No you wouldn't. If you find light aircraft different enough think about how different the 747's going to be.

Well thats put an end to my dreams

Can anyone just elaborate on what is actually so different, is it the flight dynamics, or the method of navigation etc.

Mistral - would you TRUST your airliner to someone like Charlie or myself who think that the epitome of flight is a Gladiator?

apart from the main buttons in flight sim, i would like to see anyone with no real knowledge even try to figure out what some of the key buttons do. think of it like trying to parrallel park an 18 wheeler when all you have driven is a car.

I could take ya up in a 767, configure everything for you, and hand you the controls. If you had flown a realistic one, you could turn and climb/descend. You could even probably fly a halfway decent approach. But there are just so many things missing from the sim. You could fly it though, I would just have to work every switch and little gadget you have never heard of.

I know a pilot for a major airline (won't mention it out of respect, but it is in business and starts with a D) who shuttled a 737 to the airplane graveyard and his copilot traded seats with a ridealong who flew in the sim. He said she could fly fine (this way back when 2000 was the best thing), albeit uncoordinated and not used to the controls (duh). She flew all the way 'til the approach and did some stuff with the flaps and gear, but he said he wouldn't trust her to crash land it even.

I could fly it by using the autopilot, but that's as far as I would go.
I'd never attempt of landing manually, as it would be too hard.

Saratoga - If you setup the autopilot and autoland, I'll fly it .. (until the autopilot cuts out, then I'll gladly give it back to you)

I think that most people with any interest in aviation have wondered at some time whether they could land an airliner if the crew were incapacitated. While most of my real-life experience is on light aircraft I think I could make a pretty good go of it - with some expert assistance on the ground. It might not be pretty to watch but they would stand more chance with me than a complete beginner with no knowledge of flying. However big & complex the aircraft is the basic principles remain the same.

I suspect the same goes for anyone used to the MS sims. While I've always thought they concentrate too much on the panel & instruments in MSFS this might not be such a bad thing. At least you would have some idea of how it all works, more knowledge than me as I've never used the autopilot in FS.

I sat in the right-hand seat of a Boeing 707 flight simulator during a demonstration "flight" many years ago. It had the full six-axis motion system & was one of the first examples with a computerised display projected onto a curved mirror surrounding the outside of the cockpit, very similar to the ones used today by most airlines. It had been built for an airline & was actually used for training their pilots before being dismantled & shipped off to wherever the airline was based, China if I remember correctly. Very realistic & quite unlike anything I've seen on the PC. Maybe it's different with some of these simpits.

PS. This was at Rediffusion Flight Simulation (Redifon) at Crawley near Gatwick Airport. Redifon was one of the pioneers of modern flight simulation & my brother was Shipping Manager with the company for many years. They had open days every year where employees & their friends & families could see & experience the latest developments. About the same time as my 707 "flight" they were also experimenting with ideas for the leisure market & the "Back to the Future" ride at Universal Studios in Orlando was one of their first contracts. This works on exactly the same principle as their flight simulators & is still one of the best rides I've ever been on.

Quote:

It depends on which aircraft you're talking about. I've never flown a big airliner but most real flying in smaller types is not done continually looking at instruments. Unless the visibilty is bad enough that you need to rely on the instruments just to keep straight & level the pilot has his head up & looking outside, both to see where he's going & keeping a permanent lookout for other aircraft. This can be compared with driving a car. How often or how long do you spend looking down at your speedo or other warning gauges or even being aware that you're doing so? Apart from the occasional glance down at them you're looking at the world outside, otherwise you would soon hit something or somebody.

I realise that flying a large modern airliner is far more technical these days but this is the main problem I have with FS. However realistic they might make it visually it can never be like real flying or a proper flight simulator costing almost as much as the real aircraft. MSFS is still very useful as a training aid & has come a long way in the last 20 years. My brother is not really interested as he worked with the real thing for something like 25 years. When I showed him CFS2 he said; "That's where we (meaning Redifon) were about 30 years ago".

Some fair points u two, but i still think they could make it so much better with just a little bit more work, i.e that fat panal i was talking about and so forth. But, at the same time, within the realms of reality i think flying is quite obviously not an experience that can be accuratly simulated for $50/£30.

With the correct advice from the ground via radio, I reckon i'd give myself a sporting chance in some more advanced aircraft...

Quote:


Lol! I'd hope to find a discreet frequency where I could talk to someone who had a scooby about the aircraft and its systems, and a copy of the aircrew manual nearby...

Quote:

I'm assuming you mean the photo opportunity at the end of your heroic experience:)

Quote:

I think you'll find it's already been done.

Quote:

No. Sad to say I haven't. I was thinking of Airplane.