PhrogPhlyer

I plead the 5th as I research statute of limitations.

Adding v2 or similar to the updates name would be a simple solution (addressed to content creators).

The specifics of what are required by the FAA with hovering can be found in chapter IV of the PTS. https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/training_testing/testing/test_standards/FAA-S-8081-15a.pdf These are: 1. Exhibits knowledge of the elements related to a vertical takeoff to a hover and landing from a hover. 2. Ascends to and maintains recommended hovering altitude, and descends from recommended hovering altitude in headwind, crosswind, and tailwind conditions. 3. Maintains RPM within normal limits. 4. Establishes recommended hovering altitude, ±1/2 of that altitude within 10 feet of the surface; if above 10 feet, ±5 feet. . Avoids conditions that might lead to loss of tail rotor/antitorque effectiveness. 6. Maintains position within 4 feet of a designated point, with no aft movement. 7. Descends vertically to within 4 feet of the designated touchdown point. 8. Maintains specified heading, ±10°. While hovering, lift is generated by downward airflow created by the main rotor. I normal forward flight, lift is generated (as with a fixed wing aircraft) by airflow over the wing (in this case a rotating disk). Hover to forward flight, and forward flight to hover, both go through translational lift. Due to the aerodynamic complexities while translating between these two differing lift states, this is not modeled well in any version of PC based flight sims. Keeping the change from accelerating too quickly (going to forward flight) or decelerating too quickly (going to a hover) takes a lot of practice and finesse. This is definitely easier in an actual aircraft. As for stopping too soon, not a bad thing actually, since can hover taxi forward to then land. You said it yourself... Practice. These are the elements of hover flight to practice: vertical takeoff to a hover landing from a hover hovering forward, sideways, and backwards hovering around a pattern on the ground, in various orientations normal and crosswind takeoffs from a hover normal and crosswind approaches to a hover Good luck and have fun.

High probability.

Great looking livery and scenery. Kaitak is always a fun and challenging airport.

This is exactly what has kept me interested in flight sim since the very beginning (FS1). There are no limits to one's imagination., Joop, I have used both 2004/FS9 and FSX on my computers. I bought FSX Gold Edition as soon as it was released. I even ran FSX on a small ACER laptop with minimal capabilities over 10 years ago, so I have personally never had any issues. Also, I don't focus on frame rates or other metrics. As long as I can do what I want, then I'm happy. If I run into problems with an extensively detailed addon aircraft or scenery, I reduce setting a little and press on. I like FSX a little better that FS9, but that is just my preference. Should you add FSX, I recommend that you keep FS9 running also. Then compare different capabilities and make an informed opinion based on direct usage, Keep having fun, PhrogPhlyer

I also agree, but more in light of a review on a specific aircraft or system. This is where I find sim specific write ups most useful (as in your tutorials). The basics of helicopter flying, as with fixed wing, are relatively the same for all sim variants: Push stick forward, houses get bigger, pull stick back, houses get smaller. I read in many of these initial questions an inquiry that is more generic (how best to fly a.. (helo, tailwheel, glider). And for those questions most of the good tutorials are valid cross-platform. And for whomever told you that FSX helo flying was easy, I would venture to say that a) they never increased realism, and/or b) never flew a helo in real aviation. I have around 2500 hours of real RW time, and hundreds of hours of 2004 and FSX helo time, and still must work hard to hold a very stable hover and do hover taxi patterns (turns around the tail, turns around the nose, fly a square fwd/back/left side/rt side). And a brief comment concerning throttle vs collective, either will work just fine as long as you apply/reduce power SLOWLY. A collective gives you smoother control in that with the longer "arm" a large movement equals a small movement at the base. Nels, I know we are on the same flight plan here in our support of all flight simmers. Keep having fun.

True true, mostly due too cost and availability. And never apologize for a Cousin Vinny reference!

To anyone who has flown the Kingair this is a strikingly accurate cockpit. Must be a real pleasure to fly. Very nice!

JK. Thanks for returning me to my youth. Nicely done!

Great selection.

Nels, Sorry, but this comment surprised me, and to me this sounds demeaning. Especially since it points directly to an individual tag, not the topic (helo flying). Please understand that I am not in any way disparaging newer sims, nor their users. I also do not look down on anyone who uses any platform to enjoy sim flying. I am merely stating that for me personally, I am quite satisfied with FSX, and continually look for opportunities to make my preferred platform stronger. I feel that at times we fall into the same trap as in real flying, bigger/newer/faster/jets are better than smaller/older/slower/props or helos. I for one support. and comment wherever I hope I may be helpful, to all sim flyers no matter what platform they are using, as long as they are having fun and flying. And I won't apologize for using FSX nor feel like a lesser citizen who's not part of "much of the world.

Although I like the site, I wish that HeliSimmer would also have some more on FSX. I'm going to try to solicit forum conversation there for FSX, anything of value I'll be sure to share for our helo drivers here.

Keeping the Caribou crew busy, great flight.

I personally feel that the best site for helicopter sim flying is Helisimmer. https://www.helisimmer.com/how-to-fly-helicopters

I have "heard" of an Marine CH-46 that "might" have flown under the Coronado bridge with a bunch of Seals in the back. And, you know what they say about War Stories and Fairy Tales...

Saunders-Roe SR.45 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saunders-Roe_Princess

Great set of shots Bill. NAS North Island is one of the nicest air stations in the fleet.

Thanks D. You highlight that in these discussions we must be clear as to whether we are talking "published" approaches, "programmed" approaches (such as established by someone else within an afcad, etc. or determining/creating your own approach. I do catch myself reading what I think a person wants rather than getting clarification and then answering. Thanks again, your response should be helpful for many.

With each new thread that asks this question (what altitude to intercept the glideslope) I wonder if there is actually a more specific question being asked. Such as "using a specific FMC..." or "on the afcad designed approach to specific airport..." or "flying a specific aircraft with a specific autopilot coupled nav system..." then "what is the designed ILS GS intercept altitude for that specific situation." The reason I bring this up is that many answers all go back to the real world design of a precision approach. For that, the GS intercept is either a specific altitude, or no lower than a specific altitude. And those are identified on the profile view of the approach plate (see my previous comments above). Most often the GS intercept is normally a minimum altitude, so intercept the GS at that altitude or higher. And this is a higher altitude than when reaching the OM/FAF, so that you have time to configure the aircraft for a stabilized approach (gear down, approach flaps, power controls rate of decent adjustments if get slightly above or below GS).