Is it harder in the sim than in real life? A general discussion

Finally I am putting in words what has been bugging me since my earliest days in this wonderful hobby. I am not a real life pilot (but wish someday i could afford to earn a PPL) but years of watching videos on Youtube and reading real life aviator stories has led me to believe that the sim (any desktop sim like fsx/p3d/xplane) is substantially harder to fly compared to the real world aircraft. The following are some of the most important points I could think of in support of my opinion:

 

1. Most importantly, control forces acting on the aircraft cannot be felt in the sim like they can in real world aircraft. I wish atleast trim forces could be modelled in all 3 axes in the sim. While force feedback has been around for quite a while and has been used for this purpose, most hardware manufacturers have stopped making force feedback flightsim controllers. This makes precision trimming nearly impossible to do and makes flying the sim a lot harder compared to the real world.

Real world aircraft are much easier to trim and keep in a particular pitch attitude. Apart from flying FBW aircraft with autotrim, let's simply admit that trimming in the sim is highly imprecise and mostly guesswork. "Trim off the control forces" is something we can only imagine doing while flying the sim.

(Had so much hope on IRIS dynamics and their revolutionary control loading yoke but seems that they have vanished into thin air. So for now, no option other than to continue flying with "dead controls"!!).

 

2. The lack of precision and 'stickiness' in most consumer level flightsim controllers like CH and Saitek. Also they have extremely short range of movement in their control axes especially the pitch axis. This makes precise flaring and making good landings a nightmare. To get even a respectable pitch range one has to get a PFC, Warthog etc. like controller which costs almost as much as a few real world flying hours. Real world controls are so precise that small changes in pitch and bank can be made using a single finger. I wish we could have even a quarter of that level of precision in our Saitek/CH hardware. I also wish a flightsim equivalent of the Logitech G27 racing wheel hardware could be made available. Great quality, precision and realistic feedback at an affordable price!

 

3. The lack of peripheral vision in the sim. Most real world aircraft are designed around the pilot keeping ergonomics and ease of use paramount. Most of us lack dedicated flightsim rigs (I could finally afford to get one only a few months ago and still saving up to get a decent monitor of atleast 24"). This makes visual work like traffic patterns and spotting landmarks as well as ground reference maneuvers difficult compared to the real world. Though TrackIR helps to a great extent in this but this is an expensive piece of hardware which many people may not have (got mine only last year).

 

4. Lack of proper aircraft controls.In the real world most of the essential controls of the aircraft (e.g. gear, flaps, spoilers, lights) are within easy reach to the pilot who can manipulate them without looking away from what the aircraft is doing. But this is not always the case in the sim where people have to assign keyboard/controller buttons/button combinations and then look away from the screen and fumble to reach them especially during critical phases of flight. Having even the most essential controls as in the real aircraft is an expensive proposition for most.

 

5. Lack of a copilot especially for flying heavy metal where the cockpit duties are overwhelming on certain phases of flight like takeoff and approach. But rather than a limitation I take this as a challenge as all modern day glass cockpit twin flightcrew jetliners are designed to be operated safely by a single crewmember during all phases of flight with the only exception being the time between starting preflight and V1. So it adds to the challenge kind of!! (And thank God for Fs2crew!!)

 

All especially real world pilots on this forum are invited to present their views either in support or against the opinions I have expressed above.

I think the hardest thing in the sim as far as being a creator is concerned is getting the air file correct & the effectivity of the controls correct. Mostly I have found its in the lift curves & moment curves of the wing & the overpowerful response of trim built into the flight sim itself. My recollections of trimming a real aircraft are very rarely like the sim even though I try very hard to find a median response, getting better though I think with each model I make (I hope).

Force feedback & moving sensation also lead to a different feeling as well as you say peripheral vision. I have had a good experience in a very quick 'trip' in the Spitfire sim at the Maidenhead museum in Berkshire UK, where they have a good cockpit with very realistic control column that has a very complex spring feel system as well as a 3 screen presentation, very nice!

I find that sim flying in general though is easier than the real thing because the model does not react to turbulence & in the RW in a light aircraft one is continually correcting for each imbalance imposed by the weather.

Keith

I had lessons in a Cessna 152 last year, these made me rethink my simulator setup. And I suppose you can get there - within the limitiation of sitting at your desk and not risiking to die or hurt someone else...

 

1&2: PFC or GoFlight These are still consumer articles, although expensive. They are not ForceFeedback, but the internal resistance mechanisms are so good, you hardly notice. Precision and "feeling" are way beyong anything made of plastic IMHO.

 

3. Three large screen full resolution landscape setup with TrackIR & EZDOK

 

4. Saitek or GoFlight offer external controllers

 

6. MCE or FS2Crew.

 

Point being, you can overcome most of these limitations, provided you are prepared to "invest" time and money until your sense of "feeling" is satisfied

 

But what you cannot overcome, is the lack of acceleration forces. In the real plane you feel that you enter into a dive or start to turn when looking at your instruments for too long. Not so in the sim, you have to notice everything visually. Yes, a good pilot can move the aircraft in such a way that you do not notice these forces much - but are we good pilots? Sure, there are full motion contraptions, even for home simmers. Not the same, IMO.

 

And this would be, what makes simming in the puter harder for me than flying in real life - I have to keep the horizon in my view all the time...

You make some excellent points, Rishav. I'd add the slight delay in response to your controls in FSX/P3D, making it harder to coordinate your inputs with the visible results -- not too much of a problem until you're trying to be extra precise.

 

And in your point 2, I have a Warthog, yet even the increased precision doesn't match the infinite possible positions of a control in real life, though it's considerably better than the Saitek, etc.

 

Real world controls are so precise that small changes in pitch and bank can be made using a single finger.

That depends on the aircraft, since some aircraft, and under certain conditions a lot more aircraft, are too heavy on the controls to literally use a single finger. But the point is well taken. In real aircraft you really need to think control pressures, not control movement, especially since movement for certain responses vary, depending on airspeed and other factors.

 

extremely short range of movement in their control axes especially the pitch axis. This makes precise flaring and making good landings a nightmare.

I'd not say nightmare, as for me it's not that bad, but it is tougher than it should be, though in no wind conditions some aspects of landing are easier than real world, especially directional control on the rollout. Still, given the proper airspeed and a decent flight model (another problem), with concentration I can usually make gentle touchdowns right where I want them in FSX/P3D.

 

In point 3, I'd add situational/positional awareness in general, not just in the pattern and for ground reference maneuvers (extremely difficult in the sim).

 

4. Lack of proper aircraft controls.In the real world most of the essential controls of the aircraft (e.g. gear, flaps, spoilers, lights) are within easy reach to the pilot who can manipulate them without looking away from what the aircraft is doing. But this is not always the case in the sim where people have to assign keyboard/controller buttons/button combinations and then look away from the screen and fumble to reach them especially during critical phases of flight. Having even the most essential controls as in the real aircraft is an expensive proposition for most.

A momentary glance at the desired control in the cockpit (easy to do in real life), along with the fact that your hand already knows approximately where the control is, and feel helps, too ( a mouse is a lousy substitute). This point is a big reason why I like the sticks such as the Warthog or X-52 with all the buttons and knobs, since I can assign the controls I use most (including view changes) to operate almost a true HOTAS and without having to look. Of course a stick is, to me, a more natural control than a yoke (especially in a real aircraft), but I've flown so many stick aircraft and so many yoke aircraft that it's not really a big deal to me which type of control I use, counting smoothness, precision and HOTAS as being MUCH more important than whether it's a stick or yoke.

 

I'd also note that the CH rudder pedals don't feel anything like the real world pedals (Saitek probably the same), even to the placement of your feet on the floor/pedal. They're designed first, at a poor angle for proper use, making it tough to make use of the brakes on there and secondly they have a heel rest and no reasonable way to rest your heel on the floor with your toes on the pedals, as you do on real aircraft. I've never seen or touched the PFC pedals, but the pictures look as if you could use them in a more proper fashion.

 

Another point is that even the best of flight models in the sim leave a lot to be desired (sim limitations) in aircraft behavior, and the bulk of models I've tried have a lot of glaring deficiencies in behavior. Add to that the miserable ground handling in the sim, along with the even worse behavior when trying to take off or land, right at the interface when both ground and air forces are strong on the aircraft, makes crosswind handling ridiculous, even worse for tailwheel aircraft.

 

On the other hand I'd note that, especially for folks new to real flying, apprehension makes real flying a little tougher, and the lack of real consequences for poorly thought out actions in the sim makes it a little easier, and the sim is certainly WA-A-A-AY more forgiving of mistakes than the real world.

 

I find that sim flying in general though is easier than the real thing because the model does not react to turbulence & in the RW in a light aircraft one is continually correcting for each imbalance imposed by the weather.

 

Keith, if you're constantly correcting for turbulence (other than really strong turbulence) in real life, then you're working too hard at it, as the aircraft will generally do a lot of the correction itself, if you give it a moment. And when you allow turbulence in the sim to have its effects, it's tougher (in many ways) than in real life, because your only input is visual vs. the various sensory inputs in real life that help you judge the correction (if any) required.

 

Finally, I'd note that your imagination is required in the sim to supply many aspects that occur naturally in the real world.

All excellent points. I would add that sims lack almost all of the sensory input found in real flight. Acceleration, Gs and the effects these play on your seat and the controls, plus their effects on your body -- sight and apparent weight. Plus sounds, resistance, even smells. The senses make real airplanes easier to fly, in my view.

 

Of course, the sims DO provide a good chance for practicing IFR procedures, as these rely more on instruments while purposely down-playing the sensory inputs.

 

Lastly, sims do not model ground maneuvers well, if at all. You can not accurately practice landing and taxing in various wind conditions, especially taildraggers.

 

I fly. And I fly FSX too. FSX isn't real, but its darn close. And its the only place I can legally and practically fly inverted through downtown Las Vegas.

view.

 

 

I fly. And I fly FSX too. FSX isn't real, but its darn close. And its the only place I can legally and practically fly inverted through downtown Las Vegas.

 

Roger Your Last!!

 

Sims also allow us to fly craft we're not type certified for. And also we can fly in and through restricted areas where we'd cause a national defense scramble RW.` Low and slow over Red Square, The Mall in DC, Tower of London, etc. RW, is truly not advised.

One other point. If you think simming is expensive, try renting any RW plane by the hour "wet!"

Of course, the sim has a feature that a real world pilot would give anything for...

 

A Pause button! :D

All good points and very accurate.

 

I was a professional pilot for 47 years and now fly FSX, too. I can add to the conversation that helicopters are particularly difficult in the sim for three reasons: 1) as stated, the flight controls just can't mimic the RW; 2) also as stated, the sim lacks physical cues; and 3) I found the lack of 180° peripheral vision very, very difficult to overcome. Two screens help, three would be better, but the sim graphics just don't capture the peripheral views while keeping realistically close to the instrument panel.

 

I plan to try TrackIR this fall but that can only help with looking quickly and smoothly, not the peripheral vision of the real 3D world.

 

Nonetheless, with a little practice and a relatively small investment in some flight controls, FSX does a pretty good job and provides many, many hours of fun /excitement.

My two-cents worth:

 

Using FS as a simulator for VFR flying is not really realistic.

 

It can be a good instrument trainer, provided you have had r/w flight instruction before you practice. There's nothing to be accomplished if you're just teaching yourself bad habits that are going to be expensive to unlearn in the air. Also, don't forget the excellent books that are available for sale and the free-to-read books in your library. You can also print on-line instrument training manuals published by the FAA. Those are free. Just fill your printer with paper and print away.

 

Art

Another thought has occurred to me: real world flying is generally easier once you are trained, but is probably more difficult for a novice, especially the first few hours, at least partly because of anxiety and having to become accustomed to the environment.

I think the sim is both easier and harder than r/w flying. Depends on what we're talking about.

 

I remember a landing in a Skyhawk a couple weeks ago. It was a nasty day with lots of gusty crosswind and mechanical turbulence (caused by trees and buildings adjacent to the runway). Although normal procedures call for an approach speed of 65kts, I opted 70 that day to accommodate for random, abrupt changes in wind conditions. Then when I was around 30ft in the air, over the piano keys, a sudden burst of cross-tailwind of which magnitude I'd never experienced before hit me and the left wing instantly stalled and dropped. I recovered with full power and right rudder and at this point my instructor took over and landed the plane. Even with great weather addons such as ASN installed, I can't recreate the complex aerodynamics and micro-meteorology involved in r/w aviation. I don't know about X-Plane, but as far as I know, there are no risers, sinkers, wake turbulence and a plethora of other small (but critical) environments simulated in FS. To this regard, I'll say r/w flying is harder.

 

However, as Inuss said, r/w flying gets easier and easier the more you're trained. My flight school really focused on teaching me how to feel and fly the airplane rather than to purely rely on the instruments. (With this respect, all incoming students are now trained in very basic Citabrias with very little cockpit instrumentation) And the more I was taught like this, the more aware I was to even the slightest RPM changes without looking at the tach and the slightest risers/sinkers before looking at the altimeter/VSI. This made it easier for me to maintain my assigned altitude, heading and speed, but in the sim, none of these environmental elements of feedback are available. Therefore, instrument flying is harder in the sim due to the lack of "feel."

Keith, if you're constantly correcting for turbulence (other than really strong turbulence) in real life, then you're working too hard at it, as the aircraft will generally do a lot of the correction itself, if you give it a moment. And when you allow turbulence in the sim to have its effects, it's tougher (in many ways) than in real life, because your only input is visual vs. the various sensory inputs in real life that help you judge the correction (if any) required.

Larry

I understand what you are saying but my experience of flying in turbulence in the sim is nowhere like RW, one can leave the stick alone & the model just returns to the previous condition, even if I turn down the stability. Can't do that in RW. My phrase about continually working is relative to leaving the stick alone in the Sim. Mind you my first lesson in a Tiger Moth did not have a good pre flight brief from the instructor & once airborne & trimmed out he apparently said 'You have control', after about 3 to 4 minutes he woke up & asked me if I was controlling the aircraft, as it was starting very gently into an incipient spin, to which I said No! Communication became easier & better after that!

Keith

 

P.S. Looking forward to virtual glasses ? Occulus Rift?

NAV radios were never that hard to tune in real life;)

I understand what you are saying but my experience of flying in turbulence in the sim is nowhere like RW, one can leave the stick alone & the model just returns to the previous condition, even if I turn down the stability. Can't do that in RW.

Agreed they are not much alike, Keith. I didn't intend to imply that you leave the aircraft alone, though, which is why I said, "...as the aircraft will generally do a lot of the correction itself, if you give it a moment."

 

It's also why I said, "...tougher (in many ways) than in real life...", not in all ways. The turbulence in the sim is so weird that I usually leave it turned off, plus we don't have the "seat of the pants" feel in the sim to aid us in dealing with turbulence, which is one (of many) things that does make it tougher.

 

Whether the sim model comes back to the previous condition may depend on the specific model, at least as to whether it's on course again, and perhaps how strong, but I don't have a lot of sim experience with that. I deal with mild RW turbulence, on the other hand, so automatically that I hardly notice corrections. When it's beyond mild (or light, of you prefer), it's another story, of course.

(4. Lack of proper aircraft controls.In the real world most of the essential controls of the aircraft (e.g. gear, flaps, spoilers, lights) are within easy reach to the pilot who can manipulate them without looking away from what the aircraft is doing.)

 

 

Unless you are flying a pa 34 and you need to close the crawl flaps

Here’s the procedure. Place left hand on instrument panel glare shield. Lean over and place head in passengers lap (female pax, OK. male pax, not so much) with right hand reach down under instrument panel and close flaps. With left hand pull yourself up to the upright position,

Grab yoke in both hands and try to regain control of AC. You will know the AC is entering a spiral.

Your pax will inform you in graphic detail.

skytrek

I don't have a PPL but have had a few lessons in a Cessna many years ago.

I got into Flight Sims seriously about 18 months ago and decided to try to make it as realistic as I could. I tried FSX and X-Plane and mainly fly FSX.

Most of the success I have had has come from evolving the setup I use.

 

First and foremost I use a Force Feedback system - a Microsoft sidewinder 2 bought off ebay - with FSForce2 software that corrects the problems FSX has with forces. I then built my own trim wheel using a simple potentiometer connected to a Leo Bodnar card. As soon as I built this I started flying better because it encouraged me to trim correctly and frequently. Yes this setup allows me to feel the trim wheel taking the force out of the controller so you can trim by feel and know exactly when it is right. With this force setup I tell people to fly by pressure not by moving the stick. The controller tells you when stall is approaching, gives you feeling when undercarriage is raised and lowered and gives feedback on the quality of your landings through the force of impact. Go vertical until your speed drops to zero and there are no forces in the stick at all which is quite disconcerting. This stick and FSForce2 transform the whole experience bringing it closer to reality. Different types and sizes of plane feel radically different.

 

I didn't want my controls on a desk in front of me so mounted them on a pair of speaker stands that sit at either side of my chair bringing them to just the right height. I fixed an A5 box file to the top of one and mounted a Saitek 3 lever throttle quadrant in that, angled so the levers move forward and backward. My trim wheel and rudder and aileron trim knobs are also mounted on that in similar layout to a real plane. I have also mounted a slide potentiometer to handle flaps and a roller ball for any unavoidable mousing needs. Some controls are via a dedicated keyboard controlled by HIDMACROS giving me single key press access to the controls I want. This also has a Landing Gear control lever mounted on the side which works by pressing 2 separate keys for up and down.

 

I also use CH pedals and a 24 inch screen with TrackIR (which is great) and have recently added a second set of 3 levers to give me better control of multi engine planes. I have also recently added a set of rotary encoders for controlling Nav radio and autopilot functions.

 

This setup gives me a system that gives me a lot more information about the plane's behaviour, lets me find controls easily without having to search in different planes, gives a natural feel to looking around and retaining orientation on approaches etc.

 

You can achieve quite a lot through adapting your own controls (and its fun to do so). For me the Sidewinder and FSForce2 with a trim wheel transform the whole experience and make it far easier to fly more precisely and naturally. If you can get one I urge you strongly to do so.

 

Whatever you do Have Fun.

 

Cheers

 

silver

Well, I'm no pilot (one of the few things in life I wanted to do and never accomplished) but over the years what i've heard from real world pilots regarding FS9 is that the small aircraft are much too easy to fly and the large ones too difficult.

Of course, the sim has a feature that a real world pilot would give anything for...

 

A Pause button! :D

 

Not forgetting the beer button.

The feet up on the sofa watching something interesting (Manhattan project last night) on iPlayer during cruise button.

Plus not to be forgotten ,the huge bag of dry roasted peanuts button ,for when the tum doth rumble after a generous use of the beer button.

 

Cheers Socks

I have flown in a real Cessna 172 several times and with be working this year hopefully on getting my private license. All I can say is the biggest difference for me is the hands on feel of the plane. I have used the cessna 172 that comes with FSX, and have found it to be very basic was far as sound and feel. Thats what prompted me to get A2A Cessna 172 trainer . The operation and feel of the aircraft is 100x more realistic than the boxed version from FSX. It makes you start the plane just like you would in real life, and if you mess up, you can could the plugs, and have to take it in for repairs. Also included is all the pre-checks, just as if you were getting ready to fly the real thing.

 

My biggest hangup is I learn by feel and by what I see around me. I tried to make my cockpit as real as I can get it, but there is no replacement for the real deal.

Not a RW pilot but the one thing that strikes me in FSxxxx is the limited view, particularly on the heavy iron where the panel occupies 2/3 of the screen and you are left, like Chad, peering over the top of the dash. Have never been able to get the virtual seat adjust to make much difference and the effect is noticeably worse in some older aircraft ported to FSX, where the view angles down to the ground rather than straight ahead.

 

That and second re the Pause button, also save and resume. Just made a fiery inferno of my DC10 at Aspen. No problem, reload and try again!

For what it's worth, every new aircraft I purchase I spend some time adjusting my control sensitivity and the aircraft.cfg files so the ground handling and control feel in the air seems reasonable, i.e. not "twitchy" for lack of a better word. The items I adjust in the .cfg file are the pitch, roll, and yaw inertia values and under [Flight Tuning] the pitch, roll, and yaw stability terms. It seems like everyone's hardware set up is a bit different and a bit of tweaking really helps. I will also say that some aircraft, like the PMDG 737 NGX handle well right out of the box on my rig.

It's about the same for both. The desktop sim does lack some RW capabilities like proper ATC usage/traffic saturation, delays, holding, diversions, etc. So it's not as task saturated as RW, but also the sim does have the limited view/peripheral vision that RW pilots sometimes desires for soft landings. It's hard to really get immediate feedback on your landing from the sim, unless someone makes a gauge or visual device to grade it based on force impact. But there's no gauge in the real airplane so there's no point to that. I also noticed the sim doesn't simulate ice conditions that often or as well as RW, also turbulence/chop.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk