On 4/25/2012 8:57 PM, sambodidley wrote:

Well, that's the same with me, except I'm filling a void too. I'll
likely never fly *anything* in the real world. Can't really afford it.
No matter what type plane.
What type aircraft I sim has nothing to do with trying to be a virtual
fighter pilot, or virtual airline capt, or even a virtual Cessna 152
pilot. I'll likely never be any of them.
So.. I fly *everything* on the sim. If it's got wings, I'll fly it, and
if I can't, I'll learn how to fly it.

But you have to understand that after flying something like a realistic
737 for a while, flying a small prop plane is generally quite boring on
the sim. There is little to none of the excitement you would have in
the real world.
And it's so easy, that there is really no challenge to it unless you
do exercises that are difficult, such as blind IFR flight training
exercises, or whatever. That's about all I would do if I had to
fly a 152 on the sim every day. At least there would be some challenge
to it.

Would I fly one in the real world? Heck yea.. In a second if I had the
chance. But it's a lot more exciting to fly a 152 in the real world,
than it is on the sim.
On the sim, a 152 puts me to sleep.. There is hardly anything to do,
and I'm going so danged slow, it's like turning the speed down to 18%..
The challenge for me is almost zero when flying normal type flights
in one of those. And if no challenge, I won't be spending much time on
it. I'm that way with anything. I get bored easily.

Heck, I've been driving real cars and trucks for years, but that
doesn't mean I want to simulate driving one.  :/
Where is the challenge in that? I already know how to do it.
If I'm going to simulate flying a plane on the puter, I need something
a little more intensive, not to be bored to tears after about 15 min.
That's why I generally fly more complicated aircraft on the sim.
Gives me enough to do, to not be bored to death. Even using the
autopilot systems, etc, it generally takes more thinking, and more
constant planning, to stay ahead of the aircraft when running a 737
doing 430 knots, and using real plans and procedures, than something
like a 152 doing about 90 knots just buzzing the countryside VFR between
small airports. Fun in the real world.. Not on the sim. Or at least for
me..
And I have to learn all those various systems on the 737, which is just
that much more to have to learn and do, which further lowers the
boredom factor. It's kinda fun being able to watch a real 737NG
pilot, and know most everything that he is doing down to every
single switch.

That's why I told "MX" if I were to spend money on a prop plane,
I would be going for the newer more intensive models, like A2A
Accumsim, etc.. I have to learn all the real procedures and quirks
of the aircraft, which helps keep the boredom at bay.
Try frying an engine with the Dreamfleet Baron.. I bet it's almost
impossible..  :| Quite easy with one of the Accusim planes if you
don't do things in a orderly military manner.
Anyway, being as I've never flown anything in the real world, I
see no reason to restrict myself to any single type in the simulated
world. It's all artificial flying no matter what I run..
So I might as well run something with gusto..
I still wish I had a PMDG Learjet, as that is one of my favorite
planes to fly.. Kinda like the Corvette of the biz jet world..
Small, fast, and just complicated enough to keep me from going to sleep.

BTW, I hope this doesn't dupe.. I sent it off, and the servers went
kaput, so I'm sending it again..

It's up to you, but remember that software doesn't wear out. The Dreamfleet
Beechcraft aircraft are superlative.

I've read about the A2A stuff, but it seems to all be military.

But I mean, if you are using a 2D view, but there are no 2D throttles, how do
you look at the throttles?

Perhaps if you have TrackIR (although I have my doubts), but that's too rich
for me. The VCs I have in all my current aircraft are less polished and
detailed than the 2D cockpits. And instrument readability is extremely
important, and it's better in the 2D views.

It's unfortunate that they chose not to develop it for FS9. I have the older
PMDG 737, which is excellent, but it was an early effort and doesn't have the
finish of the 747-400 that I also have.

I have the Level-D 767, too, which is also very nice, although the cockpit
details are a lot harder to read (too much emphasis on photos and not enough
on clear images). The externals are great.

I think each company should continue doing what it does best. Spreading things
too thin is not good. I use Dreamfleet for Beechcraft and Piper, Carenado for
Cessna props, Eaglesoft for the Citation X, PMDG for the 737 and 747, and
Level-D for the 767. They are all nice aircraft. And since I like them all, I
can't really switch to FSX until all of the same aircraft were available for
that sim (not to mention all the other add-on and scenery issues).

What I'm saying is that simulation gives you access to aircraft you're never
going to fly in real life, either because you can't afford to buy the real
aircraft or because you cannot get certified on them.

Like I said, even an airline pilot cannot fly big iron in real life the way he
can on a sim. On the job, he flies where he is told, period. In a sim, he can
fly anywhere, on any type of aircraft. Sure, it's not the real thing, but
simulation still has many advantages that real flight does not.

I also think that many airline pilots actually enjoy the systems and
intellectual aspects of flying, rather than the seat-o'the-pants sensations.
There is great satisfaction to be had in mastering complex systems and getting
them to work in precise ways to complete specific tasks. Some pilots may enjoy
doing loops in a glider, but others may enjoy sitting and watching a huge bank
of instruments in hard IMC and navigating their way in zero visibility to a
perfect landing at a distant airport.

I'd take a Baron. Maybe a Bonanza. Not keen on Cessna. Don't know much about
Piper.

But part of the problem is that I don't want to be stuck with just one
airplane. I want to fly different kinds of airplanes, and that just isn't very
practical in real life. One aircraft is costly enough, but a whole fleet ...
not easily done.

It may be a blast for a certain time. But if all you have is one type of
aircraft, and you've had a taste of what various other aircraft are like in
simulation, you might get tired of the real aircraft after a while.

For example, a Cessna 152 may be great fun to fly, up to a point, but if you
want to fly 400 miles, you're going to start wishing that you had something a
lot faster. Conversely, if you have a 747, that's fun, too, until you realize
that you can't really go anywhere other than major airports with it.

I can't agree. The past few days I've been flying mostly a Citation X, but
this morning I made a short flight in one of my pokey little Cessna 152s. Very
different flying. I spent most of the time in the 152 peering out the window,
trying to find landmarks to guide me, since the 152 doesn't have much in the
way of instruments. Very different from the Citation with its FMS. But the
Citation is also different from airliners, since it doesn't have autothrottle
or autoland.

When I get tired of one aircraft type, I switch to another.

Try pilotage on the 152. It can be a sobering experience.

And yes, even though MSFS scenery isn't photorealistic, there are enough
landmarks in it to allow you to navigate by pilotage.

This morning I spent a lot of time trying to figure which Interstate I had
below me, and whether or not the shape of the lake ahead matched the lake I
thought I should be over, and so on. Same as real life.

Yes, it's slow, but there's a lot to do just keeping it in level flight. If
you fall asleep in a 152, you end up hitting a mountain. I have to retrim
every time the wind changes, and I have to constantly tweak the yoke to keep
the wings level, lest I enter a slow turn and drift off course. I've become
lost more often in the 152 than in any other aircraft, I think. On several
occasions I've landed at small airports that were not actually my destination
airports (although they were close by, if that counts). And I don't even try
to fly at night.

Fly the 152 between two small airports at night using pilotage alone. That'll
keep you awake.

You need to take the simulation more seriously. It's not boring if you keep in
mind that you might end up dead if you make mistakes in navigation or flying.

You might be surprised at what's possible with the Baron. I was.

A story I've told before: One time I was doing touch and goes in my trusty
Dreamfleet Baron 58, and after one particularly hard landing, I noticed that
the aircraft kept rolling to the right after I was airborne again. At first I
thought there was a bug in the simulation, but then I wasn't so sure. I tried
lots of things while struggling to keep the wings level. Finally I noticed
that the roll tendency disappear with flaps full retracted. Incredulously, I
landed again and taxiied to the ramp. Just out of curiosity, I took a very
close look at the flaps after extending them ... and lo! I noticed that one
flap was about half an inch lower than the other. The hard landing had jarred
one of the flaps out of position, making the flaps uneven when extended!

Now, that sort of thing cannot happen by accident in a sim. It cannot be a
bug. It has to be something that the designers deliberately programmed into
the simulation. Needless to say, I was impressed. On the Baron, a hard landing
actually does lasting damage. The only way to "repair" the aircraft is to
reload a new copy of the aircraft for the flight.

I've also noticed sometimes, when changing the external view of the aircraft,
that the internal parts of the airframe are simulated, even though they aren't
normally visible in any of the various views available in the sim.

A great deal of care has been put into the Dreamfleet aircraft, and some other
third parties do the same.

The Citation X with winglets is the fastest bizjet around.

    A taste of an aircraft in simulation by a non-pilot is nothing but the
delusion of a dreamer.  For me, just one hour, even in a little ultra-light
or power parachute , would be much more enjoyable than a lifetime of simming
in supersonic  fantasies.  I would be out flying every day right now in
anything I could get off the ground,if my condition permitted, reveling in
every second of it, and never tire of it.  Once you've had a taste of the
real thing delusions can no more satisfy your desires than virtual sex. <g>
Sam

news:jnarrg$auh$1@dont-email.me...

    True, but you have a much larger void to fill than I.  My void consists
of the many things I have enjoyed doing in my lifetime but can no longer do
in my present condition.  Flying is one of them that I can (sort of) relive
in a stimulator, to a small degree. I can just choose the parts of it I
enjoyed the most and skip the rest of it. Why would I want to waste my
available flying time going over check lists and procedures I've done
thousands of times before in RL?  In fact, I start many of my flights from
up in the air when I'm just going to practice maneuvers. Why waste the time
for a take off and climb?  That's one of the great advantages of sim flying.
I use it every chance I get.
    And speaking of boredom, I can think of nothing  that would bore me
worse than reading a lot of manuals ( even if I still had the vision to do
so) to be able to program a plane to fly itself.  I've always been a
hands-on pilot and have no interest in riding along. A flight at 30k ansl
would run a close second on my boredom list.
    Flying small single engine props can be as interesting as you choose to
make them. I find them very good for practising REAL piloting skills like
flying 8s on pylons and 8s around pylons in a cross-wind. Try slow-flying a
C172 with the stall horn blaring, while making turns,  without losing any
altitude.  Those are the kind of skills REAL pilots learn before they ever
think about programing airliners to fly them selves. Those are some of the
things Capt. Sully learned to do long before he did his Miracle On The
Hudson.  If you really want to go for realism then start from page one. Any
school boy can program a computer.<g>
Sam

You're entitled to your opinion.

Not for me. I'm not a big fan of physical sensations, and I like instruments
and systems and safety. I would get next to nothing out of an ultralight.

As I've said, you're entitled to your opinion. And as I've said, if I had lots
of money, I'd be more likely to spend it on a full-motion simulator than on a
real airplane, for reasons I've already explained.

Some people like that. Everyone is different.

Why do some air traffic controllers choose to simulate their RL jobs on VATSIM
many times each week? The reason is that some aspect of the job that they
enjoy is also adequately simulated, making the simulation enjoyable as well.

Depending on what a pilot enjoys about flying, simulation may or may not be
enjoyable for him. Obviously, pilots who are mostly interested in strong
physical sensations aren't going to get anything out of desktop simulation at
all. But those who are interested in navigating, instrument flight, etc., can
find simulation very enjoyable.

See abpve. For many real-world pilots, taking off is one of the best parts of
flying.

Here again, everyone is different.

Captain Sully is a poor example, as he is a steely-eyed missile man who is an
expert in systems and procedures and follows them religiously. The type of
flying you're describing is closer to barnstorming.

I think your problem is that you believe that the only viewpoint a real-world
pilot can have is your viewpoint, and since your viewpoint does not hold
simulation in high esteem, you incorrectly assume that simulation is
objectively inferior to real flight.

On 4/26/2012 5:45 PM, Mxsmanic wrote:

Wrong, wrong, wrong...  Taking off is a piece of cake, if trimmed
correctly, it'll do it by itself.  Landing is where the fun is (not
counting navigation, unless a computer is flying the airplane)......

--
MnM

On 4/26/2012 10:38 AM, Mxsmanic wrote:

You would have to look at the VC panel if you were using 2D..
Which would be a pain in the rear I suppose..
Like I say, I'm totally VC..

I use the space bar and mouse to steer the view.

On 4/26/2012 3:40 PM, sambodidley wrote:

The thing is, I've done the low and slow stuff.. So it's not like I've
never tried it.. I've been simming for 20 years, and have simmed the
Cessna's many many many hours through those years.
I bet I can make a C152/172, etc, do most anything you would ask me to
demonstrate. And I'll make videos to prove it if need be..
You've seen me putt around on the Cub, D-18, trike.. Like I say, on the
sim, I'll pretty much fly anything if it's got wings.

Fer instance, how many simmers do you see that can do stable high alpha
passes with the FA/18?  I can, no problem.. That's a fairly tricky
maneuver.. The balance of thrust vs pitch, etc must be almost perfect.
I'm sure some can do it, but I'm sure many would falter a bit and get
quite ugly. I can even do high alpha turns with that plane.

This is basically the same maneuver as you describe when running the
Cessna near stall speed. I just have more thrust available from
the engine, and the AOA increases *greatly* when doing that in an FA/18.
It will look like I'm popping a wheelie as long as I maintain the pass.
BTW, I never use an autopilot when flying that plane. Pure stick,
rudder, and thrust.

Anyway, the way I look at it, it's a wide, wide world of sims..
No one is going to like simming the same things as others..
Which is no problem to me. If you prefer the small props, more power
to you.
But sometimes with your comments, you seem to give the impression
that if we are not flying something you agree with, or prefer higher
performance aircraft, or do checklists, or fly the aircraft in
the manner they are used in the real world, then we are deluding
ourselves, living a fantasy life, etc.. I find that a bit snarky at
times.. But whatever...
I don't criticize what other simmers might want to do.. That's their
business or fun, not mine.
So I sometimes have trouble seeing why you would even care what anyone
else does. I'm not forcing you to do it, or even suggesting that you
sim like I do.
BTW, I'm no school boy.. I'm 55 years old. Not as old as you, but
I didn't just fall off the turnip truck either..

On 4/26/2012 11:13 AM, Mxsmanic wrote:

I wish you all would make up your minds.. What do you think I'm
doing when running the 737?   :/ Or any other plane for that matter..
It boggles the mind...
If I fly too "seriously" some complain that I'm deluding myself, if I'm
not as serious enough, some complain that I need more fear of whacking
the ground in my blood..  Good grief..
This is starting to get silly..

I know all about the Dreamfleet planes. I've known the guy that
started that outfit since before Dreamfleet was even a glint in his eye.
Yes, they are good aircraft. I agree.. But that does not mean I'm going
to buy one, if there are newer more state of the art aircraft available.
Even if old military, if they are more accurate, those are the ones I'll
likely spend my money on.
Heck, I never bought *any* payware aircraft until the 737NGX.
I usually found suitable planes off the various sim sites,
and then tweaked them until I was satisfied with the way they
flew.
But I just got too tired of "Fisher Price" mickey mouse operating
jetliners.. I'll never go back as far as those.

There "might" be a new one out that is just as fast.. But I
forgot.. But yes, I agree, the X moves on down the road quite
quickly. I used to fly it a lot on past sims. But I still like
the Learjets.. Not quite as fast, but fast enough for gov work.

    It might seem that way to you, but I'm not really concerned with what
anybody else does with his simmer or what or how he likes to fly. As a
matter of fact, I'm actually amused when listening to a couple of non-pilot
simmers seriously expound on their virtual flying. The range of interest in
this group is broad enough to cover everyone.
    I've just merely expressed MY opinion here on the subject just like you
have expressed YOURS. I have no problem with that at all. As Mx stated
everybody is entitled to his own opinion.  Your opinion doesn't upset me in
any way.  After all, it IS, like mine,  only an opinion.  I wouldn't argue
with anything you have said. You two simmers don't even agree with each
other on everything. If my opinions have upset anyone then they have a
problem I can't help them with.<g>
Sam

news:jnd0fl$900$1@dont-email.me...

    Now, you see what taking opinions seriously can get you into?<g>
Sam

news:jnd2c0$hrd$1@dont-email.me...

I've always advocated taking simulation seriously.

The more you "get into" the simulation, the more you get out of it. Maximum
realism requires a suspension of disbelief. You just have to pretend that it's
real, and you'll enjoy it a lot more.

Why do you think kids have so much fun pretending? They are willing to take it
seriously, at least while they are doing it, so there's a greater immersion in
the virtual experience. People seem to lose that ability/desire as they get
older. A stick can be a light saber to a five-year-old, but for most adults,
it seems to stubbornly remain a stick.

I feel sorry for real pilots who have such serious psychological issues that
they can never take simulation seriously, which deprives them of a great deal
of potential enjoyment. When they say "it's not the same thing," what they
really mean is "I refuse to consider it the same thing, even during the
simulation." Naturally they get nothing out of it.

Well, if you want to enjoy the simulation, be serious about it. If you want to
please people who think you shouldn't use your imagination, then don't be
serious about it.

That's your choice, but for me the type of aircraft is often more important
than having a simulation that is the state of the art. The Carenado Cessnas
have many rough edges, but they are still fun to fly.

Ah. Well, PMDG was my first payware aircraft purchase, too, but PMDG
specializes in large airliners, so I had to look elsewhere when I wanted small
aircraft.

What do you think of Level-D and their 767?

Another advantage to simulation is that you're not paying for fuel or
maintenance, so you can always fly as fast as the aircraft can safely go. I
set the FMS for MAX SPD most of the time.

An exception is mirroring real-world flights, which requires cranking down the
cost index until the aircraft is just as slow as the real thing, with a
constant 3 degrees of nose-up pitch as it mushes through the sky.

I didn't say it was hard, I just said it was fun.

I like landing, too.

In fact, I tend to fly short flights because I get bored quickly in cruise.

Yes, you are. It shows in your posts. There's nothing wrong with that,
however, and it's okay to admit it.

Some people have a great deal of self-esteem invested in being a "real" pilot,
and they feel threatened by anyone who suggests that simulation might be
anything like real flying. Therefore they try very hard to emphasize huge but
not necessarily real distinctions between simulation and flying in real life.
I've seen this pattern thousands of times. It's easy to recognize.

For some real-world pilots, flying is not merely or even principally an
enjoyable activity or a job. Instead, it's a pillar upon which they support
their self-esteem. Pilots like this are extremely sensitive to anything that,
in their perception, might dilute the high-and-mighty status of piloting.
These are the pilots who constantly dismiss simulation and never miss an
opportunity to point out how artificial simulation is (at least to them).

Of course, there are many pilots who fly because they love to fly, and have no
self-esteem issues wrapped up in flying. They usually like to fly in
simulation, too, since it's the next best thing to flying for real when real
flight is not an option.

Amused, or stressed?

It's interesting because one sees this in many other domains as well. People
who undertake something in order to prove to themselves or the world that they
are "better" have a very different attitude about the activity than those who
undertake it just for enjoyment. I've seen it happen with doctors, lawyers,
computer people, actors, musicians, you name it.

On 4/24/2012 11:10 AM, Mxsmanic wrote:

What's out there as far as motion sims?  I think an all electric motion
platform might work better than most.

--

Copter Six

On 27/04/2012 5:20 PM, Mxsmanic wrote:

Anything from start-up to shutdown was always fun!.   :-))

Having to go home again was the only hard bit.

--

                /\
        ^V^   _/__\_
              ///'}
       ___    /` \
     >-=-I>==(  \=\====
       ```    >  >
              \ /
             --/
Bruce

In my price range, nothing!

I haven't looked into it because I can't afford it. But I'd probably want the
same thing that airlines use, with the six degrees of motion, collimated
visuals, etc. The only thing that bothers me is that I'm not sure if you can
use these big sims all by yourself--that is, without a copilot and without an
instructor behind you. Maybe I could get a modified one that would work for
flying on my own.

I'd like the same kind of sim for smaller aircraft, too, like Cessnas and
Barons and Citations.

The big ones seem to use hydraulics, smaller ones seem to lean towards
electric. My guess is that hydraulics work better but cost more, whereas
electric actuators are cheaper but perhaps not as responsive.

    Well, I see that you are also into simming psychology, Dr Freud. You are
no closer to reality in that field than you are in your flight fantasies.
But whatever makes you happy is fine with me.
    Like I stated, I have no problems with other peoples fantasies. Heck, I
indulge myself with plenty of my own. I just never lose sight of the fact
that it is actually only a fantasy and has nothing to do with reality. In
fact, some of my fantasies would be down right frightening it I had to face
them in real life. That's what fantasy is all about. Pleasure on demand. All
the fun and no consequences. Who could NOT like that?
    But getting back to simming. Having actually experienced many aspects of
flying, it is much more difficult for me to push that knowledge back out of
my mind and pretend I'm doing something that I KNOW is not anything at all
like the real thing. In this case it is not my OPINION  but FACT based on
actual experience.  That's the real reason  real pilots can't get the same
excitement from simming that non pilots enjoy, Dr Freud. It's like when you
learn that there ain't no Santy Claus. Christmas never is as much fun
again.<g>
Sam

news:baikp7pat6k8qcqnacl2d9bdpojp6aa2mu@4ax.com...

On 4/27/2012 11:12 AM, sambodidley wrote:

OMG!!!  Say it ain't so, Sam...  [sob]

--
MnM

news:jneipv$59t$1@dont-email.me...

    See there, I'm just an evil old Grinch going around and stepping on
those children's dreams.<g>
Sam

I'm interested in psychology generally.

Because you say so? I think not. The rest of your post illustrates my points.

The mere use of the word "fantasies" reveals more than you'd probably care for
otehrs to know.

Why not? If you constantly remind yourself that it's a simulation, you cannot
fully enjoy it.

But I know the reason: The exaggerated, pivotal difference that you perceive
to exist between simulation and real flying is important to your
self-esteem--much more important than getting maximum enjoyment out of
simulation.

When they become frightening in simulation as well, you'll know that you're
doing it right.

Lots of uppercase letters there.

You're making a mistake that inevitably results from your restricted
viewpoint. You believe that I share the same perception that you do. You think
that I believe there is a huge difference between simulation and real flying,
when in fact I know that there isn't. You hope that by constantly emphasizing
the difference that you believe exists, you will somehow diminish my own
enthusiasm for simulation, and that I will somehow come to envy you. But
nothing could be further from the truth. Your viewpoint is not mine, and you
are wasting your time whenever you fail to realize this.

You don't speak for all real pilots, whereas I know a great many pilots who
get quite a bit of excitement from simulation, as much as I do. But they enjoy
flying for the sake of flying--it is not a crutch for their perception of
their own worth, as it is for you.

You can make fun and blow smoke all you want, but I know better. In fact, as
an outside observer, I may understand what's going on better than you do.

If you change your attitude, you might come to enjoy simulation a lot more.
But most people never change their attitudes.