I have GamePass, so I thought: "I'll give this a go. How hard can it be? I'm really good in Elite Dangerous."
Turns out: Quite hard. I have a newfound respect for airline pilots.
On a related note, even my RAF cadet experience 20 years ago counted for naught. Whilst I could keep the plane in the air, landing proved the most difficult, and I crashed and bounced and would not have survived without invulnerability switched on.
It’s not that difficult to land; especially in a sim where you can experiment without worry.
It’s all in the setup - as you line up on your final approach, make sure you are at a prescribed speed and rate of descent; generally in a small plane (172 etc), you’re aiming for around 300-500ft/m at 70-80kts, and the plane is pointing to hit the runway at the threshold (piano keys / white lines).
Counter intuitive: Throttle controls rate of descent, elevators control speed. Mess around until you feel these two things clicking.
When you’re around 20-30ft above the threshold, reduce power to idle, keep the aircraft straight and level or the nose just slightly high and just let the plane drop on to the runway!
Whatever you do - don’t force it, take your time and you’ll have far more fun actually going to places and stopping there!
These are good tips for flying GA and getting started in the sim. Older versions of FS used to teach more of the ground school theory than the current version. I did the tutorial just out of curiosity but it didn't really teach enough to have an understanding of flight in the way the FS2004 lessons did.
For flying jets though (assuming this is what the GP means when mentioning the respect for airline pilots), you'll have some higher numbers, and you'll use the thrust for speed rather than the "counter intuitive" approach you'd use in a smaller aircraft.
The things to remember at first are that you're moving faster than you think in the air, so you need to take a longer final approach than you may think as a newcomer, as you're "consuming" that distance rapidly. You'll also need to get used to lining up with the runway (assuming you're doing VFR approaches, which isn't how airlines do it in reality) and find a reference in the cockpit. And chances are you'll be coming in far too high as well - you will feel lower down when you get the view from up front (compared with a side window) and often end up too high. If this happens, go around and try again - if you dive down to compensate, you'll end up gaining too much speed and miss your touchdown zone on the runway.
A good way to learn and practice landings is to wait until ILS and autopilots in FS get their bugs fixed, and learn enough to configure them to fly the landing. If they're accurate replicas, the A320 neo should be able to land itself from ILS. Learn what the approach looks like, and get used to the height and view of the descent. Then try some ILS approaches with flight director on, but autopilot off, so you're flying the approach yourself, but with guidance. This can be tricky if you're not used to the auto throttles on an Airbus though.
> For flying jets though (assuming this is what the GP means when mentioning the respect for airline pilots), you'll have some higher numbers, and you'll use the thrust for speed rather than the "counter intuitive" approach you'd use in a smaller aircraft.
Minor point - fairly certain power applications are used regardless of the size of aircraft to control the rate of descent.
Pitch + Power = Performance
You're essentially trying to get back on your landing descent profile.
Too low? Add power, pitch up slightly to maintain speed, reduce rate of descent.
Too high? Remove power, pitch down slightly to maintain speed, increase rate of descent.
It is somewhat counter intuitive, but power does not have a "direct" relation with speed, but certainly impacts it.
Even if you fly straight and level, and start adding power - the increase airflow over the wings/elevators will cause a pitch up / lift, your speed will decrease which will need counteracting by a slight downwards pitch to maintain straight / level, and only then would you see a speed increase. There will always be a point where the aircraft just settles into a given configuration of power and pitch/attitude, giving you a specific horizontal/vertical speed.
You yourself mention pointing the aircraft down (pitch), thus gaining speed (without touching the power), which is exactly the counter-intuitive approach to power/speed.
I may not be explaining it well but here's a decent article:
And you'll find quite a few more if you go searching.
I also highly recommend looking up the pilot owner manuals, they give you performance tables for given configurations (rpm, power, density, altitude, fuel, temp etc), and of course what power settings to use and numbers to hit for various stages of flight.
I do concur with all your other points though, it's an absolute blast - especially in VR. And of course, I can't encourage folks enough to try out the real thing, I find it easier than driving a car! :)
I remember reading "Heirs of Empire" by David Weber, and it casually mentioned that Dakax had a database that was immutable. I remember thinking that was a good idea, and planned to think about it later, but alas I had forgotten about it by the time I'd finished the book.
When you see the color details, it will show ten Pantone colors (five from the Coated and Uncoated guides each) matching that color, in the order of their match %.
I feel there is a mechanism (sleep deprivation?) that causes amnesia of the most difficult months of raising a newborn. By the time the baby is a year old or so, the pain is forgotten, the baby is cuter (and interactive!), and the parents start to think, "Maybe we want to do this again..."
I'm glad I got my vasectomy done when our youngest was still in that first stage.
I understand what you mean. There's an incredible amount of tactile information in the real world, and I can't help feeling that there's probably almost as much information flowing in as audio or visual (that we as humans can process at any one instant), but I have been unable to find anything to back up my wild hypothesis.
People have used stimulus arrays attached to the back to "replace" eyesight. It would be interesting to compare the number of nerves coming from the different senses, and how much neuronal area the senses get as the signals are aggregated.
Turns out: Quite hard. I have a newfound respect for airline pilots.
On a related note, even my RAF cadet experience 20 years ago counted for naught. Whilst I could keep the plane in the air, landing proved the most difficult, and I crashed and bounced and would not have survived without invulnerability switched on.