PDA

View Full Version : Simulation vs Reality



M_Gunz
12-06-2008, 12:20 AM
It's a known topic like how real is this sim and what level pilot does this sim make me?

I'd like to give some idea of the step away from reality is any of these sims.
Would you think that learning to ride a bicycle on a PC bicycle sim and could make someone a bicycle rider?

Or motorcycle, there are motorbike sims and we know how just like real those are, don't we?
Do I care if the numbers match real when greatly most of the experience is missing?
Would I base how I'd ride on what I would do in the sim given the same situation? Yeah.. right.

Then take flying being another dimension and then some more complicated....

It's a freaking blessing we have what we've got. Imagination and experience fill the gap but experience in
sim is not always applicable to real though from what I see of real pilots in sims is that their experience
does apply to the sim. They imagine from real experience to run the sim, others experience what a sim gives
and run from that which can be super-excellent and still blow it IRL doing what worked in sim 1,000,000 times.

Freiwillige
12-06-2008, 02:04 AM
Bicycle and motorcycles are about balance mainly. Although say if its a super detailed Harly Davidson simulator for example, Could it make you a better rider if you have never riden before? Sure it could teach shift points at certain RPM's, Breaking distance ETC.

Now does being a sim pilot make you more capable to be a real one? The U.S. Airforce says yes. In a 1997 study they found that cadets who had 100's of hours of home flight sim experiance out performed the ones who did not. That says alot to me.

Now the finall question. Your stranded at a remote airfeild in the California desert. The pilot that flew you to this exotic location has been bittin by a rattle snake and needs desperate medical attention. Who do you think his choice would be to fly the damn plane? Your buddy who has never learned anything about flying or yourself who has spent countless nights playing Sims, who knows a bit about prop pitch and mixture and what a yoke is?

Another freind of mine who is going thru flight school as we speak gets credit hours on microshaft flight simulator X. That answers your question?

GIAP.Shura
12-06-2008, 03:55 AM
The flaw in your comparison is down to input controls. A bicycle simulator does not have the same input control as a real bicycle, just like the skills someone has developed to be good at FPS would not translate in any way into making them a good rifleman.

For flight sims, however, the basic controls are very similar. There will be some transferable skills.

However, I do believe that IL-2 is very far from reality mainly due to the psychological differences which can't be modelled rather than anything else. When it comes down to it, it is entertainment.

UgoRipley
12-06-2008, 04:10 AM
Originally posted by GIAP.Shura:
The flaw in your comparison is down to input controls. A bicycle simulator does not have the same input control as a real bicycle...
That reminds me of an evening out with friends in Paris many years ago, we were in a "pinball arcade" (or whatever these places are called) and there was this fascinating game with a bicycle in front of a huge monitor that caught my interest...
It looked a bit "retro" and it was really standing out of all the rest (shooters, cars and such).

In the game itself there was a bicycle flying like a bird, and the input was in fact biking as crazy, in order to make the "bird" wave its wings and gain altitude, the handles controlled pitch and roll, and the goal was popping some ballons and stuff like that.

It was real FUN !!

GH_Klingstroem
12-06-2008, 05:42 AM
I have flown computer games and have been addicted to them since I was 9-10 (1989) started with red baron etc etc.. When I started my training for gliders licence at the age of 15 the instructors told me that I basically already knew how to fly an airplane and asked me how that could be. Same thing for my private pilots licence when I was 18. I needed 4 hours before he wanted me to go "solo". Saying this I think that u definately benefit from flying these games/sims. I have noticed that my skill when judging heights vs glding distance is better thanks to flightsims.
I got my airline pilot licence in 2004 and passed many of the simulator tests very much thanks to FS2004 where practicing IFR flying is very well depicted!

Now I work for an airline in in central europe and love it, but I still, after I come home from a day´s flight, fly Il2 every day!

I had one great experience a few years back, flying a Pa28. I had been flying infront of my computer quite a bit the previous days and used the CH YOKE for my computer.
Taking off in my real Pa28, after take off I wanted to turn left after takeoff and wanted first to LOOK left. Haha my left hand was automatically looking for the little button on the flight controls to let me turn my head to the left. It took me a second or so before I laughed out loud and realized that this time Im actually flying for real...
But to sum up!
These games and sims definately help you IRL!

WTE_Galway
12-06-2008, 06:54 AM
The thing that regularly gets missed in this discussion is you can learn some VERY bad habits from flying sims that take real world instructors a lot of work to knock out of you.

Just two of the problems from my own flight training that were directly attributable to flying flight sims to much without an instructor ...

- on landing the particular Cessna that I trained in you needed to pull back very firmly on the Yoke to the point that it virtually hits your chest in order to flare properly in a landing (high wing aircraft like Cessna's have minimal ground effect). unfortunately being used to sim joysticks I never pulled back enough in flare and occasionally terrified the poor instructor http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
- i spent a LOT of time in single seat fighters in combat sims and when I first got in a Cessna could land fine in a crosswind (even a heavy one) but had trouble with a straight landing. It took my instructor ages to work out what was going wrong. Turned out when coming straight in I kept lining up the center line of the runway with the middle of the nose (like i do in a combat flight sim) instead of the center of my yoke http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Once this was pointed out my landings improved instantly.

M_Gunz
12-06-2008, 07:44 AM
Help yes though in ways sims also can teach bad habits when what should go wrong doesn't or does differently in sim.
Replace?

On two wheels there is the feel of balance, feel of the road, condition of the road, how your mass moves in relation
to the bike and all part of a turn that well, have fun simulating just balancing on two wheels. With experience your
imagination fills the gap to some extent but what about for someone with no experience riding bikes?

How much of flying turn and maneuver beyond gentle and slow does having the feel of moving in the plane make a difference
in just how you control the maneuver? Look at how much difference in having an FFB stick is supposed to make, what we
are missing sitting in a chair is more than hard G's here and there.

WTE_Galway
12-06-2008, 07:53 AM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:

How much of flying turn and maneuver beyond gentle and slow does having the feel of moving in the plane make a difference
in just how you control the maneuver? Look at how much difference in having an FFB stick is supposed to make, what we
are missing sitting in a chair is more than hard G's here and there.

I use an FFB stick because the feedback it provides on the edge of stall, while not realistic is useful.

However I am not aware of any current sim that provides "realistic" feedback to a FFB stick, they are mainly for gaming effect.

As an example the correct way to trim an aircraft is hold the stick/yoke in a position that gives the speed and attitude you want and then start winding on trim until the stick pressure disappears and the stick is neutral in that position. In other words change the trim and the position the stick centers at "hands off" changes.

I know of no current flight sim where a FFB stick behaves that way.

M_Gunz
12-06-2008, 09:55 AM
The FFB stick can't position itself... there is only force towards center? Artefact of spring-type joysticks I think.

The difference between IL2 and real trim bugged me from week 1 back in 2001.
I asked if we could have 1 button that we hit and trim winds in enough to cover stick force when the button got pressed,
so then you hit the button and ease the joystick to center then you'd feel force ease off even though yes, your hand
would move and it can't be avoided given current hardware and software.

RPMcMurphy
12-06-2008, 12:06 PM
Originally posted by GH_Klingstroem:
I have flown computer games and have been addicted to them since I was 9-10 (1989) started with red baron etc etc.. When I started my training for gliders licence at the age of 15 the instructors told me that I basically already knew how to fly an airplane and asked me how that could be. Same thing for my private pilots licence when I was 18. I needed 4 hours before he wanted me to go "solo". Saying this I think that u definately benefit from flying these games/sims. I have noticed that my skill when judging heights vs glding distance is better thanks to flightsims.
I got my airline pilot licence in 2004 and passed many of the simulator tests very much thanks to FS2004 where practicing IFR flying is very well depicted!

Now I work for an airline in in central europe and love it, but I still, after I come home from a day´s flight, fly Il2 every day!

I had one great experience a few years back, flying a Pa28. I had been flying infront of my computer quite a bit the previous days and used the CH YOKE for my computer.
Taking off in my real Pa28, after take off I wanted to turn left after takeoff and wanted first to LOOK left. Haha my left hand was automatically looking for the little button on the flight controls to let me turn my head to the left. It took me a second or so before I laughed out loud and realized that this time Im actually flying for real...
But to sum up!
These games and sims definately help you IRL!

Thats a good story. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif
Same goes for me sort-of. In FS98 I spent many hours flying in zero visibilty with instruments. When I got in a Cessna and put on that visor I had no problem flying instruments only. The instructor thought I was cheating somehow, he couldnt figure out how I was able to do it my very first time. Too bad I never got my license. Too expensive for me. I did manage to get some solo time in gliders though later in life, and yes these sims helped me alot too.

idonno
12-06-2008, 12:33 PM
Originally posted by GH_Klingstroem:
I have flown computer games and have been addicted to them since I was 9-10 (1989) started with red baron etc etc.. When I started my training for gliders licence at the age of 15 the instructors told me that I basically already knew how to fly an airplane and asked me how that could be. Same thing for my private pilots licence when I was 18. I needed 4 hours before he wanted me to go "solo". Saying this I think that u definately benefit from flying these games/sims. I have noticed that my skill when judging heights vs glding distance is better thanks to flightsims.
I got my airline pilot licence in 2004 and passed many of the simulator tests very much thanks to FS2004 where practicing IFR flying is very well depicted!

Now I work for an airline in in central europe and love it, but I still, after I come home from a day´s flight, fly Il2 every day!

I had one great experience a few years back, flying a Pa28. I had been flying infront of my computer quite a bit the previous days and used the CH YOKE for my computer.
Taking off in my real Pa28, after take off I wanted to turn left after takeoff and wanted first to LOOK left. Haha my left hand was automatically looking for the little button on the flight controls to let me turn my head to the left. It took me a second or so before I laughed out loud and realized that this time Im actually flying for real...
But to sum up!
These games and sims definately help you IRL!

When I first started taking flying lessons, an hour long lesson would wear me out. There's so much you have to concentrate on at one time. I ran out of money long before getting my licence so that was that for many years. During that time I discovered flight sims and put in hundreds (if not thousands) of hours. When I was able to start taking lessons again I found an hour long lesson a piece of cake. I could easily go two or more. The basics of flying the airplane had become almost second nature, so the only thing I needed to really focus on was doing the specific things my instruct wanted.

I remember the exact moment I realized how much the sims had helped. We were nearing the end of the downwind leg and I was looking over my shoulder at the runway for the correct angle start the turn to base, when it hit me just how familiar it all was, and how I knew exactly what I needed to do to land the plane.

After I got my license I took a friend up with me. I was trying to point out something to him on the ground on my side of the plane, but he couldn't see down at that angle from where he was, so I kicked full right rudder and just enough left aileron and flew the airplane crabbed to the right and banked to the left so he could see. Once he did, I returned to level flight and was just a little surprised to see that I was still on course and altitude. I mean exactly on altitude. I learned to fly like that in the sims.

Another friend was training to be a flight instructor and needed someone to go up with him and play student, That was me. The airplane we were flying had sticks instead of yokes. Apparently, people who are used to flying with a yoke have a tendency to climb while turning with a stick. When he asked me to do a steep turn I banked it over and did a 360 dead on altitude. I could see the annoyance on his face when I said "Let me try that." By that time I was approaching about 10,000 hours of flying sims with a joystick. Yeah, I'm a little addicted. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Years ago I read a post from a Dawn of Aces flier who was taking aerobatic lessons in real life. He correctly performed a hammer-head stall on his first attempt, much to his instructors' surprise.

Yes, these sims are not 100%, but danged if they ain't close. You just have to remember that even if they are 99% accurate, in the unforgiving world of aviation, that 1% can kill you quick.

I think a lot people are afraid to admit to how good some of these sims are, for fear that some goober will go out and kill himself in a real plane trying to do something he had no business doing. Well, to all you goobers out there let me just say DON'T TRY THIS AT HOME. Actually, in this case I guess it should be ONLY TRY THIS AT HOME. And to the not-so-gooberish of you out there, <whisper>It's very close to real life</end whisper>.

Klingstroem, I find myself wanting to zoom in my view when I'm looking at something in the distance. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Holtzauge
12-06-2008, 02:13 PM
I just want to second some of the commments above on how much you can learn about real flying from this sim. I have more than 20 years experience in gliders and powered aircraft and have worked as an instructor as well. I have taught a lot of people to fly so I can with confidence tell you that if you can take off, land and pursue a manouvering aircraft on full real in this sim you will not find it hard to fly IRL as well. As a sidenote, through my previous line of work I have had the privelidge to fly a few of the simulators used to train modern jet fighter pilots and those are actually pretty easy to fly if you compare to the full real settings here!

True, there is no "seat of the pants" or stick feedback and the SA is not the same in IL2 as in a real aircraft but actually those things make it EASIER to fly not HARDER!

So keep on practicing and be proud if you do well here. If you learn to fly well in Il2 you will definitely need less time to get your license!

buddye1
12-06-2008, 02:48 PM
Tim Elkinton, our RAF Hurri Pilot from the BOB, who hangs out at the A2A BOBII Forum and helps us some has stated , "a simulator is nothing like flying".

Also my experience in the Space Shuttle Crew Trainer when you ask a crew member about the Simulator Vs reality , you would get the same answer.

However, the purpose of the Crew Trainer and any Simulator is to learn how to use the A/C (or vehicle) to accomplish your mission.

If you ask the Shuttle crew that question, the answer is always a, "Yes". The Shuttle Crew Tranier was updated for all missions.

If your mission is learning to fly then IL2 (or any accurate simulator) would help you learn, IHMO

TX-EcoDragon
12-06-2008, 09:09 PM
I had some bad habits from sims when I started flying the real thing. . .but I certainly had some advantages too. Generally these were related to instrument interpretation when "under the hood" ie wearing view limiting devices and flying solely by reference to the flight instruments, and some added situational awareness and comfort orienting myself based on magnetic headings, using section lines etc. I'd say my R/C flying taught me more about actual stick and rudder skills than any sim could do.

I've had simmers up in real planes and they can handle very minimal maneuvers pretty well, shallow turns and descents etc, but most people don't employ the real world procedures that might be a big deal in the real world, and not so obvious in the sim.

There is no doubt that a sim can be useful, particularly when coupled with appropriate guidance from a flight training text and/ or flight instructor, but only in certain areas, and generally only for procedures vs actual stick and rudder skills. Most student pilots are told to avoid using sims during primary training for this very reason until the stick and rudder skills are second nature, it's generally thought to be better to avoid them, loggable full motion, full cockpit loggable sims might be the exception here but when the time comes for procedural training, they have their place.

NAFP_supah
12-07-2008, 03:57 AM
Also you can do things in sims that in real life would put your lunch in your lap http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Some flight sim friends of mine experienced that when I took them up http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Kettenhunde
12-07-2008, 04:08 AM
when the time comes for procedural training, they have their place.


Exactly. Games have very little to do with actual control of the aircraft.

This is especially noticeable if you fly a taildragger.

All the best,

Crumpp

idonno
12-07-2008, 10:28 AM
Originally posted by Kettenhunde:

Games have very little to do with actual control of the aircraft.




Have you read any of the posts in this thread from the real life pilots?

Maybe you didn't get anything from flying sims that transfer over, but don't tell the rest of us who did benefit from it that we didn't. What, are we making it up? Are we just lying?

Good flight sims have a lot to do with actual control of the aircaft.



My plane.

http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll104/michael_t53/MyAirplane.jpg

1947 Cessna 140



P.S. No, they generally don't do the tail dragger thing well at all, but I'm sure that has more to do with the decisions of the developer than with what is possible in a flight sim.

K_Freddie
12-07-2008, 01:29 PM
Not having anything to do with MS-FS, but people say it good for procedural stuff.
IL2 I'd say is good for a/c control and situational awareness (rubber necking), and making firm, quick decisions.

All of these things in a real plane will come naturally much faster having 'simmed'. The next trick is just to get yourself used to the real 3D environment and effects.
So essentially simming will get you 2/3rds of the way to real piloting.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Kettenhunde
12-07-2008, 03:03 PM
Have you read any of the posts in this thread from the real life pilots?


I did read them and I wrote what I think from my own experience as "real life" pilot. It's not a "real life" pilot either. We are not comparing pilots, the thread is about comparing game playing to piloting an aircraft. Calling yourself a "pilot" solely due to game playing is kind of far fetched IMHO.

These games don't do rudder control very well at all. You cannot learn correct rudder inputs from any flight sim that I know of today.

Now, very few of the aircraft in IL2 have the stabilizing effect of a nosewheel but they most certainly act like it.

I am sorry, but the absence of the necessary correct control inputs makes for a very poor simulation of the control of an aircraft in my book.


1947 Cessna 140


Nice plane and I really like how the taildragger Cessna's fly. I loved the Cessna 170 I got my initial tailwheel certification on. I have fond memories of that docile babydoll. Only yoke and one of few high wing aircraft I have ever flown.

All the best,

Crumpp

TX-EcoDragon
12-07-2008, 03:59 PM
In related news: http://www.theonion.com/content/news/blue_angels_hold_first_ever_open



http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

P.S. I'm just kidding. . .



P.P.S. idonno, based on that C140s registration it's a 1946! I'm shocked it doesn't do vertical takeoffs and employ guided rockets! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

idonno
12-07-2008, 04:54 PM
Originally posted by Kettenhunde:

It's not a "real life" pilot either. We are not comparing pilots, the thread is about comparing game playing to piloting an aircraft. Calling yourself a "pilot" solely due to game playing is kind of far fetched IMHO.



Yeah, I can see how you might have gotten that impression, but that's not what I was implying with the term real life pilot.

Kettenhunde
12-07-2008, 05:31 PM
C140s registration it's a 1946

Yep, one based out of W03 too. I have family in the vicinity and land at KGWW when I visit.


Yeah, I can see how you might have gotten that impression, but that's not what I was implying with the term real life pilot.


No issues. These games are fun. If you can learn a little about the real thing in the process, so much the better.

I am thankful that so people are interested in WWII Aircraft and if these games keep that interest peaked, I am glad to help out the communities of players.


The enthusiasm of Erin Rappaport, a Springfield, IL eighth-grader who played flight simulators on her PlayStation and impressed Naval flight teams when she sat in the F/A-18 Hornet's cockpit for the first time and already knew, or could guess," the functions of many of the jet's 188 different controls.

"That sounds just like Erin," said Rappaport's math teacher, Janice Billingsly. "We'll miss her very much."



That is just too funny.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

All the Best,

Crumpp

Crikey2008
12-07-2008, 05:32 PM
[QUOTE]
...Games have very little to do with actual control of the aircraft.

This is especially noticeable if you fly a taildragger.
QUOTE]

I've noticed advice in this forum that [what they call] 'torque' lessens as the tail is lifted in game.
One can't take that perception from a sim into RL in a tail dragger because then they would not expect gyroscopic effects to kick in in RL when they raise the tail for real.

IMO, sims are useful tools for training aircraft control only to the extent they assist to reach a standard where the pilot can take an adequate expectation with them to a real aircraft. The main problem is lack of depth perception primarily in the lateral view but in other views as well. IL-2 acknowledges this.

RL flying should be expected to comprise about 40 hours learning aircraft control in critical manouvres and a lifetime of learning airmanship.

idonno
12-07-2008, 07:47 PM
Originally posted by TX-EcoDragon:

P.P.S. idonno, based on that C140s registration it's a 1946!



There is some confusion about the year of manufacture. The placard on the airplane says 1947, but some of the paperwork says 1946. The 140 airframe that originally held this airplane's serial number was wrecked way back when. Everything salvageable was attached to a 120 fuselage and the airplane was reborn. It may be that the 120 was manufactured in 47, but the placard says Cessna 140, serial number 12910, date of manufacture 1947. I don't know.

The only difference between the 120 and 140 fuselage is the windows behind the doors so they cut the holes for the windows and voila, a 140.

Plunkertx
12-07-2008, 08:55 PM
I bought FSX and flew nothing but the Piper Cub. Then, I started taking RL lessons in a Cub and impressed my instructor. I now have 11hrs in a Cub and I can for a fact say that FSX is about 85% like the real thing! The only differences in RL are taxiing..for some reason it's quite different in the game, but it's not too bad. The game really helped me.

M_Gunz
12-08-2008, 04:38 AM
Okay you can learn things in flight sims that help in real flying.

Limited elements of the experience are re-produced by the sim but some things can't be re-produced so far.

I wouldn't dare to try flying IRL even conservative BCM's and ACM's without much time getting to where I'd be qualified to fly
aerobatics which in the sim, all of them, it's no big problem. I would need to bridge the gap with experience IRL flying.

Does 1000 hours of aerobatics in FSX make one ready to fly aerobatics? Notice the level of this vs level of that here.

Pluto8742
12-08-2008, 06:56 AM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
Okay you can learn things in flight sims that help in real flying.

Limited elements of the experience are re-produced by the sim but some things can't be re-produced so far.

I'd go with that. When I took up gliding I found that having flown R/C models and played slight sims did help quite a bit. It meant that I had a pretty good intuitive understanding of how aircraft fly. This is an understanding that I simply couldn't have reached from just reading about flying.

Having said that, Kettenhunde has a point about rudders. I think most sims under-represent the need to control the rudder. For adverse yaw in the case of gliders or for all sorts of reasons in the case of powered aircraft. In IL-2, one can fly around quite happily and never touch the rudder. I guess this is because the sims have to be playable by people without rudder pedals, and also because most simmers would be irked by having to hold in continuous rudder on some aircraft without trim or in particular parts of the flight envelope. Rise of Flight should be interesting in that respect if modelled correctly.

Calling IL-2 and FSX "games" is a bit harsh, though. IL-2 and, to a lesser extent, FSX do make pretty good attempts to simulate significant parts of aircraft flight behaviour. They simplify ground handling, engine control, stall behaviour and rudder control, but much of the rest looks about right. The lack of weather in IL-2 is my own biggest gripe. Landing a glider in a 20+ kt cross wind is far more challenging than anything IL-2 can produce. I think that, just as I wouldn't dismiss an R/C model as a "toy", I wouldn't dismiss flight sims as just "games". Games are what kids play on consoles. Reminds me of that scene from Flight of the Pheonix, where the German engineer goes crackers when someone calls his model aircraft designs "toys".

Cheers,

RD.

RPMcMurphy
12-08-2008, 09:16 AM
Originally posted by Pluto8742:
I'd go with that. When I took up gliding I found that having flown R/C models and played slight sims did help quite a bit. It meant that I had a pretty good intuitive understanding of how aircraft fly. This is an understanding that I simply couldn't have reached from just reading about flying.



A while back, in the mid 90s, I picked out a 2 meter RC glider kit in a hobby shop in Fayetteville NC, put the box on the counter and as I was paying for it the hobby shop guy asked me where I do my flying, and I said:
" I don't know anything about flying."
He sort-of rolled his eyes and said:
"Good luck."
After a month or so I finished it.
A beautiful job too. A Goldberg Gentl Lady glider.
I found a hill and tossed it.
After repairing it, I went back to that hill again, and tossed it again. This time the wind wasnt blowing 10-15. I managed to keep it from crashing. After about 10 or 12 tosses I was finally able to bring it around and make a 360 turn. I was ecstatic at that moment.
I had learned to fly an airplane.
Before I had little understanding of how things worked, the effects of control surfaces etc.
After a few more trips to my flying spot I was thermalling that glider, launching it with a high start, and nearly loosing it a few times by letting it 'speck-out. I got to where I could bring it down and catch it in hand. I later got a glider with ailerons.

And so then cmae the real-thing.

I ended up at Sterling Mass Airfield flying the real thing. L-23 Super Blanik.
This was about 5 years before I discovered flight sims.
But, sticking to the topic; Flight sims do help improve or maintain flying skills.
Its a good way to get "chairborne"
on a day with bad weather.

Holtzauge
12-08-2008, 11:58 AM
Originally posted by Pluto8742:

Having said that, Kettenhunde has a point about rudders. I think most sims under-represent the need to control the rudder. For adverse yaw in the case of gliders or for all sorts of reasons in the case of powered aircraft. In IL-2, one can fly around quite happily and never touch the rudder. I guess this is because the sims have to be playable by people without rudder pedals, and also because most simmers would be irked by having to hold in continuous rudder on some aircraft without trim or in particular parts of the flight envelope.

RD.

Well I do not agree about the rudder bit. The beauty is that if you pay attention you will see that adverse yaw is actually modelled in IL2. Look at the ball and roll right and left without applying rudder. The ball will not stay centered. Do the same with rudder input and you can keep the ball centered.

Seeing this and correcting for it is in my experience also what will differentiate a IRL pilot who has learned to fly on powered planes from one that has learned on gliders. A glider pilot is usually more attentive to correcting adverse yaw also in powered planes while some (most?) powered pilots just don't bother.

BUT: This effect is actually modelled in IL2! Talk about doing a great job and paying attention to detail. When I first noticed the effect I once again chalked up another point to Oleg and his team.

BTW, If you want to practice adverse yaw here is a glider simulator that's quite OK.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/First-Class-Simulations-Glider-...id=1228761505&sr=1-8 (http://www.amazon.co.uk/First-Class-Simulations-Glider-Simulator/dp/B000IDNU38/ref=sr_1_8?ie=UTF8&s=videogames&qid=1228761505&sr=1-8)

Speaking of limitations, there is a major one with glider simulators: They will not teach you how to center a thermal. You who know and master this know what I'm talking about. The seat of the pants input you get from down below http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Kettenhunde
12-08-2008, 01:41 PM
Well I do not agree about the rudder bit.

You are free to do so but it does not change anything I wrote or the fact the game does not model correct rudder inputs.

You can see this especially in take offs and climbs.

None of these games model the correct rudder inputs. That is why none of them are used in any flight training or recommended by any flight training agency for learning aircraft control.

slipBall
12-08-2008, 02:36 PM
Alot of good points brought up here. If you can take off and land every time, that means that you understand flight theory, the importance of altitude, air speed and the like. Those of you that religulously, and constantly use your gages, would fair better in real aircraft. Input is the same, you may need more movement, or force, but its the same.

Goober1962
12-08-2008, 03:16 PM
The 1% site for MSFS claim to be within 1% of the real FMs http://avhistory.org/communityserver/default.aspx
The guys over at Targetware also claim that their FMs are more realistic. http://www.targetware.net/

I know that you've flown Targetware Crumpp... what are your thoughts on those claims.

idonno
12-08-2008, 04:16 PM
Originally posted by Kettenhunde:

...the game does not model correct rudder inputs.

You can see this especially in take offs and climbs.



No, I can't.

M_Gunz
12-08-2008, 08:24 PM
Originally posted by Goober1962:
The 1% site for MSFS claim to be within 1% of the real FMs http://avhistory.org/communityserver/default.aspx
The guys over at Targetware also claim that their FMs are more realistic. http://www.targetware.net/

I know that you've flown Targetware Crumpp... what are your thoughts on those claims.

I remember when Oryx was finishing his PhD in aeronautics and had met with the 1% group.
What he told them was "Yes, within 1% of what you know.". He had a starter list of things they didn't know.

M_Gunz
12-08-2008, 08:29 PM
Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
You are free to do so but it does not change anything I wrote or the fact the game does not model correct rudder inputs.


Huh? The inputs are pilot strength applied to the pedals. As the plane goes faster the feedback on the pedals changes.
I wonder if propwash effects are coded to affect forces on the pedals? There is no air, only what is coded works.

Kettenhunde
12-08-2008, 08:53 PM
I know that you've flown Targetware Crumpp... what are your thoughts on those claims.

Quite a few of our members are among the development team for TW.

The ground handling is abysmal but I think that is known bug in the system.

The graphical model is outstanding as well as much of the function. They are the only "sim" I have seen that correctly models the function of the FW-190 flaps. They also model the 190's gear position indicators. Both of those are nice touches which impressed me. We helped them unofficially to work the KG functions but the program engine has definite limits.

I don't think it is much different from any other game. It's fun but it is not applicable to actual piloting.

IMHO many players take these games way too seriously to the point of trying to justify it as some sort of recreation of real life. The reality is it is just a game for fun and nothing more. There isn't anything wrong with that either.

As a pilot I don't think it is worth trying to justify to yourself that there some sort of value to the experience beyond that.

All the best,

Crumpp

Aaron_GT
12-09-2008, 02:13 AM
None of these games model the correct rudder inputs. That is why none of them are used in any flight training or recommended by any flight training agency for learning aircraft control.

The FAA has certified a couple of training programmes based on simulators employing X-Plane, but it's the entire system (i.e. a physical cockpit, etc.) rather than X-Plane itself.

Kettenhunde
12-09-2008, 03:40 AM
None of these games model the correct rudder inputs. That is why none of them are used in any flight training or recommended by any flight training agency for learning aircraft control.



Aaron,

There are several simulators available which you can log time on.

However the FAA is very specific in its allowable use of such devices. All of them are specifically for teaching procedures and not aircraft control.

The loggable time is strictly controlled. There is no speculation or room for interpretation.



Personal Computer Aviation Training Devices (PCATDs) are a convenient and cost-effective way to polish your IFR skills when away from the airport. On Top offers the most realistic graphics and interactive features of any simulator: in fact, up to 10 hours can be logged toward the instrument rating under AC 61-126. Now you can fly in low IFR conditions anytime, practice instrument failures that you can't safely do in an airplane and fly approaches to ANY airport in the world. With On Top, you can instantly pause the simulator to review dozens of details about your flight, allowing you to master complex procedures before you get in the airplane. Excellent for initial instrument training or simply for staying sharp.


http://www.sportys.com/acb/showdetl.cfm?DID=19&Product_ID=10886&CATID=172#desc

The FAA AC that covers computer training.


AC 61-126


Qualification and Approval of Personal Computer-Based Aviation Training Devices



http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAd....nsf/key/AC%2061-126 (http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/key/AC%2061-126)

AC 61-126 outlines the purpose and use of computer simulation in aviation training.


Flight task procedural skills have traditionally been trained almost exclusively during in-flight training. Ground training has been used to impart required aeronautical knowledge. Recent studies, however, have suggested that procedural understanding of instrument flight tasks can be taught during ground training using devices such as those described in this AC. Two of the most recent studies were conducted by the Embry Riddle Aeronautical University and the University of Illinois.

http://fgatd.sourceforge.net/ac61-126.html

As these simulators are not teaching aircraft control, they only need to approximate the aircraft.


There is no requirement for a PCATD to have control loading to exactly replicate any particular aircraft.


http://fgatd.sourceforge.net/ac61-126.html

All the best,

Crumpp

Lubcke
12-09-2008, 12:17 PM
No name calling please.

Xiolablu3
12-09-2008, 12:36 PM
Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> I know that you've flown Targetware Crumpp... what are your thoughts on those claims.

Quite a few of our members are among the development team for TW.

The ground handling is abysmal but I think that is known bug in the system.

The graphical model is outstanding as well as much of the function. They are the only "sim" I have seen that correctly models the function of the FW-190 flaps. They also model the 190's gear position indicators. Both of those are nice touches which impressed me. We helped them unofficially to work the KG functions but the program engine has definite limits.

I don't think it is much different from any other game. It's fun but it is not applicable to actual piloting.

IMHO many players take these games way too seriously to the point of trying to justify it as some sort of recreation of real life. The reality is it is just a game for fun and nothing more. There isn't anything wrong with that either.

As a pilot I don't think it is worth trying to justify to yourself that there some sort of value to the experience beyond that.

All the best,

Crumpp </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I realise that this not a nice example, but..


Wasnt it a known fact that the 9/11 terrorists practiced on a PC Flight Sim?

M_Gunz
12-09-2008, 01:05 PM
Some went to pilot school here in the USA too, for months.

WTE_Galway
12-09-2008, 03:32 PM
Originally posted by Xiolablu3:


I realise that this not a nice example, but..


Wasnt it a known fact that the 9/11 terrorists practiced on a PC Flight Sim?

I suspect mainly to get a feel for the glass cockpit of the planes involved.

Though probably also to become familiar with the VFR landmarks seeming as they trained on the west coast and I doubt ATC would have been all that co-operative in giving them vectors to target.

that said ... its surprising the one or two slightly more fascist members of the Bush administration at the time didn't try and ban flight sims altogether.

idonno
12-09-2008, 07:21 PM
Originally posted by WTE_Galway:
... its surprising the one or two slightly more fascist members of the Bush administration at the time didn't try and ban flight sims altogether.


http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

M_Gunz
12-10-2008, 03:53 AM
The ones from the legislative who started talking big about kicking out judges who made the wrong decisions
fit the wannabe category quite well.

Airmail109
12-10-2008, 05:52 AM
Originally posted by slipBall:
Alot of good points brought up here. If you can take off and land every time, that means that you understand flight theory, the importance of altitude, air speed and the like. Those of you that religulously, and constantly use your gages, would fair better in real aircraft. Input is the same, you may need more movement, or force, but its the same.

I was reading a study a while back that said student pilots who had simulator experience solo'd on average 50 percent faster, but took 30 percent longer learning how to land. I'll try and find it when I have time.

M_Gunz
12-10-2008, 05:58 AM
It was related in another current thread that IL2 FM does not pitch the nose down on entering into ground effect.
It's hard to land without getting within 1/2 wingspan of the ground first.

1000 hours of doing it one way only makes it harder to do it another way.

Kettenhunde
12-10-2008, 07:00 AM
I was reading a study a while back that said student pilots who had simulator experience solo'd on average 50 percent faster, but took 30 percent longer learning how to land.

I can see that easily. Knowing procedures is a large chunk of the fight. If a student knew radio procedures, taxiway/runway markings, checklist use, patterns, etc..

It would greatly reduce the amount of time required to solo them.

Landing is all about aircraft control though.


All the best,

Crumpp

Daiichidoku
12-10-2008, 07:03 AM
Now the finall question. Your stranded at a remote airfeild in the California desert. The pilot that flew you to this exotic location has been bittin by a rattle snake and needs desperate medical attention. Who do you think his choice would be to fly the damn plane? Your buddy who has never learned anything about flying or yourself who has spent countless nights playing Sims, who knows a bit about prop pitch and mixture and what a yoke is?



uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

get on the radio and have anti-serum flown out with a para-med in a high speed helo or plane and have a beer while you wait

Kettenhunde
12-10-2008, 09:54 AM
Who do you think his choice would be to fly the damn plane? Your buddy who has never learned anything about flying or yourself who has spent countless nights playing Sims, who knows a bit about prop pitch and mixture and what a yoke is?



Great way to discover the real reason why that "30% longer to land exist's", if airmail is not mistaken.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

idonno
12-10-2008, 10:34 AM
Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Who do you think his choice would be to fly the damn plane? Your buddy who has never learned anything about flying or yourself who has spent countless nights playing Sims, who knows a bit about prop pitch and mixture and what a yoke is?



Great way to discover the real reason why that "30% longer to land exist's", if airmail is not mistaken.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That should probably read; 30% longer to land using the accepted technique.

After many crashes, I figured out how to land an airplane while flying sims. When I started taking lessons I was making one bad landing after another, trying to reconcile what my instructor was telling me with what I already knew how to do. After a while I asked him to just let me do it without any input from him. He agreed, I did it my way and made a decent landing. It wasn't an issue of aircraft control, it was all about technique. If the instructor had never said a word to me about how to land, I would have made good ones right from the start.

Holtzauge
12-10-2008, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by idonno:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Kettenhunde:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Who do you think his choice would be to fly the damn plane? Your buddy who has never learned anything about flying or yourself who has spent countless nights playing Sims, who knows a bit about prop pitch and mixture and what a yoke is?



Great way to discover the real reason why that "30% longer to land exist's", if airmail is not mistaken.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That should probably read; 30% longer to land using the accepted technique.

After many crashes, I figured out how to land an airplane while flying sims. When I started taking lessons I was making one bad landing after another, trying to reconcile what my instructor was telling me with what I already knew how to do. After a while I asked him to just let me do it without any input from him. He agreed, I did it my way and made a decent landing. It wasn't an issue of aircraft control, it was all about technique. If the instructor had never said a word to me about how to land, I would have made good ones right from the start. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sounds like you had a good instructor. He listened to what you had to say and compromized. As they say, there are many ways to skin the cat.

In my experience, pilots can vary a lot in the way they fly/control the plane. Some will hardly move the stick at all while others move the stick about almost constantly. Both get the job done and in my experience it's a personality thing that's hard to change. It shows up early in training and seems to stick with the pilot.

As a sidenote, I can tell you that the second Swedish JAS39 Gripen fighter prototype was lost because of this (excessive stick input). There was a known limitation in the prototypes fly-by-wire steering laws at the time but it was deemed safe to fly because the board that gave the flight clearence found it improbable that the pilot would saturate the FBW processing with enough excessive stick input to cause a departure. History proved this to be a misjudgement....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1U1_95nBTWA

K_Freddie
12-10-2008, 01:46 PM
Originally posted by idonno:
When I started taking lessons I was making one bad landing after another, trying to reconcile what my instructor was telling me with what I already knew how to do. After a while I asked him to just let me do it without any input from him. He agreed, I did it my way and made a decent landing. It wasn't an issue of aircraft control, it was all about technique. If the instructor had never said a word to me about how to land, I would have made good ones right from the start.

I had a similar problem with my instructor, shouldn't complain as he (an air force pilot many longgg hours)was doing this for free... anyway yap yap yap 'in my ear all day long'. He kept wanting me to land on ILS but I had my own ideas (the way I fly this sim). I'd come in above ILS then just before the runway, nose in and then flare. He would freak out and made a note in my flight log that I was trying to 'crash the plane on the runway'. I told him this was not the case.

My reason is that I could bring the plane(Ok it was a light plane) in at above normal approach speed, level off at ~20 feet, and settle down with more control than trying to be 'perfect' and just above stall speed - which I thought was silly. HUH!!

So a few days later I did my first unassisted approach on a small Stellenbosch runway. Compared to DF Malan this runway was... damm... anorexic http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif. I was all over the place, bank left, bank right.. my knuckles were white on the control stick.
We missed the trees http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif then were were over the end on the runway, still some 50 feet up, then we were over the parked a/c on the side on the runway.... JEEEZZZZ what am I going to do.

The I had a 'spark' moment while over the parked aircraft. I just cut the throttle, nose down a bit, and a bit of left bank, and side slipped towards the runway. At the last moment right bank, and nose up... a second later wheels touched in the centre of the runway... 'Good... that was Good' was his comment.. His face was white... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I think he learnt something that day. I certainly did... I learnt how close to panic one could get. It got easier from then, but too expensive to continue... a pity.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

M_Gunz
12-10-2008, 03:01 PM
Now the finall question. Your stranded at a remote airfeild in the California desert. The pilot that flew you to this exotic location has been bittin by a rattle snake and needs desperate medical attention. Who do you think his choice would be to fly the damn plane? Your buddy who has never learned anything about flying or yourself who has spent countless nights playing Sims, who knows a bit about prop pitch and mixture and what a yoke is?


Can't bother taking the time to learn to fly it's no big surprise about going into snake country without learning about snakes.

99%+ of deaths due to rattlesnake bite are from shock (panicky shock) and not from the poison. Yes true the bitten one would be
sick as H for days but with good health to start with, and water, should survive even alone.
But with an I'm gonna die mentality propped up by bad information it can turn into a final experience quickly enough.
Wake me up when you see bear cubs, don't play with them if you do as that's really dangerous and stupid... just wake me up then.

idonno
12-10-2008, 04:40 PM
Originally posted by K_Freddie:

'Good... that was Good' was his comment.. His face was white... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif




http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif Too dang funny! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

buzzsaw1939
12-10-2008, 05:14 PM
Hey Freddie, I'd like to have that instructors name, I'll see to it that he gets more training or gets his licence pulled! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Skoshi Tiger
12-10-2008, 06:32 PM
Originally posted by Daiichidoku:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Now the finall question. Your stranded at a remote airfeild in the California desert. The pilot that flew you to this exotic location has been bittin by a rattle snake and needs desperate medical attention. Who do you think his choice would be to fly the damn plane? Your buddy who has never learned anything about flying or yourself who has spent countless nights playing Sims, who knows a bit about prop pitch and mixture and what a yoke is?



uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

get on the radio and have anti-serum flown out with a para-med in a high speed helo or plane and have a beer while you wait </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You could always cut the bite and suck the poison out, except if he was bitten on the bum hel'd probably just have to die! !)

You could always set of the ELT orEPERB, if you couldn't work out the radio. (I assume they're required in the US???)

Kettenhunde
12-10-2008, 06:42 PM
If the instructor had never said a word to me about how to land, I would have made good ones right from the start.


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

M_Gunz
12-10-2008, 11:40 PM
I still get the feeling that the words "I learned this move in a flight sim." are some of the most dreaded ones a CFI hears.
You know, right up there with "I can't pay you today." only scarier.