The difference between the Sim and real life flying

Since getting a subscription to Plane & Pilot magazine I have read article after article about mishaps and how to prevent them, etc. In the recent issue they talk about density altitude. I was amazed at how it said many pilots thought their engine wasn't performing the way it was supposed to not even knowing what the effects of density altitude was. In this article it talked about how you should fly in the early morning and not with wind exceeding 10 knots if you intend on flying in the high country like Leadville, CO. Now in real life this is putting your life in danger and it would seem flight characteristics are a hell of a lot different than they are in the Sim. I mean, in the Sim I could care what time it was or if the winds were 25 knots at Leadville. I can fly it and land. That I can guarantee you. I have flown a Lear 45 into Louis Armstrong airport during hurricane Katrina and granted I was veering left and right on the runway like hell, I still managed to land it and park. In real life forgetaboutit. It just isn't happening.

 

So it does seem there is a big difference between flying in the Sim and in real life. In the Sm I'm a damn ace. But in real life I have no idea how'd I perform. :pilot:

This is a very good point. We are still a way off realism when it comes to flight characteristics but then most sims are marketed to suit all comers and maybe it would put off those new to sim flying.

 

Cheers

Stinger

 

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Density altitude is one.

Laminar flow impact of rain-on-wings is another. Let's not go there about icing.

Trim (position) impact arising from CofG position is one more.

And anyone who has put the wrong fuel in their aircraft will tell you that isn't simulated, either.

 

Really `as real as it gets` is only a tagline, NOT a statement of fact.

 

...anyone who has landed in a crosswind in real life will tell you that.

In this article it talked about how you should fly in the early morning and not with wind exceeding 10 knots if you intend on flying in the high country like Leadville, CO.

Density altitude is, of course, a very real factor that must always be considered, along with winds and weather. But while the early morning (usually) is the best time to fly up there (9934 ft), so much depends on the aircraft (and pilot) too.

 

A Cessna 150 would have a lot more trouble up there than a Bonanza, but a Cessna 172 is a two place aircraft at that altitude (sometimes even in Denver) at the very best, and there are times that the cool of the morning is the only time to fly it. Even a C-182 may be a two place when it's hotter.

 

A Learjet, which you mention above, could potentially operate there most any time, provided he watched his weight and balance and his takeoff performance charts very carefully.

 

Many folks (especially non-pilots) don't realize that aircraft performance is related to sea level under standard conditions (59ºF, 29.92 in Hg, 0% humidity), and the standard temperature decreases as the altitude increases at 3.5ºF per thousand feet, so that at 5,000 ft. it's 41ºF and 26ºF at Leadville (9934 ft.). Thus at 70ºF and still at an altimeter setting of 29.92 in Hg, the Leadville density altitude is 12,890, getting fairly close to the service ceiling of the C-172, and at 90º it's 14,041, meaning you might get off the ground in ground effect (if the runway is long enough), but never be able to climb.

 

A 1972 C-150 only has takeoff performance charts up to 7500 feet (this is for density altitude, of course), where the ground run is shown (at 32ºF) is shown as 1360 feet (2440 over a 50 ft. obstacle), with a 10% increase for each 35ºF increase in temp above standard. And its rate of climb is shown as 220 fpm at 10,000 feet at 23ºF, decreasing the rate of climb 15 fpm for each 10ºF above standard day temp.

 

A 1968 C-172 only has takeoff performance charts up to 7500 feet (this is for density altitude, of course), where the ground run is shown (at 32ºF) is shown as 1565 feet (3855 over a 50 ft. obstacle), with a 10% increase for each 25ºF increase in temp above standard. And its rate of climb is shown as 230 fpm at 10,000 feet at 23ºF, decreasing the rate of climb 15 fpm for each 10ºF above standard day temp. It also shows that at 15,000 ft. and 5ºF the rate drops to 22 fpm (yes, twenty two). That's improved if you drop the weight from 2300 lbs to 2,000 lbs (minus 2 150 lb. people) to a ground run of 1120 ft. and 50 ft. of 2155 ft. The rate of climb is also increased at 15K at 2,000 lbs to 155 fpm.

 

The figures above are from the actual aircraft manuals, so that means the best that can be done with perfect pilot technique on a new airplane under ideal conditions, including no wind and smooth, paved runway and proper tire inflation. Real world performance is likely a tad less than the manual shows, since the conditions are likely to be less ideal and the pilot is unlikely to match the performance of the test pilot who established those figures.

 

A Bonanza has a bit more margin, but it is similarly affected by density altitude, as are all aircraft. Its performance charts are in the form of a graph, rather than a table, so I won't try to quote everything here, and it only shows takeoff performance up to 8,000 ft., but at its 3400 lb (F33A) max gross weight, its 10,000 foot density altitude rate of climb drops to just under 600 fpm from the sea level value of just over 1100 fpm, with gear and flaps up.

 

And, having spent most of my flying career in the high country (Denver, Albuquerque) I can guarantee those changes in performance are very real, and I've seen density altitude bite all too many folks.

So, flight Simming = No vertigo or butterflies. Plus, you get to walk away from every crash with

ne're a scratch...

 

I've been a passenger in single-engine aircraft several times, both as a teen and recently (good

landings).

And, having spent most of my flying career in the high country (Denver, Albuquerque) I can guarantee those changes in performance are very real, and I've seen density altitude bite all too many folks.

 

Here's a good video of density altitude biting someone. Thankfully everyone survived.

 

I've been flying in Mobile, both in the sim and real life (until 2008) since I moved here in 2004. The only time I ever really thought about density altitude was when it was hotter than Hell and taking forever to climb to altitude. Just tried a 172 flight out of Leadville, CO in the sim. My engine died right after I started the sim. Got that sorted out and took off at a BLISTERING climb rate of 200-300 feet per minute. Weaved my way through the valleys and am now on the downhill run to San Luis Regional. That was eye opening. Never really had to deal with those problems growing up in West Tennessee and down here. The closest I got to it was making sure a train wasn't coming down the track at the end of Wolf River airport outside of Memphis on a really hot day when I was flying the 152. The math said I could make it just in case the train was there, but I never fully trusted my math skills.

Here's a good video of density altitude biting someone. Thankfully everyone survived.

 

 

 

I remember seeing that back then. The real video shows their injuries.

I've been flying in Mobile, both in the sim and real life (until 2008) since I moved here in 2004. The only time I ever really thought about density altitude was when it was hotter than Hell and taking forever to climb to altitude. Just tried a 172 flight out of Leadville, CO in the sim. My engine died right after I started the sim. Got that sorted out and took off at a BLISTERING climb rate of 200-300 feet per minute. Weaved my way through the valleys and am now on the downhill run to San Luis Regional. That was eye opening. Never really had to deal with those problems growing up in West Tennessee and down here. The closest I got to it was making sure a train wasn't coming down the track at the end of Wolf River airport outside of Memphis on a really hot day when I was flying the 152. The math said I could make it just in case the train was there, but I never fully trusted my math skills.

 

Great Story!! Near Memphis you had to deal with extreme heat. Other places deal with extreme altitude. And yet others have the combination of both heat and altitude!!:eek::eek:

 

There were days at a time where we couldn't fly our USMC CH-46s from Midland Texas to El Paso because of the combination of heat, head winds, and West Texas altitude meant we didn't have the range to fly that far!

 

You'd be surprised how little there was for young single men to do in Midland Texas on a Tuesday night in 1966!! :mad::mad:

 

And yes, from time to time RW experiences can be just as unreal as sims are!!

 

Michael

Near Memphis you had to deal with extreme heat.

HA! And I say again my last: HA!

I loved the "extreme heat" in Millington compared to Yuma. It was nothing. By comparison.

I would have LOVED to be stationed permanently in Millington. Heck, I applied to instructor duty there. I went to AVI C-7, after I had to re-up for 6 to get it.

Then the monitor, a not too bright SSgt who had been in my shop in Yuma, assigned me back to YUMA!! I could have killed him. He said he thought I liked Yuma, and wanted to be back there. I can't think of any way he could have been wronger (is that a word??), if he had tried.

Guy named Timothy B Smith. Scrawny, nay, nearly skeletally thin. Married to a woman 5 times his size. Unbelievable.

 

If you want to get extreme heat, go to Yuma in the summer. Or the spring, fall, winter...hell any time! Miserable place, 24/7/365.

 

You'd be surprised how little there was for young single men to do in Midland Texas on a Tuesday night in 1966!!

 

And yes, from time to time RW experiences can be just as unreal as sims are!!

Once again, try Yuma! There was Casa Gutierrez, and the Club on base. Other than those...

 

Have fun all!

Pat☺

I wouldn't call Memphis "extreme heat", just hot enough to not be enjoyable for a fat kid in a 152 on a grass strip at an airport with a broken Coke machine. But I do miss the simple flying back then. Too many regs nowadays.

 

BTW- "wronger" may not be a word, but I'm adding it to my vocabulary just cause it's a fitting word!

You're both just talking about heat. Millington, Memphis, and a lot of other places in the Southeast had high heat and high humidity! Add those together and it's bad!! As far as Yuma, yes it's hot but Thermal and other strips out there can be worse!

 

BTW Pat: Nightlife in Yuma wasn't bad if you crossed the bridge. And unless I'm mistaken, you seem to have done pretty well living in Yuma! You ended up with Mrs. Ghost!! ;):cool:

You're both just talking about heat. Millington, Memphis

 

Ah, My favorite....RatCenter, Mucus! Sorry, I meant NATTC, Memphis/Millington, Tenn. I was there in the heat of summer of 1968 through Feb.1969. 90 degrees and 90% humididity. Aviation Fundamentals "P" school, Avionics school, and then AT "A" school.

 

NATTC=Naval Air Technical Training Command

 

Company 4A. Here is a quick shot of the old barracks and the new one. We were the first Company to move in! Stand by for pics!

 

Our theme song...."Hey looks us over, NATTC" "Spread a ration of chickencrap all over me"!

 

All true, and many thanks to everyone who contributed such solid, important information.

 

Besides being fun, sim flying can be a huge advantage to real world pilots, from newbie to ATP pro: procedures, procedures, procedures.

• While an engine may not perform as in the RW, the sim can provide useful practice in management techniques;

• The sim is a great place to learn/practice aircraft start-up and shut-down procedures to develop good habits;

• To help develop your instrument scan don't use the autopilot;

• Set up your sim for some system failures to test your awareness of both the aircraft and your place in the sky; i.e., can you make it to a safe emergency landing, etc.

• Use of technology: GPS, FMS, radios, etc.;

• VFR work: proper altitudes, visual approach procedures, etc.;

• Instrument flight procedures, including ATC;

• Etc., etc.

 

Two of the biggest problems in home sims are lack of depth perception and narrow field of view. I haven't tried VR yet, which might help solve the problems, but there are still limitations. Nonetheless, the sim can be a great tool, and a lot of fun flying machines you'd never have the chance to in the RW.

 

For 40+ years I flew real world heavy iron and sophisticated helicopters in which I received regular refresher training, which proved invaluable. They were great for cementing systems knowledge and testing ones judgement. Unfortunately, the system failures in FSX and other home sims don't replicate the real world as well as the professional training sims; and, we almost never have a copilot at home. But there are still plenty of valuable lessons to be learned...try to be organized about your learning curve and just keep plugging away.

sim flying can be a huge advantage to real world pilots, from newbie to ATP pro:

 

That's true as long as you don't build and practice bad habits, which can be a bear to break, then establish proper habits. It's especially a potential problem for new folks with no instructor or for pilots trying things they've not been trained for.

 

But I agree the potential for lots of good is there.

 

lack of depth perception and narrow field of view

I don't find depth perception to be too big a problem (on occasion though...), and the narrow field of view is much less of a problem using TrackIR, since I can turn and move my "head" most any way I choose. I find that lack of feel, both in the controls and in the backside, along with often poor flight models to be more of a problem.

 

But as a procedures trainer the home sim can be excellent, as well as little expense involved -- convenient, too.

I don't find depth perception to be too big a problem (on occasion though...),

Heck, I'm used to no depth perception, in sim or out. I haven't any since I lost my left eye. I've gotten pretty used to it by now.

 

Happened in YUMA, BTW! Cursed wild horse nailed me on my motorcycle at 60 MPH, rotten thing...

Ohhh how I hate Yuma!

 

Although I have to agree, Michael, I came out of it with two of my kids in the military, and the wonderful Miss Ghost. Those two things make it worthwhile having been in that heck-hole.

 

Oh, Zippy, I stayed in the new barracks you showed in your second picture! BKS 411. They weren't all that new when I got there in '78. 411 was the closest to the chow hall, though, which was fine with me!

They were still using the old building(s) in your first picture as the Squadron offices for 901 and 902. S1 thru S4.

 

Have fun, all!

Pat☺

In real world the airplane can spin and dive down out of control when stalled. Another case is airplane skid or slip too much causing it to go out of control. Can simulator do that? We can practice recovery if it can.

In real world the airplane can spin and dive down out of control when stalled. Another case is airplane skid or slip too much causing it to go out of control. Can simulator do that? We can practice recovery if it can.

 

They can also get into a spiral dive which many people think is a spin (two different things). With the proper flight model it can do most of what you ask, but few flight models in the sim will spin. And just for those who don't know, a spin isn't necessarily "out of control," since many of us have practiced them for safety training and even for fun, in real aircraft. I still enjoy them in the sim, on occasion, too.

Larry's right, as usual.

A well modeled plane with a GOOD FDE will spin nicely. Most devs, sadly, either don't know HOW, or don't bother with details like spins, and so on. They're more concerned with making the plane's eye-candy as good as they can. The FDE is often purely secondary.

Having said that, and I must say I still have a huge amount to learn, I enjoy fixing FDE's, both aircraft.cfg and .air files. It's a LOT of fun, for me, to change different settings, trying to make the plane perform up to it's spec'd potential. Not above, not below, but AT it's specifications.

 

Including spins.

Many planes will fly themselves out of a spin, if the pilot permits them to. Heck, a lot of planes are darn near impossible to get INTO a spin, either in real life, or the sim. Not impossible, any plane can be spun, but very difficult.

Surprisingly, when I was learning to fly in a glider, they spun rather easily. They had to be held in the spin, though. If the controls were neutralized, the plane would recover very quickly. Just fly it's self right out, often in less than 1/2 a turn.

I actually used a spin to get out of a near-midair (NOT my fault). I was at 1000', saw a tow-plane with a glider on suddenly seem to appear, as if by magic, right in front of me. As the saying goes, co-altitude, constant bearing, decreasing range. I was already getting slow, in a left orbit, loosing altitude to enter the pattern. Without thinking, I flipped the glider into a spin, recovered, and got into the pattern. I spun less than 200', but it saved my tail. I thanked my instructor heartily for stressing the practice of things like spins, believe me.

The tow-plane pilot never even saw me, BTW. He had no idea why I was yelling at him on the ground radio when I got down. They had to drag me off it. I was only 15 at the time, so he would have kicked my tail if they hadn't explained what happened to him. :rolleyes:

 

When I was flying the Citabria, it was even easier to spin, but it is an aerobatic plane. Recovered just as easily as a glider too, oddly enough :D

 

They can also get into a spiral dive which many people think is a spin (two different things).

The infamous Graveyard Spiral? Nasty thing. IMO, it mostly comes from pilots THINKING they know more than they do, and trusting the seat of their pants, instead of their instruments, which is a HUGE mistake. Their butt is invariably wrong.

I think "Unusual Attitude Recovery" should be a very important part of any pilot's training. And to trust the instruments, not their tails, no matter what they think. The instruments know a lot more than the human in the driver's seat!

It still kills, though, which is very sad.

 

Sorry, ramble. Have fun, all!

Pat☺

 

The infamous Graveyard Spiral? Nasty thing. IMO, it mostly comes from pilots THINKING they know more than they do, and trusting the seat of their pants, instead of their instruments, which is a HUGE mistake. Their butt is invariably wrong.

I think "Unusual Attitude Recovery" should be a very important part of any pilot's training. And to trust the instruments, not their tails, no matter what they think. The instruments know a lot more than the human in the driver's seat!

It still kills, though, which is very sad.

 

Sorry, ramble. Have fun, all!

Pat☺

 

Pat - Funny you should mention the Graveyard Spiral! I was fortunate to have had an ex military pilot/flight instructor from WWII days. He never gave me any spin training, just would talk about spins and how they were a requirement back in the "days of old" when my Dad and Grandfather was learning! He did, however, introduced me to the Graveyard Spiral. I was getting ready for my Private Pilot checkride and he wanted me to be "more than ready!" He had me flying "under the hood" doing unusual attitude recoveries and then he warned me about what he was about to do to me. It was him putting the C150 into a graveyard spiral and then seeing how I would react to it! It took me a couple of times before I could get the plane to recover. Those spirals were probably harder for me than if he had just gone ahead and given me some spin training! But, I learned a lot from his methods! One that still sticks out, "Don't ever get yourself into a Graveyard Spiral situation!" LOL!

 

I flew with several instructors, but Mike's methodology always seems to be the one that always "stood out" more so than the others! AND, was I ready for the checkride? It went flawless and no Graveyard Spirals, thank god!

 

Happy flying! You keep bringing back memories, thanks! - Rick :cool:

And don't forget ground handling for small GA aircraft, especially tail-draggers. Flight Sims do NOT model ground handling very well. There is a whole 'nother science to taxing with the wind blowing.

And don't forget ground handling for small GA aircraft, especially tail-draggers. Flight Sims do NOT model ground handling very well. There is a whole 'nother science to taxing with the wind blowing.

 

+1 on that Bob! The wind can jump up and bite the tail-dragger on the ground! Good point for those transitioning from tricycle gear to tail-draggers!

 

Thanks - Rick :cool:

And don't forget ground handling for small GA aircraft, especially tail-draggers. Flight Sims do NOT model ground handling very well. There is a whole 'nother science to taxing with the wind blowing.

 

And even more interesting with a skid equipped Tiger Moth & no wheel brakes!!! To my shame I once had to leave the aircraft near the signal square instead of the flight line, 'cos it just would not go right, & there were no wing walkers about to help either!

And don't forget ground handling for small GA aircraft, especially tail-draggers. Flight Sims do NOT model ground handling very well. There is a whole 'nother science to taxing with the wind blowing.

 

Small or large, the ground behavior of aircraft in the sim are totally wrong in anything but the gentlest of turns. Any side load and it's almost like you're on ice, sliding sideways. And taildraggers tend to stay straight in the sim while on the ground (other than torque/P-effect), even in the best flight models.

 

Some crab is needed on the ground in the sim in crosswinds, in addition to, or instead of, crossed controls to keep the path straight. And anything over a two or three knot x-wind shoves the vertical fin all out of proportion to the wind strength, when taxiing.

Found out quite recently that increasing the value of Cn_dT(T) Yaw Moment Thrust in block 1101 of the air file can significantly improve ground handling on Nigels Avro 621, makes it more responsive to throttle/thrust.