Flight simulator vs Real world?

T

tcepilot

Filing Flight Plan
Joined
Jun 30, 2014
Messages
12
Display Name
Display name:
tcepilot
What are your experiences with flight simulation versus the real thing (other than the obvious)? In another thread someone said that bad habits can be developed. What are they and how can you avoid them?
 
I use Microsoft Flight Simulator but use it to pretend I fly a 737. In real life I just grind around in a C172. I think the simulator might help with your scan or vor practice but you might get too used to keeping your head in the cockpit and not looking outside.
 
I used my school's Redbird simulator for around 10 hours of my instrument training. I used it because I had trouble understanding holding patterns. Instead of spending hundreds of dollars in the plane and waiting for approach to clear us for approaches and missed approaches, my CFI and I did it in the simulator. He could pause, reset, and move me. Can't do that in the plane. Its really nice for IFR procedures, loading stuff up in the GPS, flying approaches, missed approaches, DP's, etc. It's not really useful for VFR stuff but if your school has a sim, definitely work on some IFR stuff
 
I'm transitioning to a new aircraft. Luckily, someone made a nice version of it available online. I use it to get familiar with basic procedures, what to look for, how I am going to potentially operate it, etc. It helps get my head in right direction, but in no way will it supplement for the real thing.

I am big on using flight simulators for IFR/IMC navigation. I spent about 3 hours the other day buzzing around on Victor airways, being sure to identify navaids via morse code, keeping the ident on when using NDBs, determining distance from a navaid without using DME, navigation via reverse sensing, NDB holds, backcourse approaches, circling, etc. I make it hard on myself there, so I can be somewhat prepared out in the real world (potentially).

Of course, nothing beats going out and doing it.
 
I have been attending recurrent using Level-D full motion w/day visual simulators at FlightSafety for 15 years. Sim is great for emergencies and windshear, unusual attitudes, etc. With that said, it does not fly completely like the plane but extremely close.
 
as he said, close enough. I've gotten several type ratings 100% in the sim, with my first time in the real airplane as a flight in revenue service.
 
If you guys read his other thread, don't forget this is somebody who has not started any primary training yet. The simulator is not going to help you develop the muscle memory necessary to fly the aircraft VFR (visual flight rules, ie looking outside, which is what you will be doing for all of your training up to and including private pilot license minus a few hours under simulated instrument conditions).

Yes, the simulator may be helpful for some IFR (instrument flight rules) work to help you get familiar with instrument scan, navaids, etc.. but it simply is not going to help you develop the muscle memory you need as a pre-solo student pilot learning basic control of the aircraft. The typical home simulator will not provide any force-feedback. Therefore, you won't learn how to trim the pressure away, you won't get used to the buffeting or sloppiness at low airspeeds/high angles of attack, you won't get a feel for the speed of the airplane based on the vibration of the engine and sound of the air as it passes around the plane. You will probably not learn the proper way to scan for traffic, because other traffic on MS Flight Simulator is simply easier to spot than in real life. You won't get any relevant radio work in either.

I think mostly everybody here will agree with this.
 
Last edited:
vdehart said:
If you guys read his other thread, don't forget this is somebody who has not started any primary training yet. The simulator is not going to help you develop the muscle memory necessary to fly the aircraft VFR (visual flight rules, ie looking outside, which is what you will be doing for all of your training up to and including private pilot license minus a few hours under simulated instrument conditions).

Yes, the simulator may be helpful for some IFR (instrument flight rules) work to help you get familiar with instrument scan, navaids, etc.. but it simply is not going to help you develop the muscle memory you need as a pre-solo student pilot learning basic control of the aircraft. The typical home simulator will not provide any force-feedback. Therefore, you won't learn how to trim the pressure away, you won't get used to the buffeting or sloppiness at low airspeeds/high angles of attack, you won't get a feel for the speed of the airplane based on the vibration of the engine and sound of the air as it passes around the plane. You will probably not learn the proper way to scan for traffic, because other traffic on MS Flight Simulator is simply easier to spot than in real life. You won't get any relevant radio work in either.

I think mostly everybody here will agree with this.
Click to expand...


Good advise


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Apparently sims are more useful than some think, even primitive ones.

My brother is not a pilot, doesn't fly, but does play around with PC flight sims. I took him flying recently in an area he'd practiced over in the sim. "Wow, this looks just like the sim... that's XXX airport, there's the river, that's CITY", etc. Knew how the various instruments worked, knew how a VOR worked, knew what the controls should do, etc.

All he had left was "muscle memory". All of the learning that would have taken hours in the air (and $$$) had already been done on the ground.

The military calls this type of sim a "procedures trainer". They recognize it will not be helpful with muscle memory for -flying-. In fact, a procedures trainer will usually have a simplified flight dynamics model to allow the pilot to concentrate on learning the aircraft systems (and building that particular type of "muscle memory").

Have a PC? Want to learn to fly? Download a flight sim and start figuring out what everything does. It's not time wasted.
 
While you certainly can learn a few things, you can also learn them wrong. Did he really understand VORs, or did he dial it and go? Did he correct for twist or backlash? How about reflections? Wind? Did he ident the navaid? Can he do more than intercept a radial, say, navigate to an arbitrary point with crossed radials? Does he understand how to avoid reverse sensing?

It's not hard to get a superficial and sometimes wrong concept from a sim, especially without an instructor. So, he saved 15 minutes of studying to get the absolute basics. How much time to correct the misunderstandings?
 
My favorite use of the simulator is to simulate upcoming real-world flights. I use it to become familiar with terrain, landmarks, airport locations and layouts. I do this for routes that I've either never flown or perhaps haven't flown for a long time. As a solo student, I used it to simulate my long cross country; I found it extremely helpful.
 
Mistake Not... said:
Apparently sims are more useful than some think, even primitive ones.

My brother is not a pilot, doesn't fly, but does play around with PC flight sims. I took him flying recently in an area he'd practiced over in the sim. "Wow, this looks just like the sim... that's XXX airport, there's the river, that's CITY", etc. Knew how the various instruments worked, knew how a VOR worked, knew what the controls should do, etc.

All he had left was "muscle memory". All of the learning that would have taken hours in the air (and $$$) had already been done on the ground.

The military calls this type of sim a "procedures trainer". They recognize it will not be helpful with muscle memory for -flying-. In fact, a procedures trainer will usually have a simplified flight dynamics model to allow the pilot to concentrate on learning the aircraft systems (and building that particular type of "muscle memory").

Have a PC? Want to learn to fly? Download a flight sim and start figuring out what everything does. It's not time wasted.
Click to expand...

My exact experience from age 16 until I could afford flight lessons at age 32:yes:

"Solo Flight", MSFS, X-Plane, etc. were my first teachers (along with a few well written flightsim books). I was definitely ahead of the game. The bad habits that I had to unlearn, paled in comparison to the knowledge I gained from the simulators. Took me awhile to get used to all of the physical sensations after sitting in a computer chair for 16 years:rofl:
 
Last edited:
I'll give my $0.02. I'm a PPL student who has years of flight sim experience and recently went on the first solo for a C172 in real life.

The simulator is a great way to become acquainted with certain aspects of procedures. The C172 trainer from A2A Simulations is a great example of learning how to preflight, practicing checklist flows, etc. Also I think a home simulator is great if you're practicing flight planning, under the hood work, and practicing your ATC proficiency with a service like PilotEdge. Also, I'm assuming you have a simulator with full controls (real yoke, rudder pedals, throttle quadrant). If you don't have those controls, transitioning will take time, especially for aileron/rudder coordination.

Once you go fly for real, there are certain subtleties that only the real world experience can offer: minor shifts in wind, heat related turbulence, real world traffic issues, sunlight glare, ground effect. These issues lead to extreme difficulty in learning how to land properly. The simulator gives us a huge security blanket for errors. In the real world, those errors can be actually fatal.

At this stage, I use the simulator to practice emergency procedures or if I've been away from real flying due to traveling for work. Once I'm back in the real cockpit, I generally avoid the simulator to not encourage any lack of focus related to sitting in front of a computer vs. flying a plane with you actually in it.

I would seriously discuss your simulator experience with a CFI and ask them their opinion on how you should use it. Using a simulator can encourage bad habits which in turn will cost you more money as you rid yourself of those habits in the real aircraft.

Use caution and if used correctly, a simulator can be a great learning tool while earning your ticket.
 
There are a lot of good FAA-approved flight simulation devices which can, in the hands of an instructor who understands how to use them properly, be of tremendous value in training, especially for the instrument rating and for learning complex avionics systems. There are also a lot of flying games which aren't so useful and can be very counterproductive when they do not accurately emulate the "real world". Either way, trying to play with them for things on which you haven't been trained, you can easily teach yourself any number bad habits, of which some poor instructor will then have to break you so you can relearn them properly.

In particular, for someone who has not started training yet, it's important to realize that nothing short of the megamillion-dollar full flight simulators such as the airlines use will give you accurate emulation of the flight control responses of a real airplane. Also, they lack the full visual experience and kinesthetic responses which are important to learning basic aircraft control. My advice is to leave those games alone for now. As you go through training, you can talk with your instructor about how to integrate approved flight simulation devices into your training in an appropriate manner.
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
Did he correct for twist or backlash? How about reflections?
Click to expand...

I've been flying on and off for 20 years and I have no idea what those are. If we're making up terms to describe VOR operations, I'll go with "That VOR's bearing grease is indicating low, adjust 10 degrees north." amidoinitright?


Does he understand how to avoid reverse sensing?
Click to expand...
VORs do not reverse sense. Apparently sim or no, it's still possibly for some people to get that wrong. :)


So, he saved 15 minutes of studying to get the absolute basics. How much time to correct the misunderstandings?
Click to expand...
So.. you're claiming, apparently, two things:

(1) Learning the function of the altimeter, air speed indicator, horizontal situation indicator, attitude indicator, vertical speed indicator, turn coordinator, VOR, comm panel, manifold pressure indicator, rpm indicator, ammeter, ADF, compass, fuel totalizer, 430W and storm scope should only take 15 minutes. That's an average of less than a minute an instrument, and you should probably try to hurry along on the easy ones to save two minutes for the 430. :)

(2) Any learning about these devices and how to use them NOT done in an airplane accompanied by bored 20 something time building CFI is not only pointless, but actually harmful.

Where does this snobbery come from? Holy crap. Why do people on this board get their panties in a twist over someone teaching themselves some aspect of aviation? This ain't rocket surgery, people. I downloaded the 430W emulator from Garmin and taught myself how to use mine.

People keep alluding to the "bad habits" that will have to be corrected by using a sim. Ignore the kinematic aspects of flying... No one's claiming they'll be able to feel a coordinated turn from sim time alone. What SPECIFICALLY are they learning using a sim which correctly simulates the operation and behavior of the flight instruments that will have to be "corrected" later.

Right.
 
So, now learning VORs has expanded to every possible instrument, and he's proficient on all of hem? Even a fuel totalizer and stormscope? Don't make stuff up.

A VOR receiver used naively will seem to reverse sense under some conditions. When used correctly, they don't reverse sense under any conditions. And the naive form is in the AFH.

If you don't know what VOR twist is, your own skill is less than proficient. No, I did not make it up.

One really obvious and common bad habit is excessive heads down time VFR. Particularly pre-solo, the panel is almost irrelevant.
 
Last edited:
Hardest habit to break from sims is the proclivity for flying under bridges.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Hardest habit to break from sims is the proclivity for flying under bridges.
Click to expand...
...in between buildings, landing helicopters on random buildings in Manhattan, buzzing control towers and following trains in X-Plane :D.

Not to mention violating all types of airspace:mad2:
Yes you do learn some bad habits that will have to be broken.

Fortunately for me, I went to flight school at KTEB (Teterboro) so I had no choice but to learn about airspace from day one, as I was taught how to weave my way over to Morristown and Caldwell for touch & go's without busting Bravo!!! (Landing practice at TEB was impossible)
 
Last edited:
I can only speak for myself, but as I said in my first post, the postives outweighed the negatives (which I had to unlearn) and my CFI agreed. But then again, he was a 23 year old kid that had me doing stalls on my first lesson (scaring the crap out of myself:lol:).

On another note, I played with electricity and electronic kits from about 8 or 9 years old. Learned a heck of a lot about the subject by the time I started taking Electrical classes in high school and Electronics in DeVry. So what I learned at home was of great benefit to me and only added to the learning experience in school. Even made a career out of it (28 years):yes:
 
Last edited:
Is a wrench a good tool or a bad tool?

"Geez, they're bad. Whoo. Used one on a bolt once, and the head sheared right off. I'm never using a wrench again."

"Yeah, I had a wrench once. Left it on the floor one night and stubbed my toe in the dark on the way to the bathroom. They're nasty buggers!"

"When I was a kid, my brother got hold of a wrench and beat me about the head and neck one day. Those things give me the heebie-jeebies...."

Any tool can be misused. That doesn't make them inherently bad. There are any number of horror stories about lousy instructors, too.
 
As someone who works in the simulation business, I say: they are a useful tool (even the "toys" like MSFS). BUT, like all tools there are things for which they are suitable and things for which they are not. (To borrow from an earlier post: I'm not driving a nail with a wrench.)

The most important thing I've seen over and over is to work with an instructor to learn the right way to do things. Then you can use the simulator to reinforce those things.

I used MSFS to pre-fly some cross countries when I was training. I actually got lost in the sim flying my night cross country. Saw the rabbit at a nearby field and went there. Figured it out and learned from it. My CFI had an instrument flying sim setup in his house which we used (did not log) for some of the practice for instrument flying.

If you're not a pilot or working with a pilot, you don't understand what the limitations of the simulators are. That's where the problem lies.

John
 
Assuming you're talking about home flight simulators, not Redbird or Elite, etc... (?)

If so, jcepiano stated everything exactly as I would have. I'll just add that the A2A products (C172 and PA-28-180) are the only GA FSX/Prepar3d add-ons I would recommend for pairing with RW flight training. Default anything from Microsoft is useless, even Carenado aren't modeled thoroughly enough to be much help. X-Plane is much better but A2A isn't compatible with X-P.

I've logged around 6,000 hours on MS Flight Sim (version 4.0 to present, 25 years worth) and while it helped somewhat with the flying part, what helped me the most was the relative confidence in radio communications offered by years of flying on Virtual ATC networks like VATSIM (and PilotEdge as well). FS also has saved me lots of time and agony learning the Garmin 430/530 thanks to addons like the RealityXP Garmins.

Of course, now that I'm working on my IR, I find the sim very helpful for scan practice and general familiarity with approaches, holds, and the like.

But, in the sim, there is no FAA looking over your shoulder, there is never a worry about airworthiness, no finding something questionable in a preflight, no real consequence to bad aeronautical decision-making, no TFRs/MOAs/SUAs/etc., weather has little consequence most of the time, as does weight and balance or proper fuel planning, the list goes on and on.

Basically, my advice is to realize the limitations of the technology and supplement your real world flying with the sim and you'll be fine. :yesnod:
 
MAKG1 said:
Did he correct for twist or backlash? How about reflections?
Click to expand...

Okay, I'm wrapping up my CFI-I, what's twist, backlash, and reflections? Doing a search on the Instrument Flying Handbook turned up nothing for me...
 
kevmor99 said:
Okay, I'm wrapping up my CFI-I, what's twist, backlash, and reflections? Doing a search on the Instrument Flying Handbook turned up nothing for me...
Click to expand...

Twist is a difference between labeled courses on VOR roses and the actual magnetic courses. For IFR, you always use the VOR roses, and those match the broadcast. When you measure a course off the chart, you're making an error of up to several degrees. Worst I've seen is 5 deg, but 2-3 deg is typical. In some instances, this can lead to position errors that exceed VFR visibilities, so there is some risk of getting lost after following an uncorrected radial for several tens of miles. Not an issue for airways, if you use the course labels. Potentially big issue if you copy it off a VFR nav log or the output of Foreflight.

Backlash is a property of every gear. You turn the OBS knob, and for some distance, you get no motion in the CDI. It should be no more than a few degrees, but I've seen as much as 20 (which I squawked as broken). The card does not necessarily see the same backlash as the needle, so this can be a course error. To compensate, always do your last knob twist in the same direction (I use increasing course, always), including VOR checks.

Reflections are an issue for weak signals, where you may not be seeing a direct line of sight. Much more of an issue for NDBs (which also see refractions), and hopefully the nav flag has popped out well before this is a factor. But that means you have to look at the nav flag, and it has to work properly. This happens sometimes with terrain, particularly at low altitude, and it isn't always far away and might not be weak enough to pop the flag. With this and the related shadowing issues, you'll generally see a NOTAM "XXX VOR unusable below YYYY."
 
jsstevens said:
As someone who works in the simulation business
Click to expand...

Hey. Cool. Me too. Four years as software lead on an Army helicopter cockpit procedures trainer.

If you're not a pilot or working with a pilot, you don't understand what the limitations of the simulators are. That's where the problem lies.
Click to expand...
Not to pick on you, specifically, but people keep saying this, and I keep asking for specific examples.

I claim a consumer grade flight simulator is an excellent way to familiarize a non-pilot with the various instruments in the average airplane panel. I've seen it happen. You can even buy add ons which simulate more complicated instruments (http://www.reality-xp.com/flightsim/gns430/).

This should be obvious, and yet we have MAKG upthread arguing even this use is fraught with peril.

I know consumer grade flight sims have limitations. What I haven't seen anyone even list, let alone argue persuasively, is how are they harmful? Exactly? What bad habits will you develop that will significantly negatively affect training? What will you end up spending $$$ to unlearn? If they're so bad, a list of say, 10 major "wow, I sure wish I hadn't flown that sim, now I have to spend hours unlearning -that- habit" items shouldn't be hard to produce. And yet...

Doesn't matter, really. I think kids are smart enough to ignore the nay sayers and simply play with the sim, find the experience translates quite nicely to the real world, and laugh at the doom-n-gloomers. :)
 
Mistake Not... said:
Hey. Cool. Me too. Four years as software lead on an Army helicopter cockpit procedures trainer.

Not to pick on you, specifically, but people keep saying this, and I keep asking for specific examples.

I claim a consumer grade flight simulator is an excellent way to familiarize a non-pilot with the various instruments in the average airplane panel. I've seen it happen. You can even buy add ons which simulate more complicated instruments (http://www.reality-xp.com/flightsim/gns430/).

This should be obvious, and yet we have MAKG upthread arguing even this use is fraught with peril.

I know consumer grade flight sims have limitations. What I haven't seen anyone even list, let alone argue persuasively, is how are they harmful? Exactly? What bad habits will you develop that will significantly negatively affect training? What will you end up spending $$$ to unlearn? If they're so bad, a list of say, 10 major "wow, I sure wish I hadn't flown that sim, now I have to spend hours unlearning -that- habit" items shouldn't be hard to produce. And yet...

Doesn't matter, really. I think kids are smart enough to ignore the nay sayers and simply play with the sim, find the experience translates quite nicely to the real world, and laugh at the doom-n-gloomers. :)
Click to expand...

The biggest (and this bit me in my training for a while) is it trains you to look at the panel and not look out the window nor to the sides. My instructor threatened to cover the panel with a towel a couple of times. I'd be looking for heading, altitude, AI for bank angle, etc. I should have been looking out the window at the horizon and looking around for traffic.

The most important skills for VFR flying are airplane feel (sloppy controls=slow airspeed=beware!, for example) and out the window references for attitude. Home grade toy simulators train you to ignore both of those things without you even being aware of it until you've flown a real airplane enough to develop them.

Can you use MSFS to learn how a DG works? Yes. VOR concept, sure. (But probably with some help, frankly. VOR to/from and radials is not intuitively obvious, to me at least.) Will you limit yourself to that without input of somebody who knows about the out the window and feel? How would you know to?

John
 
One thing I noticed about the couple people I know with lots of MS style sim time is they don't trim the plane much and will just hold that pressure.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Hardest habit to break from sims is the proclivity for flying under bridges.
Click to expand...

There are opportunities to maintain those habits. In Ag you learn to fly under the electric wires next to the field. Most bridges are spacious in comparison, especially the big fun ones.
 
Henning said:
There are opportunities to maintain those habits. In Ag you learn to fly under the electric wires next to the field. Most bridges are spacious in comparison, especially the big fun ones.
Click to expand...

Been under plenty of bridges(legally too) but you know vanilla ga pilots don't get to have that fun.
 
Henning said:
One thing I noticed about the couple people I know with lots of MS style sim time is they don't trim the plane much and will just hold that pressure.
Click to expand...

Interesting. I started in sims long before I did the real thing and I never had that problem. Maybe because my dad was a pilot so I knew what trim was.

Personally, I found simming to be very beneficial in the flight training process. Yes, I did have the common bad habits to break like looking at the panel too much, but overall it helped the PPL process.
 
jsstevens said:
Can you use MSFS to learn how a DG works? Yes. VOR concept, sure. (But probably with some help, frankly. VOR to/from and radials is not intuitively obvious, to me at least.) Will you limit yourself to that without input of somebody who knows about the out the window and feel? How would you know to?
Click to expand...

Sort of.

Sim DG's don't generally precess. That's a big error.

You might get an OK superficial idea about how mixture works. You might even find out with "realism" cranked up (which is NOT the default on MSFS -- and you have to know to look there) why leaning is important at high altitude.

This is not "fraught with peril," but it does not teach you without someone to guide you. It may give you a very basic introduction, no more. And without an instructor, you have no way to know what's real and what's BS. Heck, for a "procedures" trainer, have you ever seen a desktop sim that would require a flooded start procedure? I have yet to see one where the primer/boost pump has any effect at all.

I think some folks are confusing learning with exposure. Self-"teaching" with a sim does the latter.

I work sims as well. The limitations are critical. As is proper training in their use. I also used desktop sims quite extensively before I learned to fly. They were fun, but they taught nothing anywhere near proficiency in anything, and came pretty close to a wash as to whether time was lost or gained. I thought I knew how VORs worked from the sim -- I could use it to get close enough to spot an airport using the excessively easy visuals. Then I figured out how they really work, with the help of a good instructor.

Only in a sim can you fly an airplane into the ground at 1000 FPM and have it bounce. Well, sometimes you get the "You Crashed" dialog. Depends on the sim.
 
Last edited:
My first and only experience with hypoxia(simulated) and Vortex Ring State, were both in X-Plane.

On another note:

I'm sure glad my electrical teacher and my electronics professors never told me I shouldn't have been tinkering with batteries, motors, breadboards or building AM and Shortwave radios as a young kid in my parent's attic
(aka "the lab":lol:)...without their guidance.

Like learning the finer points of aviation, I was smart enough to realize that no matter what I taught myself at home, I'd need the professional guidance of the experts. And I still do:yes:.

On that note, I'm happy to see what Lockheed Martin is doing with Prepar3d.

Oh yeah, I did get shocked once from the flyback transformer while trying to fix a TV:yikes::rofl:
 
Last edited:
Flight simulators, even all the way up to Level D sims, are great at teaching procedures, but generally suck at actual flying.

There's a quote along the lines of "Making a good landing in a simulator is like kissing your sister. Sure it might feel good, but you shouldn't go bragging about it."
 
Dead Stick said:
The difference between the airplane and a simulator? The airplane is more realistic. :yesnod:
Click to expand...

For primary instruction, that may be true.

For instrument instruction, the opposite can be true. When training in flight, "instrument failure" means "cover up the instrument(s) so you can't see it". In reality, instruments don't just disappear when they stop giving correct information.

In a sim, you can model a vacuum failure, or a clogged pitot or static (or both) source. So then, you have to recognize that hey, I changed the power setting but the airspeed indication didn't change. What's going on?

Or you're working your scan and trying to get the AI to straighten out, and it takes a few seconds to realize that hey, it's not agreeing with my turn coordinator and compass...

And then you need to factor that into your scan. Either *you* have to find something to cover the faulty instrument(s) with, or else you need to quit looking at them.

Much more realistic than having a suction cup suddenly appear during flight.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Interesting. I started in sims long before I did the real thing and I never had that problem. Maybe because my dad was a pilot so I knew what trim was.

Personally, I found simming to be very beneficial in the flight training process. Yes, I did have the common bad habits to break like looking at the panel too much, but overall it helped the PPL process.
Click to expand...
I don't personally know any pilots. But since about third grade I have studied airplanes non stop! Included in that was trim, prop control, mixture, etc. Really its not all sim pilots. But only the sim pilots that play it as a game and have little interest in becoming an actual pilot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top