CanuckInUSA 0 #1 June 3, 2005 Well it's happened again. It looks like I'm addicted. Early last Sunday morning, myself and three other friends pilled into a real world Piper Twin Comanche multi engine general aviation aircraft and flew from Boulder Colorado to Twin Falls Idaho to jump at the Perrine Bridge. Then on Tuesday afternoon we flew home back to Colorado. Well these two flights have brought back great memories of my own PIC flying days when my pilot's license was still in date. Anyway, since Tuesday evening, I've been hitting my FS2002 flight simulation software pretty hard (I will be installing FS2004 very soon) and I've been flying all over the western USA in a very well commercially modelled aircraft a Piper Archer (something very similar to what I used to fly in the real world). I've purchased a terrain elevation add-on which adds more realism to the simulations showing somewhat accurate terrain elevation points and I've flow from: Boulder CO to Laramie WY Laramie WY to Kemmemer WY Kemmerer WY to Twin Falls ID Twin Falls ID to Jacksons Hole WY Jacksons Hole WY to Boise ID Boise ID to Kalispell MT Kalispell MT to Spokane WA So here I sit in the virtual FBO of Felts Field (KSFF) in Spokane with a flight plan already filed (not opened) and ready to fly to Bellingham WA before I venture south along the west coast from Oregon, Nor-CAL, Southern CAL, Grand Canyon, Vegas before making my way back through Moab on the way home back to Colorado. I know these are only virtual flights, but I have seen some awesome scenery along the way in my general aviation aircraft (these simulators have come a long way over the years). And my simulations thanks to being an uncurrent real world licensed pilot, are some what realistic. Call me crazy if you wish ... but flying sure is fun. It's just too bad that real world flying is just so darn expensive. In the meantime I think my simulated road trip around the western USA has been fun. Now I just need to figure out how to model a swooper in FS2004 (once it's installed and running). Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Beerlight 0 #2 June 3, 2005 I bought FS2004, and maybe it's just me, but it sucked versus FS2002! Let me know if it works for you... I've use FS2002 as a "before I fly" tool. I've flown "virtually" to airports I plan to visit in real life... works great..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyangel2 2 #3 June 3, 2005 They have a flight simulator at the college I work at, and I'm allowed to use it when ever it's not booked with students. I'm proud to say that I still can't land without a huge crashMay your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view. May your mountains rise into and above the clouds. - Edward Abbey Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Duckwater 0 #4 June 3, 2005 FS 2004 is great. You can download real AI traffic with correct Airline/Aircraft Type and flight #. So, if you are at DFW, AA Flight 1420 to Little Rock, MD 80 is taking off right on time. www.projectai.com Going to Chicago at rush hour is a pain in the ass. The default a/c suck. There are some amazing models out there for free with unbelieveable animation and detail including reflective textures. The seats in the first class cabin recline in to beds! www.meljet.com Download any kind of a/c you want www.avsim.com The real world weather feature is awesome. I flew for real from DFW to ONT a while back. It was clear to Palm Springs then there was a solid deck at about 5,000' from the mountains west. I got home, turned on flight sim, took off from Palm Springs and the simulation was right on with the cloud deck at the exact altitude. The flight models are good except the Extra 300 flies NOTHING like a real Extra 300. -- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #5 June 3, 2005 QuoteI bought FS2004, and maybe it's just me, but it sucked versus FS2002! Let me know if it works for you... Why do you say this? I know my FS2002 is working pretty well for me. But I've heard that the WX is better in FS2004 + there are better default airport markers. QuoteI've use FS2002 as a "before I fly" tool. I've flown "virtually" to airports I plan to visit in real life... works great..... If you actually use the same aircraft, then yes FS200x is a great tool (even though we all know that it's still not the same as real world flying). Back in 2001/2002 when I was doing my flying, I used FS2002 as a tool to get to know my way around the Colorado mountains before I did the real world flight. It was a great learning and a good place to make my mistakes (remembering that I have upgraded my terrain elevation points over the default values and get somewhat realistic mountain perspectives). In fact I can't help but remember thinking to myself as I was on short final in the real world approaching Glenwoods Springs in February of 2002 ... "hey I've been here before" ... and I had been there thanks to FS2002. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #6 June 3, 2005 QuoteI'm proud to say that I still can't land without a huge crash Landing an airplane takes more mental concentration than landing a canopy. Plus while I can't speak for this (full motion if I'm not mistaken) simulator you speak of in Fort Collins, but landing with my FS2002 setup (using a yoke and rudder pedals) is harder on my computer than it is in real life. The controls on the computer are way more sensative, plus I lack the physical controls and visuals on the computer. One good thing about my simming is that it's cheaper than the real thing and cheaper than skydiving. But it could turn me into a hermit. Nah ... sooner or later I'll be off to the DZ (likely tomorrow). In the mean time, I think it's almost time to fly from Spokane to Bellingham (via Seattle). Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pilotdave 0 #7 June 3, 2005 QuoteI bought FS2004, and maybe it's just me, but it sucked versus FS2002! Let me know if it works for you... 2004 kicks butt over 2002. What didn't you like about it? My computer just isn't quite fast enough to deal with the latest freeware planes for 2004. There are some really incredible aircraft available for free. But it's freaking hard to land an F-18 when your frame rate drops to almost nothing on short final. Dave Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
flyangel2 2 #8 June 3, 2005 Quotesimulator you speak of in Fort Collins, Nope, at Aims Community College. Doesn't matter that I can't land yet, it's free time.May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view. May your mountains rise into and above the clouds. - Edward Abbey Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kris 0 #9 June 3, 2005 Don't forget about the great sim that puts Microsoft's FS series to shame. X-PlaneSky, Muff Bro, Rodriguez Bro, and Bastion of Purity and Innocence!™ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Duckwater 0 #10 June 4, 2005 I DID forget about that. I had it many versions ago....Downloading 8.10 now. Heres a screenshot with realistic AI traffic SETAC airport this evening. -- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Duckwater 0 #11 June 4, 2005 FS 2004 - Even the Bellagio fountain goes off. The Vegas scenery is amazing.... Here are some screenshots. ii Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
