Microsoft Flight Simulator has "flight lessons" with a virtual flight instructor, some of which teach concepts that are taught during actual flight training. These simulators are becoming very realistic, and I can see them being helpful as an introduction to a subject prior to running the Hobbs meter and paying for actual flight time. Will this experience help or hurt someone who decides to become a real pilot? Is it a tool which can help students/instructors in an actual training environment?

Clarification:

This was written about Microsoft Flight Simulator X (FSX). Parts of the answer probably apply to the new Microsoft Flight Simulator (2020 release), but that isn't what I had in mind when writing this. Maybe a new answer will be appropriate after using MSFS for some time.

Rc Plane Simulator Download

Download Zip 🔥 https://tlniurl.com/2yGazc 🔥

Especially when I was a student, I found this incredibly helpful for my long cross country flights. You can look at a map all you want, but its still not the same as sitting in the simulator, and looking around ("I see the mountain on my left.... and the lake below me. I can follow this valley all the way to the airport..." etc). And I've generally found the simulator, with good terrain and textures loaded, can be pretty close to reality.

The night before I did a student flight from KBFI to KVUO, I flew the entire thing in FSX. The next day, it really felt pretty much like making the same flight all over again. Based on the landmarks, timing, views, etc, I knew exactly where I was, and I was confident that everything was going right.

Because of these limitations, I would NOT use a flight simulator to try to learn takeoffs, landings, or certain maneuvers. (You can learn the "procedure" in a simulator... when to reduce power, when to add flaps. But the "feel" will be all wrong).

Typically in real-world training, my instructor told me: "We're going to practice engine-out emergencies" and my mind immediately starts preparing for that... And naturally, we have to do them at a safe altitude in a safe area.

In a flight simulator, you can set up the computer to give you a random emergency at a random time. You might get the problem on short-final, or over a metro-downtown area. Something that you just can't do in reality.

I haven't had any real-life emergencies, so I don't know how accurate a flight simulator is. But I believe that some practice is better than no practice at all, and flight sim lets me fly into storms, icing, get lost in fog, fly approaches below minimums, have an engine seize up on me, etc, all without risking my butt or a $200,000 airframe.

Procedures

Reviewing steps and procedures before going in the air. For example, for a student, steep turns or stall recovery can be a little nerve wracking at first. It may be much easier (and cheaper) to do it in a sim with an instructor, discussing all the steps and reasons for actions. Then when the student gets in the air, they won't have the "feel" for it, but at least the general process is already familiar.

Navigation

Tuning and identifying VORs, and interpreting the needles can be done just as well be done on the ground as in the air. If the sim has good, realistic terrain (I prefer MegaSceneryEarth), it can also be used for some visual reference lessons.

Instrument interpretation

Scanning and cross-checking the 6-pack of instruments can be done in a simulator just fine, and a student can practice doing it for long periods of time for a fraction of the cost of flight time.

On the ground & Outside the plane

Anything on the ground, such as taxiing and parking, or anything outside the airplane, such as pre-flight inspection, or weather interpretation, just doesn't work in a sim.

Radios

I haven't seen any flight sims that really work for the practice of talking on or listening to the radios. (I haven't used VATSIM, which might help). I don't think there's any good substitute for actually flying in a real airspace while simultaneously engaging in real radio conversations.

Feel

Even the best full-motion sim isn't a substitute for the forces a student feels in a real airplane. This is especially true on ground-reference maneuvers, takeoffs, and landings, where I feel sims fall far short of reality. No one will ever get a "feel" for the plane from a simulator.

It can definitely help: when I did my instrument rating my instructor used MS FS to walk through (fly through?) various procedures before doing them for real. He also used it for NDB training because the aircraft we used didn't have ADF. I found it very useful, and if I had bought it myself it would probably have saved me a lot of time and money. The main benefit for me was that it lets you run through procedures to practice getting all the steps right and in the right order; I've never used any scenarios like the ones you mentioned so I don't know how useful they are.

Another very useful simulator I've used is the Garmin G1000 PC trainer. The G1000 has so many features that trying to identify them all while sitting in an actual aircraft is difficult, even if you have the aircraft available and can pay for it. It also lets you practice various failure modes, which is often difficult to do in the real aircraft. Garmin provides simulators for their 'basic' aviation GPS units too, and they're great for the same reason: you can play around as much as you like. There's no doubt in my mind that they help very significantly.

I think that as glass cockpits become more and more common, simulation will become more and more important. They're great tools, but they also bring a lot of complexity and learning how to handle that complexity safely is a lot easier using a simulator. Of course you eventually need to go up, fly, and try out what you've learned for real, but it's no fun trying to flip through a G1000 user guide in flight.

Physical and mental limitations not withstanding, I would say that just about anyone can learn how to fly. But I don't believe that everyone who can learn how to fly could be a good pilot. Flying and pilotage are very much more than successfully operating a flying machine in order to fly. It's even a lot more than doing that and following the procedures (ATC, operating in controlled airspace etc) which accompany it.

A pilot becomes good when the operation of the machine or the following of the procedures is not enough to to produce a safe, successful conclusion. A good pilot avoids the traps and pitfalls that catch the unwary and have proved the rule, all to often, that in the ongoing contest between the earth and flimsy machines arriving in other than controlled circumstances, the earth has yet to lose.

A good pilot takes care of the machine and it's passengers. A good pilot can deal with the unexpected and make sound decisions to continue a flight or not or perhaps even to not commit aviation at all. A good pilot has situational awareness which tells them, via sixth sense, that the bizjet calling left base is a potential threat and is already looking by the time the tower calls.

There is the emotional response; that thrill, that feeling of privilege, that unquantifiable human response to flying that is so much more than operating the machine. There is also a set of skills and mental and physical responses without which, it is not possible to be a "good pilot" (IMHO).

I have only a couple of hundred hours. A handful on fixed wing, the rest on helicopters. I also have about 3500 hours "flying" big tin on VATSIM (if you are serious about PC simming and don't know about VATSIM, Google for it right now!).

In VATSIM, I can operate a 777 (my favourite) very successfully including all of the related procedures which VATSIM does a remarkably good job of simulating. I can fly a SID, follow my planned route, follow a STAR and do a visual onto 26R at Heathrow without breaking sweat, talking to and complying with ATC all the way. I can deal with an unexpected hold or a last minute change of arrival without fluster. I know this all works because I have also been lucky enough to do this in a "real" sim (737) and I had no problems at all using the automatics and hand flying the machine for the first 500 and last 1000 feet to depart and arrive safely back at Heathrow.

However, when I was learning to fly a helicopter, the reality of it all was very different. Hovering is like learning to ride a bike. I would say anyone with reasonable co-ordination can learn to do it. I can hover all helicopters I've flown with ease. Without even thinking about it. Thing is, I can't really tell you how to do it and I have never been able to keep a PC sim helicopter in the air for more than a few minutes without getting into horrible shape. Try explaining to a child how to ride a bike. I reckon it's impossible.

When you switch from lurching around the sky with your instructor calling "I have control" every 20 seconds to that magical moment when you are suddenly in a steady hover, there are some things which simply cannot be simulated which your brain needs.

The beginners mistake is to focus on the ground, I think most people are looking about 15 metres ahead. You cannot succeed like that. What you want to do is focus your eyes well into the distance and let your peripheral vision do the work. It's almost subconscious and I can't even tell you how it all works but you do realise that you are moving over the ground with subtle cues coming in from your periphery.

The second, and more important set of cues, are those that come through the "seat of your pants". With a little experience, you just "know" when the helicopter moves, even before your peripheral vision has picked up the movement and you've already put that pressure on the cyclic (and it generally is pressure, not movement) to arrest the movement before the machine has deviated from it's position. There are always small movements but to an external observer, you are sitting there, in the air, without so much as a ripple. 152ee80cbc

jdk download for windows server 2016 64-bit

i wanna forget my bad days mp3 download

https public.tableau.com en-us s download on your web browser