Via the "GEAR" link I found an article by R.Goyer about FS-2002.
I want to emphasise/warn the "fact" that this "game" is not - in any way (not even 3-dimensional) suitable for some form of "Pilot-training".
So, if your children want to play this game than go right on and push that Ctrl plus E button to start up the engine(s) ... very, very realistic indeed !
When you want to learn "bad habbits" and thus "pilot INproficiency" than FS-2002(Pro) is your best choice ! ! !
All Comments
When I was a student and got under the hood for the first time my instructor was supprised at how easily I recovered from the unusual attitude he had the plane in. Then he said "oh yeah, you fly a computer don't you". MSFS definitly helped me become familiar with the instruments.
I still use it sometimes when I can't get out to the airport enough. I set up a flight and use the VOR's etc. Just to at least keep my panel work up.
I agree that MSFS is a very poor simulator of VFR flying, but it does a good job of teaching basic IFR flying principles if used correctly. Get yourself a sectional of any area, put yourself in that area in MSFS. Now put the ceiling to 500 feet, visibility to 1 mile and put yourself at 5000 ft anywhere on the sectional. Now, find your way home. Using the GPS gives you a warm and fuzzy whenever you need it but after a few times it should be no problem to be lined up on the ILS to whichever airport you chose, without directions from "center". Useful if not perfect.
I agree that MSFS is a decent way to keep up IFR panel scan and a modicum of proficiency. My main IFR instructor that I use for proficiency (a grizzled former Eastern captain) definitely recommends using it to stay sharp.
My friends recommend that a yoke and preferably peddles are much better than a joystick for practice. There is a set from CH available from avshop.net that currently costs about $250 for yoke and peddles with USB connectors that are pretty nice considering the price.
This combo is never going to be as good as the official PCADT setup, but we're only talking about $300-$350 for software, yoke, and peddles.
I find that it's much harder to get the simulator consistently trimmed up than a real plane. But at least you can play with shooting approaches to minimums before going to a new place.
Just my $0.02.
Cheers, David.
I gotta say, the default planes in FS2002 are utter crap. Download some POSKY planes or buy the excellent Dreamfleet products and you'll have realistic flying, looking planes that have all sorts of awesome stuff. Add the scenery that you can buy/download, Project AI traffic, and lots more (like new cloud packs/water textures) and you've got as real of a simulator that there can be, with the exception of those airline training ones [IMG]/ibb/skins/default/emoticons/wink.gif[/IMG]
i don't know about you but i have a full set of sectionals and a regularily fly VFR in FS 2002. it doesn't have all lan dmarks but it has enough for me to navigate using only my eyes compass and the view out the window. Also where elso can i fly a King air on a CAT 3 ils down to 0ft ceiling with a RVR of 300 ft. I've found my simulator flying very useful.
My dad, a CFI and ATP for Delta was very sceptical at first. But he finds that FS 2002 is a very useful flying tool.
Isaac
i have been flying flight simulator for 5 years and gotten very good in my opinion. i have never flown yet but plan to start lessons in august and i'll see how realistic it is. For ifr it looks to be good use along with outside training or a lot of reading on the net because it cant teach everything.(key point) Personally i can pass all the lessons easily (i would like to hear some feedback about these from experience pilots) I know of many people who are real pilots and fly this game all the time so it cant be all that bad. I anticipate the arrival of fs2004 century of flight on july 29th and plan to buy it. The gps and atc are supposed to be much better, which is good since what they have now needs improvement. This game has come a long way in its many years.
As a recent edition to the "pilot club" and a regular FS2002 user, I think I have a leg to stand on here.
I am a carbon copy of the student rvmeder was probably referring to - a self-taught instrument pilot. The flight dynamics in FS2002 are not the greatest and many aspects of VFR flying are difficult to practice in the game so I learned how to fly accurately based on instruments. How do you know when you are straight and level? When the AI says so! How do you know when you need to roll your turn out on base leg? When the DG says you are 90 degrees from the runway heading! How do you know the correct pitch attitude in a steep turn? When the VSI reads zero! It may sound silly but I probably wasted a good 3 lessons learning how to look out the big giant window in front of me.
With that said, I believe FS2002 is invaluable for IFR "training". While nothing compares with flying a 172 around in the soup, for the price of the software and an extra 8 bucks down at your local pilot store for approach plates and an enroute chart, you can learn tons practicing flight planning, departure procedures, enroute procedures, approach procedures, etc. While I was taking my IFR lessons, I think I flew every existing approach in Southern California down to minimums at least once. Boy was my instructor surprised when I nailed a localizer back course on my third lesson.
CH Products do make great Yokes and rudders. I believe the Yoke adds enough realism to make flying with FS2002 worthwhile. A word to the wise: stay away from the rudder pedals. I am sure the pedals themselves are a great product but Microsoft didn't do their homework regarding rudder usage. Someone over at Microsoft was told that a turn requires you to hold the rudder in for the entire turn - another habit that had to be broken.
A serious shortfall of FS2002 is the crappy GPS. With no OBS mode and no approach procedures, you have to be crafty to pull off a GPS procedure. That should be fixed here shortly with the Garmin 500 included in FS2004.
-/\/\
I've used every version of flight sim, back to the Apple II days. FS2004 is a great sim. I layed off flying for 12 years, and flight sim kept me "in the ballpark." I recently started flying again, and found there were certain things that the sim can't do, such as seat of the pants feel and 100% accurate aerodynamics. It works great for navigation, approaches and many procedures.
I would absolutely recomment the yoke and pedals. That makes a BIG difference over the keyboard, mouse or joystick (unless you fly a plane with some kind of stick).
I also found it helpful to fly the bigger, faster planes. I probably have a 1000 hours flying the 737, King Air and Cessna 421. You get accustomed to everything happening faster, and having to be (way) ahead of the airplane. When I finally went back up for real, in a 172, everything was happening at what seemed like a slow, manageable pace.
The sim can't substitute for the real thing, but it is very valuable for certain things.
FS2002 (or 2004) is very helpfull for instrument training, especially when you are doing it in a 172 or similer aircraft.
You can go out and do NDB approaches and the instruments all work the way they should.
You can go and practice holds, hold entries, throw in X-wind.
You can now fly GPS approaches with the new garmin 530 panel in the new MS flightsimulator, even though I don't have this version of the program, it must be really neat and would still help you learn about the GPS (at least moreso than many students I see).
You can go fly VOR approaches.
You can practice rate climbs and descents, etc.
The thing about MS flightsim is that you need to know the limitations. It's not the programs fault that it can't teach you VFR and how to scan for traffic. That's what a flight instructor does and it is nearly impossible to replicate with current technology (although not totally impossible, I've seen some really good level 6 FTDs that can be used for visual flight manuvers).
On the 737, instead of pressing CTL+E you can add the fuel at 20% N1, watch em fire up just like normal.
Again, you need to know the limitations. It can teach you great stuff about flying using a Flight Director, of course an FD is not the end all flight instrument, and I've noticed many pilots in level D simulators that fixate on that one instrument, ignoring some of the other "real important" instruments like the IVSI. This isn't a problem with MS flight simulator software, this is a flight instruction issue.
If someone wants to bag on MS flight sim for VFR flight, then so be it. It's not going to tell you anything about scanning, anything usefull about landings, and it may give you the "general idea" about some flight manuvers, but not being able to really "look around" keeps it from being usefull. It makes flight instruction harder in this sense.
On the other hand, it is an excellent tool for pilots that are getting their instrument rating. They can go and do the exact same things that they do on the flight and "improve". I can go and fly the same approaches that I do normally on MS flightsim. I can go review stuff ahead of time before I have to teach it to a student. I have used it as a student to work on several areas of instrument flight. It is a great tool when used correctly (like most tools obviously).
Date: 11/30/2004 10:20:52 PM
Author: Stryker
The thing about MS flightsim is that you need to know the limitations. It's not the programs fault that it can't teach you VFR and how to scan for traffic. That's what a flight instructor does and it is nearly impossible to replicate with current technology (although not totally impossible, I've seen some really good level 6 FTDs that can be used for visual flight manuvers).
The basic scenery isn't too bad for VFR pilotage, but you can improve it significantly if you add on one of the new "mega scenery" packs. I do most of my sim flying in California (since I live here), and have the add on scenery for northern and southern California. It improves the visuals *dramatically*
As for other air traffic, the basic program isn't bad, but you can use MyTraffic or Ultimate Traffic to add more traffic, including plenty of general aviation. If you use flight following, you'll get advisories on other traffic to watch for. That will keep you in the habit of looking outside the plane (although it is more difficult). Since you can't "lean forward or sideways" to look outside, use all of your available views. Switch to cockpit view, or hit "w" in normal view to hide the instrument panel. Sometimes, I even use the external (chase plane) view to pan around for other traffic.
I have had several versions of MS Flight Simulator over the years. Now I've got the latest, FS 2004, and it's really a great program! Sure, it could be a lot better, but for the price, you can't really beat it for features and options out-of-the-box.
I do recommend using it on a dual-monitor computer, and orient one monitor below the other, having the instrument panel skewed to the lower monitor, and window view out the upper monitor. This can add a little more realism, especially if you have the availability of large, flat panel monitors on your PC.
I had a 13 year hiatus from flying, and used MSFS from time to time to keep myself at least atuned to the cockpit and how to navigate. Now that I'm working on my Instrument Rating, I find the program to be invaluable as a procedure trainer. I don't make the mistake of expecting MSFS 2004, or any PC based training device to be the equivalent, or as flexible as even a Frasca simulator, but it's a good way to stay up on things between flights.
While MSFS can be instructive for the student and VFR pilot, I have been finding it is a better tool for the purposes of IFR procedures with holds, ILS, and other IFR related navigation and planning activities than it is for VFR if you want to use it as a learning aid.
I would also add that every CFI I have spoken with that has said, in all but one case, that a student that came to them that learned on MSFS knows their stuff, but is horrible at using the rudder pedals. Lack of coordinated flight seems to be a huge telltale sign of a MSFS "pilot" when they start their real-life training.
Remember that there is no substitute for real training in the real thing with a good CFI next to you!
Just my two cents....
Top Rated
Tip of the Week
brought to you by
Take extra care to avoid activities that might detract from flying.
Partner Pages
