It’s been the catch phrase used everywhere the last few years, and it has become the gold standard of top quality aircraft or those so realistic and so well designed that you could study them to obtain actual type ratings and pass an initial course.

Most add-ons are of simpler design and varying levels of quality, but over the years, these study level aircraft for the Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 (MSFS20) and X-Plane 12 (XP12) platforms have grown in numbers.

I am old enough to remember the old fighter sim called Falcon 4.0 in the late 1980s and early ’90s. It came with a thick paper manual that felt like a novel. I miss those days of real boxes, manuals, and reading material.

Some of the most detailed aircraft add-ons come loaded with PDFs to study, and some have nothing at all, leaving it up to the customer to go online or just obtain the actual real aircraft’s study manuals. It seems lazy to not bother to publish a manual for an aircraft release, but then again, if it’s so realistic that the only PDF says “go obtain a real Airbus A320 POH” for more information, I’m sold. If something is that good and complete, then I think the developer is allowed to be lazy, or perhaps a bit big braggish.

Most commercial pilots, or experienced aviators in general, were dismissive of flight sims at home. Twenty years ago, I was embarrassed to come out of the sim closet for I’d be a victim of skepticism or at least a target of laughter. “No flight sim can do anything close to what ‘real pilots’ deal with in Level D sims,” I was often told. Or, I’d hear, “Oh, yeah, that little Microsoft Flight Simulator, I played with it once. It looked like a cartoon, so that won’t help anybody.”

• READ MORE: Turn Up the Heat in Sims With Density Altitude Games

This is what every older-and-bolder, gray-haired retired airline pilot said when seated to my left.

Now that I have gray hair, I am all too happy to encourage the younger generation to get active with sims when they aren’t flying the real thing. It’s also accepted among almost all real pilots I know as a really useful tool now that photorealistic graphics are everywhere and far exceed the quality of a $20 million sim the FAA approves. For as little as $2,000, you can rival those simulators at home.

I am not going to mention every study level aircraft available—that would require a book.

Yet over the years before and even right through MSFS2020 and XP12, several come to mind and most are quite famous and have been around for a long time:

Precision Manuals Development Group

The company has been around since the early 1990s. It’s the longest add-on group ever for any sim, and in my opinion, the finest. Everything about it is study level.

Its entire Boeing products are the gold standard of what an add-on should be, and nobody has rivaled it in producing a Boeing 737NG, 747-400, or 777. Now since the release of MSFS2020, we have been enjoying the entire 737NG set, including BBJ. Almost every system, failures, controls accuracy, autopilot, performance, switchology, sounds, visuals, etc. have all been reproduced perfectly.

• READ MORE: The Art of Simulated Long-Haul Flying

Years of development for just one airframe. You’d ace a type rating in the real aircraft after spending time with PMDG products. I wish I could go get a 737 type rating just to test this theory myself. I feel I know no other aircraft as well as this one, due to my years with PMDG 737s. Now, we are about to get its 777 finally after years of waiting patiently. It will be released this year and continue the outrageous quality and realism we all crave from a company that really only releases masterpieces.

Fenix

This company is a new entrant that stormed onto the stage just last year with its completely detailed A320 for MSFS2020. Upon release, it quickly became accepted as the most detailed Airbus for any sim platform.

In my opinion, the early release suffered from performance and frame rate issues as it couldn’t compare to the smoothness and fidelity of the PMDG lineup. But a year later, with all the refinements and the recent release of the update or Block 2, it is now a masterpiece. Detailed systems right down to individual circuit breakers are modeled. Engine modeling and accuracy is key. All that has been done, and now the IAE version is included, each with its own systems, sounds, and realistic performance.

• READ MORE: Taking Risks at a Trio of Mount Rainier Airstrips, Virtually

Some say it has blown past the PMDG. Whatever the opinion, I share the zeal. It’s smooth, precise, and many real airbus pilots online tout it as basically perfect. A true study level that you’d absolutely use during type rating school. I’ve enjoyed flying it now, as much as I have over the years with the PMDG lineup.

SimMarket

This company sells the Maddog MD82 for MSFS2020. I am not as familiar with the older airliners, so I will defer to the majority of sim fans online holding this up to the level of the Fenix.

For MD fans, this is also a real keeper. It represents a blend of systems modeling and accuracy all from the later ’70s to later ’80s replicated at a high level. In a battle for the top, this is often referred to as the best airliner ever made for MSFS2020. I’ll have to learn it better to give my own opinions, as I have used it little, never being a Maddog fan. But I see the reviews touting it as in the top few airliners ever released.

X-Plane

It has the outrageously in-depth Felis 747-200 series for the X-Plane sim. It is one of the most complete jetliner simulation add-ons I have ever used—from nose to tail. This is one of the reasons I still use XP12.

I cannot say enough about this masterpiece other than I wish it was available on MSFS2020 as well. You need to be three pilots at once to handle this beast. Setting up view points is key, as you’ll not only be pilot and copilot but flight engineer as well, often manipulating the systems as you sit sideways. You can feel the quality, heaviness, and momentum.

X-Aviation

The company sells the most renowned and sought-after bizjet for any sim, the Hot Start Challenger 650. This completely study level jet is once again simulating entire circuit breakers from head to tail. Setting the bar so exceedingly high, it’ll be what all future bizjets are compared to.

Sadly, only X-Plane 12 has it, but again, that’s another reason I still use it. The accuracy, realism, handling, etc. is all spot on. I fly a similar aircraft in real life and find this exceptionally close to the real thing. Again, it’s a type rating quality example to learn from. Many have called it the best jet ever designed for any sim, and it’s impossible to disagree. It certainly rivals the airliners above in total quality and experience.

Flysimware

It has a Learjet 35A that was recently released in “early access.” I have featured this in many an article so far, and it is well on its way to what I would call an honorable mention study level aircraft.

Its blueprint quality visuals, scaled parts, and cockpit clarity make this a winner right out of the gate. I’ve never seen such a beautiful reproduction in an early access or beta-style release. The flight quality, accurate avionics, sounds, and more make this a really promising product when the final version comes out.

It is the best pure bizjet built specifically for the MSFS2020 lineup so far. Let’s leave the jetliners behind now, as accuracy and study level can go down a category and be just as advanced.

A2A Simulations

The company has the 1960s Piper Comanche 250 featuring its coveted Accu-Sim 2.0 technology to bring a living, breathing aircraft to your desktop. This example must be run as gently as a real one, maintained and babied, or else face what real owners face: expensive repair bills.

You can damage and destroy the airplane if you’re a ham-fisted pilot. The aircraft requires a full preflight and walk-around inspection. You can test the fuel and do everything a real pilot would during a flight.

Continually monitoring its wear and tear, systems, and cleanliness is all part of this intensely realistic model that keeps its constant state alive, meaning it will remember its health on a continual basis, even if you fly something else in between on different days. You even get to perform an overhaul and other yearly tasks.

This airplane has quite a following and has been labeled by many as the best general aviation aircraft ever designed for any sim. I believe A2A is leveraging its AccuSim technology to future releases, and it certainly has captured the immersion of owning, operating, and maintaining a personal airplane like no other.

Conclusion

These are all my experiences with what I own and fly in the sim world. Your opinions may vary, especially when you get into the smaller airplanes as it’s much easier to simulate a simple single-engine in study level than an airliner.

In some ways, many of the default or add-ons for GA are close to this namesake already. A basic default Cessna will accelerate any new student pilot right to the top. The graphics of MSFS2020 and XP12 aircraft are good enough and photorealistic enough to permanently lodge in the brain of anyone learning to fly and stay current.

It’s a great time to study and learn in today’s flight sim environment. Compared to what we had in 1981, everything now is study level.

This feature first appeared in the Summer 2024 Ultimate Issue print edition.

The post Ultimate Issue: Taking Sim to a New Level appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Using live weather was easy enough, but I wanted to test the extremes of heat to see what would happen to the typical GA aircraft under these conditions. In keeping with the theme of how it affects most GA pilots, I chose a late model Cessna 172 featured in both sims, one that many real-world pilots perhaps own or rent from a flying club.

The aircraft is a late model but not too modern, which meant it came with some GPS add-ons but kept with a traditional “six-pack” of instrumentation. I used the WB-SIM Cessna 172 enhancement from Just Flight available here.

This plane is an enhanced version with realism improvements, flight physics, systems, engine wear and tear, and much much more. The sounds are improved too, replicating them well.

The First Test

My first test was to see what takeoff performance was like in the 172 at a typical East Coast airport near sea level in believable, accurate weather conditions. I chose Eastern Slopes Regional (KIZG) in Fryeburg Maine. We were having record heat in the high 90s in New England on the day I was doing my test, so it’s an accurate sample.

The constants I have chosen for each sample takeoff test are:

• Full fuel
• Two pilots weighing 170 pounds each
• Flaps up
• Time in seconds after full power brake release to obtain a rotate of 60 knots
• Runway distance measured to that 60 knots liftoff point
• One takeoff run in one direction and another the other way to compensate for slope, etc., to obtain the proper average
• Temperature in Fahrenheit that is accurate with real locations or actual record highs to keep it realistic
• Winds calm each takeoff

KIZG / 700 MSL / 95 F / FULL FUEL / FLAPS 0

The takeoff run here was 22 seconds to 60 knots at 1,000 feet ground run one way, and 22 seconds exactly again, yet 1,500 feet the other way (slope was the issue).

I then cranked the temp up to 100 degrees and that added another two seconds to each ground run and another 300 feet in distance too. It is awesome to see how MSFS2020 is simulating the heat and air density. It really works.

I then tried the test in XP12 with the default Cessna 172. I found it pretty close with a ground run of 21 seconds one way, 25 the other. Distances were 1,300 feet and 1,800 feet, respectively. 

Which Cessna is more realistic? I am not sure, so I’ll just say both are. They clearly are affected by their simulators’ weather modeling, which is great in both sims. Climb rates at 100 F in both airplanes did hit 1,000 feet per minute, which kind of surprised me initially. I have never flown a late model 172. All the 172s I flew in college were worn-out wrecks. Maybe new ones are really superior.

I then wanted to try the famous “hot-and-high” scenario, so I chose Mammoth Lakes, California. Mammoth Yosemite Airport (KMMH) sits at over 7,000 feet msl and gets extremely hot as it’s near the deserts on the Nevada border. A major highway runs alongside the runway, so I figured that’s handy if something should go wrong. Also, the huge skiable mountains reaching toward 14,000 feet to the west are scenic.

KMMH / 7m000 MSL / 101 F / FULL FUEL / FLAPS 0

Takeoff was very sluggish at over 36 seconds—well over 10 seconds longer up this high at a ground run of almost 3,000 feet. That was about double the ground run of the Maine test conducted some 6,000 feet lower. In the XP12 Cessna 172, I hit 44 seconds on each run. Distances were a bit farther.

I then went to the granddaddy of all “hot-and-high” airports—Telluride Regional (KTEX) in Colorado. The airport sits at more than 9,000 feet and is the highest commercial airport in the U.S.

I had the joy of flying a Challenger 300 into KTEX last fall in real life. It was a gorgeous destination, with a deep blue sky, pine smell, and noticeable reduction in performance even in the jet, where more thrust is required just to taxi. You can really feel it even in colder weather.

So how did the 172 do now on a roasting high-altitude day of 91 F —about a realistic max for that area?

• READ MORE: Navigating Telluride’s Box Canyon Runway, Virtually

KTEX / 9,100 MSL / 91 F / FULL FUEL / FLAPS 0

On Runway 09, it took 35 seconds in the XP12 Cessna 172 to reach 60 knots at a ground run of 3,000 feet once again. That is a slight uphill angle. On Runway 27 it went down a bit and used up only 2,200 feet of pavement at 26 seconds.

The MSFS2020 Cessna 172  had nearly identical ground runs at 39 seconds uphill and 37 seconds downhill. Acceleration was slower in the MSFS2020 plane this time. At lower airports the XP12 Cessna was more sluggish, but performed better up high in this scenario.

Once airborne, the climb rates again hit close to 1,000 feet initially but not for long. I was barely able to get around the pattern at all, with no more than 500 fpm to 10,000 msl for the pattern. Takeoff was a fully leaned event  prior to brake release.

L06 / MINUS-210 MSL / 131 F / FULL FUEL / FLAPS 0

For the last test,  I tried the lowest airport I could find in the hottest-sounding place in the U.S.— Furnace Creek, California. The name fits for good reason.

At minus-212 msl I don’t think I have ever used a flight sim plane that low before, and it sure looked odd on the altimeter. At a temperature this high, I imagined the tires melting into the pavement or my hands being burned on seat belt buckles. It would be insane to even attempt this without an air conditioned aircraft. 

At this temperature, it took 20 seconds to reach 60 knots with a ground run of 1,500 feet. This is just like my first sample in Maine. It is about 1,000 feet lower, with the advantage of being so low that your density altitude would be to some advantage even in the heat. The temperature, however, was so high it negated that advantage.

This was a fun experiment. As usual it opens the door to so much more. How does winter compare? How does a Cessna fly in Alaska at minus-60 F. (I have done it in sim, and this is where I learned that Cessnas make contrails during taxi.)

How about trying this hot stuff in a shorter, more dangerous tree-lined airport where a crash is more certain? What if you loaded up with rear passengers too? How about some tailwinds?

In the real world of business jets, we let our handy FAA-approved iPad performance calculations do all the work now on hot and high. At recurrent, all I do is fly single engine missed, V₁ cut and takeoffs, climbs out of terrain, wind shear, and more all while being above ISA. Even in powerful jets, where one engine performance is almost a nonevent, combining heat and altitude together can be a real nail-biter. 

The real-world implications of all these things are something to practice and consider from the safety of your armchair at home. This unscientific experimentation can be tucked into the back of your noggin for some thought-provoking recall in real life. Anything that does this is another feather in your cap of aviation safety.

The post Turn Up the Heat in Sims With Density Altitude Games appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

I remember buying sets of highly decorated various airliners with probably just 2D cockpits. We could get everything back then in the mid 1990s, when airlines around the world were still flying everything from 727s and DC-8s to 747 Classics.

I remember dying to fly the Hong Kong International Airport (VHHH) checkerboard approach with world scenery starting to appear all over, but I refused to break the “flight simmers code of conduct” set forth by none other than myself. This code followed one command: In order to fly to some distant part of the globe, you must fly there in real time on a “real” flight. 

Selecting a menu or instant positioning to any airport was strictly against the code. I would cringe at all my fellow flight simmer friends who just subscribed to a “go-there-because-I-can” type of mentality. My attempts at encouraging them to punish themselves for their acts went mostly ignored. 

The first amendment of the primary code is that you can only be in one part of the globe at any one time. If you took 14 hours to fly to Hong Kong, then you’re not able to join a friend in Florida to fly in formation on the same day. Forget about it. This harsh way of enjoying the hobby is the only way to go.

To conduct these long flights today, we finally have a sim that does it without issue. It used to be that Microsoft Flight Simulator (MSFS) would slow down in performance over time, often reaching half of its normal performance at takeoff. To finally make it halfway around the world, often flying overnight to a horrible, jerky, stutter-filled mess was a real killjoy. But now with the more powerful machinery and a far advanced and updated MSFS over the last year, we can enjoy a 14-plus-hour trip with our computer keeping up just fine.

There are some great new add-on aircraft available to make these journeys both realistic and reliable. Most recently I purchased the great new quad-jet A340-300 from the in-sim marketplace developed by LatinVFR. While not advertised as a “study level” airliner, it is a real beautiful, solid, and realistic rendition of one of my favorite heavy jets. It also has the complete passenger cabin modeled, which I am in favor of.

Being able to “walk” around the interior to stretch your legs or take in the view from numerous hotkeys is a great feature we are seeing from many more big jet manufacturers in MSFS. It really adds to the immersion factor to be able to do this.

• READ MORE: What Is the Best Flight Simulator?

It’s important to save views in all locations. 

• READ MORE: Your First Sim

After testing the A340 for a few short flights I have concluded she’s a good solid addition to my fleet. I ended up at Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport (PANC). 

However, some errors or incomplete items exist in the flight management system (FMS) programming, affecting autopilot functionality in general. There are some bugs with auto throttle and airbus logic as well. So consider this a fun, stable, nice hand-flying beast with the well-known A340 sluggishness it’s famous for. 

Four small CFM A320 engines slung under the huge airframe is certainly odd, although I love the look. It’s graceful and sleek, and the big titling gear makes for some incredible butter-smooth touchdowns that almost anyone can perform.

The sound set provided is nicely done, with a great harmonic hum being heard at takeoff and during climb power, similar to exactly what you hear on a CFM-modeled A320, which makes sense as that is basically what is propelling the monster. The 340 takes some time to get used to and has its quirks and flying quality habits, but that is part of the fun as it represents what the real jet feels like in a good way.

The BravoAirspace sim company released its newest offering—a 787—in May. In order to try out the new 787-8, I first ran a series of tests around PANC. It was a real joy to fly, just as good as any 787 I have used in the sim. 

All the 787s available, including the default Asobo-stretched 787-10, are very well modeled now and have pretty complete simulations with FMS and other systems. However, this one features an entirely modeled cabin that is the best one I have seen to date of any sim jet. It’s second to flight modeling, and this one flies well. It is rock solid on autopilot, stable on autoland, and wonderful to hand-fly.

The FMS programming, along with a built-in flight pad of sorts, helps speed and performance programming. All the parts externally are executed perfectly in scale and placement. My only gripe is that the designer chose to go with the worn-out dirty look, rather than a newer or cleaner appearance. I like both options. Hopefully, someone will soon upload a brand-new clean paint for me to enjoy too.

The real thrill of long-distance globe hopping to me is seeing the new scenery the world provides along with local immersion factors, such as structure styles, foliage types, road traffic, and potentially new weather special to that area. I also love that I am storing away all this visual and local airport knowledge in my head, so that someday if I ever end up in these faraway places, I may feel like it’s déjà vu. Once arriving into faraway locations in heavy jets, I’ll grab a smaller GA plane to really see the local area, backcountry strips, or coastal resorts accessible by floatplane only.

Some sim pilots only care about the flight deck in detail, without any concern for the cabin to be modeled at all. I am a firm lover of all the immersion we can have, and if the cabin is modeled well without any hit on PC performance, then let’s have it. I love placing passenger views. It’s fun to “walk” around the cabin at random times just taking it all in, making it  complete.

The BravoAirspace 787 add-on really boasts the best airliner cabin I have ever seen in MSFS. The plush curtains and individual seat back video screens that are custom to the airline livery are a great visual. And the mood lighting that many new airliners have now is modeled to change with the time of day simulated.

I was excited to suddenly see the vapor trails and fogging being modeled on engine compression on takeoff, wings, and drag surfaces. This is based on moisture simulated at the time, and Asia was moist. Landing in the predawn hours, seeing it all from a passenger window, was super. The fogging was well done, intermittent and seemingly based on control movements, pitch and power, just like real life as far as I know, including my only experience as a passenger on a Dreamliner near the wing a couple of years ago.

After the long leg to Malaysia, I next flew the one and only Boeing Business Jet (BBJ) to other Pacific Islands to the east, such as Palau, where they once filmed Survivor TV episodes.

I love the PMDG BBJ model. It’s easy to get up and running, perfectly modeled visually, and a ton of fun to hand-fly. I see many BBJs everywhere I go in real life, as they are the epitome of a private jet. Certainly larger than any bizjet built specifically for that purpose, it towers over most on any GA ramp, yet can easily operate to and from at a 4,500-by-100-foot runway.

BBJs come with “short field options” added to the stock 737-700 base unit, allowing slower takeoff and landing speeds and additional flap degrees for departure. It’s all included in the many options found within the PMDG FMS unit in the virtual cockpit. With all the details maximized, it’s a treat to see zero performance decrease on a PC, when compared to a default Cessna. 

I recently subscribed to Navigraph and have been slowly learning how to use it. I am still a complete novice but have figured out how to get it showing on the EFB in the PMDG BBJ.

Once breaking clouds over Palau, I was stunned at the mirror imagery as the cumulus  fully reflected off the blue waters below. With calm winds, nothing but a mirror lay below, matching the sky condition and reflecting the image above and below the horizon, a very odd yet realistic vertigo challenge.

I am so excited you could honestly practice vertigo awareness in MSFS. It is another reason manually setting weather is so pleasing in the system, as you can really produce great visuals and “skyscapes” that can make colors and details pop. 

The post The Art of Simulated Long-Haul Flying appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

So you decided to get into a flight sim and may not know where to begin. Although an abundance of online guides and videos exist, I find them often overblown—too lengthy and filled with fluff. I would prefer to just give you the facts, introducing you to Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 and what is needed to run this program well enough to have you saying, “Wow,” “OMG,” and “I can’t believe it is this realistic.” If it weren’t, I wouldn’t be as addicted to it as I have been the last 20-plus years, nor as bullish in telling other pilots how beneficial it is to your chosen career, proficiency, and overall situational awareness.

MSFS 2020 needs a solid, powerful laptop or desktop to run well. The good news is most of these can be easily obtained for between $1,000 and $2,000 off the shelf today. Naturally, the more you spend, the more capable the PC you’ll have, but with the refinements, MSFS 2020 has gone through since its introduction more than 20 years ago, you’ll be able to run it well on most new, gaming-style PCs and laptops.

• READ MORE: What Is the Best Flight Simulator?

PC Requirements

Gaming PCs come with the proper video card and CPU combinations, hassle-free, and I highly recommend this approach. Most online and brick-and-mortar stores sell these. If it’s not called a “gaming PC,” don’t get it. I use an HP Omen laptop with a 17-inch display for all my virtual flying, as I travel as a pilot and need something portable. The laptop is strong enough to run MSFS 2020 on the highest detail settings at 50 FPS. Yes, a laptop can now run MSFS 2020 as well as any desktop setup.

Specifically, you want an Intel i7 or i9, or AMD RYZEN 7+ processor, plus a NVIDIA GeForce 3060 series or higher graphics card, a 1TB SSD drive, and 6 GB of RAM, or more. I find Intel CPUs superior in performance and reliability when it comes to any flight sim, as opposed to AMD, but others may disagree. Do not get anything less than these specs.

Controls & Hardware

This is the portable setup I use for travel. I highly recommend this as the best entry-level option with high performance for MSFS 2020. I use the HP laptop, Thrustmaster Airbus sidestick, Xbox Elite controller, mouse, and Thrustmaster Airbus throttle quadrant. You can get the Airbus controllers together for less than $200 at Sporty’s. The Xbox controller can easily be found online or in electronic stores.

For the grand setup for a home, one good choice is the Flight Sim Starter set for $599, also from Sporty’s dedicated flight sim store. The Honeycomb system is reconfigurable for any type of aircraft you want to fly. Once I started flying virtually with this, it became so much more enjoyable and realistic.

Whichever controls you decide to use, they can be set up easily by plugging them into the USB ports—Windows will configure them automatically, in seconds.

Installing the Simulator

The new MSFS 2020 can only be installed through a high-speed internet connection. If you do not have high-speed WiFi, Ethernet, or so forth, then you will not be able to run MSFS 2020 at all. Although this is a departure from the norm of years ago, the sim uses live-streaming photorealistic world graphics, terrain, airports, weather, and traffic. The disk space required for this would be enormous. The sim will push updates automatically for itself and any purchased add-ons, with less hassle than keeping track of all this yourself. However, I must stress that without high-speed internet you will not be able to run this sim—or if you try, you may have performance issues. Investing in a good internet is a must for this hobby.

My recommendation is to purchase and install this via the Steam gaming service online. It is safe, easy, and reliable. The Microsoft Store also offers it, but it seems the highest satisfaction comes from those who use Steam. It may take an hour or more to install the first time, depending on your connection. 

Preparing To Run MSFS 2020

Once the controls are plugged in and MSFS 2020 is installed, you’ll run it for the first time. Depending on your PC strength, the program will determine your graphics settings. In most cases, you can go into General Options/Graphics/Global Rendering Quality to see what is chosen for you. If you have a new gaming PC, go ahead and set this to “Ultra,” save, and exit.

Setting Up the Pilot Cameras and Views

This is one of my biggest things to emphasize. Trying to move and view with a mouse or joystick hat will lead to frustration. Using the function within the sim, find General Options/Controls Options/Keyboard/Translate Cockpit View Right, Left, View Forward, View Backward, and give each one of these a command you like. I have named each of those entries, [Right], [Left], [Up], and [Down], corresponding to the arrow keys. Then find Cockpit Camera/Increase Cockpit View Height, name it [Right Shift] + [Up], and then Cockpit Camera/Decrease Cockpit View Height, and name it [Right Shift] + [Dn]. Combining two commands works.

So now you can “move” easily around in the cockpit; the first step in setting cameras. Once you place your eyeball view in the virtual cockpit where you want it, you must lock it into place.

Next, set up your pilot views or cockpit cameras. There are nine views you can select by pre-positioning your favorite viewing spots, to recall instantly instead of using the mouse or joystick that switch to look around. This will take a bit of time, but will last forever on each aircraft. You can also customize the commands to save each view, 1–9. Go to Controls Options/Keyboard. Your controller will be listed here—take the time to go through each of these menus to customize what you like. “Saving Custom Camera” and “Load Custom Camera” can be accomplished now as well. It is not overly complex but takes some time. Once you do this, you’ll be able to keep these and rarely need to tinker again with them.

I have customized my setup to be CtrAlt+1 through 9 to save nine different viewpoints. Save Custom Camera is the entry in the sim. For instance, to save and lock in the pilot’s view, use Ctrl-Alt-1; then copilot, Ctrl-Alt-2; left view snap, Ctrl-Alt-3; right snap, Ctrl-Alt-4;etc.—however you like. Using your controller to “grab” these views, assign custom “Load Custom Camera” to a joystick or controller button, or keyboard option. I use buttons on my joystick or yoke to allow smooth viewing, snapping to import views, instruments, systems, etc. These will automatically save per aircraft.

I hope this quick course in initial PC setup and assigning camera commands helps get you started with MSFS 2020.There is much more to cover as we move forward in this series. In the meantime, if you conquer this, you’ll be able to start assigning key commands and functions throughout the sim, and deleting many of the defaults you’ll never use. The beauty is that all this is saved automatically. In the 2.5 years I have used MSFS 2020, nothing has been changed, deleted, or corrupted. It’s a game-changer.

This article was originally published in the May 2023, Issue 937 of  FLYING.

The post Your First Sim appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

In my early 20s, I started my first real flying jobs, first as a CFII, then a fledgling “corporate pilot” flying an advanced T-Tail Piper Arrow. To me, with its big tail, the Arrow was an airliner. It looked like a McDonnell Douglas MD-80 or Boeing 727, I thought. Some 30 years later, I’ve now gone full circle having flown almost 11,000 hours with some 7,000 of those hours in business jets. 

Recently I got checked out in a club’s Piper Archer II. It’s just like the one in Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020, also known as FS2020. Or, I should say, FS2020 is a lot like the real aircraft. 

The fidelity of sims allows me to compare sim vs. real life, and the gap of realism is closer than ever, with some of the photos I see on the internet fooling me into thinking they’re real. I wanted to share my personal sim vs. reality pics with you. But let’s take a look at the first part of this “Been There, Done That” series together.

• READ MORE: Flight Sims, Real World Flying Interact Beautifully

The Carenado sim add-on Archer II with a classic panel offers the same pilot’s-eye perspective at proper viewing height. This is extremely important in any flight sim, as you must position the seat at the exact correct angle and height to get the best visual sense to make proper takeoffs and landings. This is just like real life, where you must do the same, but for some reason, most “default” viewpoints in the flight sims I have seen have this far too low, as if being seen from the eyes of a toddler in the seat.

I have learned how to use the real-life Garmin GPS panel based on what I see in the sim here. When flying the real plane for the first time, I felt right at home learning on the go. A real “been there, done that” feeling.

Early on in my career as a new jet pilot, first type rating class for a Beechjet 400A, I was faced with the flight management system (FMS). The instructors at CAE were amazed at my ability to program and execute anything on the “box,” as normally, new jet pilots must take an extra five-day course on this machine. They couldn’t believe someone who had never flown jets could use the FMS so quickly, and when they asked me where I learned all this, they were stunned. They couldn’t believe any Microsoft Flight Simulator “game” could produce this much accuracy. I proved them wrong. 

The finest Collins FMS representation for 20 years or more has been on the PMDG 737 series, often known as the finest jetliner add-on ever produced year after year for the MS series. It is identical to most business jet FMS units in service today and was most beneficial in my first type rating Class. A. 

I recently visited my sister in Arizona and we took a trip to Sedona. The spectacular scenery was showcased all around us. Equally impressive is the scenery in the new MSFS. While not totally photorealistic, it sure beats any FAA level D that I have used. So I decided to find our exact Sedona hotel view, and replicate it in the flight sim. This is my balcony view in MSFS which took quite a while to find by Bell 407. 

Years ago I took a trip to Europe in one of the Challenger 300s I flew, where I got to go to the most beautiful place I have ever been on earth—Zermatt, Switzerland, home of the Matterhorn. This is me standing on a glorious May afternoon at about the 11,000-foot level. 

In the sim, I risked it all to land a Bell 407 in the exact general area in MSFS, using the same time of day, date, etc. I had to manually play with the snow depth adjustments to better tweak the visuals to match the photos. 

The real Gornergrat Observatory is perched high on a mountain at 10,200 feet, complete with a train line. It is a hotspot for skiers year-round, and is a luxury hotel as well. 

Two years ago, I was in command of my first-ever Pacific Ocean crossing to Lihue, Hawaii (PHIL). The 5.5-hour flight was non-stop from Oakland International Airport (KOAK) to PHIL, arriving on a glorious July afternoon. 

The MSFS2020 view is at the same place and about the same distance, at the time of day, reflecting the same weather. The only corporate jet by default that we can use in MSFS is the Citation Longitude, it’s quite similar to the Falcon 2000s and Challenger 300s that I have flown in its performance and range. 

• READ MORE: Flight Simulator’s Cessna 310 Offers Up Realistic Weather Lesson

Here is the same location in the sim. Not quite as photorealistic as some areas, but the terrain and placement of the lakes are perfect. Flying this close to those sawtoothed peaks ought to be rough, but surprisingly in all my years operating in and out of this place, I have yet to experience any shear, turbulence, or mountain rotor activity. The reason for this is when operating in the Rockies, we tend to only go in or out during good weather. I have not been there when it’s too windy. Perhaps a good thing to try in the sim for a future piece. 

I love simulating the ultimate private airliners, especially the Boeing Business Jet (BBJ) series. Nobody has produced a better BBJ than PMDG Simulations. PMDG has made the 737 series for more than 20 years and is heralded as the finest replication of a 737NG on the computer platform with much attention and approvals from Boeing. I was shocked when I saw the real BBJ2 (737-800 series) in the exact livery of the one on the sim I love in Van Nuys Airport (KVNY). 

Up until now, all my sim flying has been done primarily while traveling, in a hotel using a great portable joystick, and throttle quadrant. But in a moment of “hold the press” excitement, I just got my first ever professional grade yoke, throttle quadrant, and rudder pedals. I am blown away by the quality and workmanship of these units. I have never felt such realism and precision until now. 

I would highly recommend getting this pack as I did from the great Sporty’s Pilot Shop for about $600, which by itself is an amazing deal on the three components of any home cockpit. Once you make this investment, for the cost of about three flying lessons, you’ll get years of realism and fun out of them. The build quality is the best I’ve come across without cannibalizing a real aircraft. 

The post Been There, Done That appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

It was a great place to attempt to simulate in Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 (MSFS2020)—a low-level, risky flight that barely cleared terrain. 

As I get older, my real-life flying is becoming more conservative. In a flight sim, however, I’ll take risks. 

I targeted three unique destinations in Washington state, starting at Ranger Creek Airport (21W) near Greenwater, then Tieton State Airport (4S6) in Rimrock, and Strom Field Airport (39P) in Morton. I downloaded freeware scenery for each field in order to enhance the small airport feel and theme. Custom scenery for all the airports is available to download free here. 

High Terrain

This route brings you over some pretty high terrain, so I chose the recently released Beechcraft 60 Duke by Just Flight. 

The Black Square Duke is a “study level” complete version of the real thing, an airplane you must take care of and maintain realistically. This airplane is powerful, with turbocharged engines and a healthy climb rate. It will have no trouble getting over the peaks, even on a warm day of 70 degrees Fahrenheit. 

Ranger Creek sits east of massive Mount Rainier and is perhaps the closest airport to that famous dormant volcano. I have always wanted to go there in person, because it sounded mysterious and backcountry-ish. 

• READ MORE: Simulated Austria Is Wild, Wonderful

The scenery in these airports adds enough added objects to increase the immersion factor. I don’t believe it reduces any FPS performance to any noticeable effect over default, so most everyone should be able to use it well.

Choosing the recently released Beechcraft Duke was easy. The flight sim community has been awaiting this some time now, as beloved Black Square designer (famous for the redos of the default Bonanza, Baron, and TBM) had decided to design this entire airplane from scratch, modeling everything perfectly.

It doesn’t disappoint, and the couple of hours I spent on this article was not enough to begin to learn this fully detailed aircraft. It is a “living, breathing plane,” one of the new popular approaches designers have been employing lately to many releases on the commercial side. 

The route to Tieton State Airport took about 15 minutes as the direct line wasn’t easy with terrain, but I also enjoyed some relatively low-level, summit skimming and side swiping on such a perfect day. The live weather of MSFS2020 and sunshine will provide some thermals, updrafts and downdrafts, as well as proper shadowing of lift, such as lakes and ponds, having no updrafts, and fields providing the most thermal-induced results. The terrain is great practice to follow along with on a sectional chart, noting the accuracy and landmarks along the way, imitating the visual world almost perfectly in MSFS2020 default photo scenery. 

• READ MORE: Healthy Obsession: What Flight Sim Has Done for Me

The Duke has been completely retrofitted with the latest and greatest modern technology, as you can see. Engine analyzers and proper technique are required to maintain health. This really made me think back to my piston-twin days when I experienced the most complex flying of my career. I had nothing modern, sometimes no autopilot, flew in IFR alone, and often had to know how to perform holds and ADF approaches with passengers on a timely schedule.

The sectional via ForeFlight on iPad and the GNS750 doesn’t portray the huge, steep descent you’ll need to make to enter the pattern, losing many thousands of feet. It is one of the most breathtaking areas I’ve ever seen. (For Top Gun: Maverick fans, much of the recent movie’s high-speed chases were filmed here over Rimrock Lake. That is something to re-create using the F-18 available in Marketplace, coupled with the Top Gun: Maverick add-on for effect. 

An eerie pattern emerged with the mummification-style face rising from the terrain. It can get right in your way on a downwind. 

New Lessons Learned

The mummy face becomes much more of a huge rock as you maneuver a right downwind-style approach. You cannot do a left downwind at all due to the other mountain on the base at the final to that runway, so you must land over the lake—one way in and one way out.

Over the right base leg above Rimrock lake, it’s hard to not spend all the time rubbernecking the area. The calm winds made for a mirror of tranquil water below, perfect for a floatplane digression perhaps. But with terrain and uneven heating at work, I was not set up well for my first attempt, as I was clearly too high and unstable. That meant it was props full forward, power up, gear up, and get out for another try.

When writing about sim flights, I always learn a new thing or two. The sim behaves in many ways like real life with various parameters cropping up that you hadn’t planned for—which is fun. It’s also a valuable learning experience. You think pilots probably don’t go around in real life as much as they should, and this is really an issue in the sim world. I hardly ever go around on my PC, as it’s hard to be hurt in your computer chair. This is a bad habit to get used to. I am trying to go around more often now in my serious sim sessions as it’s so necessary to keep that real-life mental readiness in full swing. 

• READ MORE: Ultimate Realism ‘X-posed’ in 747-200 Classic

Along with go-arounds, even flying simulated low passes across an unknown field is good practice too. 

The leg to Strom Airport was quite scenic as I detoured south a bit over the lower valley, along a road, river, and lush farmlands. I could see the Randle-Kiona Airpark (WN55) along the way to my south, although I didn’t land there. 

I felt a jolt going over the terrain with lift initially then a noticeable downdraft on the leeward side. All fabulous fun with live weather. 

There is an endless world to explore with almost perfect photorealistic scenery worldwide. The freeware and payware airport enhancements out there really do add some immersion to low-level, small backcountry airstrips that may be worth getting on a case-by-case basis. 

I am not a huge fan of add-on scenery, in general, as the default world seems almost perfect. But in MSFS2020, it is easy to add without any real performance degradation. The details of handmade airports are really cool and often match the real-life counterparts perfectly. 

The new Beechcraft Duke (and Turbine Duke) are lots of fun and will get you in and out of anywhere without concern. These three airports can be accessible by any lesser-powered single as well in the sim. It would be fun to redo these legs on hotter days in weaker aircraft as well to see what kind of trouble I could get into. 

The post Taking Risks at a Trio of Mount Rainier Airstrips, Virtually appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

I am fortunate enough to go to work and play with actual flight controls connected by pulleys and cables to a bizjet worth some $20 million. Yet, this career only came after spending the first 20 years of my young adult life behind a computer, seeing the world, learning jet systems, playing the role of airline pilot, and educating myself on everything I could about what a career might be like in this exhilarating world. 

After so many years using Microsoft Flight Simulator (MSFS) 95, 98, and X, and X-Plane, I felt I had a pretty good hand on geography, airport locations around the entire U.S., and almost all of the major landmarks. Indeed, that was the case. As I started my career flying jets around the country in 2004, I definitely had that “I’ve been here before” feeling.

Starting with a good computer is key. MSFS or X-Plane won’t run well on a poorly optimized or weak machine. The good thing is prices have come way down these days, so it’s easy to find a good, solid PC to run either sim. My advice is, as always, get an intel chip base, i7 or i9, with Nvidia GeForce video. MSFS has always been the least hassle with this combination. Also required is a monitor with G-Sync technology, either on the laptop itself or externally on a home desktop system. I tried a non-G-Sync laptop by accident recently and returned it immediately due to screen tearing and artifacts, as well as stuttering in frame rates. Not all gaming machines are G-Sync, so beware and do research. The difference is night and day when using a G-Sync display.

• READ MORE: Setting Up Your Sim

Also, I am here to state (though it goes against many opinions among gamers) that a powerful laptop specifically built for gaming will run any sim phenomenally. Do not believe the naysayers. Yes, a desktop is the most powerful system to run a sim, but the compact technology in today’s top-end laptops is far superior to what it used to be. And trust me, you’ll not notice much of a difference. I like the laptops as they come ready to use, already built with the right components melded together for peak performance and quality. It’s cool high-tech wizardry.
You will never find a “gaming” computer in a Walmart, Staples, or even Best Buy. I highly recommend online purchases from dedicated retailers like, Xotic PC, Jetline Systems, or in some cities the great Micro Center. I bought mine at a local Boston Micro Center, and I love the hands-on shopping and ability to just bring it in for any issues or maintenance.

My mainstay sim gear to complement the laptop is the Thrustmaster TCA Sidestick Airbus Edition, Xbox Elite 360 controller, and Thrustmaster THQ throttle quadrant. All are easily portable and high quality. Our friends at Sporty’s Pilot Shop offer a bundle of these. The Xbox Elite unit can be purchased at most stores and is exceptionally great for programming the autopilot functions that I use. MSFS seems to accommodate an unlimited number of plug-in USB devices, and this inexpensive unit is one I highly recommend.

Twenty years ago, we had flight yokes, rudder pedals, and more. Yet they were quite heavy and extremely expensive. The market is wide open now with many brands to choose from, satisfying everyone from the casual simmer to the home cockpit builder. Military enthusiasts get what they’re looking for as well, with extremely realistic side sticks replicating exact fighter jet models.

Even though I love my portable on-the-road sim setup, when sitting at home, feeling the throttle quadrant in my right hand with the yoke in my left, feet in place, I can forget that this is all simulated. The realism is really heightened when using a 747 and swapping out the normal two-engine jet for the quad jet pieces that come standard with the Honeycomb base throttle unit. Now, manipulating four individual throttles really comes to life. You feel like you’re in command of something big.

A 747 or Piper Cub, it’s all available when using a Honeycomb THQ. The combinations are limitless and the quality is great. It offers precision handling, and all the parts and pieces can be popped off and on easily to turn it into anything you want. Then you just assign each slider to something in the MSFS controllers configuration screens.

The default throttle parts for Honeycomb are great and work the best overall. Recently, a new company called Prodesksim has started making add-on enhancements for the existing Honeycomb throttle quadrant. ProDeskSim attachments  add visual realism, true-size parts, and functionality. However, one issue I discovered is that the overlays, or underlays, of the throttle and speedbrake strips keep popping out of place as they don’t sit tightly enough to withstand the speedbrake or flap levers moving in and out of place.

Each time I use either the flaps or speedbrake axis, the plastic inserts all pop out from the detents being used. You can use the items without the flap tracks certainly, but you lose immersion and the actual detents most of the units use.

To remedy the loose underlay parts, you have to be very careful or kind of hold them in place with an available finger before using the axis. If you’re a cockpit modeler simulating just one type of jet, you could glue these into place, but it would be permanent. 

I have since learned that ProDeskSim has implemented a fix for all future units to keep this issue from occurring (my demo units came out early in 2023). The innovation here is great. I love how the company can make so many options and attachments based on the default unit. You can turn your Honeycomb unit pretty much into any GA or jet aircraft you want, making the possibilities seem endless.

I’m honestly not fond of reassembling each time as I change aircraft often enough to where this would be a big setback. For a cockpit modeler of one particular jetliner, this isn’t an issue. I found myself using the Boeing twin jetliner units the most as they are fantastic and only take seconds to install.

In case you’ve never used rudder pedals, it’s definitely one of those experiences where you don’t know what you’re missing until you try it. Once you set your feet snugly on them, you’ll wonder how you survived without for so long. I can’t bring them in my suitcase or I probably would.

Getting all the right hardware in place is the first step to enjoying your sims. You certainly don’t have to spend a fortune since the basic Airbus stick-and-throttle unit combined is only $199. The quality is precise and solid. There are online folks who have showcased using real aircraft cockpits and even airliners from nose through first-class cabins to run their sims. I can only dream of that for now.

The post All the Right Tools for Setting Up a Flight Sim appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Innsbruck is one of the most beautiful and spectacular places on earth with an airport that can support a variety of airline equipment up to a small widebody such as the Boeing 767-300ER. I have traveled to LOWI for my entire “sim life” but sadly haven’t been able to see it in person yet.

To demonstrate this magnificent place, I chose horrendously gusty winds by manually editing the weather in both X-Plane 12 (XP12) and MSFS2020. I wanted to test terrain-induced dangers with modeled shear, downsloping, thermals, and maybe some rotor effects. 

The results were good and depicted simulated wind over steep peaks equally well. Both sims have enhanced their ability to handle wind flow over terrain and objects, such as buildings. Each will delight and tantalize you into taking risks you would not in real life. However, if you find yourself in a real-world situation that demands all your wind-battling skills, I am confident some, if not most of which you experience in either sim, will translate to useful skills. 

• READ MORE: Ultimate Realism ‘X-posed’ in 747-200 Classic

I started this exercise using the closest thing to a large bizjet I could find, which in MSFS 2020 is the Aerosoft CRJ 550 series with corporate livery. I enjoy this model and use it often, as I have seen these converted to private use in the real world.

I began and ended all my flights at LOWI to test terrain, feel out the winds aloft, as well as terrain-based wind flows and shear. 

The CRJ is interesting to fly with a lot of trimming required as it’s a long-bodied jet with a large swing either side of the CG. I have not flown one in real life, but I find flying pitch with stab trim almost entirely while hand flying. I mean, all jets I have flown are like that, but this is fairly sensitive to pitch, power, and flap configuration—all requiring lots of trimming. Taking off in violent winds was a task. The small aileron “tabs” were not doing a great job in crosswind ability.

Using live weather in my first view patterns was wild enough. On the downwind to the westerly runway at LOWI, I experienced a lot of up and down drafts, shear, varying winds, and sloppy controls. Even some unstable virga bursts were in the valley, corresponding to the actual METAR at the time. 

Snow cover is supposed to be realistically placed, and if it was, the coverage seemed quite believable. Snow still was deep in most elevated regions and spotty in the valley floor by the airport. Also visible was green grass and flowering trees. 

For the final approach, I calculated V_REF of about 128 was fought with much shear, with airspeed variances of up to 20 to 30 knots, providing a wild ride. In the CRJ you can not hear any engines from the cockpit, making for an odd audio sensation. You must look at your power settings only. This makes it easy to get behind the “power curve,” and often I found myself overcorrecting or undercorrecting on speed control. 

I imagine this is how a real CRJ pilot must feel. To me, engine sounds are extremely useful and one of the senses you can not operate without. I imagine MD80-style pilots are used to the same sensation.

I love comparing sims, so I loaded up manual weather in XP12 to mimic the same windy conditions, as live weather in the sim works well. 

I wanted unlimited visibility and no rain. Live weather in XP12 has a defect where it rains all the time, regardless of actual METAR. With a lighter corporate jet, that is powerful. As is often the case with swept-wing jets, sometimes extra drag is required beyond gear and flaps. In this case, I ran the speedbrakes often on final, as gusting winds often increase speed and put you high on the glideslope. 

It definitely was a jarring trip and was often violent with bank angles going beyond 40 degrees. Landing was wild, leading to the aircraft’s big wings striking the ground at times in the crosswinds approaching 35 knots. Its powerful reversers worked great, and slowing down was not an issue. The same monster engines worked great on climbout also, blasting through the shear layers.

Lastly, I tried the heaviest aircraft I could use at LOWI that I had in my library: the 737-700 BBJ models from PMDG and LevelUP for XP12.

Using 130,000 pounds as my test weight, I kept the same weather parameters going, with equally set manual weather in both sims, featuring the same winds. Hand flying the circuit, I blasted through the shear with ease, but the big wings made it even more noticeable in rolling motions and aileron slop.

I have noticed when flying big jets in my sims, the longer wings and winglets of newer airliners tend to “right the jet” quickly as it creates a stable platform in roll. However, it often results in necessary “tugging” or more force to start or end a bank. Older jets without winglets or shorter wingspans are much faster in roll and lack some stability in bank.

• READ MORE: A Better Virtual Flight Deck

I only have my real-world corporate jet experience to draw upon, but I do believe this is true. I have flown “wingleted” Challenger 300s and non-wingleted Falcon 2000s, Hawkers, and Beechjets. Of those, I found the Challenger 300 has a more stable roll and is more sluggish as well in that axis. When I flew Beechjets, with short stubby wings and no winglets, I realized it would simply roll off into oblivion if pushed more than 30 degrees over. There was no inherent stability. 

Some circuits were done taking off downwind. I could actually feel the requirement to push forward on the yoke, keep the stab down, and “dive away from the wind.” That technique works here as well. By neutralizing the yoke, I lost the ability to steer and attack whatever crosswind component was evident. Pushing too far down made steering overly sensitive, but pulling toward takeoff made steering impossible. It was a battle and balance that is realistically conveyed in both sims. 

Initiating the PMDG 737-700 BBJ was equally satisfying in XP12, with more fantastic weather modeling. The “violence” was real, and two landing attempts were met with sudden go-arounds as crosswinds, sudden sink rates, and warnings were severe. 

After a 50-degree sudden roll over at 500 feet, I was done and practiced wild go-arounds. This was in XP12. In both sims, if your sound settings are accurate, you can really hear the gusts on the windscreen on final as power is relatively low. This is something that is present in the real jet I fly.

Once again, I must tout the amazing XP-Realistic Pro, available at www.x-plane.org, for XP12, or the FS-Realistic Pro for MSFS2020. Both enhance and add necessary sound and visual effects for each sim.

Unexpected rolling motion hit me in XP12—and I loved it. Downwind washing wind flow is the reason I suspect, but I can imagine how nauseating this would be in real life. As a captain of jets for many years, I am OK while up front, but as soon as you make me a passenger, all bets are off for my stomach.

Even in the default XP12 scenery you do get the feeling of new worldly locations, with the local-style architecture and buildings changing. The European look is quite evident in Austria, creating an immersive experience, although not quite as dramatic as in MSFS2020.

Doing multiple takeoffs and landings to and from such a beautiful place is fun and satisfying to watch on the replay mode of XP12. I hope Asobo Studio will include replay into future versions of MSFS2020. You can learn a lot from sims, and being able to watch every aspect of it over and over during challenging situations is a great tool. 

The post Simulated Austria Is Wild, Wonderful appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

I was obsessed. Once college approached, I knew I was going to become an airline pilot, and I wouldn’t stop until I was an old man flying a Boeing 747. I was originally going to go to college to become a TV meteorologist, but failing grades in math kept that dream far away. I found it much easier to get into a state college with an aviation program, so off I went to one in New England to become a pilot.

While earning all my primary ratings, private through commercial and CFII, Microsoft Flight Simulator was right there with me. It provided all I needed for that extra boost when studying ILSs, holding patterns, VOR tracking, stalls, slow flight, cross countries, and more. Once the newer versions of MSFS were released (these major new versions were anticipated and sold in PC software stores in malls back then), it would cause so much excitement and anxiety for me that I’d be prepared to drive hours to get the coveted box in hand before the stores ran out, or other friends I knew grabbed theirs. Then the worries over computer strength and how the new version would run upped the anxiety. But it was a fun time back then, one that blew past any young child’s Christmas morning memory on any new release day.

After acing my IFR rating (the CFIs never understood how I knew all this stuff prior to beginning flying), my next big “ace event” was years later during my first real job as a Cape Air captain flying a nine-seat Cessna 402. I had to go for weeks of indoc and training, and my monthlong-stay hotel room was filled with some great multiengine hardware. Throttle quadrants, rudder pedals, and all were a fixture in my small room along with the PC. Today, I highly recommend the Sporty’s Pilot Shop Flight Sim Starter Set—quality Honeycomb equipment—or FLYING’s custom rig.

• READ MORE: Ultimate Realism ‘X-posed’ in 747-200 Classic

Some fellow classmates came to observe or try engine failures in a Cessna 421 add-on, the closest thing we had to the lower-powered 402. But it all worked and made sense. My multiengine failures and a simulated ATP check ride—complete with many single-engine NDB approaches to minimums in the real airplane—all seemed easy to me as I was able to fly all this before. The heck with imaginary “armchair flying”—I had the real thing in my hotel room as far as I was concerned.

Years later, once again another big event was my initial type rating in my first jet—the Beechjet 400A—in Wichita, Kansas. Most folks get a full initial type school of more than three weeks for most bizjets. However, my Part 135 boss was a cheapskate (imagine that) and wanted me typed within a four-day recurrent session the other pilots get every year. That was a lot to accomplish. The instructors said they didn’t think I could do it, as nobody gets a type off a recurrent session. And since it was my first jet rating, I had to take the four-day FMS ground training event as well.

Learning an aircraft FMS is the hardest thing for new jet pilots, and I had no time to learn it. Well, I said let me try the sim and see how I do in the FMS. I had a secret weapon nobody knew about. I had been using an FMS for years in MSFS, thanks to PMDG (www.PMDG.com), the makers of the finest Boeing airliners for the sim platform. Once I was in the real Beechjet sim, I discovered, sure enough, the FMS is exactly like the one in the Boeing jets. Even the glass cockpit was similar. The instructors were dumbfounded as to how I could suddenly bang away at all the keys, programming and modifying all the while learning to fly the jet. I let the cat out of the bag and told them, thanks to me being a geek on MSFS, I had learned all this years ago. They’re reaction was “no way” … but I was told to go ahead and skip the FMS course. I got my type rating in four days!

There was a fairly good Beechjet add-on for MSFS2004 made by Eaglesoft, and I used it during this training event and subsequent recurrents as I became a captain for the 135 outfit I flew with for several years before getting a new type rating on a big, beefy Dassault Falcon 2000 eventually. Sadly, no Falcon products existed for any sim platform, so I was a bit overwhelmed during that initial type rating. But, as most flying jobs change, so did this one. I was suddenly changing jobs and getting typed in a Hawker 800 series—a bit of a step back from the big Falcon.

Now, once again I had the sim advantage as one did exist from designer Carenado (www.carenado.com). The Hawker 850 was out for MSFSX at the time, and it was excellent in preparing me for the overall layout, look, and feel for learning the cockpit. However, it was not too big on exact systems modeling, so I used it as more of a visual familiarization tool than anything else, as well as for some basic flying qualities I believed were probably modeled pretty well.

Soon that 135 job ended, as those old 800s were poorly maintained and most flights were an exercise in using the emergency section of the POH. So I quit, only to find a job flying a much newer, late model Hawker 850, exactly as I had in MSFSX. This was a hoot. The newness and power was so much greater than the older sister. But that new boss suddenly traded in the 850XP for a big, powerful Challenger 300. This was the pinnacle of my career back then, and I had yet another sim weapon—the incredible Challenger 300 for X-Plane 11.

This favorite of many was sadly discontinued years ago, but I used it to the fullest extent while it was available. Systems, operations, layout, and flying quality were all simulated. I became extremely familiar with the CL300 during this time, and once I was type rated and flying the real thing, I became a reviewer of the X-Plane version. I was even able to help the author a bit on tweaking some parameters to better equal the real jet.

But the more I flew the real thing, the more I realized how well done the X-Plane version really was. I used to think it was too powerful, easily performing initial climb rates hitting 10,000 fpm, then I found out, yes, indeed the real thing does it too. What a ride!

Now that sims have helped me learn the real aircraft I fly, what about other stuff? How about life and death? Through no fault of my own, or perhaps a clumsy error, or maybe being even wreckless a bit while flying on the PC, I have found myself in sudden potentially dangerous scenarios that require immediate thinking and problem solving. I often leave the airplane on autopilot to do other things but have returned on a few occasions to discover one or more engines have failed for some reason. In jets it could be because of high-altitude weather, lack of anti-icing items being used, or other issues. Now I must think and react as a real pilot.

Even without a checklist at hand, it’s a brain exercise that is nothing but beneficial. So in a way, that is an actual emergency not planned at all and definitely a surprise. In smaller airplanes I have experienced total loss of power, so a visual landing off airport is an incredible “big picture” situational awareness type of tool that’s very realistic. I have written about such emergencies in past issues of FLYING’s digital platform.

Actual live weather feeding can provide an unexpected moment. So now, it’s time to dig out approach plates or perhaps attempt a visual with terrain. How about a planned emergency? Sure can. Options in either MSFS2020 or X-Plane 12 (XP12) give you the ability to randomly have a failure of anything you choose at a specific time, keystroke, or random period. XP12 goes farther and gives you the chance of random bird impact and resulting crisis, with hundreds more just waiting for you to activate. During jet recurrent events, we practice multiple engine failures at V₁, so that is easily something I’ll do in the sims at home.

Get a friend involved to secretly program something bad to happen. Back when I was a single guy and had a fellow roommate pilot pal (Rob, this is you) whom I taught how to fly, we’d call these randomized, intentional moments of doom “horror flights.” We’d set up the other guy while he wasn’t looking to have to fly the Cessna 182 and have total electrical failures combined with vacuum failure at night. Looking up to see nothing but a turn coordinator to live by is terror in IFR. Use engine sound for rpm and wind noise for pitch. If the outcome was bad, we’d throw each other down the stairs to simulate a crash and resulting injury. This added to the fun and realism. I don’t think any of us really lost too much blood.

I have been to many airfields in the real world where I’ve experienced that “been-there-done-that” feeling. Places like KASE, KTEX, KHSP, KJAC, KVNY, KSFO, KTRK, CYVR, PHLI, and dozens more where, if it weren’t for the sim, I’d be a level behind. Most involve high terrain or odd procedures. My first European trips in the Challenger were done in MSFS or X-Plane. Any new places I know of that I am heading to will be at least seen virtually before going in real life.

Every sim session is educational and keeps the brain in “big picture” mode. SA, or situational awareness, is key. I have flown with so many other pilots that lack this skill or are somewhat always behind the jet. A home simulator keeps these skills sharp. You’re always thinking ahead about “What if…?”

You don’t even need the latest MSFS or X-Plane to do this—or a fancy PC. Any version would do. I’d go as far as to say some of the big picture things can even be accomplished with an air combat sim. If you’re always thinking and doing, planning and preparing with a home flight sim, you’re leaps and bounds ahead of the traditional “armchair” pilot.

Going from class to a hotel room, sitting in a chair with a cockpit diagram in hand, isn’t going to cut it. You’re missing the other half.

This column first appeared in the December 2023/Issue 944 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post Healthy Obsession: What Flight Sim Has Done for Me appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

Competition is good, and before 2020, we all began to think Microsoft was out of the game, and X-Plane creator Austin Meyer would be the savior, keeping this hobby alive forever. Certainly not swayed by Microsoft’s offerings, Meyer and his team forged ahead, putting the finishing touches on X-Plane 11. X-Plane 12 was released earlier this year after a long beta period. Not forgotten here, or elsewhere, the X-Plane series is continuously updated and developed. In fact, Meyer’s team at Laminar Research is the largest it’s ever been—tiresomely working on X-Plane 12.

I won’t hide the fact that MSFS2020 is gorgeous to look at and has the most stunning aircraft to visually drool over. Photorealistic qualities abound both in the cockpit and view outside. Worldwide satellite imagery turned 3D being fed to you as you fly makes for the most gorgeous earthly renditions I have ever witnessed on a PC. There’s worldwide live weather, even clouds that look real as they are fed via satellite imagery at high resolutions and a fast frame rate. But this can be detrimental to some that lack high-speed connectivity.

Offline play is also nonexistent. The MSFS world will only load well if you’re on a super internet connection. Otherwise, it will struggle and run too poorly to enjoy. Many of the installation issues or updating problems users experience is because of the lack of quality internet connectivity in other parts of the world. With X-Plane, you can still fly offline, anywhere, anytime, hassle free.

But I want to get into detail on one thing. The flight quality in MSFS—although improved since its release—still feels somewhat “too easy, or rail-y.” The development team has openly discussed how new programming of wind on terrain, weather, active thermals, and lift/drag all have improved flight models, and, yes, you can certainly feel the improvements over previous versions. But still something is missing, at least on some default flight models. The lack of momentum, lift being produced on individual surfaces, weight, and weather conditions at hand don’t touch the “blade element theory” X-Plane has rallied with since the beginning.

A Different Model

The realism of the flight model and the pure feel of flying any machine in XP12 is just pure joy. If you have high quality hardware, it’s even more noticeable. As I write this, I am flying a 747-200 with the masterful Honeycomb yoke and a throttle quadrant supporting up to four engines. (Sporty’s Pilot Shop is the place to go for the starter set and run it on a Doghouse Systems Flying Edition core).

I have fallen in love with the Felis 747-200 classic add-on, available for purchase from the x-plane.org online store. This to me is the absolute greatest example of top-end flight dynamics quality, resulting from the XP12 programming. Flying the greatest airliner of all time and being able to feel every aspect is what I love.

You can really feel the momentum to get moving and power required to break away on the tarmac. The sway, moving on body gear steering, is all there all while monitoring your brake temperatures from the flight engineer’s position. The entire cockpit is modeled with every system and switch performing some function with consequences.

I am not a 747 pilot nor engineer, so I really need to spend a lot of time studying all this from profiled documentation or many resources available on the internet. It is a dream to just “do patterns” in this beast—at light weights, pretty agile yet rock solid.

Flying the Felis ‘742’

When considering the Felis “742” in XP12, the lighting, sky, and weather depiction is improved, but jagged shadows and somewhat grainy textures still exist around the cockpit at times. The Felis 742 has an EFB that will calculate the necessary speeds, with corresponding flap settings, takeoff power, etc. This beast will react to weight extremely realistically, and you’ll feel it while hand flying.

The takeoff is the most realistically pleasing of any flight sim aircraft I have ever used in 40 or more years as a simmer. Partially because of XP12 itself and its brilliant modeling, and partially because of this particular aircraft add-on’s quality. As you go barreling down the runway, (don’t forget XPrealistic for the shaking and sounds not included in XP12 by default) the rattling and vibrations come to life. At V_R, you pull hard on the yoke and wait. Nothing happens right away then slowly the “Queen of the Skies” will relinquish her grip on Earth, bringing the nose up to takeoff attitude, and moments later the main trucks will unplant themselves and she’ll break ground. You can feel this with your eyes, and vertical speed, and even with your controls. It’s absolutely amazing—with wings bending and lifting, external flyby views are the best at these moments.

Magnificent in every way, the 747-200 for XP11 and XP12 demonstrates dominating realism—it could be the best rendition of any heavy jet for any flight sim. In cruise you’ll be constantly fiddling with the four power levers to tweak precise fuel flow just like the real 747-200. Holding four levers in your hand with real hardware ups the immersion 10 times, or cheat and use the primitive autothrottle. I will have to wait until the PMDG Simulations team releases its 747-400 series, sometime in the next year I believe, to see if it can outdo this model with the MSFS base. PMDG is the master of flight dynamics for the Microsoft franchise, featuring the 737NG, 747-400, and 777 previous version. But until then, the Felis 742 can not be touched.

Improving X-Plane

The current state of X-Plane 12 is under constant improvement. The folks at Laminar Research are working on some internal graphics enhancements to mesh with all the extra VRAM optimizations currently undergoing to bring XP12 to the next level. I’ve been told that the problems I have experienced with jagged edges, or blocky shadows, etc., will be drastically improved, but it all takes time. It’s a puzzle of memory allocation and individual pixel related algorithms.

Meyer’s efforts are to continually produce the most realistically accurate flight simulator in the world, not a scenery sim or one that showcases your home and driveway below. As we know, those things are in “the other sim.” For now, I have also been enjoying the proven XP11 with the Felis 747 and other top quality add-ons I have purchased over the years. They all perform flawlessly in XP11, from the standpoint of flight dynamics, in a world that is still tried and true. I have no doubt XP12 will dominate everyone’s XP world in the upcoming year or so, sending XP11 to the closet.

What XP12 now offers is a completely new scenery base model, with greater variability of the “plausible world.” The biggest overhaul was with ambient lighting, weather modeling, and effects such as standing water, puddling, spray, and ground icing and its effects on the aircraft at hand. The weather is so cool that I have often placed myself on a ramp, engine off, in silence to hear and watch an incoming squall line blast me.

To take a flight sim aircraft model and place yourself in an area on the ramp in silence, with no engines running, to watch and listen to the weather inbound is a testament to its realism. The roar of thunder, wind, pouring rain, and lightning flashes are the best I have seen. The same with icing, snow squalls and slippery runways, where water will freeze up on you—either all manually driven or via live weather. The XP thunderstorm model will destroy you if you choose to tangle. The MSFS thunderstorm may look good but is weak in comparison. There’s a feeling of danger in XP when it comes to the weather.

Weather Realism

Using live weather will dynamically change as you fly the globe. It’s accurate, fast loading, and works well on a weak internet connection. But a fun exercise is to build the weather manually. X-Plane doesn’t interpret METAR visibility well in automatic weather, limiting it to only 10 miles by default since that’s the upper limit on worldwide METAR reports. This is very annoying, as in-flight visibilities often go far above 100 miles. The XP world always looks too hazy. By taking auto weather off, and manually controlling it, you can enjoy all the preloaded winds aloft, etc., and then raise the visibility to something more fitting.

• READ MORE: Testing Live Weather and Winter Wonders Along the Way

Manually building more believable cumulus clouds and thunderstorms is great. For those of you who don’t like the automatically made clouds, try making a scattered layer of cumulonimbus with no rain, no change, and steady state. You’ll get some very believable puffy clouds on an otherwise nice day. Be sure to manually add thermals below the bases as well for typical daytime chop. Then make the clouds deteriorate on their own for the next level of greatness with the thunderstorms XP so perfectly demonstrates.

The X-Plane pucker factor wouldn’t be what it is without the ability to set up more than 500 combinations of system failures anytime, anywhere. This powerful tool is another feature that has made XP so incredibly real for flight training, awareness, and other real-life “big picture” skills that home simulators can perfect. From bird strikes and the resulting random damage to faulty maintenance that could lead to an aileron coming off sometime unexpectedly, it’s all there. Not for the faint of heart, yet absolutely necessary for one’s skills and processing strengths as a sim or real-world pilot.

The add-on market of available fully detailed systems for loaded aircraft is strong. Operating them in the X-Plane world (either version) gives the desktop pilot the best feel for what that particular real-life aircraft counterpart flies like.

This feature first appeared in the October 2023/Issue 942 of FLYING’s print edition.

The post Ultimate Realism ‘X-posed’ in 747-200 Classic appeared first on FLYING Magazine.