FS Vs. Real Life

[Hagar]

I think that most people with any interest in aviation have wondered at some time whether they could land an airliner if the crew were incapacitated. While most of my real-life experience is on light aircraft I think I could make a pretty good go of it - with some expert assistance on the ground. It might not be pretty to watch but they would stand more chance with me than a complete beginner with no knowledge of flying. However big & complex the aircraft is the basic principles remain the same.

I suspect the same goes for anyone used to the MS sims. While I've always thought they concentrate too much on the panel & instruments in MSFS this might not be such a bad thing. At least you would have some idea of how it all works, more knowledge than me as I've never used the autopilot in FS.

I sat in the right-hand seat of a Boeing 707 flight simulator during a demonstration "flight" many years ago. It had the full six-axis motion system & was one of the first examples with a computerised display projected onto a curved mirror surrounding the outside of the cockpit, very similar to the ones used today by most airlines. It had been built for an airline & was actually used for training their pilots before being dismantled & shipped off to wherever the airline was based, China if I remember correctly. Very realistic & quite unlike anything I've seen on the PC. Maybe it's different with some of these simpits.

PS. This was at Rediffusion Flight Simulation (Redifon) at Crawley near Gatwick Airport. Redifon was one of the pioneers of modern flight simulation & my brother was Shipping Manager with the company for many years. They had open days every year where employees & their friends & families could see & experience the latest developments. About the same time as my 707 "flight" they were also experimenting with ideas for the leisure market & the "Back to the Future" ride at Universal Studios in Orlando was one of their first contracts. This works on exactly the same principle as their flight simulators & is still one of the best rides I've ever been on.

[Mistral]

So it is the fact that the actual dials/gauges/buttons/gizmo's etc on the real aircraft that are the main difference different. If this is so why don't MS and other designers incorperate ALL details of the cockpit and make FS truly 'as real as it gets'??? Maybe they feel that then i wouldn't appeal to the mass markets and become to specialised???

[Hagar]

So it is the fact that the actual dials/gauges/buttons/gizmo's etc on the real aircraft that are the main difference different. If this is so why don't MS and other designers incorperate ALL details of the cockpit and make FS truly 'as real as it gets'??? Maybe they feel that then i wouldn't appeal to the mass markets and become to specialised???

It depends on which aircraft you're talking about. I've never flown a big airliner but most real flying in smaller types is not done continually looking at instruments. Unless the visibilty is bad enough that you need to rely on the instruments just to keep straight & level the pilot has his head up & looking outside, both to see where he's going & keeping a permanent lookout for other aircraft. This can be compared with driving a car. How often or how long do you spend looking down at your speedo or other warning gauges or even being aware that you're doing so? Apart from the occasional glance down at them you're looking at the world outside, otherwise you would soon hit something or somebody.

I realise that flying a large modern airliner is far more technical these days but this is the main problem I have with FS. However realistic they might make it visually it can never be like real flying or a proper flight simulator costing almost as much as the real aircraft. MSFS is still very useful as a training aid & has come a long way in the last 20 years. My brother is not really interested as he worked with the real thing for something like 25 years. When I showed him CFS2 he said; "That's where we (meaning Redifon) were about 30 years ago".

[Felix/FFDS]

So it is the fact that the actual dials/gauges/buttons/gizmo's etc on the real aircraft that are the main difference different. If this is so why don't MS and other designers incorperate ALL details of the cockpit and make FS truly 'as real as it gets'??? Maybe they feel that then i wouldn't appeal to the mass markets and become to specialised???

There's just so much "realism" you can design and build into a mass market US$50./  simulation.   FOr starters, practically NO simulator will effectively simulate the g-forces on your body, or the attack on your senses when the airplane goes through unnatural attitudes - a spin, roll, or one of those crazy Lom

[Mistral]

Some fair points u two, but i still think they could make it so much better with just a little bit more work, i.e that fat panal i was talking about and so forth. But, at the same time, within the realms of reality i think flying is quite obviously not an experience that can be accuratly simulated for $50/

[Hagar]

I believe there are some extremely realistic panels, both freeware & payware, if you look around for them. I think the DVC is the way to go & it's quite possible FS2006 or a future version of FS will do away with the 2D panel completely, like CFS3.

After a lot of experimenting my Fox Four colleague Mike Eustace has produced what I think is the best possible compromise for a 2D panel. His latest panels feature Look Up & Look Down views which can be assigned to different keys & even spare buttons on your joystick. They're for CFS2 only & I haven't seen anything like it for any version of FS. http://www.simviation.com/lair/cfs2kwextras.htm

[C]

With the correct advice from the ground via radio, I reckon i'd give myself a sporting chance in some more advanced aircraft...

[Felix/FFDS]

With the correct advice from the ground via radio, I reckon i'd give myself a sporting chance in some more advanced aircraft...

ATC:  Charlie, PLEASE keep the screaming down!

Charlie:  (censored - even for SimV)

ATC:  

[C]

[quote]


ATC:

[Hagar]

I want the chief engineer & chief pilot of the airline on the other end of that radio or I ain't playing. If Charlie's on board he can do it. I'm no hero & he's younger & better looking than me. He's also far more qualified for this sort of thing.

[Craig.]

I want the chief engineer & chief pilot of the airline on the other end of that radio or I ain't playing. If Charlie's on board he can do it. I'm no hero & he's younger & better looking than me. He's also far more qualified for this sort of thing.

I'm assuming you mean the photo opportunity at the end of your heroic experience:)

[C]

I want the chief engineer & chief pilot of the airline on the other end of that radio or I ain't playing.

That was my thinking... Someone who knows what they're talking about. Then I'd at least have a 5% chance of cobbling together some sort insrument/visual approach at a sensible speed. Oh, and a runway the width of Manston's would be good too...

Then again, I'd probably be in the other 95% and make a pig's ear of it...

If Charlie's on board he can do it. I'm no hero & he's younger & better looking than me. He's also far more qualified for this sort of thing.

I'm not qualified at all! Maybe for the photos...

It'd make a good book though...

[Hagar]

It'd make a good book though...

I think you'll find it's already been done.

[C]

I think you'll find it's already been done.

Have you read "Talkdown" by Brian Lecomber?

[Hagar]

Have you read "Talkdown" by Brian Lecomber?

No. Sad to say I haven't. I was thinking of Airplane.