HSLD

My advice is save you money. If you want to practice preflight checks, get a checklist and go do your walkarounds, preflight checks, "flows", etc. in the airplane when it's not being used. I used to insist that my students do chair flying at a rate of AT LEAST 3 hours in the chair to every 1 hour in the plane. Chair flying is free and will allow you to get all the cockpit house keeping skills, and maneuver procedures down so that you can concentrate on flying to standards.

A computer program has the opportunity to introduce negative learning, and the it's really important to have good habits from the start. It's been years since I did nay flight instruction, but to other CFIs recommend using a computer sim for PRIMARY students?

OldAg84

A couple of questions-

HSLD- what sort of bad habits might develop?

What are some of new features of FlightSim X?

As a "wannabe" who neverwill" (at least for the airlines), I've enjoyed the game. I've been impressed with the fact that you could "go anywhere" and the airport layouts look generically the same. Granted they buildings lack detail, etc.

I'm teaching my son some things using it. Basic navigation, physics, etc. Of course, then I get the "Dad, could a 747 land in that field?" kind of question.
But at least he's thinking!

LeoSV

yeah, that's just it. you CAN land 747's on whatever field it can fit on. Hell, you could even land it in the middle of a pasture, and then take off again. There's no preflight stuff, when you runoff the runway, it makes no difference. When you fly over the white house, it doesn't matter. you can't do spins. you can fly and land into any military base and ATC will not "yell" at you. you can fly into class alpha airspace and not need an instrument flight plan. you can get clearance to land at a class Brave airport and an airliner will probably rear end you. you can put in any emergency code in the box and ATC will not ask you if you have an emergency. It's just for entertainment. If any program actually did all that stuff, it would cost more than $29.99.

Flying Ninja

Flight Simulator 2002, 2004, X, whatever...it's just a game and it's great as a procedures trainer, and is not meant to teach you how to fly a real airplane. When MS say "as real as it gets" I think they mean as real as they can get it compared to other flight simulators of lesser quality.

With regard to VATSIM, it's nice when there are actually controllers online. Most of the time I'm getting taxi clearance from some center controller. When there are plenty of controllers, VATSIM is great. Otherwise, eh.

Back to FS, you can definitely make it more realistic and applicable for VFR training if you get MANY monitors that encompass your visual availability in the real airplane. But if you add up all that hardware expense, you're better off just fly the real thing and log some real time on the books.

JSchraub

Check this out
http://www.sa-transport.co.za/aircra...ision/747.html

JesseSW

In regards to that link with the 747 landing on the small strip posted above by LeoSV.
Did you see the faces of those pilots I would be kissing the ground too after that landing. Talk about impressive. Imagine putting a postage stamp in the middle of the living room and make a running dive with your tongue to lick it.
In regards to Microsoft Flight Sims.. I would have to agree with the majority of people on here. It is a game, but a useful one for basic familiarity. I've been into it since the 98 edition and have upgraded each time a new version has come out. I'm highly anticipating the release of version 10 in mid October. There is a playable demo out there that gives a taste of what to expect.

http://www.microsoft.com/games/fligh...downloads.html

If you have Windows Vista..then fasten your seatbelts because it's going to be noticeably better that v9 in almost every regards. For one thing the environment is much more dynamic. The wet ground surface reflections are nice for example, extra ground traffic both airport and civilian, more interactive ATC and Co-pilot option. I haven't been able to get my 2004 Virtual Cabin to act like a swivel head but I've seen it done before. On the Demo for 10 it works very nicely.

Check out the flash website for all the skinny on FS(X).
http://www.microsoft.com/games/fligh...sh/default.htm

In the end there is obviously no substitute for actual flying. That being said, I am still a strong advocate of the Microsoft flight simulator legacy. Some CFIs swear by it as a tool to keep sharp even if it is dull in comparison.
Be careful it can be addicting.

JesseSW

In regards to that link with the 747 landing on the small strip posted above by LeoSV.
Did you see the faces of those pilots I would be kissing the ground too after that landing. Talk about impressive. Imagine putting a postage stamp in the middle of the living room and make a running dive with your tongue to lick it.
In regards to Microsoft Flight Sims.. I would have to agree with the majority of people on here. It is a game, but a useful one for basic familiarity. I've been into it since the 98 edition and have upgraded each time a new version has come out. I'm highly anticipating the release of version 10 in mid October. There is a playable demo out there that gives a taste of what to expect.

http://www.microsoft.com/games/fligh...downloads.html

If you have Windows Vista..then fasten your seatbelts because it's going to be noticeably better that v9 in almost every regards. For one thing the environment is much more dynamic. The wet ground surface reflections are nice for example, extra ground traffic both airport and civilian, more interactive ATC and Co-pilot option. I haven't been able to get my 2004 Virtual Cabin to act like a swivel head but I've seen it done before. On the Demo for 10 it works very nicely.

Check out the flash website for all the skinny on FS(X).
http://www.microsoft.com/games/fligh...sh/default.htm

In the end there is obviously no substitute for actual flying. That being said, I am still a strong advocate of the Microsoft flight simulator legacy. Some CFIs swear by it as a tool to keep sharp even if it is dull in comparison.
Be careful it can be addicting.

JesseSW

Found a video that shows some of that dynamic environment footage I was talking about for FSX.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...imulator&hl=en

From a standpoint of graphics these new implementations are light-years ahead of the previous versions. Advanced real time shaders and texture rendering allow for greater realism in lighting & weather effects. The term used in the video phong & bump mapping are graphic terms for getting specular highlights from a texture file to emulate depth of 3d without having to model it which takes up compute power. (getting a Masters in computer visualization currently) This all translates to more effecient game play without slow frame rates but while creating tons more options and quality at the same time. To get the most out of this new version you are going to have to have a pretty fast computer with a nice video graphics card. If possible, operating under Window's Vista will maximise your performance with 64 bit multi-threading processors.

ps... sorry for the double post above... was having technical issues.

Pilotpip

OldAg,

I used to think it was great practice too. That is until I started instructing and saw every student pilot under the age of 30 not take their eyes off of the instruments. I get a sick satisfaction out of the looks they give me when I cover the instruments and make them fly with their eyes outside like they should as a private pilot. It's great for some procedures and instrument stuff (lots of great practice on holds and ILS approaches in various conditions) but for flows and checklists nothing beats the real thing. There are too many things like the layout, and avionics that aren't the exact replica on FS. I still encourage my students to do exactly what HSLD did way back when, sit in the plane and imagine they're doing the real thing.

CRJ-200

I did the exact same thing