aiir

I’m using it to supplement my training, plus, if you’re young and you love airplanes there’s no way you haven’t run into a sim once or twice in your life. Haha... so be careful, because I do believe that you can definitely pick up some bad habits. Treat it like a sim and not like a game, follow real world procedures, etc. Although, I’m still not there, as some of the guys above suggested, you can also use it to familiarize yourself with the FMC, and cockpit layout of the regional airplane you’ll fly which should give you a slight leg up. I usually don’t go out of my way to tell people that I use it since there’s no need, and when people bash it I just nod and agree. Life’s too short to waste it arguing with people, haha...

foxtroutuniform

I have used fsx and xplane throughout my flight training. Just used it to learn flows, call outs, and profiles for a upgrade. Before getting in the sim at flight safety my sim partner and I would would spend an hour on the cockpit poster on the wall. If a cockpit poster adds value then x plane can definitely. If sitting in a chair pretending to fly a airplane (chair flying) adds value then x plane will too. We had the first one hour block off private pilot in a sim that looked like it was fs 94 at my flightschool. If you go into the flightsim as if it is a real flight , using real procedures you will definitely learn. Plus one for pilot edge. I had a eureka moment on there and IFR flight training just clicked. And also be careful what you do in x plane will translate into the real world and will be costly for your flight instructor to fix.

Cheese7

JohnBurke, about how many approaches have you flown (or "played") in X-Plane? Which version of X-Plane was it? Are you familiar with the nitty gritty aspects of X-plane? (How it was created, the coding, physics modeling, etc.). It would be hard to put X-plane in the same category as a computer game. It might be sold in the Computer Game section at Walmart, but from a practical perspective, it's much more like a real simulator than a game.


To the original poster, I used X-Plane during my instrument training (both on a PC setup and as part of a FlyThisSim simulator). I would recommend using it concurrently with actual in-airplane training with a good CFI-I during the instrument portion of your training. It was very beneficial and it saved me LOTS of money and actually added to the quality of my training. It allows you to make mistakes and correct them essentially for free (no incremental cost). In the real airplane, I was paying $120/hr, not to mention the wasted time of flying to/from airports to find the approaches. Also, in the actual airplane, you are limited to the approaches within a reasonable distance from wherever you are training. In X-Plane, you can fly some of the most complex approaches out there. During the in-plane training, I found myself repeating the same approaches because they were convenient. The checkride was like a dog and pony show because I had flown most of the approaches in the local area already. X-plane allows you to step it up a notch by challenging yourself with approaches that you've never seen before. Also, while flying in the actual airplane, I was only able to get a few hours of actual IMC during training, most of that was enroute, not on approaches. I only flew a handful of approaches with IMC past the FAF. The rest were under the hood with Foggles. Even the best view limiting devices still allow you to cheat a little bit. Its hard to see the whole panel without accidentally catching a glimpse of the ground out the side window or the natural horizon over the glare shield. Flying under the hood is not nearly as demanding as flying in actual IMC. With X-Plane, you can set the weather to whatever you want, whenever you want, so you can keep moving the ceilings lower and lower as your skills improve.

I'm not saying that X-Plane takes the place of a CFI at all, but if you're just shooting approaches alone or with a safety pilot, X-Plane is almost as beneficial as the real thing, much less expensive, and you can practice flying down to minimums without the same risk level of flying down to minimums in a real-world scenario.

Just my opinion. Your mileage may vary.

Pilsung

^^Exactly this!!^^

Filler

PT6 Flyer

I would that, if anyone is using a simulation device, only use a simulation device that allows you to crank in a little turbulence. If a software simulation device does not allow you to crank in a little turbulence, it definitely should not be used.

Does anyone remember the old 310 desktop analog (not digital) flight simulator? It was great because I could always crank in a little bit of turbulence.

I have used Microftsoft FlightSim to practice flying approaches, and one of the things I noticed about it right away was how it would fly very smoothly and without any turbulence, and how it was seriously destroying my instrument scan.

I have never flown the X-Plane. Does it allow you to crank in a little bit of turbulence?

Pilsung

X-plane 11 allows you to fly based on the real time current weather (automatically rendered via internet data) or customize the settings from mild to wild including things like visibility, turbulence, storminess, winds and time of day...

Pilsung

...syncing Vatsim with a headset to Xplane completes the ultra-realism and usefulness of this tool allowing one to "file" and fly an IFR flight while communicating live with "ATC" (experienced real people, real time taking on the role of ATC via the internet)- it doesn't get much closer to reality than this and I have little time for folks that call it a "game"- it's all in how you use it.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fkWKmkJuByo

aiir

Yup, it allows for this. Also, for any one who cares, this is the 172 I’m using. It’s an add on: Cessna 172SP Skyhawk

The downside to flight sims is that you have to know a bit about computers and you need a pretty strong one. FYI, you need to be running at above 25fps to be in “real time”, most laptops won’t crack it.

It really is what you make for it, for example I really enjoyed reading “Stick and Rudder” by Lang and applying what he talks about in the sim and sorta seeing it in a more tactile way, it sort of blends the new with the old. Of course always keeping in the back of my head that I’m in a sim and there are of course limitations.

I guess you can call it a “game” when I sort of go and do the test pilot thing, based on some limitations that I’ve read. It’s fun, and it’s a bit of a learning experience, and that’s alright within the safety that the sim provides vs. the real thing.

I still don’t know if I’m going to recommend sims when I become a CFI, because I still feel that it depends on the person, and there are some that will no doubt pick up bad habits, or different habits, but for most it should be alright.

BravoPapa

I remember a story from many years ago about a guy that joined the Air Force or Navy to be a pilot and he was a prolific Microsoft Flight Simulator user. They noticed how quickly he was learning and he told them he flew the simulator all the time for the rating and they ended up incorporating MS Flight Simulator into their program. These computer 'games' as JohnBurke would say are useful tools in flight training. I think they are especially good for instrument training to get procedures down.

When I did my instrument I did 15 hours on one of the old ATC710 desktop mechanical simulators with an instructor to get the procedures down which of course counted toward my total time. MS Flight Simulator and X Plane are far more realistic than that was.

JohnBurke is just being his usually curmudgeonly self. Don't pay any attention to him on this subject.

tomgoodman

You can use a tuna sandwich if it helps you pass a check ride, but it is still just a tuna sandwich.