile of a specific make and model of aircraft, the $50 program cannot provide the training and proficiency benefits of a true (FAA-Approved) PC-based aviation trainind device (PCATD), which costs hundreds to thousands of dollars.
2) The other point overlooked is that periodically in MSFS history, Microsoft has made bold claims that this game would be used as a recruiting tool, that it would generate more interest in flying, and thus more simulator gamers who will go on to be actual pilots.
In reality, unless someone already has an affinity for aviation, they're not going to buy the game. It's great that the software provides some theory behind the basics of flight, but the number of people who became certificated as pilots solely because they happened to purchase the game on a whim is insignificant (if there is one at all).
=====
I agree that Mr. Goyer does discount the game too much. The points made by other pilots regarding flying to an unfamiliar field, shooting an approach, or demonstrating to a novice various aviation concepts should allow MSFS to be regarded as an effective tool for certificated pilots.
I, too, like to boot up the game and challenge my proficiency as much as the game will provide, but one of my pre-boot checklists for the game is reminding myself, "it IS only a game."
Addendum:
Although ACES is being shut down, nowhere in Microsoft's announcement says that Flight Simulator has been terminated. It may be possible for the title to continue under a separate Microsoft department, or outsourced to a reliable firm.
Also, there are a few other titles out there that have comparable qualities. Although MSFS has the lion's share of the market, gamers...and pilots...shouldn't fear losing their ability to "fly their desktops" (or laptops) !
I'm joining the chorus of disagreements with the article as written. I was first exposed to flying via MSFS, and my experience with it has always been very beneficial to my real-world piloting experiences. Much of my initial PPL training (VOR navigation, situational awareness, etc) seemed remedial due to my years of "preschool" flying on MSFS.
I've found that most true gamers, defined as those who play a wide variety of the most popular games on the most popular consoles and dedicate several hours of their weekly or daily lives to video games, are easily bored with MSFS and don't get very much entertainment value out of, as one friend put it "just flying around".
The detailed and real-world flying similarities offered by MSFS (following procedures, checklists, navigation, etc) are precisely what attracts pilots and aviation enthusiasts to it, and what's sustained it all of these years, even as PC-based games of any sort have faded in popularity compared to the Playstation and Wii games.
Like most of the people here... I'M ALSO WITH BILL COX's. He's right. Not all of us have the money to get a PPL or even to fly sometimes with a friend. Even that, at least here in Portugal, is expensive. But it's truth, if you go to google an search for forums about flying simmers, you'll see that EVERYONE of US is trying to get as real as it can get on a simulator. We do this because we love flying, but somehow there was no chance to fly for real, and it's truth, WE NEED FLIGHT SIM EVERY DAY... Since 98 that i fly microsoft and like Edwin here, i don't see it like a game, because it's not! It's a Simulator. It's what get us as close to real as we can get in the safety of our home.
Let's hope some entity really picks up the development again. No arcade game is even compared to Sims, so let's hope the good work continues.
Have a nice flight, everyone :)
I also agree with the majority opinion here that there is value in what FSX, and previous versions, have brought to the pilot and non-pilots alike. I'm a new instrument student in Wisconsin who barely got in any hours in December when we had 45" of snow - but it truly made a difference to spend time in the sim working on my scan, instrument failures, timed turns, compass turns, etc. My instructor noted significant improvement in my progress and I'm confident it was because I was able to keep up in my virtual world. Putting all the instruction arguments aside, it's not often you get to jump between cockpits of a C172 and 757 or dozens of other aircraft on a moment's notice. It truly provides an enlightening experience in many more ways than one.
I am an avid Flight Simmer and have logged over 1,000 hours over a few years. I have a love for flying and I vow to one day take to the skies in the real world, but because of my age and the fact that I cannot afford flight school yet I use the sim to satisfy the hunger for flying. There are many reasons that flight simulator has a purpose, and they range from familiarizing one's self with a variety of aircraft types to keeping your flying skills fresh. I know pilots who use it as a resource and they find it very helpful for honing their skills. It has the ability to simulate a wide range of emergencies and conditions, and is becoming exceedingly realistic and proficient at it. I can say with lots of confidence that it has taught me how to fly, and I have proven this in real aircraft in the real world. From my point of view, flight simulator can in some circumstances be more difficult to use than the airplane. For one, the view offered from the computer is much harder to use than simply looking left and right. Buttons have to be pressed just to look around the environment. When using the instruments in FSX, you need to click on them to make adjustments, which wastes time compared to pressing buttons and turning knobs in fractions of a second. Lastly, the ATC experience in flight simulator is lacking and options are very limited. In the real world, controllers offer so much more than just clearances and hand-offs. You can request alternative routes and airports, get deviations for bad weather, and communicate during an emergency situation. For these reasons the simming experience has obstacles that can prove to be difficult when operating an airplane. For those who doubt the realism offered, I suggest you purchase a copy and try it out. You can simulate emergencies as mentioned before, create your own weather conditions with unlimited factors or download real time current weather for the location that you have selected. Almost every single airport and dirt strip in the world can be used. Icing, wind shear, and turbulence affect your aircraft's performance. You can specify fuel and cargo weights and adjust the CG of your aircraft accordingly. Flight Simulator has no limits and defintitely lives up to its claim as "As real as it gets." It is a valuable tool to pilots and a valuable reference to anyone with interest in flying. I was upset to hear it dismissed as if it were "just a game." It cannot be judged by its cover this way and must be scrutinized to unveal everything it has to offer.
Like everyone else here, and that has to be something of a clue to Mr. Goyer, I think he has completely missed the runway with this one.
Like many others I have started with FS in the Novalogic days of a few scraggly lines and two airports. And I have upgraded to every FS version since. Often along with an upgrade to my PC hardware as well.
No new FS = no need for a new PC, with new Microsoft OS...heck I might even buy a Mac next...X-plane runs much better on that.
As for the discussion of the value of FS the other respondents have already said it all.
I too am one of those that came from FS to the real airport when time and money allowed. I own a share in a PA32-301 and have my IFR ticket.
Much of the flight training is actually more effective, especially the IFR and general navigation stuff when done along with FS and not just in the real airplane.
Get an approach slightly wrong and want to try again....no problem reset the flight to the IAF. You can do 20 in the time you might fly 2 or 3 in real world busy airspace like we have here in SoCal.
Finally while Mr.Boyer certainly has every right to think what he wants I am disappointed that Flying would give him the soap box to stand on for his put down of a valuable Add-On to real world flight.
Those interested in how Flight Simulator (and related products) can be be used effectively in real-world aviation training and proficiency programs can find an online annotated bibliography with links to articles, studies, and related information at: http://www.bruceair.com/msfs/fs_in_training.htm
When the Light Sport Catagory was added it was touted as a way to bring legions of wanna be pilots into the Flying community by allowing many more people to fly thru a reduced set of regulatory requirements and a reduction in the cost of owning and operation of aircraft. Unfortunately the cost reduction idea has not met it's goal. Most LSA's cost as much or more than a large segment of the used single engine aircraft market and rental prices are not significantly lower. Until the dream of more economical flight is realized there will be a large group of both licensed and unlicensed aviation nuts out there who will do much of there flying on a simulator. The article writer I feel is letting his Ivory Tower complex show thru. Come on, get out and experience the real world!
I am a Multi-Engine Private Pilot and a DAILY Flight sim user. I started way back with FS5 and then bought every version since. I am not current now, so therefore I can fly on the sim at any time. It is such a shame that there is not a new version of Flight Sim on the horizon. I have downloaded about a hundred different aircraft, helicopters, blimps... even car's! Where else can you strap on a X-15 and blast into space if you want... Oh Microsoft you blew it! After all the money spent on the products.. now we are in limbo somewhere. As a side note, I have met the most wonderfull people all over the world in the sim. Some are pilots some are not, but that makes it interesting watching them fly. Please somebody pick up where Microsoft left off.
I also disagree with the author in that as both a Private Pilot and avid flight simmer, Microsoft Flight Sim X is a fantastic tool to work on flying skills, earning future rating/tickets or even for conducting "recons" of new areas, airports or approaches. It isn't a game, it is a simulation! I think the scope of use is far greater than he realizes and another good example of this is to check out the forums on the internet or check out one of the several flight sim magazines such as Computer Pilot, or PC Pilot.
I Am a student pilot, and I got started on aviation through Flight Simulator. I think it is an amazing tool, and you can learn the fundamentals of flight through it. Also, through VATSIM, one of the biggest FS Communities, I learned proper radio phraseology, and on my first lesson, I did all the talking. All that is not to say it is with out flaws. VFR is difficult with out addon terrain, The aircraft it comes with fly nothing like the real thing and it can encourage the "Gamers" how Not to fly.
After a 1000 or so hours of MSFS, I feel it has helped me greatly into the transition to the real cockpit. I had the privilage to learn to fly at a very young age,Lets say well below the FAA standard requirements. And in a D-18S Twin Beech at that. I really hate to see Mircosoft grounding there Flight Sim software program. But I understand there ecominic position,like most of us can. Let all of us that have benifited from MSFS, hope they have a change of heart, and continue to develope better and more realistic versions of there famous software. The future of Aviation need a lot of new pilots to continue it's growth.
I have been flying MSFS since 1986 on an Atari when the buildings were just stick figures. I am not a pilot, but I belong to AOPA and EAA, as I have as much invested in the thrill of flying as a "real" pilot.
I hope that Aces will start their own company, because it is just one fantastic program.
Microsoft only had a profit of $22 billion this year. I guess that isn't enough.
I am a pvt. pilot from the Island of Bermuda. We have no light
aircraft here, I have a U.S. license, having to go to the U.S.to fly.
several times a year.
I have been using MS flight Sim for several years to practice
procedures, and proficiency, With the add on VATSIM I can fly almost realistic
IFR flights with ATC, including real World weather downloading.
As mentioned not having a airplane to fly here MSFS serves me well staying in shape several hours a week.
In my opinion FS9," A Century Of Flight" was the best Sim MS produced, I have been flying MS since FS5.
I have been flying the MS Flight Sim for the past 25 years, that's right, since the DOS era. I upgraded to each new versions since then. It was reported in both Flying Magazine and AOPA Pilot that someone who flew it seriously for a number of years has cut down the private certificate training by a third. It might be a game for some of you but to me it's a great training tool. I usually fly the Skykane RG anywhere but I also fly the Learjet 35 from KLDJ Linden NJ to CYUL Montréal, my home town, both very successfuly. It is "as real as it gets" to quote Microsoft.
I served in the Air Force in the 70's inspired because my father was a navigator on a B-29 on Tinian Island. I did my ground school for my private license 25 years ago, but with 5 children of which the last one is in her 2nd year in Santa Barbara and with 4 weddings and 5 college expenses.. I resorted 4 years ago to the Sports License. First one to take the test at Mt Sachs college. Passed 99%. Now, it is VERY obvious what truth is in this question. I spend hundreds of hours on X-Plane and flight sim 2004. Very picky about the aircraft I have purchased in there accuracy. I have the ELITE avionics, Chart table, E6b calculator etc..and if I mess up I take it very seriously. To me this is 100% training. Same thing as taking online college courses only I believe my flight sim standards are MUCH higher. I read Richard Collins article a while back, and many others thru the years. I also know personally of the young Navy Cadet training. The question I think is who has the resources to make a simulator with the instrument accuracy of X-plane mixed with the graphics and second monitor capabilities of microsoft. I have talked often with Jason Chandler, designer for X-plane and Jeff Rhodes with Flight1 and others. The potential in flight simulation has not even taken off yet. AOPA member and reader of Aopa Pilot and Flying magazine for years--cover to cover
As a Civil Air Patrol pilot,I can attest to the nurturing that
sim does for our Cadets.Not all can afford the real thing,even in CAP programs. But when you can see the look on a Cadet's face as they fly the sim,you know what the next gen pilot looks like..and remember what it was to dream about it when you were that age. Our pilots use sim for poor wx day flying approaches.
I've been reading Flying since the late fifties and this is one of those rare "down the nose" articles that sneak thru the editors' rewrite baskets.
Paul Miller
