What else do I need for setting up FSX for flight training?

Hi,

I'm setting up a training station to aid my wife as she pursues her PPL. I've got previous IT teching experience but am new to flight sims. I am wanting to try to get as much verisimilitude as possible since we live in the Alaskan Bush north of the Arctic circle which makes for a demanding student environment and expensive flight hours as all AvGas has to be barged in once a year. I got a little carried away and bought a ton of stuff before stopping to think about how it would all integrate. so, I was hoping some old hands on here could take a look at what I got and make suggestions or point out any common pitfalls that I might be getting ready to face based on what I've got.

Also, I'm curious about how you guys feel Prepar3D stacks up against FSX. I admit I'm drawn towards the better graphics, but I've heard that Prepar3D doesn't have live weather generation and as unbelievably fickle and rapid changing as the weather is here in the Northwest Arctic Borough, I worry about shorting my wife the experience of dealing with that. That may sound fairly trivial but I travel a great deal in the bush for work and prior to coming up here had over a decade experience in general aviation as a jumper and later jumpmaster so have a fair bit of experience with aviation weather and it is surreal how quickly and radically the weather up here can change in a way that affects flying.

Here's what I've got so far:

I'm starting with a 4 year old video editing workstation that I retired from my business and have decided to try to use that as the foundation for the system. It's specs are:

AMD Phenom II X6 1090T hexcore running at 3.2 Ghz

16 Gb of DDR Ram

Asrock 890FX Deluxe 3 mobo

SoundBlaster XFi soundcard

Geforce GTX460

I also have a Geforce 210 512Mb DDR3 if I need a second vid card for less intensive graphics work.

Control-wise I have:

Proflight Yoke, Rudder, Throttle Quadrant, TPM, Cessna Trim wheel, BIP, Switch panel, Radio panel and multi panel

This will all go in a Flight Training Cockpit Advanced Panel once it comes off of backorder.

I also have a 40" HDTV as the primary display and 16" inch USB monitor for gauges and a Flight Sound X dongle so she can use her headset.

I will likely be adding some FIPs and a Desktop Aviator 2450 GPS Panel in the near future.

Software-wise, I'm running FSX w/ Acceleration, VATSIM and Flight1's Ultimate Alaska

Thanks for your help; it's appreciated.

Well, you certainly have enough equipment! What plane is she learning in?

Not sure what you expect from FSX as far as training is concerned. It is excellent at learning procedures and some general knowledge but at other things, not so much.

One important thing you need her to be aware of, do not develop bad habits using FSX, and that is easy to do.

She should only use FS for practicing what her instructor is teaching and not to try to get too far ahead of him. Talk to the instructor then use FSX as he recommends. Go slow, there is a lot to learn.

This book has been around awhile, I dont have it so wont comment on it but it may be useful for what you are looking for.......

http://www.amazon.com/Microsoft-Flight-Simulator-Pilots-Training/dp/0764588222

You may want to consider Alaska Adventures virtual airline for bush flying in Alaska and the Yukon with GA aircraft. Scheduled and charter flights are available.

Bruce

Tour Director Alaska Adventures

http://www.flyaka.com/

FSX isn't authorised for real-world flight training.

It's not loggable, but I regularly fly with her CFI and he highly recommends it for procedural work which is why I am setting up the system.

And that hardware is nowhere near enough to do FSX justice.

2 questions:

1. What would you recommend?

2. Is your recommendation based off flying in typical environments? The reason I ask is that my wife will be flying the sim almost exclusively in the Northwest Artic Borough which has no road or railroad system and very low population density (~8,000 people in 11 villages) spread out over an area the size of Kentucky. I plugged in the GPS coordinates for the only city in the region (~3200 pop.) and with the detail slider maxed on Ultimate Alaska, the test was showing that I was using less than 20% of the machine's capability.

Well, you certainly have enough equipment! What plane is she learning in?

182 and a 206 though passengers out here often have the option of riding in the right seat so at some point she'd like to sim the Navajo and Caravan. I also wouldn't mind adding the Saratoga at some point as that's a backup plane for my job and I sometimes get to ride right seat in it.

Your system should run FSx just fine, especially if you are only going to fly your local area. However it is plenty to fly anywhere in the world, I use a lot less and get fine performance.

As far as planes, all the ones you mention are available as addons, but as she is just learning, and primarily procedures, the default planes will work fine for what you need. The is really nothing to gain at this point by buying addons as far as training, but of course none of us EVER pass on adding planes, and we really don't need a reason :-)

There are a bunch of good comments above, but I'd like to emphasize one particular thing mentioned above: don't expect FS to behave as real aircraft do. For procedures training it's GREAT! For trying to replicate an actual flying experience, it's not so hot -- imagination actually has to play a part, and since there's no physical feel (seat of the pants, etc.), and since the viewing area/angles differ quite a bit from real, there can be what we instructors call "negative transference," that is, the same kind of thing that makes a person want to steer an airplane with the "steering wheel" because they're so used to that in a car.

Another difference which, sometimes, can seem huge, is that it is ever so much easier in a real aircraft to find all the switches and buttons, and to operate them with minimal attention, while sometimes in the sim it takes a lot of concentration with the mouse. That's one reason that, though it's otherwise not always completely realistic, I use a HOTAS, that is, a stick/throttle festooned with buttons and switches so that I can soon learn to operate controls (other than stick and rudder) with as little conscious thought as in a real aircraft; believe it or not, that does (for me, at least) add to the realism/illusion of flying.

Of course if you have all the light switches, gear and flap switches, mixture/prop, etc. individually there on a panel, that becomes less of a factor (I don't have that).

Also, this comment from above:

One important thing you need her to be aware of, do not develop bad habits using FSX, and that is easy to do.

How True! And bad habits are harder to break, then teach correctly, than starting from scratch with no habits and doing it right the first time.

So please, be sure she follows the CFI's instructions about using the sim.

One other factor I'd like to suggest, that has worked well with all my students since long before sims were available:

After she gets back from a flight, have her sit down in her favorite easy chair, close her eyes, mentally grab the stick (yoke) and throttle, and relive the flight in her mind, preferably even using hands and feet. Do that at least a couple of times between flights, as well as any sim procedures the CFI wants done. This will help imbed the lessons in her mind.

One last thought: think of sim use as procedures training, not flight training -- it can make a difference.

It's not loggable, but I regularly fly with her CFI and he highly recommends it for procedural work which is why I am setting up the system.

As I said, FSX isn't authorised for real-world flight training.

As I said, FSX isn't authorised for real-world flight training.

Why do you find it so necessary to reiterate the obvious Gerry?

So what? Many CFI's do recommend any flight simulation program for procedural training.

As I said, FSX isn't authorised for real-world flight training.

Nor is it prohibited -- the time isn't loggable as flight hours, but that doesn't prohibit learning, especially under the direction of a CFI. Training time doesn't have to be logged just because it results in learning, else ground school couldn't be used either, and then 40+ hours wouldn't come close to teaching enough -- you'd be into the hundreds of hours.

It seems to me that the proper phrase to use here is that FS (of all varieties) isn't an authorized simulator or flight training device, as defined by the FAA, to be used for logging flight time. But neither are books, small models for manual demonstration of maneuvers, hands (for the same purpose), chalk, paper and pencil, or many other things that are used as training aids (not training devices). FS is a perfectly suitable training aid.

Ease off, please...

Read what I actually said.

I DID read what you actually said.

FSX isn't authorised for real-world flight training.

Perhaps to you the phrase "real-world flight training" means only actual logged time, but to me (and I suspect to many others, as well) it means training towards becoming a pilot, including book learnin', procedures (in aircraft, plus radio, plus other things), AND actual flight time (only part of flight training). If you'd said "FSX isn't authorised for logging real-world flight time" then I'd have fully agreed with you.

Ease off...

in any event, this software cannot be part of an approved training program under the standards of the faa or any other regulatory agency.

fsx eula

I don't fly in real life but I did find something that helps me learn in FSX. Debriefing.

I started doing debriefings after several landings that went wrong, and I had to take manual control to land it safely. Something else was I read about accident reports on a site called "The AVHerald".

On that site you find accident reports that describe the flight, and what went wrong, sometimes based only on ATC oservations, transcripts the Cockpit Voice Recorder and of the Flight Data Recorder.

From then on, after my own flights I would sit down with a piece of paper and a pen. Then I would describe the entire flight to a imigened "Chief Pilot".

Short remarks first.

-What went right? (e.g. Well, at least we landed safely..... )

-What went wrong?

-Anything you did not understand? (e.g. plane wouldn't decend on glideslope!)

-Any other remarks?

Then, longer answers.

-What was the Departure and arrival airport?

-What was the weather like during the flight?

-Takeoff settings?

Describe the flight.

Climb:

Flap movements. Pitch.

Cruise:

GPS plan used or manual navigation.

Decent planning ok?

Describe the descent.

And approach.

Initially I don't use a list like this. I just describe things as best I can. As if I'm in a simple office with only a desk and the Chief Pilot sitting across from me with a notepad. Often I also made a quick drawing of the flown track.

Then, after the debriefing I have coffee and relax.

Later I look at what I wrote down with the list of items in hand, and try to fill in the blanks. Imagining the Chief Pilot grilling me on the details.

Quite a few times those analasys led to unexpected realisations. For example: "Of course! I forgot to set the GPS/NAV switch back to nav!" or "I must have forgotten to retract the flaps fully. I noticed in cruise the pitch was lower then normal, but disregarded it. Flaps must have been at setting 1 or 2! That's why I ran out of fuel."

It led to small changes in procedures too.

10.000ft -Check landing lights off.

changed to:

10.000 -Check Landing lights off, Gear up, Flaps fully up.

(I climb out very slowly.)

Added the steps:

Decending through 10.000 --Lights on, Check NAV/GPS switch is set to NAV.

On downwind: --Check again NAV/GPS is set to NAV.

I don't do the analysis that often anymore, but I kept some of the old ones. Re-reading those you really relive the flight. They read a little like the real-life accident reports.

It made reading real life accident reports a lot easyer too. It makes it much eayer to imagine what was going on during those flights. Often, reading those, halfway through I already think: "If only they had done....".

Please don't get me wrong, I do not for a second think that that real life stuff is "fun", or "easy". But I did learn a lot from it. It saved me from making many mistakes in the sim.

I am convinced that learning to analyse your flights, going through them step by step, is imperative for improving yourself.

It will make you better at scanning all the instruments, all the switches, going through the flight done so far in your mind and realising why the switches are where they are. It makes you much more acutely aware of your flight phase. And by analysing after the flight you learn to polish out your mistakes.

Another example. I used to switch on the seatbelt light at 10.000 so the passengers could have fun as long as possible. Then the cabin crew be seated call on short final. I had a few near misses (Boeing737/747). After debriefing, I discovered that the added stress of thinking about the passengers until final caused accidents. So, from now on the seatbelt light goes on 100 NM before top of descent. The cabin crew is seated below 15.000. They may be less comfortable now, but they are a lot safer!

I hope that helps home your skills.

note:

Be aware always that the sim is very different from the real aircraft. After two years simming I thought I would be able to pilot a real aircraft. Two years on from then, and I'm glad I didn't try!!:) There are so many factors that aren't simulated that flying for real would be vastly different. There is the fear factor. In a real plane you are flying constantly, so there is no time to go study the dials at your leasure. There is the constant communication. You have real passengers in the back, and freinds and family to come home to. Items (engines, gauges) can fail unexpectedly, in the sim they don't fail, or fail at a programmed time, so it's not that surprising. etc, etc.

If your altimeter fails in the sime, you know what to expect, the reading gets stuck, and nothing else is affected. If it would happen in a real plane you would start worrying about failed electrical circuits, external damage, etc. Very different....

Navigating in the dark on instruments, with mountains nearby, and lives at stake can't be trained very well in a sim I think. The stressors are so vastly different from when sitting behind a computer screen in a heated room with a mug of tea in your hand and a freindly face at your side.

With that in mind,

Enjoy!

il88pp.